Clinton legacy debate continues via Bill Maher

The Clinton war to refute The Path to 911 is being fought on many fronts, but perhaps the most important is the soundbite mechanism. Generate memorable language, get it spoken first by celebrities and "experts" and then by your side. If you can popularize it, the culture starts to accept your point of view as definitive.

It has worked really well for the War Room Gang before.  Paula Jones and the hundred dollar bill is a memorable example of this tactic from an earlier war to obliterate some of the damage done in a scandal.

Humor, especially derisive humor directed at your foe, is particularly valuable, making the other side a laughingstock. It is impossible to persuade people who are laughing at you. Additionally, it provides a disincentive for others to follow in your path.

That's why I am a bit suspicious Bill Maher scheduling Richard Clarke tonight on his show. Maher will have the crowd on his side, and is a skilled performer as a barb—thrower. He is not too likely to challenge the Clinton—friendly view of the film and controversy.

Our frequent contributor Noel Sheppard was way ahead of me, wearing his Newsbusters hat.

After all, why should Clarke go on a real news program where he can be asked real questions when there are hard—hitting journalists like Bill Maher around?

Noel asked Michael Scheuer what questions Maher should ask if he were interested in getting at the truth of what Clarke has had to say. Posted by Noel

Thomas Lifson   10 06 06

The Clinton war to refute The Path to 911 is being fought on many fronts, but perhaps the most important is the soundbite mechanism. Generate memorable language, get it spoken first by celebrities and "experts" and then by your side. If you can popularize it, the culture starts to accept your point of view as definitive.

It has worked really well for the War Room Gang before.  Paula Jones and the hundred dollar bill is a memorable example of this tactic from an earlier war to obliterate some of the damage done in a scandal.

Humor, especially derisive humor directed at your foe, is particularly valuable, making the other side a laughingstock. It is impossible to persuade people who are laughing at you. Additionally, it provides a disincentive for others to follow in your path.

That's why I am a bit suspicious Bill Maher scheduling Richard Clarke tonight on his show. Maher will have the crowd on his side, and is a skilled performer as a barb—thrower. He is not too likely to challenge the Clinton—friendly view of the film and controversy.

Our frequent contributor Noel Sheppard was way ahead of me, wearing his Newsbusters hat.

After all, why should Clarke go on a real news program where he can be asked real questions when there are hard—hitting journalists like Bill Maher around?

Noel asked Michael Scheuer what questions Maher should ask if he were interested in getting at the truth of what Clarke has had to say. Posted by Noel

Thomas Lifson   10 06 06