The Right Coast - Perhaps the best thing on Clarke and 9/11, however, is written by Ann Coulter, in her column this week. anncoulter.org Coulter takes a lot of heat even from the right, but much of the criticism is inappropriate. Coulter is not trying to write "balanced" columns -- balance which is more appearance than reality in many "balanced approaches", such as with Clarke's claims. Instead, she focuses in on what she regards as the essential point and then makes the case for it. It is true that her view of the essence, in general and in her most recent column, is critical of Democrats and moderate Republicans, but the real question is how strong her arguments are.
In her most recent column, she rehearses the history of presidential responses to terrorism and shows how Carter and Clinton did little to address terrorism. The first Bush did more, but not that much more. Reagan does the most, as does President Bush (especially post 9-11).
I am sure that there are details that are being left out and that certain events are construed in favor of conservative Republicans. (Of course, other columnists never do this.) But the real value of the Coulter column is how much evidence she can supply for her claim. She is able to make an historically sophisticated point (that others have neglected), while both powerfully refuting and ridiculing Clarke. There is a reason Coulter is a best seller. |
