In my opinion, The Washington Post is being a bit hard on Scott McClellan, today:
…Howard Kurtz writes: "He was painful to watch at times, gamely repeating the same stock phrases under a barrage of hostile media fire, grasping for new ways to deliver the same non-answers." (By the way, the last time I checked, that’s called "staying on message.")
…Dana Milbank writes: "Bush bestowed the dreaded ‘heckuva job’ laurel on McClellan (‘job well done’ was today’s version) and said: ‘I don’t know whether or not the press corps realizes this, but his is a challenging assignment dealing with you all on a regular basis."
Others have been more kind to Scott, but are attributing the shake-up to Bush’s dilemma:
…Dan Balz opines, "… yesterday’s senior staff changes represent a frank acknowledgment of the trouble in which President Bush now finds himself. "
My take hasn’t changed. McClellan had a tough job. Was he perfect? No. But it’s a tough gig …