Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Clark calls for a new American patriotism (BARF ALERT)
NY Slimes ^ | Sept. 22, 2003 | Eric Schmidt

Posted on 09/22/2003 9:16:54 PM PDT by Sparta

Clark Calls for a 'New American Patriotism'

By ERIC SCHMITT

CHARLESTON, S.C., Sept. 22 — Gen. Wesley K. Clark called today for "a new American patriotism" that would encourage broader public service, respect domestic dissent even in wartime and embrace international organizations like the United Nations.

General Clark, a former NATO commander and Army officer who last week announced his candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination, accused the Bush administration of neglecting economic problems and of pursuing a dangerous go-it-alone foreign policy.

But he also used the setting of the Citadel, the military college here, to appeal to about 150 cadets and civilians on the parade grounds to help restore something loftier, a sense of national spirit that he suggested that the administration's campaign against terror had corroded.

"We've got to have a new kind of patriotism that recognizes that in times of war or peace democracy requires dialogue, disagreement and the courage to speak out," General Clark said. "And those who do it should not be condemned, but be praised."

General Clark made it clear he believed that the administration had unfairly focused on whole classes of immigrants, for fear of a minority within them.

"Three million Muslims have come to this country from Asia and the Middle East," he said. "They didn't come because they were afraid of our values. They came because they wanted to live under them."

Today was Day 6 of the campaign, and General Clark's 20-minute stump speech at the hastily arranged event here had a few rough patches.

"Patriotism doesn't consist of following the orders, not, not not when you're not in the chain of command," the general said, stumbling over his words and catching himself before he inadvertently encouraged insubordination in the ranks.

Despite the stumbles, General Clark heard good news in a CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll that showed he had jumped ahead of the other Democrats. The poll, conducted over the weekend, showed him tying President Bush head to head.

General Clark was invited to speak here by Philip Lader, a visiting professor of political science who is a close friend of former President Bill Clinton. Many former top Clinton aides have roles in his campaign.

General Clark directed his attacks against the administration, never mentioning the other nine Democratic hopefuls. He criticized the Bush team as doing little to stem the job losses and mounting deficits that have weighed on the economy since he retired from the Army in 2000.

"I'm running for president because I could not stand by and watch everything that we fought for, everything our nation had accomplished and become, unravel before our eyes," General Clark said.

He said the administration had failed to shore up health care and education, but he offered no detailed plans.

"One of the principles we learned in the United States armed forces was the principle of accountability," he said. "Americans today are asking, `Why did we lose three million jobs over the last three years?' "

He fired the other barrel of his attack at the handling of Iraq and at overall foreign policy, especially given that Mr. Bush is requesting $87 billion from Congress to finance reconstruction and military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"What was the strategy?" he asked about Iraq. "What was the purpose? What is the success strategy? How are we going to finish the mission there?"

General Clark did not discuss what are apparently his reversals on the the war. Last October, he said that he would support the Congressional resolution that authorized the use of military force in Iraq and then spent months criticizing the execution of the war. On Thursday, the day after he announced his candidacy, he said, "I probably would have voted for" the resolution. On Friday, he backtracked, saying, "I never would have voted for war."

By coincidence, his aides said, General Clark spoke here nearly four years to the day after George W. Bush, then the governor of Texas, visited the Citadel to lay out his most explicit thinking on military policy.

General Clark did not delve into such detail, but said he would map out a foreign policy, drawing on his experience leading tens of thousands of troops and working at the highest levels of the government, first as a senior general in the Pentagon and later as NATO supreme commander in the 1999 war in Kosovo.

He said his approach was based on three basic pillars. First, his strategy would reach out more aggressively to allies. He said he would also work to improve relations with international organizations like the United Nations, which he said were created decades ago to "to distribute the burdens of leadership, to share the responsibilities and to share the benefits of security."

Finally, he said, he will always support a well-financed military, strong enough to deter or, if necessary, defeat any threat.

After his remarks, General Clark bounded into the audience, shaking hands, signing copies of his memoirs and getting a feel for what life is going to be like in the campaign.

Terry Tranen, 61, a retired aerospace engineer, said General Clark was the Democrat with the best chance of beating Mr. Bush.

"I think I might send him some money," Mr. Tranen said. "That's the real test, isn't it?"


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 2004; wesleyclark
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-102 next last
To: DoughtyOne
Actually, if it is true then he is somewhat better off than if it isn't. A man can warn his country not to jump off a cliff out of genuine concern for it, if that is what he thinks is happening.

But if he makes up out of whole cloth imaginary misdeeds to ascribe to his own country and its present leadership, inviting in the process hostility or weapons development or concerted alliance by dangerous enemy states, purely further his own political ambitions, then not only is he a pathological liar but he puts his personal power over the good of his country.

61 posted on 09/23/2003 10:28:11 AM PDT by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

Comment #62 Removed by Moderator

To: JasonC
When a person who is privy to classified information, reveals that information for political gain, he's seriously screwed up. Imagine what would happen if every member of our intelligence agencies were free to declare as a presidential candidate then reveal anything they knew. Clark's actions are inexcusable and he should be be taken to task for what he has done, providing it's true. If it isn't, he's still a slimeball, just a different kind of a slimeball.
63 posted on 09/23/2003 10:38:08 AM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

Comment #64 Removed by Moderator

To: Matthew Paul; snippy_about_it
"I'm running for president because I could not stand by and watch everything that we fought for, everything our nation had accomplished and become, unravel before our eyes," General Clark said.

It's because of people like Clark and his butt buddies, the Clintons that our country is unraveling.

Thanks for the ping Matthew Paul.

65 posted on 09/23/2003 11:32:34 AM PDT by SAMWolf (This tagline has been cruelly tested on cute little furry animals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: SAMWolf; Matthew Paul
...embrace international organizations like the United Nations.

Clark statement here is just ONE reason he is a loser!

66 posted on 09/23/2003 11:35:27 AM PDT by snippy_about_it (Fall in --> The FReeper Foxhole. America's History. America's Soul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Taiwan Bocks
Thank God he isn't running as a Republican for governor in some state!

LOL. That's funny.

67 posted on 09/23/2003 11:39:05 AM PDT by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Sparta
This just received from a good old friend...

BEHIND THE HEADLINES Latest contender for president
comes from long line of rabbis by Ron Kampeas

WASHINGTON, Sept. 17 (JTA) — Raised a Southern Baptist who later converted to Roman Catholicism, Gen. Wesley Clark knew just what
to say when he strode into a Brooklyn yeshiva in 1999, ostensibly to discuss his leadership of NATO´s victory in Yugoslavia. "I feel a
tremendous amount in common with you," the uniformed four-star general told the stunned roomful of students. "I am the oldest son, of
the oldest son, of the oldest son — at least five generations, and they were all rabbis." The incident could be a signal of how Clark, who
became the 10th contender in the Democratic run for the presidency on Wednesday, relates to the Jews and the issues dear to them.

Apparently Clark, 58, revels in his Jewish roots. He told The Jewish Week in New York, which first reported the yeshiva comment in
1999, that his ancestors were not just Jews, but members of the priestly caste of Kohens. Clark´s Jewish father, Benjamin Kanne, died
when he was 4, but he has kept in touch with his father´s family since his
20s, when he rediscovered his Jewish roots. He is close to a first cousin, Barry Kanne, who heads a pager company in Georgia.

Clark
shares more than sentimental memories with Jews. He couples liberal domestic views that appeal to much of the Jewish electorate with
a soldier´s sympathy for Israel´s struggle against terror. Appearing in June on "Meet the Press" on CBS, Clarke said he agreed with
President Bush´s assessment that Israel should show more restraint, a reference to the policy of targeting terrorist leaders for
assassination. "But the problem is," Clark continued, "when you have hard intelligence that you´re about to be struck, it´s the
responsibility of a government to take action against that intelligence and prevent the loss of lives. It´s what any society would expect
of its leadership. So there´s a limit to how much restraint can be shown."

Speaking to the New Democrat Network this year, Clark said
that dismantling Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat´s Ramallah headquarters was "a legitimate military objective from their
perspective. "For the Israelis, this is a struggle really for the existence of Israel," Clark said in remarks quoted on a support group´s
Web site. Clark is also tough on neighboring Arab states, expecting more from them in nudging the Palestinians toward peace.

