But now that Bush/Cheney '04 had begun to unload some of the infinite millions that fill its coffers (courtesy of the corporate bagmen that wag the dog of the Bush Republican Party), we were about to learn a lot about the junior senator from Massachusetts. We were going to learn that he is a classic tax-and-spend liberal (false), that he is an inveterate flip-flopper whose only allegiance is to his own political advancement (sort of true), that he is out of step with mainstream American values (in a culturally polarized country, a meaningless assertion). And we were going to learn that he is soft on terror.
That script has now been rendered inoperative. The next few months, instead, are going to be all about the continuing redefinition of George W. Bush, about replacing the mythic post-9/11 stalwart leader defending America with the sadder reality: that our president is a small-minded, rigid man too blinkered by personal obsessions (Saddam), too wedded to bad ideas (invading Iraq), and too surrounded by dangerous ideologues (the neo-con cabal) to act effectively in the nation's interest.
For this we can thank Richard Clarke, who was a terror warrior before being a terror warrior was cool. Clarke has brutally torn away the veil of White House spin, debunking the absurd claim that Iraq was a central battle in the war on terror, that taking out Saddam, at a cost of more than 4,000 American casualties (and counting) and $150 billion (and counting), has made America safer.
The beauty of Clarke's assault is that his illiberal credentials are impeccable, that he has come to the truth from the right rather than the left. He cannot be easily dismissed. His allegations will not fade. The narrative is now reset. It is a fundamental axiom of post-Watergate politics that the great engines of American hype invariably cast low those they have raised highest. The next installment will come next month, when super-journalist Bob Woodward publishes a blockbuster book about Bush's terror war. It is said to be a damning indictment.
