Well, this is it. The final Scotty Show. We've come a long way. And let me say this -- I think this thing we have done here, you and I... I think we caused Scotty's resignation. Bush's poll numbers have consistently dropped since The Scotty Show started. Coincidence? Surely not. And why have those numbers dropped? Well, because Bush is a fucknut, for one. But also, nobody was buying what Scotty was selling. And why's that? The Scotty Show takes credit.
But now we need your help! Help us name the upcoming Tony Snow shows... "The Snow Job" has been suggested, but do we have anything more original? Enter your submissions here. Also, I'd like to honor everyone's request for Scotty Show/Kitty Picture t-shirts, preferably in time for YearlyKos. If you have the time, the will, and the graphic design chops to help, please contact me.
Press comments and questions are italicized for her pleasure.
Scotty's bullshit is thick and bold, like in real life.
Bullshit detector translations are in plain text, which I'm sure signifies something suitably profound.
Scott, 73 percent of Americans in a new poll say that the country is headed in the wrong direction, and six of ten conservatives say that the country is heading the wrong way. Why do you think that Americans have concluded that under this administration, things have taken such a bad turn?
Well, I'm not sure that I'd agree with the word, "concluded." Let's keep in mind that these are snapshots in time.
Let me tell you guys something... this is EXACTLY what you're gonna miss about me.
Three out of every four people in this country say that we're heading in the wrong direction?
Three out of every five people from the president's own party say that?
No problem! It's just a "snapshot in time". Totally meaningless.
Mere reality is no match for a dismissive phrase followed by ten minutes of bullshit Republican talking points!
This President has an optimistic agenda for the future, and we are leading the way to get things done for the American people. The economy is growing strong. We saw the latest numbers come out today -- 138,000 new jobs created last month. We've seen more than 5.2 million jobs created over the course of the last two, two-and-a-half years since August of 2003. The unemployment rate remains at 4.7 percent. Consumer confidence is a good indicator to look at. It is at a four-year high. Productivity in the first quarter was up significantly. Wages are going up in that first quarter. Those are good signs for the economy.
And yet three out of every four Americans think the country's headed in the wrong direction. Besides, what are unemployment rates, consumer confidence, and productivity except for "snapshots in time", anyway?
So I think Americans are feeling good about the economy and they're showing it through their confidence in the direction the economy is headed. Consumer confidence, again, is a good indication to look at. That's what they're doing. That's how they're acting. And I think that's a more important indicator to look at.
Yeah! Because it's a well-known fact that people cannot buy shit AND think that the country is going in the wrong direction at the same time.
The world is also in a time of great change. We are engaged in a global war on terrorism. This President has made his number-one priority the safety and security of the American people.
And he is going to continue doing everything within his power, as long as he is in office, to save lives
and prevent attacks from happening,
and make the world a safer place. And we are making the world a safer place.
Some people seemed to take out their frustrations yesterday on Secretary Rumsfeld. What did the President think about that exchange? And does it change his opinion at all about the Secretary?
People have a right to express their views, but I think you ought to step back and review history a little bit, not try to rewrite history. Saddam Hussein's regime was a threat. It was a threat to the region, it was a threat to the world.
Really? A threat to the world? Who's rewriting history again?
And in the aftermath of September 11th, this President made a determination that we were going to confront threats before they fully materialized, before it was too late.
With that in mind, our U.S. forces are converging on Belgium. Sure, they pose no threat to us, but September 11 changed everything. We can no longer wait for Belgium to become a threat! We must conquer them NOW!
So you thought that this former CIA analyst who challenged Rumsfeld was trying to rewrite history, is that what you're saying?
I'm saying that people can express their views, but what I was talking about is, let's step back and look at history, and look at what the facts were, and look at what people knew at the time, and to also put it in the context of the post-September 11th world that we live in.
Good idea! Let's step back and look at history!
March 30, 2003: "The area in the south and the west and the north that coalition forces control is substantial. It happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."
-- Donald Rumsfeld
September 10, 2003: "I said, 'We know they're in that area.' I should have said, 'I believe we're in that area. Our intelligence tells us they're in that area,' and that was our best judgment."
