So, Richard Clarke doesn’t like the way the Bush administration handled the events leading up to 9/11. He feels that more could have been done to prevent it. Did we really need Richard Clarke to point that out to us? Wasn’t it obvious that the Bush administration was completely incompetent with regards to the handling of 9/11 (before and after it happened)? And now that Bush is getting a lot of bad press from Clarke’s book and comments on how incompetent he is, he has decided to “allow” Condoleeza Rice to testify to the commission investigating 9/11. It’s more like she will be made to testify against her will. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not the biggest advocate of Condoleeza Rice. But she certainly isn’t the only person in the Bush administration that was involved in the handling (or lack there of) of 9/11. It kind of makes you wonder why she is being singled out. I have an idea. Why don’t we “allow” Bush to testify publicly about what did and didn’t happen prior to 9/11? Put Colon Powell on the stand too for all I care.