Right Up Top

It doesn't. What does is that he was a mouthpiece for a load of horseshit that was shoveled on the American people, and he's continuing to shovel it. In this interview, Terry asks him if he feels he contributed to the 'hyping' of WMD in Iraq to make the case for war. He responds:

Absolutely not. I accurately- the job of the press secretary is to faithfully articulate what the government is doing and why it's doing it at the time it's doing it. All you can do is work off the best information available at the time.

Now, as informed people, you and I know that the White House had plenty of information at the time that indicated that: 1) Sadam had not rebuilt his WMD capability 2) he had no ties to Al Qaeda and would not share such weapons with them even if he had them, and 3) that he would never make any sort of attempt to attack the US with such weapons except in one sole situation: if we were to invade. Read the July 2002 National Intelligence Estimate. Did he intend to rebuild his capability? Yes. Were there valid reasons for invading Iraq? Yes. Did the White House or Fleischer point to a single one? No, because they knew damn well that the American public would not think those reasons (control of oil, pressure on Saudi Arabia, strategic location, establishment of a functional democracy in the region) were good enough to set a precendent of pre-emptive attacks. Instead, George Bush stood up in his State of the Union in 2003 and said "Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans -- this time armed by Saddam Hussein." It was despicable fearmongering, and it was fucking immoral. And THAT, Dailey, makes anyone who took part in it a Douchebag Extraordinaire.
And to top it all off, now Fleischer is trying to make a buck off it. That gets him extra douchebag points.

How does publishing a book about his time working for the president qualify him as a douchebag?