Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Cohen: Bush, Clarke, and a Shred of Doubt

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
kskiska Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-04 03:19 AM
Original message
Cohen: Bush, Clarke, and a Shred of Doubt
Pity poor George Bush. For some reason, he has been beset by delusional aides who, once they leave the White House, write books containing lies and exaggerations and -- this is the lowest blow of all -- do not take into account the president's genius and all-around wisdom. The latest White House aide to betray the president is Richard Clarke, who was in charge of counterterrorism before and after the attacks of Sept. 11. He says Bush "failed to act prior to September 11 on the threat from al Qaeda."

As with former Treasury secretary Paul O'Neill, another fool who had somehow risen to become chairman of Alcoa, Clarke's account of his more than two years in the Bush White House was immediately denounced by a host of administration aides, some of whom -- and this is just the sheerest of coincidences -- had once assured us that Iraq was armed to the teeth with nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. Among them, of course, was Condoleezza Rice, who on Monday insisted in a Post op-ed column that Bush not only did everything just right, but so, really, did Bill Clinton. Both administrations "worked hard," she wrote.

(snip)

Rice's real gift is situational rhetoric. Now, with Bush under criticism from a respected terrorism expert -- and a Republican, to boot -- she makes common cause with the Clinton administration.

Rice's real gift is situational rhetoric. Now, with Bush under criticism from a respected terrorism expert -- and a Republican, to boot -- she makes common cause with the Clinton administration. But that was not always the case. Last October, she faulted previous administrations for doing little about the terrorist threat. In a New York speech, she said of the terrorists: "They became emboldened, and the result was more terror and more victims."

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16407-2004Mar22.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-04 04:31 AM
Response to Original message
1. Condisleeza
Another vapid, incompetent liar. She said that she will not sign on for another 4 years and wishes to go back to being a Professor. I wonder if here students would believe anything she says.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seventhson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-04 06:32 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Only if she says "I am an incompetent liar"
who got my job by ass-kissing and for the purpose of "colorizing" Bush's retinue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-04 08:33 AM
Response to Original message
3. "Situational Rhetoriic"
Great phrase. The best counter to "Moral Equivalency", which, by the way, we don't hear used anymore, do we.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bonhomme Richard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-04 08:58 AM
Response to Original message
4. I think she has a bizarre ethics code. In her mind..............
it is perfectly OK to lie unless you are under oath. I think that is where she draws the line and the administration knows it. Not that she has an ethical problem with lying under oath but the fact that if caught she could go to prison. She will not risk that. Ergo the reason they are playing games about her testifying before the commission.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 09:43 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC