Wesley Clark: A Clinton by Another Name? (GREAT ANTI-CLARK ARTICLE w/ AMMO)

FrontPageMagazine.com ^ | September 17, 2003 | Lowell Ponte

[jmstein7]

bump!

[Dog]

Others who interviewed Gen. Clark in Kosovo were shocked by his casual talk about how he would launch military strikes against Hungary if it tried to send fuel to the Christian Serbians, or against Russian ships if they entered the war zone.

Time to do some research..

[tsomer]

How is a guy who talks like that gonna get pinko Rat primary voters to vote for him,

I hope you are right. But...

The democrat voters are sheep, and will be led anywhere as long as certain keywords are repeated. In fact, if a sense of crises can be whipped up, they're even easier to lead. They are well into this phase of the campaign, with Saddam popping up here and there, Osama periodically mailing a cassette, talk of sabbotage and allegations of mistatements about wmd's.

Clarke will walk the domestic issue line, and this will take care of most of the herd. The remnant will receive appeals on the basis of his millitary "peace-keeping" expertise and service on behalf of the UN.

He's Mussolini spouting the same populist, socialist bilge in an obvious bid for power. This nanny wears jack-boots.

[Graewoulf]

The left-wing extremists will vote for Clark because Clark wants Socialized Medicine for all Americans.

hilly called it "Health Care" to hire her goal of Socializing the Medical Profession in America.

[RetiredArmy]

Read the article carefully regarding the questionnaire given to Marines. It does not say that Clark was involved in that. The article just blames generally the Clinton Administration. Clark was not Commandant of the Marine Corps, nor was he CJCS. If he can be linked to that questionnaire somehow, fine. But I don't see any evidence of that.

To me that makes him in on it as I am sure he had knowledge. He has been Klinton's butt boy since 1993. They had to have had conversations about this. This guy did not get 4-stars on merit. The higher ups in the Pentagon said he did not deserve it. He got it by kissing Klinton's fat @$$.

[metesky]

The aim of the plan is partly to demonstrate a U.S. commitment to using military force in concert with other nations rather than unilaterally, an approach dubbed `assertive multilateralism' by Madeleine K. Albright, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

We'd still be debating if these friggin' nitwits had won in 2000.

[logician2u]

Heard it, too, and had to suppress a laugh.

It's just a little ironic for Rush to be reading the Ponte piece on Wilkes Clark's role in Waco, including the paragraph about "the death, mostly by fire, of at least 82 men, women and children."

Rush, if you recall, was a steadfast defender of Janet Reno when she faced some hostile congressional questioning about what had happened. To my knowledge, he has never changed his opinion, even after considerable evidence that the federal government both overstated the case against Koresh and did everything it could to cover up its culpability for the deaths of so many innocents.

Except for party affiliation, Rush and Wesley could be blood brothers.

[austingirl]

Great post.

[flamefront]

She's in the news since she is on the NYSE board. She has been speaking against the administration and its treatment of the Arab world. She has a memoir about to be released.

Expect her and the rest of the Clinton crowd to be back.

(The left never moved on; why should anyone else.)

[XJarhead]

To me that makes him in on it as I am sure he had knowledge.

Then you'd have to blame every other general officer in every branch of the service, and I can't imagine that going over well with the American people. And the bottom line is that, as an Army general, I can't imagine he'd have had much say over tests given to Marines, because I don't see his resume as including any joint commands that would have a significant component of Marines.

He has been Klinton's butt boy since 1993. They had to have had conversations about this. This guy did not get 4-stars on merit. The higher ups in the Pentagon said he did not deserve it. He got it by kissing Klinton's fat @$$.

I agree, but there's really no way to make that a campaign issue. Are we really going to attack the military career of a 4-star general? "Yeah, he's just Clinton's butt-boy and not worthy of his rank." Do we expect that to play well with the voters? A personal attack on the service of a decorated Vietnam Vet? His status as a vet doesn't make him immune from attack, but it gives him immunity for attacks on his military service. The Republican base may buy that, but the great middle will not. On top of that, all general officers must be approved by Congress, so how are we going to spin Republican approval of this supposedly unqualified general?

I know there are "political generals", and you know that. But most voters will just have a visceral, negative reaction to anyone who attacks a 4-star general for his military service, particularly in today's "pro-military" climate. That's just a political reality.

[metesky]

Her time has come and gone, thankfully.

No one pays attention to the political opinions of the cleaning woman.

[colorado tanker]

Politics 101 is that a candidate has to secure his base during the primary season and then broaden his appeal in the general. Clark has been handpicked to broaden the Dim's appeal to voters in the middle who don't trust them on national security issues. But how does he secure the Dim base to get to the general? The Dim base hates the military. When Clinton ran as a DLC type "moderate" he got credibility with the base becaue of his dodging the draft and opposing the Vietnam War. The modern Dim party was born 1968-1972 over opposition to Vietnam and they're having a second childhood over opposing Iraq. How does Clark gain their trust?

[stratman1969]

Wonder if Neil Young will re-write "Ohio" to:

"Tin soldiers and Wesley's coming
We're finally on our own
In April I heard the drumming
80 dead outside Waco"

[metesky]

Clark had nothing to do with the questionaire. It was an Annapolis middie working on a thesis who passed this crapolla around.

But you can't deny that these attitudes pervaded the upper echelons of political officers looking to grease their way up Birry Krinton's pole.

Yuck! I just made myself sick.

[TrueBeliever9]

you are so right...Clinton/Cohen probably got Clark out of there ASAP to avoid Clark any exposure to the truth...it was Cohen that instituted the order that in all national elections in the future the military cannot vote on their bases - as has been the custom - which enables many military to vote (versus having to go off base and vote during the course of duty). I think the three C's are all in cohoots!

[XJarhead]

Clark had nothing to do with the questionaire. It was an Annapolis middie working on a thesis who passed this crapolla around.

Oh crap. Looks like my alma mater has gone to hell....

[RetiredArmy]

It certainly keeps him from getting my vote.

[Reactionary]

Clark's move for the nomination is a creation of the Clintons. The understand that their party is seen as being weak on defense, so this is their way of positioning a candidate to disarm that perception.

If he gets the nomination, you can bet that The Hildabeast will be waiting in the wings.

[CoolPapaBoze]

These “two stars” could become the 2004 Democratic “dream ticket,” if they can agree who should be on top and who on the bottom.

I'm pretty sure I know who will be on top, and who will be on the bottom.

[Travis McGee]

Clark is a globalist, who would subordinate the US military to the UN if he could.

The dreams of Clark and the Clintons coincide: they want the US under UN authority, and they want to rule the UN.

Add to this Clark's statements that "anyone who wants an assault rifle should join the Army" and Clinton's similar statements about semi auto rifles and other firearms, and it's not too hard to see what kind of a future they would plan for us, if they had the power.

Thank God for the founding fathers, and their vision in including the 2nd Amendment.

I think today that domestic enemies pose a greater danger to our freedom than foreign ones.