Presidential debate disappeared from the political landscapethis week as the commission investigating 9/11 began questioningBush Administration officials, most notably, former terrorismadviser Richard Clarke.
Destroying the bipartisan review we were promised, Republicansand Democrats reminded us that party is thicker than both blood andwater as both reacted to remarks Clarke made Sunday night on 60Minutes.
Clarke's characterization of the Bush Administration's handlingof the war on terror was, pardon the pun, a bombshell. Politicalpundits were on television within hours to dissect, parse andmutilate Clarke's words, while the "official" response was likelybeing crafted in an "all hands on deck" meeting at the WhiteHouse.
Monday morning, cabinet heavyweights carried out their marchingorders on the coffee and doughnut circuit, refuting Clarke both"unequivocally" and "in the strongest possible terms."
With every effort to discredit Clarke, Bushies come off lookinglike boardroom stiffs trying to hamstring a corporate whistleblower. Never mind that Clarke is only one in a series of peopleless than impressed with the goings on behind closed White Housedoors.
Is it possible the lid on what the White House press corps callsthe most tight-lipped administration in decades is loosening? Justrecently, former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill disparaged thepresident in print, and now Clarke does the same.
Which White House castaway will write the next tell-all? Do twobooks establish a pattern that can be trusted, or will it takemore? Perhaps Bush should fire each cabinet member before they canleave on their own. That way, no matter who writes what, it canalways be dismissed under the broad banner of disgruntlement.
Hindsight being what it is, it's easy to look back and think ofwhat could have been done differently in the early months of thewar on terror. For many of us, terrorism was something thathappened to the other guy until that fateful September day. It'shard to remember that we weren't always as vigilant. The names ofpotential attackers weren't household names.
It's possible that no action by the president would haveprevented those devastating attacks. But in those days, when wethought ourselves invincible, it was the president's job to knowthe right names, discover the hiding places and stop what could bestopped.
The sad truth is that many presidential records are kept sealedfor up to 40 years. Will you and I have to wait that long to findout what really happened in the months prior to and following 9/11?The families who lost their loved ones deserve answers now.
