Richard Clarke: Just FOllow the Money!
Richard Clarke took the full hour on Meet the Press yesterday.
Throughout the week revelation after revelation highlighted Clarke's
lack of voracity. Day by day it became increasingly clear that Clarke's
motivations were based more in partisan feelings and a desire for
revenge, Oh ... and there's that
more than one million dollars he's going to earn from his book. So ...
Tim Russert decides he's worthy of the entire hour on Sunday.
One thing should stand out here. We're spending all of this time
talking about what happened ... what Bush did or did not do ... before
9/11. What's really important is what Bush did after 9/11. The polls
show that the Democrats will have limited success attacking Bush on
his record of fighting terrorism after 9/11. That leaves them with
little to do but try to convince the voters that somehow they need to
blame Bush for allowing 9/11 to happen in the first place. Right now
Richard Clarke is their point man in this effort.
It's clear that Clarke is getting a huge pass in the press as to what
his motivations for the book are. For the most part, people are
largely buying his story that he was some sort of tortured soul that
knew the truth about 9/11, and had Bush only listened to him, the
attacks might have been prevented. Nice story, isn't it? The only
problem is this: if Clarke felt so strongly about his views, then why
didn't he just resign and hold a press conference? Why wait all the
way until now? Why wait until a few days ago to apologize to the
families? It all comes down to one thing and one thing only: money.
Richard Clarke waited until now to "tell" his story because he wanted
to make money on his book. The inconsistencies in his book and his
prior testimony don't matter...he doesn't let the facts get in the way
of his good story...it's all about the money. Otherwise, why wait?
Secondly, did anybody else catch Clarke on TV yesterday admitting he
voted for Al Gore in 2000? This doesn't exactly square with what he
told the 9/11 commission last week. He said "Last time I had to declare
my party loyalty, it was to vote in the Virginia primary for president
of the United States in the year 2000. And I asked for a Republican
ballot." Of course, the only reason he would say that would be to
leave the impression that he voted for President Bush, which some media
outlets even reported. Now he admits on
national television that he voted for Gore.
Maybe he should go work for the Kerry campaign....he's already got the
flip-flopping down pat.
Neal Boortz
.
|