-- Donald Rumsfeld
May 4, 2006: "I did not [say I knew where the WMD were]. I said I knew where suspect sites were."
-- Donald Rumsfeld
But, Scott, that's what he was trying to do, the CIA analyst. Why was a CIA analyst trying to rewrite history? He was just reading quotes.
Those are your words. I'm saying that people can express themselves.
Don Rumsfeld is trying to rewrite history from 2003. Scott McClellan's rewriting history from a minute and a half ago.
Okay, who was trying to rewrite history? That was what the question --
But I've seen coverage of this, and -- well, my point is that let's go back and look at history. Let's go back and look at the facts and look at where we are today in Iraq, as well.
Like this?
February 20, 2003: "There is no question but that they would be welcomed. Go back to Afghanistan. The people were in the streets playing music, cheering, flying kites, and doing all the things that the Taliban and the al-Qaeda would not let them do. Saddam Hussein has one of the most vicious regimes on the face of the Earth. And the people know that."
September 25, 2003: Upon being asked about his claims that Iraqis would welcome US troops with open arms: "Never said that. Never did. You may remember it well, but you're thinking of somebody else. You can't find anywhere me saying anything like either of those two things you just said I said. I may look like somebody else."
Scott, can I ask you about the economy? You've clearly got good economic data over a period of time -- you mentioned consumer confidence -- and yet there's this disconnect.
Can I -- one thing I forgot to mention at the top -- and I know this will stir some interest, but the President -- I do need to back up, it just popped back in my head and I apologize for not mentioning it at the top -- at 1:45 p.m., the President does have a pool coverage announcement. That will be in the Oval Office, so the pool will need to assemble after this briefing. And I'm not able to go further than that at this point. That's an announcement that will be made with the President.
All I can say is that it's not hooker-related.
You can't go further -- can you just tell us what it's about?
No.
I'll tell you one thing -- it definitely has nothing to do with Porter Goss being face-deep in hookers. That's for sure.
Scott, is it personnel -- is it personnel-related?
It's a personnel-related matter.
And I cannot stress this enough -- it has nothing to do with sweet, sweet hooker ass so don't even mention that in your coverage, okay? And did I mention that Pat Kennedy jumped a curb and busted his headlight? Pretty scandalous stuff, right there.
Connected to what David -- when David said economy?
No.
Just a little word association.
ECONOMY = MONEY = SEX = HOOKERS = PORTER GOSS
Don't want to put you on the couch.
No.
No, Scotty's more of the kind of guy who prefers if you put him on, say, the kitchen table. Or if he's really feeling crazy, the elevator floor in a parking deck on an early Sunday morning.
...
Hey, cool, the Bullshit Detector actually just threw up a little bit.
[Y]ou and the President often say the country is anxious about the fact that we're at war. Isn't that to suggest that Americans' pessimism and anxiety about the war far outweighs their confidence in the U.S. economy, and their confidence in the President?
I think the American people recognize the importance of succeeding in Iraq and winning. It is a central front in the war on terrorism. It is a front that we need to win. And we are going to win. We are winning in Iraq. There's much to do. We see that the violence continues. That's why --
I wonder how many times I have to say "we're winning!" before it becomes true.
But I'm asking about U.S. attitudes, about Americans' attitudes --
We'll let others do the polling. I mean, the President is focused on succeeding in Iraq. There are some Democrats --
We'll let others do the polling. Then we claim we don't care about polls. So what it boils down to is this: we can't be bothered by the opinions of you fucking whiners.
The public is more pessimistic about the war than they are confident about the economy. Is that -- do you accept that?
I think when you look at the economic numbers, the important ones to look at to look at how Americans feel about the economy, is consumer confidence. And that continues to go up.
This is what you're gonna miss about me -- my ability to provide a totally bullshit answer to a question that was never asked.
[H]ow important does the President feel about peace in Darfur as a legacy item for him? How personally connected is he to this?
Well, he's looking at it from the standpoint of the human condition. This President cares passionately about the human condition around the world. We care passionately about the plight of the people in North Korea; we care passionately about those who are suffering in Darfur. As I mentioned, there are rapes of women that continue; there is random violence; there is great suffering that has been going on in Darfur.
