Senator Joe Lieberman, a Democrat, and Senator John McCain, a Republican, have debunked former Clinton “anti-terror czar” Richard Clarke’s claims that the Bush Administration did a "terrible job" in dealing with terrorism before 9/11. Clarke has three primary motivations for making this outlandish claim: 1) he is trying to promote a new book; 2) he is disgruntled because Bush didn’t pick him to be the number two man at the Department of Homeland Security; and 3) he wants Bush out of the White House.

Both Lieberman and McCain are good men, and are known for being independent and balanced. For example, Lieberman supported the war in Iraq, and maintained that stance even as he ran for the Democratic presidential nomination (unlike John Kerry, whose stand is a definite maybe). McCain refused to call John Kerry “weak” on terrorism and calls Kerry a friend (even though Kerry most likely will be a weak president).

Who are you to believe, two good men or some disgruntled Clinton-era apparatchik? On Sunday, Lieberman said,

The charge, if I hear it correctly, that Dick Clarke has made, that the Bush administration was more focused on Iraq in the days after September 11, than on September 11 and getting back at the terrorists, I see no basis for it.

Remember, this statement was from a Democrat. The President's National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice said today,

When the president learned from CIA Director [George] Tenet that there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to 9/11, he put Iraq aside. This was now an issue of how to deal with Afghanistan.

As history shows, the U.S. attacked the Taliban in Afghanistan after 9/11, not Iraq. What's Clarke smoking? Where was Clarke when al-Qaeda bombed the World Trade Center in 1993? Where was Clarke when al-Qaeda blew up two U.S. embassies in Africa? Where was Clarke when the USS Cole was bombed?

The Bush Administration needs to go into high gear to address Clarke’s claims, as various liberal news organs are already salivating all over the story. For example, the BBC is already trying to pump up Clarke’s story:

Despite the accusations of political opportunism, Mr Clarke cannot be swatted aside so easily, the BBC's Adam Brookes in Washington says.

I’m sure the BBC would just love to see Bush defeated. That’s reason enough for me to vote for George W. Bush.