More McClellan shuck and jive

Q Scott, is the U.S. holding al Qaeda captives at a secret base in Eastern Europe or elsewhere?

MR. McCLELLAN: I’m not going to get into discussing specific intelligence activities. I will say that the President’s most important responsibility is to protect the American people. It’s a responsibility he takes very seriously. We are engaged in a global war on terrorism, and a global war against Islamic militants who are determined to attack America and kill innocent men, women and children, and we are going to continue to go after terrorist leaders who seek to do us harm, and do all in our power to prevent attacks from happening in the first place. That’s what this President is doing. He’s charged his administration and his team to make sure that we’re doing all we can to protect the American people, and save lives.

And as we do so, we will do consistent with our legal obligations.

Q The President often says that when we capture an al Qaeda person, we are bringing them to justice. Is that the case?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, when you talk about capturing al Qaeda terrorists, you’re not only talking about bringing them to justice, you’re talking about being able to get important intelligence that can help us prevent attacks from happening in the first place. I think some of the people that you’re probably referencing, talking about, are people like Khalid Shaykh Muhammad and Ramzi Binalshibh and Abu Zubaydah — terrorist leaders who are responsible for killing thousands of Americans and many others in the civilized world that are innocent people.

Go ahead.

Q That doesn’t answer the question.

MR. McCLELLAN: You bet it does. I’ve told the American people exactly what I’ve said and I –

Q That’s not bringing them to justice. Torture is not justice –

MR. McCLELLAN: — I think they think it answers it.

Q Isn’t your statement in error when you say that the previous administration came to the same conclusion? The previous administration did not come to the same conclusion –

MR. McCLELLAN: I said the same conclusion, that Saddam Hussein –

Q — to intervene militarily.

MR. McCLELLAN: — that Saddam Hussein’s regime was a threat.

Q But they didn’t go to war.

Q But isn’t the point of the –

MR. McCLELLAN: You want to talk about their comments? Let’s talk about their comments.

Q But the point of what they raised yesterday is the President’s decision to move militarily into Iraq. Are you saying –

MR. McCLELLAN: There’s no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. His regime “threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region, and the security of all the rest of us” — President Clinton, remarks to the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff, February 17, 1998.

Q But he didn’t take us to war.

Q But isn’t the specific issue –

MR. McCLELLAN: The conclusion they came to was that Saddam Hussein’s regime is a threat and a destabilizing force in a dangerous part of the world.

Q But he didn’t take us to war.

Q But the specific issue is weapons of mass destruction.

Q But the question was whether the United States –

MR. McCLELLAN: You asked me about a statement I made, and I just backed up the statement that I made.

Q Kind of a housekeeping question. You repeatedly say that you’ve been instructed not to comment on the CIA leaks case, because there’s an ongoing investigation. Can we infer from that that when Fitzgerald announces his investigation is completed you will be in a position to comment?

MR. McCLELLAN: I said I’d be glad to talk more about it after it’s come to a conclusion.

Q Well, would that mark the conclusion?

MR. McCLELLAN: Would what?

Q The end of the Fitzgerald investigation.

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, there’s an investigation and legal proceeding. And the comments I make –

Q So now you’re adding court cases.

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, Bob, I think any time there’s been a legal matter going on, we’ve said, that’s a legal matter.

Q No, what you said is, you can’t comment on an ongoing investigation.

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I think what I said last — and look what I said –

Q So you’ve added the words, “legal proceeding.”

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, now there is a legal proceeding.

Q So you’re adding the words, “legal proceeding,” to the formulation.

MR. McCLELLAN: That’s not — any time there is a legal proceeding such as that, we don’t discuss it. I mean, I think you can look back at –

Q Because –

MR. McCLELLAN: Because it’s a legal matter, and it’s before the courts.

Q The world is crawling with legal matters that the White House comments on all the time. What sets this apart?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, there are legal matters that occur all the time that we do not comment on, because they’re ongoing legal matters that are before the courts. Remember, numerous times we’ve referred stuff to the Justice Department because it’s an ongoing legal proceeding.

War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Etc.

I’m really starting to feel bad for McClellan. Now that the press has managed to generate some publicity about his doublespeak, they’re having a field day with him. When he steps up to the podium it’s like throwing chum in a shark tank.

