Getting personal - not

The administration aquitted itself well on the Sunday talk shows today defending against the ridiculous charges by Dick Clarke re: 9/11.

The laugh-out-loud silliness came from the liberal panelists like Ceci Connelly on Fox News Sunday who decried the "personal attacks" from the White House on Dick Clarke for speaking up. Personal? What's personal about rebutting the attacks by producing evidence to show that he's either lying or has faulty recollection and his charges are spurious. Clarke's sworn testimony to the committee has been amply rebutted by contradictory testimony in secret to the committee, in background briefings to the press, and by radio interviews. His credibility is shot. But is that a personal attack. Not hardly.

Yes the President's defenders have made the case that Clarke is a disgruntled demoted employee who quit mad and who has a grudge. That's not getting personal. It just explains the motive for Clarke's hit piece.

I say again, can you really take someone serious who believes that Clinton did a better job on counter-terrorism than Bush? Really?

The White House is making only two mistakes in this 9/11 Hearing situation:

1. The should be more aggressive, not less, in pressing the case that the President showed true leadership after 9/11 and has been very effective in the War on Terrorism.

2. They should find a way for Condi Rice to testify in the hearings instead of blocking her. I understand the historical precedent argument for keeping the President's closest advisors out of subpoenas. However, Condi would certainly be very credible blow away Dick Clarke. It would be - case closed.