Tuesday, March 23, 2004
Doth they protest too much?
Attacks against former counterterrorism-czar Dick Clarke by TeamBush have been the most aggressive and most all-hands-on-deck in the history of this administration. Timed to coincide with Clarke's interview on 60 Minutes last Sunday in advance of his book release for Against All Enemies literally every person from the administration who might have something to say about this guy has been on the tube, in print, and giving interviews to vigorously rail against him.
As Knight-Ridder's William Douglas detailed, the attacks ranged from his ability as NSC counterterrorism expert (Condi Rice), to his minor role in high-level meetings (Cheney), to plain old ad hominem mocking by Press Secretary Scott McClellan, who goofed on his name by saying, "This is just Dick Clarke's American Grandstand--and he just keeps changing his tune." Get it? Get it?
In fact, McClellan's silliness was probably the best display of TeamBush's overall strategy toward Clarke (and also, Kerry): Get out in front early with multiple disparaging remarks that tear him down across a wide front. Paint him as a misguided waffler with an ax to grind. They know that accuracy is barely relevant in these offensives, so it is given the short shrift.
Hoping to stem that tide, Josh Marshall has taken administration refutations point-by-point, and has found that they are either:
"saying things that are either demonstrably false or highly debatable. Along the lines of little discipline, note the contradictory nature of the attacks. In some, we did everything Clarke wanted; in others, he was out of the loop. Hard to figure both are true. It's scattershot because they're desperate and don't have the facts on their side."
One thing TeamBush has not done is provide any direct evidence that what Clarke is saying is actually wrong.
It's hard to believe that the administration hasn't been shaken by these revelations, coming as they do just the day before Clarke and TeamBush luminaries such as Powell and Rumsfeld among others are to speak before the 9-11 Commission.
Here's another view. Clarke is just one person on a growing list of people (Karen Kwiatowski, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, John Snow, and many others) who has served our country in a variety of roles, under both Democratic and Republican administrations going back thirty years who was so shocked by the single-minded moral bankruptcy of this administration (in finance, industrial policy, taxation, war, and diplomacy) that he had to come forth and tell what he witnessed.
The intense and, as Marshall argued, somewhat scattered nature of these attacks is more reminiscent of desperate lashing out than disciplined rebuttal. Storm clouds are gathering over the administration, and it clearly fears that the outcome won't be managed to its favor or benefit.
Attacks against former counterterrorism-czar Dick Clarke by TeamBush have been the most aggressive and most all-hands-on-deck in the history of this administration. Timed to coincide with Clarke's interview on 60 Minutes last Sunday in advance of his book release for Against All Enemies literally every person from the administration who might have something to say about this guy has been on the tube, in print, and giving interviews to vigorously rail against him.
As Knight-Ridder's William Douglas detailed, the attacks ranged from his ability as NSC counterterrorism expert (Condi Rice), to his minor role in high-level meetings (Cheney), to plain old ad hominem mocking by Press Secretary Scott McClellan, who goofed on his name by saying, "This is just Dick Clarke's American Grandstand--and he just keeps changing his tune." Get it? Get it?
In fact, McClellan's silliness was probably the best display of TeamBush's overall strategy toward Clarke (and also, Kerry): Get out in front early with multiple disparaging remarks that tear him down across a wide front. Paint him as a misguided waffler with an ax to grind. They know that accuracy is barely relevant in these offensives, so it is given the short shrift.
Hoping to stem that tide, Josh Marshall has taken administration refutations point-by-point, and has found that they are either:
"saying things that are either demonstrably false or highly debatable. Along the lines of little discipline, note the contradictory nature of the attacks. In some, we did everything Clarke wanted; in others, he was out of the loop. Hard to figure both are true. It's scattershot because they're desperate and don't have the facts on their side."
One thing TeamBush has not done is provide any direct evidence that what Clarke is saying is actually wrong.
It's hard to believe that the administration hasn't been shaken by these revelations, coming as they do just the day before Clarke and TeamBush luminaries such as Powell and Rumsfeld among others are to speak before the 9-11 Commission.
Here's another view. Clarke is just one person on a growing list of people (Karen Kwiatowski, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, John Snow, and many others) who has served our country in a variety of roles, under both Democratic and Republican administrations going back thirty years who was so shocked by the single-minded moral bankruptcy of this administration (in finance, industrial policy, taxation, war, and diplomacy) that he had to come forth and tell what he witnessed.
The intense and, as Marshall argued, somewhat scattered nature of these attacks is more reminiscent of desperate lashing out than disciplined rebuttal. Storm clouds are gathering over the administration, and it clearly fears that the outcome won't be managed to its favor or benefit.
Comments:
Post a Comment
