Who do you mean?
Do you mean Richard Clarke? Clarke also worked in the Clinton administration. I just watched footage of Clarke in the CBC (Canadian) doc. "The Secret History of 9/11." [That particular doc. is NOT a conspiracy film, rather it demonstrates that the U.S. had reliable intelligence dating from the mid-90's that 9/11 types of events were being planned.] I found the footage of Clarke impressive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_A._Clarke

Tuesday, Dec. 16, 2008 09:03 EST

Caroline hires flack to scare competitors

I'm not as adamantly opposed as Mark is to the idea of Caroline Kennedy being appointed to the New York Senate seat vacated by Hillary Clinton's departure for State, but it's clear that she's increasingly adamant about seeking it.

Picking up on a brief mention in Nick Confessore's NYTimes piece that Mark mentioned, the Politico's Ben Smith and Glenn Thrush have more on the hiring of Knickerbocker SKD's Josh Isay to pick up some of the political heavy lifting . . . including trying to "scare the shit" out of others who might be interested:

After a week of coy courtship and low-key feelers, Kennedy began working the phones in earnest Monday -- and signed up major Democratic fixer Josh Isay, who has deep connections to New York powerhouses Sen. Charles Schumer, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the Rev. Al Sharpton.

Kennedy spoke with Sharpton on Monday, and he said he told her about another “lady that wanted to run for U.S. Senate [who] came to Harlem, to the House of Justice, and they told me she wasn’t qualified; they told me she was just there because of who she was married to -- and that was Hillary Clinton.”

Sharpton said Kennedy chuckled.

Monday’s outreach efforts came as the 51-year-old former first daughter had begun to receive withering criticism about her lack of political experience.

“She had to work to undo the buzz for the last week -- New Yorkers were starting to say, ‘We don’t know her,’ ‘She’s got no experience,’ ‘She’s presumptuous,’” said a top New York Democrat, speaking on condition of anonymity.

“That’s why hiring Josh makes a lot of sense,” the person added. “She doesn’t know anybody, and he’s the guy to make the introductions and guide her through the process.”

Hiring Isay accomplishes several goals for Kennedy. It signals her seriousness to Gov. David Paterson, who has been cool to her weeklong whisper campaign; it initiates her courtship of state power brokers who know her only through the media and the History Channel; and it “scares the s--” out of lesser-known Democrats actively pursuing the appointment, the New York Democrat said.

This will be a fascinating political battle to watch from the sidelines, that's for sure.

― Thomas Schaller

Caroline Kennedy's attempt to intimidate her way into office are nauseating.

Monday, Dec. 15, 2008 21:31 EST

Caroline Kennedy? Thanks, but no thanks

Her name has been floated for Hillary Clinton's old job, and now it's clear that Caroline Kennedy wants it. According to media reports, the 51-year-old daughter of JFK has decided to pursue the position of junior senator from the state of New York. Here's hoping she reconsiders, and/or that Gov. David Paterson appoints somebody better suited for the post.

Not to denigrate Kennedy's commitment to public service, but the only line on her CV that truly recommends her for the post is the one at the top: her name. New Yorkers support her selection because they recognize that name, and because many have abiding affection for her family and memories of a little girl in the White House.

Among New York's 19 million citizens there are many more appropriate options. She is not the most qualified scion of a famous political family – New York's abrasive attorney general Andrew Cuomo outranks her on that front. Though she might be able to argue she's the best available Kennedy -- more suited for the gig than the disappointing Ian Kennedy, though less knowledgeable about the rough-and-tumble of New York politics than William J. Kennedy -- she is not even the most qualified New Yorker named Caroline. Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney, who represents parts of Manhattan and Queens and is beginning her ninth term, has made it known she wants the job too. She has hired someone to help her lobby for it (and has complained aloud about the other Caroline's lack of experience.)

If not Maloney, how about one of three Democrats who have demonstrated they can win in purple parts of the state? Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand just won her second term in the House from a previously Republican upstate district. If she's too much of a Blue Dog, how about Long Island's Tom Suozzi or Steve Israel? In other words, how about somebody, anybody, who has something to offer besides celebrity and good intentions, and who can do something for New Yorkers besides scratch the itch of baby boom nostalgia?

Mark Schone

You really support her in this? I'm surprised.

I have no problem with her running in a general election, and serving should she be elected. That's up to the people of New York, obviously. But trying to force the governor's hand to make her a replacement—with zero experience in office, or even in politics, really—and going for a PR blitz when her quiet offers were rejected, is offensive.

To everyone in general (so many literate people on here make this mistake, even book editors [I'm not mentioning any name]) when it is after an "if" it is "were", not "was".

Thank you for your attention.

Not so fast there, canadaboy.
If I were to look in a grammar book, that's indeed what I would find. But in functional use, the subjunctive tense is on its way out in English usage and "was" has largely supplanted "were" in hypotheticals ("if") and wishes.

The past subjunctive is, I believe, limited to the verb to be and the traditional was/were distinction is dying off. So I do what most people do, I use whichever sounds better in a given sentence. I don't think it's necessary to follow a grammar rule when it has become a minority position and no longer reflects current use. It's the old debate of whether a grammar book should be proscriptive or descriptive. Along these lines, there is the slow, sad death of "whom" except when it may concern someone or a bell is solemnly tolling.