Sunday - November 16, 2003

Category Image Wesley Clark is Insane


He's being interviewed by Tim Russert right now, and he's displaying a complete infamiliarity with rationality.

He's a cog in the Clinton machine.

He's criticizing everything about the military actions in Iraq, and despite his having worn 4 stars on his collar in the past, he shows absolutely no military insight whatsoever. He says we must make the size of the forces we use in Iraq larger. He says we must make the size of the forces we use in Iraq smaller. Then realizing the incongruity of his two statements, he quickly says that we need to increase our forces in the short term.

How short is that term, Wes? You mean until we succeeed and the Iraqis are safe again? Wow, that's original. What insight!

His criticism of the war in Iraq lacks substance. I expect regular politicians to speak glibly about military tactics and strategy. I expect much more coherent discussion from a man with his background. What are the specific points he disagrees with? The names of which units should be doing what better using what assets? I expect a discussion from him that is much more original and coherent, yet all he has done is speak in sound bites that wouldn't sound intelligent even coming from Tom Daschle.

His explanation of his past behavior is Clintonesque. I guess if it worked for Clinton, it should work for him since the target is the same democrats. He supports George Bush, but now he doesn't support George Bush. He supports the war in Iraq, but not the war in Iraq.

He claims that he wasn't told not to meet with Mladic, who was known to be a despot. But here we must apply the common man test. If the common man were to meet with a cold-blooded murderer accused of committing genocide and ethnic cleansing, would the common man think it is appropriate to laugh and joke with him, and swap hats like a bunch of college boys? Or would the common man, if he found it useful to meet with this butcher, only act as civilly as possible to communicate the position of the government he is representing? Wes yuks it up with mass murderers.

Now he's made a statement of the ecomony, regarding unemployment. After saying how terrible it is to lose a job, he tells us that people who were once executives are now selling cars. Hmm. Is there something wrong with selling cars? Car salesmen often make handsome salaries. How many Americans really feel sorry for out-of-work executives who now make six figure salaries as car salemen? I don't think that will play well with the democratic base.

The rest of his blatherings are unimportant. The only thing that is important is that Wesley Clark is a stalking horse for the Clinton machine. The Clintons still retain power at the top of the Democratic party and they have every intention to keep it that way. If another democrat wins the presidency their power among democrats wanes significantly. Their goal is to control the machine of the Democratic party, with its money and power, even at the cost of their party occupying the White House.

The political machine of the Democrats is more than merely the presidency. It is a vast network throughout the country for raising money, controlling activists, and exerting power. After watching the filibuster of the judicial nominees, can anyone say that they lack any power? The Clintons intend to keep control of that power as long as their tendrils can wind around any part of it.

Wesley Clark is an ethically deficient man, fired as a general, confused about what political party he should join, and incapable of articulating a cogent policy that isn't self-contradictory. He is meaningless except as a stalking horse, meant to disrupt the democratic nominating process to allow the Clinton machine to retain power over the party.

Go Back to the Start, Do Not Collect $200   Send me your two cents
|