...it's not dark yet, but it's gettin' there...

March 25, 2004

Dick Clark Flap, Ho Hum

i'm really not paying attention to the whole Dick Clark snipe-fest. It's all politically motivated finger pointing. On all sides. No one wants to admit that there's blame enough to go around for 9/11.

As far as i'm concerned, they all fucked up, each in their own way, and each to varying degrees. i'm talking about Bush, Clinton, Cheney, Clark, Allbrite, Reno, Tenet, Woolsey, Kerry, Monica, Woodward and Bernstein, Buddy, Barney and probably Socks the cat, too. They all could have done more, i'm sure.


Consider Socks. With all this info floating around about Al Qaeda back in the 90's, why didn't Socks hear anything? Wasn't he listening? Cats have much better hearing than people, and they're lower to the ground, too. And if he did know something, why didn't he tell anyone? It boggles the mind.

Seriously, all this finger pointing is pointless and counter productive. The question is: who has the best plan going forward? Which side in this debate is going to best prevent future terrorist attacks? These commission hearings (and their associated ephemera: the books, 60 Minutes, Larry King and the like) are not helping our fight. In my opinion; the debate has devolved into a political mutual masturbation society. Who can jerk the public off most effectively? That's why i've lost interest.

i think a recent quote by Jonah Goldberg amounts to the best bottom line take on this whole Dick Clark brouhaha:

For a whole bunch of reasons — the Florida recount, Howard Dean's influence on the Democratic party, the failure to find WMDs, etc. — the foreign-policy debate is no longer a debate over facts, it's a debate over motives.

One side simply believes, as a matter of theology, that Bush couldn't possibly have had sincere motives for war. It had to be a 'lie,' in the words of Ted Kennedy, 'made up in Texas.'

The other side, my side, finds such an analysis so irrational, so hateful and so profoundly dangerous to America that it becomes difficult not to wonder if such people hate George Bush more than they fear terrorists or love America.

Sheesh. My solution? Everyone admit some fault, big group hug, roll up sleeves, then go back to kicking ass on the badguys.

Posted by annika, Mar. 25, 2004 |
Rubric: annikapunditry


Relativist analysis is wrong. One side was trying to fix eight years of fucked up policy in eight months, the other was just fucked up from the word go, and some of us got to experience it first hand. From Les Aspen's denial of tanks to the snake-eaters in Somalia, to fishing for a nitwit liberal squish Republican to play SecDef, these people pissed away the family fortune that Reagan and Bush the elder put in the bank.

Posted by: Casca on Mar. 25, 2004

Let's just hang Barney now and get it over with.

Posted by: Steve S, on Mar. 26, 2004

The problem with your group and kicking ass solution, is that one side of the debate doesn't believe in kicking ass. Fighting terrorism for them is an episode of Law and Order.

Posted by: Stephen Macklin on Mar. 26, 2004

"it becomes difficult not to wonder if such people hate George Bush more than they fear terrorists or love America."

Goldberg is way too charitable. Those who protest a war on terror DO hate America and George Bush more than any terrorist. THe recent protest make clear that these protests are the run and funded by COMMUNISTS, period. The venom they spew is stunning.

Posted by: Mark on Mar. 26, 2004