pühapäev, märts 28, 2004
Meet the Clarke
Man, that's a weak title.
You know, I'm living in the DC area and I can't find Clarke's book anywhere right now. Maybe it's my insistence on only going to stores that I have gift cards for, but still, it's selling.
Man was amazing on Meet the Press today. Intelligent, articulate, earnest, and focused on the substance of his arguments. He made many good points and, in the process, made the Bush people look terrible. Talking about raising the level of discourse, repeatedly noting that Bush has his staff trying to ruin him on taxpayer money. Pulling out the quotes from Woodward's book was brilliant. I've been pointing to them in discussion with my friends about this all week. Every major point he makes (that Bush didn't consider terrorism urgent, that they didn't have a plan until September, that Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz wanted to attack Iraq) is backed up by Woodward, who had White House cooperation.
What's amazing to me is that none of that is controversial. I mean, this is the first time all of it has come together in one book written by an insider, but hardly anything Clarke has said this week has been news to me. And the fact that the White House hasn't actually refuted any of it says a lot. Instead, they just go after his character and pretend they've discredited him.
Also, his statement about already planning to donate part of the profits and needing to keep the rest because the Bush people will ruin his future in government, well played. Very well played.
|
Man, that's a weak title.
You know, I'm living in the DC area and I can't find Clarke's book anywhere right now. Maybe it's my insistence on only going to stores that I have gift cards for, but still, it's selling.
Man was amazing on Meet the Press today. Intelligent, articulate, earnest, and focused on the substance of his arguments. He made many good points and, in the process, made the Bush people look terrible. Talking about raising the level of discourse, repeatedly noting that Bush has his staff trying to ruin him on taxpayer money. Pulling out the quotes from Woodward's book was brilliant. I've been pointing to them in discussion with my friends about this all week. Every major point he makes (that Bush didn't consider terrorism urgent, that they didn't have a plan until September, that Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz wanted to attack Iraq) is backed up by Woodward, who had White House cooperation.
What's amazing to me is that none of that is controversial. I mean, this is the first time all of it has come together in one book written by an insider, but hardly anything Clarke has said this week has been news to me. And the fact that the White House hasn't actually refuted any of it says a lot. Instead, they just go after his character and pretend they've discredited him.
Also, his statement about already planning to donate part of the profits and needing to keep the rest because the Bush people will ruin his future in government, well played. Very well played.
