Replies

1 posted on 03/28/2004 2:30:39 AM PST by sopwith

Clarke may well be a speaker at the Democratic convention because of his attacks on Bush.His credibility as a security czar has been severely damaged.His self aggrandizing spin is almost laughable.

His anti Bush,Rice tirade leaves him wearing the mantle of a bitter,partisan hit man.

2 posted on 03/28/2004 2:46:06 AM PST by MEG33 (John Kerry's been AWOL for two decades on issues of National Security!)

3 posted on 03/28/2004 2:58:53 AM PST by VOA

Personally I believe that without CBS and The Commission, Clarke's book would be a dud.

4 posted on 03/28/2004 3:03:17 AM PST by Just mythoughts

5 posted on 03/28/2004 3:17:18 AM PST by miltonim

Great summary of Clarke and his hate-driven lies.

6 posted on 03/28/2004 3:40:21 AM PST by Right_in_Virginia

7 posted on 03/28/2004 3:41:46 AM PST by metesky ("Brethren, leave us go amongst them." Rev. Capt. Samuel Johnston Clayton - Ward Bond- The Searchers)

Stellar summary of how it really is and was with Richard Clarke

8 posted on 03/28/2004 3:44:32 AM PST by dennisw (“We'll put a boot in your ass, it's the American way.” - Toby Keith)

To: Molly Pitcher

9 posted on 03/28/2004 3:48:04 AM PST by ABG(anybody but Gore) ("Eeaaaghh!!!"-Mad How Dean)

clarke is another one of those poor schlubs who gets caught up in the liberal/media limelight... he's treated like a hero and then can't stay off the television; he thinks he's more important than he is... just like that weapons inspector from a few years ago, i forget his name... the left dispenses with these fellows in due course

10 posted on 03/28/2004 3:52:32 AM PST by InvisibleChurch (I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.)

What should we have done during those lost years? Clarke answered: “Blow up the camps and take out their sanctuary. Eliminate their safe haven, eliminate their infrastructure. . . . That’s . . . the one thing in retrospect I wish had happened.” It did not. And who was president? Clinton. Who was the Clinton administration’s top counterterrorism official? Clarke. He now says that no one followed his advice. Why did he not speak out then? And if the issue was as critical to the nation as he now tells us, why didn’t he resign in protest?

This is the essence of this article from my perspective... If Clarke was serious about wanting to warn the US about the threat of terrorism, al Qaeda, OBL and if he wanted to intercede in the gathering threat, and put this issue on the national agenda, why didn't he resign in 1999 or even 2000 and go public then? Why didn't he take up his book project and get it into the national debate for the 2000 election when he could have forced both parties to step-up and answer?

In this light, he did owe everyone an apology because HE COULD HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE AND HE CHOSE NOT TO.

Unfortunately, Richard Clarke is as feckless as his Clinton "superiors" -- and that's a very low standard indeeed.

11 posted on 03/28/2004 5:17:35 AM PST by ReleaseTheHounds

Great piece. I already posted it Friday here http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1105576/posts but it definitely deserves another. Krauthammer is the best!

12 posted on 03/28/2004 5:28:27 AM PST by kellynla (U.S.M.C. 1/5 1st Mar Div. Nam 69&70 Semper Fi http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com)

15 posted on 03/28/2004 5:59:20 AM PST by RonnG

19 posted on 03/28/2004 6:34:07 AM PST by lepton

Krauthammer is syndicated by the Washington Post. Please excerpt next time. Thanks.

21 posted on 03/28/2004 8:54:39 AM PST by Admin Moderator

Yes, and eight years of everyone being AWOL were under Clinton, right? Hello?

24 posted on 03/28/2004 2:28:02 PM PST by Seeing More Clearly Now

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794