So the President is looking at it from the standpoint of, we all have an obligation to help when there is suffering on this scale. We are the one country that has come out and said genocide has been going on in Darfur. The President has made this a high priority and we were able to move forward on an agreement between the north and south in Sudan. That was an important first step. Now we need to continue to urge the parties to come to this agreement on the Darfur region.
So the President is looking at it from the standpoint of getting peace in that region and helping to alleviate the great suffering that's going on and improve the lives for the people there -- and to save lives there, as well.
All we can really know for sure is that it ranks somewhere below catching a fish in a fake pond at his fake ranch.
I want to first go on record as saying that I appreciate the way you have treated us, all of us fairly and professionally over these years.
Thank you. It's been an honor.
Lowest. Standards. Ever.
Thank you, thank you. The D.C. delegate wants the Congress to give the Mayor of Washington the authority to call up the National Guard if needed. Right now, only the President can do that for the District of Columbia. Will the President go along with the request?
It's not an issue that he and I have discussed, but I think we have expressed our views when it comes to D.C. and its relationship with the federal government previously.
See, you almost expect me to block any attempt to get a straight answer when you're talking about the Iraq War or Valerie Plame or NSA Wiretaps... but I'm not just any White House Spokesman.
I'm Scotty McClellan -- MAXIMUM SPOKESMAN!
I don't even give straight answers to fairly innocuous questions. Watch this:
PRESS CORPS: What did you have for lunch today?
SCOTTY: I have addressed this question previously.
PRESS CORPS: Do you like the color yellow?
SCOTTY: I have expressed my views on this issue in the past.
PRESS CORPS: Has the President --
SCOTTY: Wait, wait... I hate to interrupt you, but... I have previously articulated our views on this matter.
PRESS CORPS: But I --
SCOTTY: Shhhhh. Previously articulated.
Scott, the President's poll numbers in the latest polls are the lowest of his presidency. We know that you are going to be leaving us soon, today is your last briefing. Have you given any advice --
Did you see the stock market today? Where it was two-and-a-half years ago, three years ago?
If I may, for old time's sake, I'd like to address your question about the President's abysmally low poll numbers by saying, -- HEY LOOK! OVER THERE! A POLAR BEAR!
(runs away)
Scott, the President's low poll ratings, he's not running for reelection, he's not running for election this year. Are you concerned that those low poll ratings might be dragging down Republican --
I know sometimes this room gets caught up in polls, but the American people want us to focus on getting things done. And that's what this President is going to continue to do for the last two-and-a-half years of his administration. We have accomplished much over the past five-and-a-half-plus years. And the President wants to continue to build upon that record.
The things that the President has accomplished over the last five and a half years might largely explain why his poll ratings are so low.
That's why he's reaching out to Congress on important priorities, like making sure that we move forward on a budget that meets our highest priorities, like funding our troops and funding our homeland security priorities, and then holding the line on spending elsewhere in this budget. We have a solid record of making sure that our priorities are met while holding the line on spending elsewhere.
And we're continuing to move forward on those efforts. And we're moving forward to urge Congress to get comprehensive immigration reform passed. There are a number of important priorities. The Congress is addressing high energy prices. That's an important priority that the American people care about. The President is focused on the priorities that the American people care most about.
Do you see what I did just then? A few minutes ago, when you asked me about the opinions of the American people toward the President and the direction of the country, I said, "We'll let others do the polling". But now, all of a sudden, I am MISTER I-KNOW-WHAT-THE-AMERICAN-PEOPLE-CARE-ABOUT. And it works because you, the press, will never-ever call me on it. We're a team, you and I. That's what I'll miss the most, I think. The teamwork. Because -- and I say this with all sincerity -- I could not possibly do it without your complicity help.
Doesn't the President have concerns about whether or not he's able to influence the Congress based upon those low numbers? Republicans are less likely to --
The President is going to continue to do what he's always done, which is work to elevate the tone, to reach out, and to get things done.
Look!
Up in the sky!
It's a bird! It's a plane!
It's -- HISTORY RE-WRITER!
