Whaaa!

[koboshi]

Former cybersecurity advisor Richard Clarke on the Daily Show tonight? is this for real?  WTF, Mate?^^

[HaemishM]

SWEEET!

[WayAbvPar]

This should be quite entertaining. My predicition is that Jon Stewart will take the middle of the road approach by taking jabs at Clarke by referencing all the discrediting remarks being made by the Bushies, and then also bashing the fuck out of the Bush administration with the bits they haven't been able to refute or marginalize.

Good times.

[HaemishM]

Thing is, the only coverage of Clarke at the hearings I've seen has been what's on the Daily Show. Clarke has come out looking pretty damn good at those hearings, IMO, if for no other reason than he actually said to the victims and survivors of 9-11 that "your government failed you. I failed you."

Opportunistic book-selling motherfucker he may be, but that took courage and fucking balls, as well as a lot of honor.

[cerberus]

goddamnit, watched an anime dvd and missed the daily show. So will clark be on tomorrow, or did I miss it?

[koboshi]

I missed it too but there are rebroadcasts at 10 am and 7 pm.

edit: its tonight insted... so at 11:00...  It has occurd to me that april first is coming up soon...

[Alluvian]

Thing is, the only coverage of Clarke at the hearings I've seen has been what's on the Daily Show. Clarke has come out looking pretty damn good at those hearings, IMO, if for no other reason than he actually said to the victims and survivors of 9-11 that "your government failed you. I failed you."

Opportunistic book-selling motherfucker he may be, but that took courage and fucking balls, as well as a lot of honor.

No it doesn't.  Not when you practically say it in the same breath as you babble about how you tried to warn them and they didn't listen!!!  He is selling books, that is all he is doing.  Oh, and lying under oath.  He is doing that as well, either now or back when he still had his job.

[HaemishM]

At least he had the balls to testify, as opposed to Condi Rice, who refuses to do so because other National Security Advisors in the past haven't. Because you know, it's not like we need anything like checks and balances or something.

Book sales or no, I'm on Clark's side.

[cerberus]

Rice to testify in public, under oath
Bush, Cheney also will go before full 9/11 panel

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4623066

Excellent. They are so going to burn.

[daveNYC]

Thing is, the only coverage of Clarke at the hearings I've seen has been what's on the Daily Show. Clarke has come out looking pretty damn good at those hearings, IMO, if for no other reason than he actually said to the victims and survivors of 9-11 that "your government failed you. I failed you."

Opportunistic book-selling motherfucker he may be, but that took courage and fucking balls, as well as a lot of honor.

No it doesn't.  Not when you practically say it in the same breath as you babble about how you tried to warn them and they didn't listen!!!  He is selling books, that is all he is doing.  Oh, and lying under oath.  He is doing that as well, either now or back when he still had his job.

I don't believe he was under oath when he gave testimony to congress, although I think it is a crime to give false testimony.  Considering that his testimony is classified though, makes me think you don't know what the fuck he said back in the day.

[HaemishM]

Rice to testify in public, under oath
Bush, Cheney also will go before full 9/11 panel

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4623066

Excellent. They are so going to burn.

Cheney and Bush's testimony will remain private. Full disclosure my ass.

[koboshi]

Cheney and Bush's testimony will remain private. Full disclosure my ass.

If anything is too shady I'm sure that it'll get leaked.

[Alrindel]

Oh, and lying under oath.  He is doing that as well, either now or back when he still had his job.

Note that the Republicans behind that particular smear have since backed right down.  Bill Frist, who was the one screaming "lied under oath" has since retreated to "there may be inconsistencies".  Porter Goss who said "there's a huge difference between what Clarke said then and now, and there may be a lie involved," later admitted that he was only just starting to read though the transcripts of Clarke's 2002 testimony.

As for Frist being shocked, shocked that someone would write a book about terrorism and sell it for money, it is to laugh.

[WayAbvPar]

I missed it too but there are rebroadcasts at 10 am and 7 pm.

edit: its tonight insted... so at 11:00...  It has occurd to me that april first is coming up soon...

Yeah it is on tonight- I was exhausted, but stayed up to watch it last night. Once I found out he wasn't on until tonight, I was asleep before the first commericial break =)

[WayAbvPar]

At least he had the balls to testify, as opposed to Condi Rice, who refuses to do so because other National Security Advisors in the past haven't. Because you know, it's not like we need anything like checks and balances or something.

Book sales or no, I'm on Clark's side.

Condi is gonna spill it.

I am guessing this is more a PR scam than anything (part of the agreement is that they can't ask for any further WH officials), and that she will refuse to answer a lot of questions. I am unfamiliar with the process- can she limit the scope of the questions beforehand, or do they have carte blanche to grill her about anything?

[HaemishM]

Then you missed Tim Russert asking Richard Clark if the White House was "Dissing him." Stewart's response was hilarious.

[DarkDryad]

Oh, and lying under oath.  He is doing that as well, either now or back when he still had his job.

Note that the Republicans behind that particular smear have since backed right down.  Bill Frist, who was the one screaming "lied under oath" has since retreated to "there may be inconsistencies".  Porter Goss who said "there's a huge difference between what Clarke said then and now, and there may be a lie involved," later admitted that he was only just starting to read though the transcripts of Clarke's 2002 testimony.

As for Frist being shocked, shocked that someone would write a book about terrorism and sell it for money, it is to laugh.

