The word on Clarke is he is arrogant, almost maniacally so. He knows the right answer. Everybody who disagrees is either an idiot, or an ideologue, except for him of course.
That is the big issue on Clarke. The government is give and take, people with different views. If 9-11 happened on Clinton's watch, you would bet that Clarke would be saying he was the lone beacon of truth that could have prevented it if he was listened to at the time.
He's arrogant to a fault. The way for people to attack him is not on his truth telling, or his political interests, attack his intellect, and his judgement.
The republicans on the committee should basically say that he was incompetent. That is what will get his goat. He will brush aside the liar thing, his ego and ability though are his achilles heel.
Former Clinton White House terrorism czar Richard Clarke is preparing to tell the Independent Commission Investigating the Sept. 11 Attacks this week that the Bush administration failed to act on a Clinton administration plan to attack Osama bin Laden.
And in a "60 Minutes" interview set to air Sunday night, Clarke blasts Bush for doing "a terrible job on the war against terrorism."
But just a year ago Clarke was singing a different tune, telling reporter Richard Miniter, author of the book "Losing bin Laden," that it was the Clinton administration - not team Bush - that had dropped the ball on bin Laden.
Clarke, who was a primary source for Miniter's book, detailed a meeting of top Clinton officials in the wake of al Qaeda's attack on the USS Cole in Yemen.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1102233/posts