Ann NAILS The LIAR Clarke!


Chair-Warmer On The Hot Seat
The BEAUTIFUL & Brilliant ANN COULTER!
March 24, 2004


(Attention Liberal bigots, racists & hate-mongers... Insert your usual
hate-filled personal attacks HERE if unable to refute the article...
as usual!)

ARE YOU sitting down? Another ex-government official who was fired or
demoted by Bush has written a book that ... is critical of Bush!
Eureka! The latest offering is Richard Clarke's new CBS-Viacom book,
"Against All Enemies," which gets only a 35 on "rate a record" because
the words don't make sense and you can't dance to it.

As long as we're investigating everything, how about investigating why
some loser no one has ever heard of is getting so much press coverage
for yet another "tell-all" book attacking the Bush administration?

When an FBI agent with close, regular contact with President Clinton
wrote his book, he was virtually blacklisted from the mainstream
media. Upon the release of Gary Aldrich's book "Unlimited Access" in
1996, White House adviser George Stephanopoulos immediately called TV
producers demanding that
they give Aldrich no airtime. In terms of TV exposure, Aldrich's book
might well have been titled "No Access Whatsoever."

"Larry King Live" and NBC's "Dateline" abruptly canceled their
scheduled interviews with Aldrich. Aldrich was mentioned on fewer than
a dozen TV shows during the entire year of his book's release -- many
with headlines like this one on CNN: "Even Conservatives Back Away
From Aldrich's Book."
That's almost as much TV as Lewinsky mouthpiece William Ginsburg did
before breakfast on an average day. (Let's take a moment here to
imagine the indignity of being known as "Monica Lewinsky's
mouthpiece.")

But a "tell-all" book that attacks the Bush administration gets the
author interviewed on CBS' "60 Minutes" (two segments), CNN's
"American Morning" and ABC's "Good Morning America" -- with an
"analysis" by George Stephanopoulos, no less. In the first few days of
its release, Clarke's book was hyped on more than 200 TV shows.

In contrast to Aldrich's book, which was vindicated with a whoop just
a few years later when the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke, many of
Clarke's allegations were disproved within days of the book's release.
Clarke claims, for example, that in early 2001, when he told President
Bush's National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice about al-Qaida, her
"facial expression gave me the impression that she had never heard the
term before." (If only she used botox like Sen. Kerry!)

Sean Hannity has been playing a radio interview that Dr. Rice gave to
David Newman on WJR in Detroit back in October 2000, in which she
discusses al-Qaida in great detail. This was months before
chair-warmer Clarke claims her "facial expression" indicated she had
never heard of the terrorist organization.

But in deference to our liberal friends, let's leave aside the facts
for now. A few months before Clarke was interpreting Dr. Rice's
"facial expression," al-Qaida had bombed the USS Cole. Two years
before that,
al-Qaida bombed U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. In fact,
al-Qaida or their allies had been responsible for a half dozen attacks
on U.S. interests since Clinton had become president. (Paper-pusher
Clarke was doing one heck of a job, wasn't he?) In the year 2000
alone, Lexis-Nexis lists 280 items
mentioning al-Qaida.

By the end of 2000, anyone who read the paper had heard of al-Qaida.
It is literally insane to imagine that Condoleezza Rice had not. For
Pete's sake, even The New York Times knew about al-Qaida.

Rice had been a political science professor at Stanford University, a
member of the Center for International Security and Arms Control, and
a senior fellow of the Institute for International Studies. She had
written three books and numerous articles on foreign policy. She
worked for the first Bush administration in a variety of national
security positions.

All this was while Clarke was presiding over six unanswered al-Qaida
attacks on American interests and fretting about the looming Y2K
emergency. But chair-warmer Clarke claims that on the basis of Rice's
"facial expression" he could tell she was not familiar with the term
"al-Qaida."

Isn't that just like a liberal? The chair-warmer describes Bush as a
cowboy and Rumsfeld as his gunslinger -- but the black chick is a
dummy. Maybe even as dumb as Clarence Thomas! Perhaps someday liberals
could map out the relative intelligence of various black government
officials for us.

Did Clarke have the vaguest notion of Rice's background and education?
Or did he think Dr. Rice was cleaning the Old Executive Office
Building at night before the president chose her -- not him -- to be
national security adviser? If a Republican ever claimed the "facial
expression" on Maxine Waters -- a woman whose face is no stranger to
confusion or befuddlement -- left the "impression" that she didn't
understand quantum physics, he'd be in prison for committing a hate
crime.

As we know from Dr. Rice's radio interview describing the threat of
al-Qaida back in October 2000, she certainly didn't need to be told
about al-Qaida by a government time-server. No doubt Dr. Rice was
staring at Clarke in astonishment as he imparted this great insight:
Keep an eye on al-Qaida! We've done nothing, but you should do
something about it. Tag -- you're it. That look of perplexity Clarke
saw was Condi thinking to herself: "Hmmm, did I demote this guy far
enough?"

Ann NAILS The LIAR Clarke!


