Some added details are coming out about Wesley Clark. The most revealing are those he has penned himself.
Like for example, one in Washington Monthly.
Clark depends too heavily on internationalist, and not enough on Americanism. It is increasingly and alarmingly clear Clark doesn’t have what it takes to lead America.
The kind of “leadership by consensus” Clark proposes is invariably a disaster, first because it is an oxymoron… One can either lead, or try to build a consensus, but you cannot do both.
Second, because it makes the fatal assumption that all the participants in the consensus are being above board about their motives. Which is why foreign policy gives Democrats fits. They make a great show consensus building, but can’t seem to deal with the problem when they discover that there were ulterior motives behind one member or another’s actions. The failure of Carter to deal well in Iran, for example. People of each political stripe on the issues surrounding the West Bank, for another. The ‘consensus’-centered relations almost invariably neglect the concept that there are some people… And Arafat was one, the Iranians under Carter in the other, that simply cannot be negotiated with.
Clark, by his own words, would be another such person. Fortunate that given the scenario we’ve already discussed we’ve nothing to worry about.
Still, his positions do seem to represent a large portion on the left, and thus are worth dissecting, dismembering, and disposing of.
Bootz came up with this one this morning. I’ll echo it here in total. He’s right on the money.
THIS IS HOW YOU PROTECT OUR TROOPS
By now you’ve heard of Ted Kennedy’s interview with the Associated Press. It was an anti-Bush, anti-war tirade loose on facts and high on leftist rhetoric.
Kennedy told the AP that “This was made up in Texas, announced in January to the Republican leadership that war was going to take place and was going to be good politically. This whole thing was a fraud.”
Is there any basis in fact for this claim? Kennedy cites none … he’s just satisfied to make the charge. Some analysts believe Kennedy is alluding to a meeting in Texas in January of 2002, not 2003. Carl Rove was talking to Texas Republicans and told them that the public trusts the Republicans to do the right thing in fighting terrorism. Was that Kennedy’s announcement “that the war was going to take place and was going to be good politically?”
Kennedy also says that foreign leaders are being bribed with taxpayer money: “My belief is that this money is being shuffled all around to these political leaders in all parts of the world, bribing them to send in troops.”
Nobody has made this claim before Kennedy. There are no US taxpayer funds being paid to foreign leaders for support in the war in Iraq. Could Kennedy possibly be talking about the U.S. paying the transportation costs for foreign troops going to Iraq?
This bloated sot shouldn’t even be in the Senate. The very fact that he is a respected member of the Democratic leadership is testament to the moral depravity of the Democratic Party and its supporters. Here is a man who allowed a woman, widely believed to be his paramour, to die inside his partially submerged car while he paced up and down the roadside worrying about his political future. He then used his family’s wealth and fame to virtually escape any responsibility for his cowardly actions. He should have had the decency to disappear behind the walls of the Kennedy compound years ago. Instead, he’s one of the most powerful Democrats in the Senate, orchestrating filibusters against conservative appointees to federal courts and lying about the motivations behind the war on terrorism.
Democrats should be so proud.
Yeah, right.
And I’ve got a few gallons of Florida we should talk about.
Defender of Waco Killers Found Dead in Texas
The Associated Press
SOUR LAKE, Texas (AP) – A former federal prosecutor who defended the U.S. government in a lawsuit filed by surviving Branch Davidians was found dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound, authorities said.
A police officer checking on an abandoned vehicle found the body of former U.S. Attorney J. Michael Bradford shortly before 7 p.m. Tuesday.
“He found a BMW, which was unusual, because it’s a nice vehicle and it was parked out in the woods … it had a briefcase in it, clothes and a sports jacket in it, so he started looking around,” Hardin County Sheriff Ed Cain said.
He said the officer found the body and a shotgun about 75 feet from the car. Cain said it appears the gunshot wound to the head was self-inflicted.
(Full Story)
Gee, guys… Another Clinton suicide. This one fits the pattern that’s been noticed about people who have been connected with Clinton in the past… Kinda makes you wonder what this victim knew about Clinton & Wesley Clark’s actions at Waco, now doesn’t it?.
The far left likes to bitch loud and long about Richard Mellon Scaife and his money involved in politics.
I wonder, though, how many will complain about Billionaire George Soros who has reportedly put together around ten million dollars of slush fund in an effort to prevent President Bush from winning a second term.
Here’s more
And what will they say about Soros’s writings about Capitalism being dangerous? Here’s a guy who made a billion in one day a few years back. Isn’t that a capitalist? Aparently, it’s OK to be a billionaire, if you mouth leftist nonsense.
Here’s lots more about this…. ummm…… individual.
Likley, silence will be heard from the left and little more about his involvement in our elections.
Yet another double standard.
“When my daughter was born, I got an 18-year term,” Clinton joked. “It’s a darn good thing we didn’t have a recall provision. Our decisions didn’t always suit her, but she turned out well..” Bill Cinton
We’re all just Children to you,a nd you really know best, huh, Bill?
This statement is right in line with my comments on the ruling from the 9th Circus Court yesterday, wherein I mentioned othat what that leftist body was saying, was that the people in the affected areas were children, mentally,a nd couldn’t handle voting ‘properly’.
From the mailbag his morning, comes a note wondering why I’ve not been commenting on Wesley Clark tossing his oversized hat into the presidential ring.
