Clark makes Dean sound restrained

I borrowed that from Mort Kondracke, I think, on last night's Brit Hume program. Here are the quotes. Is this the same Democratic Party that thinks it's a mortal sin to impugn someone's patriotism? Liberals should run, not walk, away from this nut.

Terry Waite speaks,

but says nothing. He was a hostage in Lebanon, you'll remember, from 1987 to 1991. He's just spouting the same old leftie nonsense now:

Though declaring himself not a pacifist, Waite maintains U.S. and coalition troops moved too quickly into Iraq with force.

There were other options, he said. United Nations weapons inspectors needed more time in their search for weapons of mass destruction.

Human rights inspectors, Waite said in an interview before his speech, needed the freedom to peacefully look for any violations that might require the now deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein to appear before a tribunal.

Stuff like this from a man who has seen terrorism up close, makes me despair for the humanity of such people. How many more people would have been tortured and killed in mass graves in Saddam's Iraq or in soccer stadia in Afghanistan, had we not come to their rescue? We tried the U.N. and inspections for 12 years. Where was he? I guess his name is his philosophy toward terrorism: just Waite.

A lesson in government

My job is to advise the county Planning Commission, which is constantly reviewing and amending the county's Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. One of the things I've learned is that such bodies don't so much plan and innovate as borrow forms from other counties and cities. And they are afraid of being questioned, so they steer away from changes that are needed because they can't articulate what the change should actually be. So you get inertia.

The same principle applies in government agencies that we expect to be creative, imaginative and adaptive, like NASA, the CIA and the FBI, showing once again why freedom is so productive, and why bureaucracies aren't.

I guess you don't get a regular column about your gaffes, such as "Bushisms"

until you're president, but to me the things Wes Clark is saying are a whole lot worse that mixing up words or words like "strategery." With Bush you know what he's trying to say. With Clark and Dean, you know what they said but you wonder why anybody would want to vote for such an arrogant jackass. Where's the flood of editorials about Clark's "secret plan" to end terrorist attacks if he's elected?