Chair-Warmer On The Hot Seat
The BEAUTIFUL & Brilliant ANN COULTER!
March 24, 2004


(Attention Liberal bigots, racists & hate-mongers... Insert your usual
hate-filled personal attacks HERE if unable to refute the article...
as usual!)

ARE YOU sitting down? Another ex-government official who was fired or
demoted by Bush has written a book that ... is critical of Bush!
Eureka! The latest offering is Richard Clarke's new CBS-Viacom book,
"Against All Enemies," which gets only a 35 on "rate a record" because
the words don't make sense and you can't dance to it.

As long as we're investigating everything, how about investigating why
some loser no one has ever heard of is getting so much press coverage
for yet another "tell-all" book attacking the Bush administration?

When an FBI agent with close, regular contact with President Clinton
wrote his book, he was virtually blacklisted from the mainstream
media. Upon the release of Gary Aldrich's book "Unlimited Access" in
1996, White House adviser George Stephanopoulos immediately called TV
producers demanding that
they give Aldrich no airtime. In terms of TV exposure, Aldrich's book
might well have been titled "No Access Whatsoever."

"Larry King Live" and NBC's "Dateline" abruptly canceled their
scheduled interviews with Aldrich. Aldrich was mentioned on fewer than
a dozen TV shows during the entire year of his book's release -- many
with headlines like this one on CNN: "Even Conservatives Back Away
From Aldrich's Book."
That's almost as much TV as Lewinsky mouthpiece William Ginsburg did
before breakfast on an average day. (Let's take a moment here to
imagine the indignity of being known as "Monica Lewinsky's
mouthpiece.")

But a "tell-all" book that attacks the Bush administration gets the
author interviewed on CBS' "60 Minutes" (two segments), CNN's
"American Morning" and ABC's "Good Morning America" -- with an
"analysis" by George Stephanopoulos, no less. In the first few days of
its release, Clarke's book was hyped on more than 200 TV shows.

In contrast to Aldrich's book, which was vindicated with a whoop just
a few years later when the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke, many of
Clarke's allegations were disproved within days of the book's release.
Clarke claims, for example, that in early 2001, when he told President
Bush's National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice about al-Qaida, her
"facial expression gave me the impression that she had never heard the
term before." (If only she used botox like Sen. Kerry!)

Sean Hannity has been playing a radio interview that Dr. Rice gave to
David Newman on WJR in Detroit back in October 2000, in which she
discusses al-Qaida in great detail. This was months before
chair-warmer Clarke claims her "facial expression" indicated she had
never heard of the terrorist organization.

But in deference to our liberal friends, let's leave aside the facts
for now. A few months before Clarke was interpreting Dr. Rice's
"facial expression," al-Qaida had bombed the USS Cole. Two years
before that,
al-Qaida bombed U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. In fact,
al-Qaida or their allies had been responsible for a half dozen attacks
on U.S. interests since Clinton had become president. (Paper-pusher
Clarke was doing one heck of a job, wasn't he?) In the year 2000
alone, Lexis-Nexis lists 280 items
mentioning al-Qaida.

By the end of 2000, anyone who read the paper had heard of al-Qaida.
It is literally insane to imagine that Condoleezza Rice had not. For
Pete's sake, even The New York Times knew about al-Qaida.

Rice had been a political science professor at Stanford University, a
member of the Center for International Security and Arms Control, and
a senior fellow of the Institute for International Studies. She had
written three books and numerous articles on foreign policy. She
worked for the first Bush administration in a variety of national
security positions.

All this was while Clarke was presiding over six unanswered al-Qaida
attacks on American interests and fretting about the looming Y2K
emergency. But chair-warmer Clarke claims that on the basis of Rice's
"facial expression" he could tell she was not familiar with the term
"al-Qaida."

Isn't that just like a liberal? The chair-warmer describes Bush as a
cowboy and Rumsfeld as his gunslinger -- but the black chick is a
dummy. Maybe even as dumb as Clarence Thomas! Perhaps someday liberals
could map out the relative intelligence of various black government
officials for us.

Did Clarke have the vaguest notion of Rice's background and education?
Or did he think Dr. Rice was cleaning the Old Executive Office
Building at night before the president chose her -- not him -- to be
national security adviser? If a Republican ever claimed the "facial
expression" on Maxine Waters -- a woman whose face is no stranger to
confusion or befuddlement -- left the "impression" that she didn't
understand quantum physics, he'd be in prison for committing a hate
crime.

As we know from Dr. Rice's radio interview describing the threat of
al-Qaida back in October 2000, she certainly didn't need to be told
about al-Qaida by a government time-server. No doubt Dr. Rice was
staring at Clarke in astonishment as he imparted this great insight:
Keep an eye on al-Qaida! We've done nothing, but you should do
something about it. Tag -- you're it. That look of perplexity Clarke
saw was Condi thinking to herself: "Hmmm, did I demote this guy far
enough?"


--
Left-wing liberals are EVERYTHING they accuse the right of being. They
are mean, vicious, hateful, greedy, cold-hearted, closed-minded,
selfish, intolerant, bigoted and racist.