Uhh you may want to look again its about the effects of biological weapons. Not about blaming anyone. Its a medical text. You guys are having soo much fun aint ya.

[daveNYC]

Your definition of medical text is more generous than mine.

[Anonymous]

Don't mind DarkDryad.  I think he posts using his Ann Coulter action figure.

[Alluvian]

Ah, now I remember why I don't post on these forums.  Less usefull than watching crossfire.

Republicans SUCK.  NO DEMOCRATS SUCK!

RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE!

That's politics I guess.

[Snowspinner]

Your definition of medical text is more generous than mine.

Much as it pains me to take DarkDryad's side on anything, the book's LoC number is in RC88.9. R is the classification for medical texts - RC focuses specifically on internal medicine. RC88.9 is a classification for medical emergencies, critical care, intensive care, and first aid.

So, yes, it is a medical book.

Which doesn't mean it's a good book - just that it is a medical one.

[Alrindel]

Its a medical text.

Here's what the cover copy says: In this indispensable guide, U.S. Senator Bill Frist - the only physician in the Senate and cosponsor of the two major pieces of legislation dealing with this frightening new threat - offers straightforward, practical advice on how to keep your loved ones safe.  Written in an easy-to-read, question-and-answer format, this authoritative reference provides the most up-to-date and reliable information on biological agents like anthrax and smallpox, the dangers posed by chemical weapons, and the vulnerabilities of our food and water supplies.

It's not a medical text.  It's a quickie cash-in book whipped out a couple of months after the 2001 anthrax scare, targeted at a very frightened Joe Sixpack.

[daveNYC]

RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE!

That's politics I guess.

Sounds more like the hamburglar.

[HaemishM]

Hamburgler makes more sense than most political discussions.

[Alluvian]

The whole post was really just an excuse to cut and paste the word RABBLE a lot.  It is so fun to say in rapid succession.

[koboshi]

Ok I just watched the show and it was a good interview.  Jon was predictably liberal (gotta love him) but Clarke was simply smart without any of the malice which has surrounded him.

[ArtificialKid]

I like this guy, if for no other reason than actually apologizing for the massive intel failure that was 9/11.  I don't think his underlying motives were pure, and he's not a government official anymore, but it's nice to hear anyway.

[HaemishM]

I thought John Stewart's interview of Clarke was spectacular. Stewart makes no bones about the fact that he's liberal, but he also took great pains to not just say "HAH HAH DUMB CONSERVATIVES AM I RIGHT?" He asked intelligent, devil's advocate questions. He seems genuinely interested in educating Americans about the way our political system works, as well as shining light on the idiocy of partisan rancor guiding policies while still being entertaining.

[DarkDryad]

Oh for christs sake when the damn book numbering says  I'm right I'm still wrong. I give up on you guys. Thanx btw spinner I know that hurt.

[Alrindel]

Of course the LC catalogue number puts it in the medical section, you dumbass: the book is not about auto mechanics, german poetry, dinosaur fossils or rabbit stew recipes, it's about "bioterrorism", so that's where it goes.  That doesn't magically transform Frist's book into a scholarly medical text written for physicians and medical researchers: read the fucking slipcover copy.  It's an "easy-to-read" book targeted at a popular audience of laymen using the boogyman tactic "how to protect your loved ones", pumped out fast to cash in on the anthrax scare, and I'm guessing it was probably ghost-written.

[Zaphkiel]

Oh for christs sake when the damn book numbering says  I'm right I'm still wrong. I give up on you guys. Thanx btw spinner I know that hurt.

    Rush Limbaugh's books are in the non fiction section, that doesn't prove anything.

[DarkDryad]

And if you look further into the book... you know actually go look at the actual bok you will find most of its contents are identifying bio and chemical weapons and relating symptoms and how to tell if you have been infected and what to do about it . It most definately is written in simple to understand terms so that the average person can wade through the decriptions of the agents. The only dumbass I see is you for being such a tinfoil hat wearing bastard.

[Anonymous]

Yes, and if a democrat had written this, you'd be the tinfoil hat wearing jackass.

[DarkDryad]

Actually no I can make the distiction between politics and other things but as proven you guys usually can't.
It has to be a fear mongering book simply because the guy that wrote it is a rep. Yeah right. To quote a famous actor : "Go sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here."

[personman]

I respect his track record as a heart & lung surgeon.

But I'm not sure how that translates to expert on using duct tape to seal windows, agent weaponizing and dispersal tactics, and in depth science on agent effects at the molecular level.  All in a jaunty Q&A format.

I do take seriously his discussion on government programs & plans, and the need to fund certain initiatives more thoroughly.  Hopefully in a different GOP environment he'd be able to return to his earlier more moderate politics rather than paying lip service to the latest "Family Values Through Defunding Last Weeks PR Announcement" and "How to Solve Any Profound Problem in Three Steps: Tax Cuts for the Wealthy, Cut Social Services, And Did We Mention Tax Cuts for the Wealthy".

Had he done a book on organ transplant issues I'd be less likely to consider such a text a ghost written effort at political positioning.

Clarke's book is actually complimentary in most places, he sticks to the core competency that he employed under four presidents (three of whom were Republicans), and Bush Jr's presidency only comes up in the last 40 pages.  And of that most of what Clarke said is simply repeating things the president himself has told us in other interviews.

Clarke's the closest thing to a hero we've had come out of the federal government at his level in almost two generations.  I hope he sells a shitton of books.

For those that differ, consider one of these -
http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html