Friday, March 26, 2004

When a Bush bucket-boy like Pinkerton writes something like:

Clarke's old boss, Rice, for example, is willing to snipe at him in newspaper op-eds and on TV shows, but she is unwilling to testify publicly before the same 9/11 commission.

The White House pleads "executive privilege," but that's a dodge. If the issue is important enough, constitutional nuance ought to give way to the people's right to know. In 1974, for example, the sitting president of the United States, Gerald Ford, testified, under oath, before the House of Representatives about his pardon of Richard Nixon. And ever since then, Ford has enjoyed a deserved reputation as a straight-talker.

And that's the reward for candor in public: not only the immediate respect of one's countrymen, but also the enduring admiration of historians.

For the moment, the Clintonians and Bushites seem to be playing for narrow personal and political advantage.

By contrast, Clarke, warts and all, seems to be thinking about the truth - which means he is thinking about the national interest, as well as the long haul of history.

I think it's time for Condy to slap palms with a Bible...

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?