HEY KIDS! In addition to learning that the President has always worked to elevate the tone and reach out to get things done, try these fun facts on for size!
- DID YOU KNOW? The President led several civil rights marches during his time in the Air National Guard in Alabama? Well it's true!
- WERE YOU AWARE? The President tried really hard to avoid war with Iraq, but Saddam forced us into it when he aimed his Super Ultra Death Ray 3000 directly at the Statue of Liberty? We had no choice!
- HAVE YOU BEEN INFORMED? The President mentored underprivileged youth during his tenure as Governor of Texas? Believe it!
Yesterday, the President prayed with those gathered inside the White House for the National Day of Prayer, yet Chaplin Klingenschmitt, that faces a possible court-martial for attending a press conference outside the White House in uniform in which he prayed. And my question, will the President ask the Secretary of the Navy to dismiss the charge against the Chaplin so he can freely pray --
Les, I think this gets into area of chain of command matters of which I cannot get into.
My last press conference ever, and THIS is the fucking question you ask me!?
There are reports of further misconduct by Congressman Patrick Kennedy of Rhode Island including driving at night with car lights off, nearly colliding with a police car, smashing a security barrier, emerging from the vehicle staggering, and telling officers he's a Congressman late to a vote at 2:45 a.m., six hours after they had adjourned. And my -- as spokesman for the nation's chief law enforcement, why wasn't this Congressman subjected to sobriety testing since he was involved in another car accident two weeks before in Rhode Island?
I think that's a matter to refer to the appropriate law enforcement officials or the Congressman's office.
What's all this fuss over?
Wait a minute... is that... the MEXICAN FLAG?
Pat Kennedy jumped a curb and scraped his car on one of the eight billion concrete barriers scattered around Washington D.C. Have a look at the massive damage that has gotten the press all in a tizzy.
Surely, this is AT LEAST as bad as a Republican who killed a guy driving recklessly, speeding, and running a stop sign. For this minor transgression, our Republican friend received a worthy punishment:
Circuit Judge Rodney Steele sentenced him to 100 days in jail and three years of probation for his conviction on charges of second-degree manslaughter, speeding, running a stop sign and reckless driving.
But the chief law enforcement, you're his spokesman --
We don't know the facts. We do not know the facts relating to this, Les.
But it sounds scandalous! Maybe you guys should cover every angle and every detail of this fender-scraping catastrophe until everyone forgets that Porter Goss has resigned because he was face-deep in sweet, sweet hooker ass in exchange for preferential treatment on government contracts!
Scott, I asked this a couple of days ago, and you said you hadn't looked at it this way. Congress has agreed to spend billions of dollars more to help the Iraqis get back on their feet. Why is there no agreement in place where Iraqis could be sending millions of barrels of oil for free to pay for this and ease our consumption and dependency on foreign oil?
Well, first of all, there are short-term steps that we can take to address high gas prices. We are taking those steps. The President is moving forward on making sure that there's no price-gouging. We are delaying some of the deposits to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. We are also looking at ways that we can provide waivers for some of the fuel standards that are in place. And so there are a number of short-term measures that we can take.
It is our philosophy that there is no problem too big or too small that we cannot solve by fucking over the environment. And yeah, he's all over that price gouging issue.
And you have been one of the greatest press secretaries we ever had in the White House.
I don't know about that, but thank you, Goyal.
If anyone knows Goyal's source, I want some of whatever Goyal's smoking.
One quickly, spending the days in the Alexandria Court House, watching the trial of this terrorist, 9/11, of course there is no death for him, but he will be in jail for life. What he said was that Osama bin Laden live long and he will never be caught, or you will never catch him, alive or dead. And he said that, personally, he would do again, and he is not sorry for anything. My question is, when are we going to get Osama bin Laden, because somebody knows where he is -- he knows, and he said many people know where he is.
He will be brought to justice. He is responsible for great crimes against humanity and great crimes against the American people. And this President does not forget what occurred on September 11th. He remembers it every single day. And that guides his thinking when it comes to our foreign policy.
