Richard Clarke on Jon Stewart tonight - Comedy Central

Don't miss it!

:kick:

Can't wait... Thanks for the head-up!!!

:thumbsup:

:kick:

:-(

:hi:

I wrote it down, in case you didn't...

Pretty dumb of him to do that, right? ;-)

That was funny. I think I will send him a message.

he'll retaliate like only a spammer can

I have used it for serious mail like once.

good email address....you'll never see the end of the spam. ;)

just saw the tail end of Rob Corrdry punkin' some lame-o.

He wants that in the discussion, I believe.

he said that some good stuff got taken out because it was secret/top secret

they truly are an incredible bunch of buffoons

often.

Bush*'s foray into Iraq hurt the war on terror

Stewart seems a bit at a loss as to how to handle this. He's doing the usual wisecracking bit, trying to walk that line between the seriousness of the topic and the comic nature of the show. But the jokey bits are falling rather flat. Clarke doing his talking points, not really responding to the banter.

Commercial break over. Talking about character assassination. Seems more comfortable.

"I'm not running for president. My character not at issue. question is, why are we attacking Iraq when it hurts the war on terrorism."

really can't address the importance of what Clarke is saying.

...but also a bit earthier....termerity and balls.......I think Clark is being professional, but in real life would be earthier....

Interesting the way Clarke described that horde of people in the West Wing paid by tax dollars writing up talking points, calling up conservative talk show hosts, etc... Sounds like he was disgusted with the political nature of the Bush administration (and we've heard this about them before from insiders...many times).

"I want to thank you, Jon, for helping highlight the issue," as they close

so, does this mean that he has gotten SQUAT from other media outlets?

am I reading too much into this?

I don't think so

could there be a more CUTTING indictment of the pathetic state we've reached, when a COMEDY show is the ONLY source of HONEST reporting that exists???????????

and I want an hour format, dammit!

...seems pretty heavy applause and cheers....

and totally have an hour-long show. There was talk of doing the Colbert Report as a separate show but I think it got axed.

I wanted to hear more of what Clarke had to say. Jon was very uncomfortable I thought.

...are all saying the same thing on this matter. Didn't mince words. They got their talking points from the White House.

I listen to Boortz in the morning, Schnitt mid afternoon, and Hannity in the evening.

These sessions take place during my ride to work, my lunch hour pickup, and my ride home in the evening.

I don't have these shows on entirely during these times.

And in the short span that I listen in, I constantly hear the same points made over and over and over about the exact same issues.

Especially on a show more popular than Faux.

:)

Your lunch hour pickup? Is that like a nooner?

I WISH!!!

no, I am friends with one of the guards in the building. He gets a very short lunch hour. So most days I pick up lunch for both of us.

:D

again!!!!

I hope he reads DU. He probably needs a bit of support these days.

I was very familiar with Clarke before this crap came up because of he is the counter-terrorism czar and specifically the cyberterrorism czar. We learned about him at RIT.

If we want good people in government, then good people need to work for government. Who wants to replace guys like Clarke? I doubt many aspire for that because of all the bullshit that comes with it. These guys are heroes just like the soldiers and firefighters and so on.

Service....its a constant theme for him...check this out:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/03/29/conservative_side_showed_in_hub_days/

Sadly, politics is about making a quick buck now. It's corporate insiders and businessmen who want in these days. Short term.

That's why Bush got into this "racket".

Worthy career public servants are becoming rare.

A true hero. :)

When asked if he had focused Clinton's attention on bin Laden and al-qaeda Clark said it was the other way around and that Clinton was the one who pushed the issue of terrorism and al-qaeda. I hope there is a transcript to confirm. The Freepers must be messing in their pants over that!

That is another reason why the bushies are foaming at the mouth at Clarke. It's because he highlights Clinton too much and doesn't highlight dumbass enough.

...Wish Stewart had dropped the jokes and followed up on that.

I snipped that exchange out, and crunched it down.

Here:
http://piratevideo.tv/MOV/ClarkeOnClinton.mov

QuickTime, 21 seconds, 261K

I missed it but I want to see the whole conversation.

He keeps cutting him off with stupid jokes, for once he should drop the schtick and be a bit serious.

...but I'm not holding my breath. Stewart generally gives the right wingers a pretty easy time. I didn't watch the show for weeks after his good buddy bantering with Hannity. I don't know why he goes all Jerry Lewis on the guests representing views left of center???

it sounds more real than the Goebbels propaganda machine...er...Fox News, MSNBC, CNBC, talk radio, etc.

google joseph goebbels and see what turns up.

-Clarke saying Clinton really drove anti-terror policy, not Clarke forcing him to focus on it. Surprised Stewart. Lot of aspects to that. Wish there'd been more follow up on it, which is I think what Clarke expected.

-Stewart's comment that the book wasn't really all that controversial--that Clarke wasn't saying anything that wasn't already out there, pretty much. This is true of course, and the answer, that Clarke is more of an insider, so his views have more impact, is only part of the explanation for the shitstorm he has been under.

The real explanation is that this isn't an ordinary adminstration, full of people who want to do good and who are focused on empirical things--policy, programs, cause and effect. Rather, it's a medieval court, and the chief value, the ONLY value really, is loyalty. Fealty to the liege-lord, W. You can say all kinds of stupid or negative things so long as you maintain loyalty (cf. some of Rummy's leaked memos), but even the most mildly critical things are intolerable--and will be ruthlessly punished--if they are framed as a breach of loyalty.

a defining feature of any totalitarian regime.

Exactly: "I'm quitting 'cause of the same reason everyone else around here is quitting. I've had my share of you, and then some. You're piss poor, boss. Fugoff."

MY most interesting bit:
Jon - Which is worse, the partisan rancor or the bureaucratic ineptitude?
Dick - They're equally bad.

Why choose between two reasons why we hate the boss? All reasons are allowed.

the trend started long ago. I'm guessing during Reagan's time. It's no small feat to change that. We need thousands of good people to go into government service. I'm considering it as well seeing as how bad the job market is.

Left-wingers tend to look down on some government service as unethical... look at the attacks on the military, the CIA, and such that happen here on DU with alarming frequency.

I know it makes me feel uncomfortable, since I'm planning on going into the civil service when I get out of college... to some people, that apparently disqualifies me as a liberal.

I loved Clarke's reply. "Both"

:kick:

Do you have this?