Excellent Richard Clarke coverage:

Atrios: "I think the important issue is the fact that when the Bush administration came into power, they decided that the position of National Coordinator for Counter-terrorism wasn't important enough to be a Cabinet level position."

Josh Marshall: "Now do you understand why they're stonewalling the 9/11 commission?"

DHinMI at Kos: "Senator Lieberman, if by some amazing fluke you actually see this email, I have a message for you: STOP BLAMING DEMOCRATS FOR THE ATTACKS WAGED AGAINST US BY REPUBLICANS!!!!!!!"

Kevin Drum: "To them, 9/11 was simply an excuse to haul out all their old Cold War theories, none of which really applied in a post-9/11 world, and try to force fit them into the new reality.... That's what the Bushies really deserve to get beat up for."

Here's my take: Well, duh. This situation will have some impact, and it'll be harder to pin the partisan badge on Clarke than it was on Paul O'Neill. Clarke worked for Clinton, sure, but he also worked for Bush Sr. and Reagan. However, unless someone can bring out irrefutable evidence that Mohammed Atta worked for the CIA under direct orders of Bush himself, this whole situation will not have enough impact. The most important issue facing voters right now is the economy; the Republicans still have more money to define the campaign, and they are doing a pretty good job of painting Kerry as a tax-raising liberal already. Outcries of "you let 9/11 happen" will be met with relentless "no, Clinton did" responses. And no one will budge.

Can't we go beat some sense into Nader so that his 3% can go in the Kerry column?

UPDATE: Wonkette seems to agree on the "duh" count: "Who's really surprised by this?... Doesn't everyone remember September 10, 2001, when Bush claimed Saddam Hussein was responsible for the poor economy, rising fuel prices, and producing Tim Burton's disappointing remake of Planet of the Apes?"