Women Are from Mars, Men Are from Venus, Fred Kaplan is from Way the Hell Out There
March 25th, 2004 - 9:30 am
Slate’s Fred Kaplan has his own take on Richard Clarke’s testimony:
I am not suggesting that Clarke’s apology was cynical or purely tactical. I’m sure it was sincere. This is a guy who was obsessive about terrorism when he was the national coordinator for counterterrorism during the Bush 41, Clinton, and
Which explains all the liberal single-moms?
[Runs out, ducking the resulting brick-bats.]
I think Fred Kaplan is Richard Clarke’s nom de sequitir…
Or is nom de plume?
Whatever.
The problem is that all the headlines (newspapers, tv) say “Clarke warned, and apologized” and any reaction by the Whitehouse necessarily is defensive.
I do wish Condi would take the stand in public. She’d be able to nail Clarke. Then, when Cheney has “heart problems” this summer, guess who gets tapped to be the VP nominee.
Maybe obsessive as in not properly focused.
Nothing like wishful thinking. First round knockout? More like Clarke got tangled in the ropes coming into the ring and knocked himself out on the turnbuckle while the truth is standing over him with a dented folding chair.
It’s pretty easy to apologize when your career is over and you’re no longer accountable for past actions. I don’t recall seeing Clarke’s tearful apologies after WTC ’93, USS Cole, African embassies, etc, etc, etc. Of course, he didn’t have a book to sell back then and the face time wouldn’t have helped his bank account.
Kaplan may be giddy as a schoolgirl about a few marginally effective points against Bush, but he’s not fooling anyone. The only thing that’s flat on its back is Clarke’s credibility.
Oh, and Bush’s credibility is all so great:
WMD’s – seriously misled (himself probably included), if not lied
Medicare cost – flat out lie
Fred Kaplan has jumped the shark with today’s piece. Not only is Clarke impeached out of his own mouth by what he said in August 2002 and January 2003 (resignation letter, also complimentary of the Bush Administration), but by what he didn’t say. If Bush is responsible for 7 months where he continued Clinton’s policies while formulating new, more aggressive ones, then why no criticism of Clinton’s 8 years of failure to solve the problem? Personally, I don’t think either administration can be faulted much, but especially Bush, who was also dealing with a recession and some serious domestic policy initiatives right after he took office.
And yet Clarke reserves his invective exclusively for Bush. Very, very smelly.
But Freddy Kaplan just gushes over Clarke. Well, Fred is a partisan goof, so some of that is to be expected, but he also went to school with Clarke. And there’s probably more there if someone wanted to look for it.
Just my $.02 worth.
1st WTC bombing- Clinton, Clarke employed shortly thereafter (IIRC)
Khobar Towers- Clinton, Clarke on deck
Attacks on American embassies in Africa
(multiple)- Clinton, Clarke on deck
USS Cole attack- Clinton, Clarke on deck
“Monica Missiles” attempt on Osama raises his stature mile-high in Islamic world, while succeeding in limiting Taliban’s supply of Exedrin– Clinton, Clarke on deck
2nd WTC- Planned, perps infiltrate country and get training, final planning – Clinton, Clarke on deck
Clarke seems to have some serious resume inflation going on–the national coordinator for counterterrorism during 3 administrations? First, he’s a career civil servant, second, he’s on the staff of the NSC, third, under Clinton he’s made the coordinator for counterterrorism–a new position–and they let him run the principals meetings regarding counterterrorism. Under Bush (43), he was proposed the higher level authority that such a title suggests, but was denied as it conflicted with the responsibilities of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the SecDef regarding military advise to the President, and the SecState regarding diplomatic initiatives. And if his “responsibilities” were really that great, then he needs to take responsibility for 9/11, but since he’s just finger pointing, it looks like he’s just a career civil servant after all.
You mean the person who advised Clinton for all those anti-terror policies, should be taken seriously by Bush? I would believe him more if he quit in August 2002, instead of acted as a mouth piece for the Bush Adm. Where’re his integrity and credibility? Mind you, after 30 years feeding on the public trough, he could have retired with full pension in 2002. His resignation would have called into question the merit of the Iraq war, would have alerted the country about Bush’s recklessness in the anti-terror front. He owed the families of the Sept.11 victims to speak up, he owed the American people the warnings against going to War. Less well-heeled whistler blowers did just that, blew the whistle for public good without thinking about themselves. Clarke only blew the whistle when he could gain the most. Despicable creature. That might also explain why we had Sept. 11, because our govt. was/is filled with these self-serving creatures.
Meh, I’m glad the US ain’t my country. Where is OBL? What the heck are you guys doing in Iraq. It is like Bush is playing Where in the world is OBL. But hey, I really couldnt care less. It’s your building, your choice if you don’t want to fire the people that let it happen. Personally, if the leader of your country can’t conjugate verbs in his native tongue, I’d start looking there for fault rather than some civil servant. Lets not pretend that terrorism is a new threat. Flying a plane into the WTC is one thing. But having a civilian airliner smash into the Pentagon? That is like Perl Habour all over again. Do you guys have AA batteries in your air force anymore? I mean I think personally if an non-responsive plane entered pentagon airspace it should be shot down. But hey, again, not my country. Then the day after the FBI personally escorts the prime suspects family out of the country? And no one cares? Clarkes credibility may or may not be crap but there are alot of public documents that show severe negligence. Again, not my country. If you guys think the job Bush is doing is good elect him again. Personally, I’d be pretty pissed off to see school funding cut and tax breaks given to people making more than a million dollars a year. Maybe, most americans make more than a million a year. I don’t think so.
As long as you guys are happy with loosing 3 million jobs keep on electing bush. At least he isnt immoral.
Did you guys see the joke he did pretending to look for the WMDs? That is funny, all I could think of was the amount of southerns who volunteered for the army that are dead because of that joke. When you aren’t american that joke is pretty funny. It’s like your leader tells you lies and then mocks you for believing it.
Your president is a riot. I hope you elect him again. I look forward to more jokes at your own expense.
SUMMMING UP RICHARD CLARKE
Dan Drezner pretty much hits the nail on the head. Remember the common line that every Washington memoir can be subtitled If Only They Had Listened To Me, and you will go a long way towards understanding the basis and…
check, check, check, and check
*ding ding* Morph hit all the DNC talking points! Troll of the day! Huzzah!
(you would have gotten bonus points for adding Halliburton or the vast right wing conspiracy though, better luck next time)
That does it, I’m not electing the guy who joked about not finding WMDs. Put me down for the guy who joked about the murder of the Vice President instead.
Click on morph’s email…what kind of test is this exactly?
Guess: to see if anyone picks up on the education funding thing (e.g., that Bush has in fact INCREASED education funding more than any previous prez)?
“the amount of southerns”…very funny!