Liberals HATE America!

Ann NAILS The LIAR Clarke!


Chair-Warmer On The Hot Seat
The BEAUTIFUL & Brilliant ANN COULTER!
March 24, 2004


(Attention Liberal bigots, racists & hate-mongers... Insert your usual
hate-filled personal attacks HERE if unable to refute the article...
as usual!)

ARE YOU sitting down? Another ex-government official who was fired or
demoted by Bush has written a book that ... is critical of Bush!
Eureka! The latest offering is Richard Clarke's new CBS-Viacom book,
"Against All Enemies," which gets only a 35 on "rate a record" because
the words don't make sense and you can't dance to it.

As long as we're investigating everything, how about investigating why
some loser no one has ever heard of is getting so much press coverage
for yet another "tell-all" book attacking the Bush administration?

When an FBI agent with close, regular contact with President Clinton
wrote his book, he was virtually blacklisted from the mainstream
media. Upon the release of Gary Aldrich's book "Unlimited Access" in
1996, White House adviser George Stephanopoulos immediately called TV
producers demanding that
they give Aldrich no airtime. In terms of TV exposure, Aldrich's book
might well have been titled "No Access Whatsoever."

"Larry King Live" and NBC's "Dateline" abruptly canceled their
scheduled interviews with Aldrich. Aldrich was mentioned on fewer than
a dozen TV shows during the entire year of his book's release -- many
with headlines like this one on CNN: "Even Conservatives Back Away
From Aldrich's Book."
That's almost as much TV as Lewinsky mouthpiece William Ginsburg did
before breakfast on an average day. (Let's take a moment here to
imagine the indignity of being known as "Monica Lewinsky's
mouthpiece.")

But a "tell-all" book that attacks the Bush administration gets the
author interviewed on CBS' "60 Minutes" (two segments), CNN's
"American Morning" and ABC's "Good Morning America" -- with an
"analysis" by George Stephanopoulos, no less. In the first few days of
its release, Clarke's book was hyped on more than 200 TV shows.

In contrast to Aldrich's book, which was vindicated with a whoop just
a few years later when the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke, many of
Clarke's allegations were disproved within days of the book's release.
Clarke claims, for example, that in early 2001, when he told President
Bush's National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice about al-Qaida, her
"facial expression gave me the impression that she had never heard the
term before." (If only she used botox like Sen. Kerry!)

Sean Hannity has been playing a radio interview that Dr. Rice gave to
David Newman on WJR in Detroit back in October 2000, in which she
discusses al-Qaida in great detail. This was months before
chair-warmer Clarke claims her "facial expression" indicated she had
never heard of the terrorist organization.

But in deference to our liberal friends, let's leave aside the facts
for now. A few months before Clarke was interpreting Dr. Rice's
"facial expression," al-Qaida had bombed the USS Cole. Two years
before that,
al-Qaida bombed U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. In fact,
al-Qaida or their allies had been responsible for a half dozen attacks
on U.S. interests since Clinton had become president. (Paper-pusher
Clarke was doing one heck of a job, wasn't he?) In the year 2000
alone, Lexis-Nexis lists 280 items
mentioning al-Qaida.

By the end of 2000, anyone who read the paper had heard of al-Qaida.
It is literally insane to imagine that Condoleezza Rice had not. For
Pete's sake, even The New York Times knew about al-Qaida.

Rice had been a political science professor at Stanford University, a
member of the Center for International Security and Arms Control, and
a senior fellow of the Institute for International Studies. She had
written three books and numerous articles on foreign policy. She
worked for the first Bush administration in a variety of national
security positions.

All this was while Clarke was presiding over six unanswered al-Qaida
attacks on American interests and fretting about the looming Y2K
emergency. But chair-warmer Clarke claims that on the basis of Rice's
"facial expression" he could tell she was not familiar with the term
"al-Qaida."

Isn't that just like a liberal? The chair-warmer describes Bush as a
cowboy and Rumsfeld as his gunslinger -- but the black chick is a
dummy. Maybe even as dumb as Clarence Thomas! Perhaps someday liberals
could map out the relative intelligence of various black government
officials for us.

Did Clarke have the vaguest notion of Rice's background and education?
Or did he think Dr. Rice was cleaning the Old Executive Office
Building at night before the president chose her -- not him -- to be
national security adviser? If a Republican ever claimed the "facial
expression" on Maxine Waters -- a woman whose face is no stranger to
confusion or befuddlement -- left the "impression" that she didn't
understand quantum physics, he'd be in prison for committing a hate
crime.

As we know from Dr. Rice's radio interview describing the threat of
al-Qaida back in October 2000, she certainly didn't need to be told
about al-Qaida by a government time-server. No doubt Dr. Rice was
staring at Clarke in astonishment as he imparted this great insight:
Keep an eye on al-Qaida! We've done nothing, but you should do
something about it. Tag -- you're it. That look of perplexity Clarke
saw was Condi thinking to herself: "Hmmm, did I demote this guy far
enough?"