As we blogged here LIVE the other day -- and the New York Post is editorializing today -- former Sen. Bob Kerrey lost it at the 9/11 hearings:
[Kerry] couldn't keep from sputtering his outrage over Fox News Channel's decision to air a tape of star witness Richard Clarke's 2002 background briefing -- saying the network "violated a serious trust."
With all due respect, that's a load of hooey -- and Bob Kerrey knows better.
We don't doubt for a moment that what really has Kerrey steamed is the fact that the tape so devastatingly undermines Clarke's usefulness as a battering ram against the Bush administration.
As for violating any trust -- since the backgrounder was conducted on conditions of anonymity -- it should be noted that the White House approved the tape's release (for obvious reasons).
Fox News Channel (which has the same corporate ownership as this paper) performed a public service and helped inject a much-needed dose of reality to the proceedings.
We're still concerned about the public's ability to recognize the sham, though. Clarke's "apology" to the victims' families brought applause from still-grieving family members in the audience, but for us it didn't ring true. We agree with Jeff Jarvis at BuzzMachine and Michelle at A Small Victory that apologizing implies we -- rather than the terrorists -- are responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Not to mention the smarminess of Clarke's implication that he was the one honest man among an otherwise corrupt administration. Why don't people pick up on the body language?
[via Lucianne]
Comments