He has
said he would like to see Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia in a "contact group" similar to the alliance that Serb-friendly Russia joined to
force the Serbs to back down in Kosovo. He blames Saudi Arabia for allowing extremist strains of Islam to spread. The former NATO
leader also opposes any active international role in policing the West Bank until the political situation is settled, a view that Israelis —
nervous at relinquishing control to foreign troops on their borders — would appreciate. Domestically, Clark favors many of the liberal
views popular with many Jews. He is pro-choice, and is strongly in favor of separating church from state. "In order to have freedom of
religion, you´ve got to protect the state from the church," he is quoted saying on his supporters´ Web site.

One of the leaders of the
Draft Clark campaign said Clark´s strength on foreign policy would neutralize an advantage President Bush now has with Jews, and
would bring the debate back to domestic issues, where the Bush administration is weaker with Jews. "It makes him credible and allows
him to focus on domestic policy," Brent Blackaby said in a telephone interview from Clark´s campaign headquarters in Little Rock, Ark.

Two of Clark´s top advisers are Jews who had prominent roles in the Clinton and Gore campaigns. Eli Segal was a top adviser to
President Clinton in his first term; Ron Klain helped run Vice President Al Gore´s
2000 campaign.


Enjoy your day


68 posted on 09/23/2003 11:41:30 AM PDT by joesnuffy (Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sparta
I'm sure the Clintons are pushing him into the race because he will further fractionalize the (now) 10-man field, draw a few more %age points from Dean,et. al, further weaking their overall chances, and hence make it even more "urgent" that Hillary step forth as the only candidate who "can win".
69 posted on 09/23/2003 11:42:16 AM PDT by willyboyishere (i)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rain-maker
Actually, that's Clark wearing Serbian cap with Gen, Radko Mladic, Serb Army.
70 posted on 09/23/2003 11:42:39 AM PDT by swarthyguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

Comment #71 Removed by Moderator

To: Matthew Paul
Unfortunately, being a General doesn't necessarily make you a good candidiate for President. General Clark's politics are definately on the Liberal, One World Order side.
72 posted on 09/23/2003 12:07:28 PM PDT by SAMWolf (This tagline has been cruelly tested on cute little furry animals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

Comment #73 Removed by Moderator

To: Matthew Paul
You got that right. Under Clinton everyone knew they could get away with attacking us and not get a real response, only tough talk.

74 posted on 09/23/2003 12:38:24 PM PDT by SAMWolf (This tagline has been cruelly tested on cute little furry animals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

Comment #75 Removed by Moderator

To: Matthew Paul
I never did understand why france, who surrendered to the Germans, was ever given permanent status on the UN. It's not even a debating socoety anymore, it's a "bash the US forum" and "see how much money we can get from them" mob.
76 posted on 09/23/2003 1:24:29 PM PDT by SAMWolf (This tagline has been cruelly tested on cute little furry animals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Matthew Paul
You are correct. I really wish we would get out of the UN and then kick them out of the US!
77 posted on 09/23/2003 1:32:08 PM PDT by snippy_about_it (Fall in --> The FReeper Foxhole. America's History. America's Soul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Sparta
The "New Patriot", the United States of the UN.

The "Old Patriot", the United States of America.
78 posted on 09/23/2003 1:34:17 PM PDT by roses of sharon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #79 Removed by Moderator

To: Matthew Paul
French Peace Treaty
Signed this __________ day of _________ in the year _____.

We, the Government of France do hereby surrender, unconditionally, to the Army(ies) of ________________, _______________, _______________, (additional space available on back if necessary).

We do not wish hostilities to continue with aforementioned Army (ies) as it may lead to pain and suffering of our proud army. We will allow aforementioned Army (ies) to occupy our country, drink our wine, violate our women (children left to us), and to have unfettered access to anything else they should desire, for as long a time period as they wish.

Please do not hurt us, we are a peaceful country that has no real army to defend ourselves (America…PLEASE HELP).

X______________________________

President, Jacques 'Le Worm' Chirac
80 posted on 09/23/2003 1:54:29 PM PDT by SAMWolf (This tagline has been cruelly tested on cute little furry animals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-102 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson