Scott McClellan; George Soros; Dick Morris; Clint Murchison; Barr McClellan; Peter Osnos; JFK; LBJ; assassination plot

Scott McClellan's new book "What Happened" is not worth writing about, but the story of its creation and the MSM/DNC efforts to foist yet more white noise on the American people is noteworthy.

First of all, there is nothing noteworthy in the book, as Dick Morris has pointed out. (I will not bother to read the book, but Morris' analysis is logical.) McClellan's anti-Bush conclusions are supported by nothing that would be unique to any insider. There is no bombshell factual revelation.

It has become clear that as McClellan began writing the book, the book was bland with no reason for the MSM/DNC to provide any coverage. At some point, the publisher exerted some degree of influence, and the project "evolved" (as the Washington Post has acknowledged. The Post tries to downplay the influence of the publisher. The Post quotes publisher Peter Osnos (a former Post editor) as part of the effort to downplay the influence of Osnos' publishing company. The Post refers to Osnos' publishing company "PublicAffairs" as a "small company," but never acknowledges that PublicAffairs and Osnos are part of the George Soros empire that owns the Democratic Party.

Flopping Aces writes more on the evolution of the book from a drab say-nothing book to a drab anti-Bush book (and the publisher's role in said evolution).

But even more interesting is the history of McClellan's father, Barr McClellan. You see, Barr McClellan is an author also. He became a partner in the Austin law firm of Clark, Thomas and Winters in 1972. At that point, "he was told about the illegal activities of the firm. . . " including the assassination of President John Kennedy. As a result of this inside information, he quit the firm five years later to start his own firm. I guess when you are gen-u-ine insiders like the McClellan's, it takes time to figure out that you don't like what you see on the inside.

Dad's belated crazy book
















But I digress. Barr McClellan decided to write a tell-all book in which he revealed the assassination plot - a plot so extensive it included Dallas Cowboy owner Clint Murchison, Lyndon Johnson, oilman Haroldson Hunt and others.

JFK assassin Clint Murchison (rear left) talking with Tom Landry and other Dallas Cowboy officials.
















The book is entitled Blood Money and Power: How L.B.J. Killed J.F.K. I am not sure how the law firm was involved, but it sounds like a more interesting story than Scott McClellan's book.


An attractive attorney at Clark Thomas and Winters - [I wonder if she knows that she is working for assassins. Maybe Scott should let her and the other employees in on the secret. Come to think of it, maybe Scott should have mentioned this whole JFK assassination thing to the President while he was working at the White House - unless, of course, Bush was in on it too. I guess that is the subject of his next book.]




In any event, the MSM/DNC's (1) failure to mention that Goerge Soros is the publisher of Scott McClellan's book (2) attempts to depict the publisher as "small" (3) failure to mention that Scott McClellan's father is a first class nut who published more interesting crap than his son ever could and (4) other stuff that we are not yet aware of - is all standard operating procedure to which we have become accustomed.

I wonder, in the entire McClellan book (Scott's - not Barr's) is there even one lie depicted that comes close to the Washington Post description of Scott's publisher as "small"?

What is more interesting is that George W. Bush hired this man in the first place. Memo to future moderate Republican presidents: Don't hire the insane or their children. George W. Bush is lucky that "war propoganda" is all that he was accused of. I can't wait to see what kind of crazies are lining up to work in the McCain administration.

=================================
visit counter added on January 25, 2009.

John McCain has been funded by George Soros and Teresa Heinz Kerry

WND has the story today of how George Soros and Kerry's groups fund McCain's "Reform Institute":

McCain used the institute to promote his political agenda and provide compensation to key campaign operatives between elections.

The ability to pay campaign operatives between elections is key, as fundraising is difficult during "off" years. The candidate that maintains a campaign staff and conducts campaign activities during the supposedly quiet "off" years has an advantage and a head start over others. This is especially true for a candidate with national ambitions as opposed to state or local candidates. State or local candidates can always use their official staff for political activities (even though they are not supposed to). But it is much more difficult for a Senator to use his government paid staff to coordinate campaign activities nationwide.

One question this raises is, why was Soros' connection to McCain not raised before McCain became the presumptive nominee? I know why the MSM/DNC did not raise this issue. But I am asking why conservatives did not raise this point until now. The WND article lists those few conservatives that discussed this issue prior to 2008. The article also lists the salaried McCain staffers that interlock the Reform Institute and some of the funding sources for the Institute.

If we are destined for a George Soros funded president regardless of whether McCain or Obama (or Hillary (if we are pretending she is still viable)) wins, then there is no point in supporting McCain. At least with a Democrat, Soros' control will be open and susceptible to opposition.

With Obama in office, we will have one enemy - the Soros funded Obama socialist tyranny. But with McCain holding the White House, we will also have to fight confused Republicans within our own ranks who cannot bring themselves to strike out at the Soros-Republican administration. This internal battle will be constant and will paralyze our attempts to rid the country of Soros' foreign influence.

There is no real solution at this point, but this is dilemma we have given ourselves by nominating an open borders "moderate."

Socialized health care, smoking bans, tyranny

For those who are tempted to let the health care debate alone in order to focus on immigration or terrorism, etc., I sympathize. But we must remember that George Soros' employees never rest and never give up a battle. The war to turn control of this country over to Soros will be fought on many fronts, including health care. We must remember that socialized medicine is a stepping stone to greater government control. In fact, it is the biggest stepping stone - bigger than the gun grabs, bigger than taxes, bigger than McCain-Feingold, etc.

So let me just say that I think socialized health care is the single biggest factor in transforming the relationship of the individual to the state. In fact, once it's introduced it becomes very hard to have genuinely conservative government - certainly, not genuinely small government. I think I say in my book that in Continental cabinets (and in Canada) the Defense ministry is somewhere you pass through en route to a really important portfolio like Health.

Mark Steyn

It will be very hard for you to campaign for gun rights, lower taxes, free speech, etc. when the government has full power to decide whether your child can see a doctor the next time he gets sick. A society that depends on the government for its medicine is a silent, subservient, feeble society.

See also Tim Harford for a discussion of how the government's control of health care allows the government to regulate more details of our lives.