As you can clearly see in this recently declassified page of George Bush's foreign policy meeting notes:
And that's why we are continuing to take the fight to the enemy abroad, so that we're not fighting them here at home.
Seriously, you folks have no idea how close we were to having Sunni militiamen and Shiite Death Squads marching through the streets of Omaha, Madison, Seattle, and Jacksonville. We really dodged a bullet there, so to speak.
That's why we have worked to dismantle the al Qaeda leadership. Some three-quarters of al Qaeda's senior leaders and other associates within that have been brought to justice -- they have either been captured or they have been killed. We are keeping them on the run.
For example, we have killed al-Qaeda's number two leader 724 times!
Osama bin Laden, who you bring up, is someone who is on the run. He's under a lot of pressure. And we must continue to keep the pressure on the terrorists, and continue to go after them by staying on the offensive. And that's what this President is doing.
Bin Laden is totally on the run. Running scared. Under pressure.
Except for, you know, the two or three times a week he has the opportunity to release a new video or audio tape. This guy gives more addresses to the United States than Bush does.
Second, quick one on Iran. This week A.Q. Khan has been released, and he's a free man now, he can travel anywhere, but we -- U.S. still does not have any access to him or IAEA. Now Iran needs him more than ever, because Iran is just about to get nuclear weapons, and they know they need A.Q. Khan. So what we have to say about this A.Q. Khan? He's a free man now, he can travel anywhere he wants, and once he said that every Muslim and Arab countries will be nuclearized by him.
We've worked closely with Pakistan in the global war on terrorism. They are now an ally in the war on terrorism, and we will continue to work with them to make sure we have the intelligence needed to continue as we move forward to learn more about the network that was broken up. This was an important success in our broader efforts, an important success of the intelligence community. And we appreciate all those that were involved in it, in terms of breaking up that network.
And we have learned much since that time. In terms of Iran, they know what they need to do -- the international community has spelled it out. It's time to come clean and to abide by your international obligations. And if they continue down the path that they're on, then it's time for the Security Council to take action. And the Security Council is discussing moving to the next diplomatic step, which would be a Chapter 7 resolution. And we're having good discussions. Those discussions continue at this point.
Did you hear that? You asked me about A.Q. Khan, the Pakistani scientist who wants to be like a fucking Nuclear Johnny Appleseed, giving nuclear weapons to all the people we've pissed off in the Middle East, and my response was "Pakistan is our friend".
Sleep tight tonight, America.
Thank you, Scott. Last month, Deputy Secretary Zoellick said that the United States would not look kindly if Nicaragua elected Commadante Ortega as the president and made some critical comments about the Mayor of Managua, who's also a presidential candidate. My question is, does this not break with your policy of not commenting on foreign elections? And if the administration is going to comment about elections in other countries or in this hemisphere, would you say who would we prefer in Peru's runoff, Colonel Humala or former President Garcia?
I think it's up to the people of those countries to choose who their president will be.
Unlike, you know, America.
But what's important for the United States is to continue to emphasize the importance of democracy in the hemisphere
Unlike, you know, America.
and to emphasize the importance of good governance
Unlike, you know, America.
and to emphasize the importance of rule of law
Unlike, you know, America.
and to talk about ways we can work together to lift people out of poverty and to help them realize better quality -- a better quality of life.
Unlike, you know, America.
Scotty, you're fucking killing me over here.
Several world leaders called on the United States to hold direct talks with Iran. And last night -- Kofi Annan and Angela Merkel -- during their visit. Could you please tell us why it's a bad idea for the United States to hold direct talks with --
Because it's not a bilateral issue between the United States and Iran. It's a problem that Iran has with the world. This is a regime that is a threat to the region by its own actions and its own behavior. This is a regime that continues to move in the opposite direction of the rest -- or most of the Middle East. Most of the Middle East is continuing to take steps forward on the path to greater freedom and greater democracy. And that's important. The President has talked about this before.
But this has been a volatile region of the world, and it's a region where we cannot accept the status quo any longer. Before September 11th and for years, our foreign policy was based on the premise that we could have stability at the expense of democracy. The President rejects that view.
Because clearly, Iraq has proven to us that it is certainly possible to have neither.
P.S.