Guess I have to write about 'ol Rich

See Dick
See Dick testify
See Dick calling himself a liar


Alrighty, well with everyone talking about Richard Clarke I think I'll chime in. But I won't use his words or anything he's saying. (He's said enough.) Instead I'll say something I believe in.

In working with kids, it's not uncommon to hear several interpretations of an incident. Perspective can be gained by listening to several stories, and trying to piece together the information from all the jargon.
Moving on. . . .I love the fact that I don't know what the government is doing at all times. (In fact, this is why I pay them for their services) If I knew every little detail about government actions, my own security would be jeopardized. Some people have a hard time with this raw fact. They simply want to know it all. What's going on behind closed doors, what's the CIA doing right now? What new military weapons are out there? Who's the biggest threat to us? How, Why, When??!?! Now, granted, I understand this mindset. I want to know all the details as well, but I realize if the government was foolish enough to make public every detail about its workings, we'd be much less secure, defeating the governments first goal.

With that in mind, what we as the people of America get, in terms of information, is bits and pieces of stories. We don't hear everything firsthand, so all we can know is what so and so claims took place; trusting a variety of sources. So here's the tie-in. It's just like hearing the kids stories. Sometimes they match up, but most of the time you get different 'truths' about what happened. This is what we're getting with these 9-11 hearings. We have some groups saying one thing, others claiming quite different 'truths'. So who do you believe? Well as always with partisan politics. . . .if you're a Bush supporter, you automatically think Clarke is a liar working undercover for John Kerry. If you're a Bush-hater, you assume Clarke is a hero for coming out and revealing the truth about an evil man named George Bush.

Here's my quick take. I'm not even going to comment on the issue at hand. I'll just say this. . . . .
Sometimes with the kids you get different stories, we already mentioned that. But sometimes you get one kid telling multiple stories; some that even contradict each other. When this happens credibility goes out the window.
Richard Clarke, with the latest 9-11 hearings, you have argued against positions you yourself took in the 2002 hearing. When asked to comment you have no explanation. Thanks for making it so clear who we should believe. Actually, I guess that's still up for grabs. I should have said "Thanks for making it so clear who NOT to believe."

See, working with kids comes in handy all the time. We just needed a kindergarten teacher to preside at the hearings.

This is some good revelation.