Being a press secretary has to be one of the shittiest jobs in any administration.

I have to admit it’s fun to read though.

Wow, “shuck and jive”? It’s the year 2005, I can’t believe this kind of racism and bigotry still exists. You should be ashamed of yourself for a thread title like this.

Racism? I know the expression and I have never heard any racist meaning attached too it. It just means, to me, to bend the truth.

Urban dictionary informs me that it can also mean “To act like a nigger,” but that one is new on me, and I am pretty sure it wasn’t meant in that sense here.

You’re kidding right? I don’t think “shuck and jive” means what you think it does.

Aren’t there innocent kittens lurking around just waiting to cause massive traffic accidents in your rural neck of the woods that need killing?

I’ve never heard “shuck and jive” used in any way other than as a racist comment. It’s pretty obvious how the OP intended the comment and your eagerness to make excuses for him is pretty sad.

I’ve never heard “shuck and jive” before ever, you old farts.

Your eagerness to shoot the messenger and ignore the message is pretty sad in itself. Any actual comments about the content?

But it’s good to see that you have finely developed sensitivities about what is appropriate in forums. As opposed to someone who strolls into a cat-loving thread and blithely announces that he runs over them intentionally. Man, those insensitive jerks suck.

They’ve got this new thing on the internets (which is on computers now, btw) called “google” that allows you to enter text and search a whole lot of stuff for a phrase.

So let’s us check and see what googling “shuck and jive” (which in the popular lexicon tends to be a synonym for “slippery and deceptive”) returns, shall we?

On March 16, 2003, noted racist Maureen Dowd used the phrase in an editorial that appeared in the notoriously Klannish New York Times.

The next google result comes from those hood-wearing cross-burners at Mother Jones. The phrase, used exactly like Midnight Son used it, appears in 1979 article.

Next up: The Industry Standard used the phrase in a 2000 article on Microsoft. Again, same usage as that of Midnight Son.

Yet another search turns up a song title for a ditty penned by Grammy-winner Jimmy Webb. Huh. Same damn usage as Midnight Son, and not one racist overtone in it.

Those infamous Nazis at The Village Voice used the phrase in a blog entry on 6-6-05. Dammit if their use of the term didn’t completely match the same usage given the term in Midnight Son’s post.

Those scamps at the scholarly History News Network had the unmitigated gall to use “shuck and jive” in a headline in August of 2003! Of course, once again, the phrase took the same meaning as it does in MS’s initial post here.

A-HA! Here we go!! Spoon, an Austin TX band, has the phrase appearing in the lyrics to one of their songs! Unfortunately, Spoon just happens to be a very literate band using a popular lexicon in the same way as Midnight Son, rather than being a band of racists.

Hell, turns out a bunch of other musicians, like Joni Mitchell among others, have lyrics with the same phrase. Huh.

Holy crap! Author Carl Hiaasen had the temerity to use “shuck and jive” in a headline for a commentary column he published in the Miami Herald in 2004! Fucking racist. Oh, wait. No.

At this point, I grow weary of listing stuff from the first 4 pages of search results google returned on the phrase. Not one could I find where “shuck and jive” took on a racist connotation. There are 43,700 results returned on the phrase, so maybe someone else could look harder. Or, hell, someone else is welcome to continue this pile-on to this sadistic cat-murdering son of a bitch. Either way, I’m all good.

Well shit triggercut, no need to make everything hit at once like that. He’s going to be up till 10:20 AM writing up a response to that. Maybe he’ll change his mind tonight. You know he could still change his mind tonight.

Believing is hard. Believing is art.

Hi Gideon!

No, this guy is a planetcrap troll… he has been outed in two other threads.



I’ve heard McClellan has a rhinoplasty every morning to make up for the previous day’s growth…

Ah ha! Anti-semitism!

Ah ha! Anti-semitism![/quote]

Ah ha! Semi-antimism!

Ah ha! Anti-semitism![/quote]

Actually, that’s anti-Gepetto-ism. :lol:

I’ve never heard of that term being racist before either.

Is it really? Or was the guy who posted it being so a troll?