I think Richard Clarke needs to be made aware of the saying, "Hindsight is 20/20." This guy thinks he's perfect and without fault and seeks to blame the Bush administration only and not the multiple massive failures of the Clinton administration in dealing with the threat of Al Qaeda. Now, here he is, with a 60 Minutes interview behind him and a book that he's trying to promote, testifying before the 9/11 committee. And once again, he lays all the blame on the Bush administration and seems to think the Clinton administration is without blame, even though they failed to act following the embassy bombings and the attack on the U.S.S. Cole. But since during the short 243 days Bush was in office before 9/11, he thinks that more could have and should have been done in those 243 days, than Clinton could have been done in the full eight years he was in office. Of course, hindsight is 20/20, and perhaps he should take a cue from William Cohen, the Secretary of Defense under Bill Clinton and finally acknowledge that with all the fact we have now, things could have been differently, but the blame does not lie on Bush, nor does it lie with Clinton. It was an institutional failure - not a failure of any administration or any specific person. Clarke needs to abandon his hunt to bring down Bush in this re-election year and finally acknowledge that there is nothing that Bush could have done to prevent 9/11. There was nothing most people could have done. As he continually bashes Bush and not Clinton, he just makes himself look even more idiotic and loses whatever shred of credibility he might have had remaining.