The reasons, are rather simple: He’s had no elective office experience, has far too much Howard Dean to overcome, and so on. One or the other might not stop him. But both put together? This is a problem Clark will not overcome, even with the Clintons behind him, as they have been.
Interestingly, Matt Drudge asks this afternoon a question I’d not thought of:
Wesley Clark fundraiser for Republicans in 2001, for Pulaski County Republican Party (Little Rock)… December 2001: Clark registers to vote in Little Rock as independent… But in 2003, now he is a Democrat?…
The Clintons, for their part, Hitlery, particularly, are under serious pressure to run this year, from Democrats who understand what a disaster for the Democrats that a Howard Dean presidency would be. Howard Dean has the Democrat nomination all but wrapped up, today, which means four more years of George W. Bush in the White House. How Hitlery will react to this situation, is the big question. Personally, I think she’ll do the obvious; she’ll run. The biggest indication we have for this, to my mind is her denial of it… Her claim she won’t run.
But in any event, Clark is going to be forgotten as a candidate by the time the snow melts in spring 2004.
You will recall, I mentioned in a couple bits about how CNN Lied, and as it turned out, the NY Times lied too, as regards a number of issues on Iraq. The story keeps popping up. This time, It’s John Burns making the claim. Here’s another version of that story, too.
Boortz passes on this morning, the fact that the leftist Washinton POst was caught twisting the truth to their own ends, again:
Here’s a link to a front page story from yesterday’s Washington Post. The story details Vice President Richard Cheney’s Sunday interview on NBC’s Meet the Press. Here is a paragraph taken directly from the Washington Post story:
“Cheney was less forthcoming when asked about Saudi Arabia’s ties to al Qaeda and the Sept. 11 hijackers. ‘I don’t want to speculate,” he said, adding that Sept. 11 is “over with now, it’s done, it’s history and we can put it behind us.'”
Now … any reasonably intelligent person with any command of the English language would take that to mean that Richard Cheney said that the terrorist attacks of 9/11 are past history and something we can just put behind us. But … is that what Vice President meant? In fact, was that even what he said?
Apparently not.
If you read the Meet the Press transcript you will see that the Cheney quote as printed in the Post actually contains fragmented statements addressing two different issues. Here … read it for yourself. Here’s the relevant portion of the transcript:
MR. RUSSERT: There are reports that the investigation Congress did does show a link between the Saudi government and the hijackers but that it will not be released to the public.
VICE PRES. CHENEY: I don’t know want to speculate on that, Tim, partly because I was involved in reviewing those pages. It was the judgment of our senior intelligence officials, both CIA and FBI that that material needed to remain classified. At some point, we may be able to declassify it, but there are ongoing investigations that might be affected by that release, and for that reason, we kept it classified. The committee knows what’s in there. They helped to prepare it. So it hasn’t been kept secret from the Congress, but from the standpoint of our ongoing investigations, we needed to do that.
One of the things this points out that’s important for us to understand—so there’s this great temptation to look at these events as discreet events. We got hit on 9/11. So we can go and investigate it. It’s over with now. It’s done. It’s history and put it behind us.
From our perspective, trying to deal with this continuing campaign of terror, if you will, the war on terror that we’re engaged in, this is a continuing enterprise. The people that were involved in some of those activities before 9/11 are still out there. We learn more and more as we capture people, detain people, get access to records and so forth that this is a continuing enterprise and, therefore, we do need to be careful when we look at things like 9/11, the commission report from 9/11, not to jeopardize our capacity to deal with this threat going forward in the interest of putting that information that’s interesting that relates to the period of time before that. These are continuing requirements on our part, and we have to be sensitive to that.
It’s clear that Cheney did not say that it is time to put the attacks behind us. He merely said that there is a great temptation to do so. If you read on in Cheney’s response you will see that he clearly thinks that this is a temptation to be avoided. He says the response to the terrorist attacks is a “continuing enterprise” and that there are still people involved in the 9/11 attacks who are “still out there.”
Oh well. If you’re a leftist newspaper and you can Dowdify a quote in order to make it look like a conservative Republican Vice President is shrugging off the terrorist attacks … hell, why not?
Bootz misses the point in a lot of areas. This is not one of them; he’s right on the beam here.
Well, if anyone was going to roadblock the will of the people in California, you just knew the Nincompoop Ninth Circus Court was going to be involved. And of course, in typical, and quite predictable leftist style, they charge that the ones “disenfranchised” would be the poor and minority voters.
I keep expecting a headline:
ISABEL HITS EAST COAST: POOR AND MINORITIES SEEN SUFFERING MOST
Idiots.
I think, were I in that set of voting districts… I’d be pissed at the Democrats. In the end, all they’re really making is the very racist assumption that the poor and minorities are not smart enough to work that style of voting machine.
091503224531 Rochester NY —
It is something of an indication of where we are, in the state of the western world, when we can pass our time, and our anger in relative minutiae. As someone else recently noted to me; when the exact location of Madonna’s tongue, or the on again off again wedding plans for Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez are considered front page news, you can pretty much figure we’re still here; that the threats we face are not larger, at least, than they were the day before.
One conclusion to be drawn from this is one you’re not likely to see mentioned in the press of today, given their leftist lean. Specifically, that the White House is doing a far better job than they’re being given credit for by the leftists who desperately want back into the place. Indeed, were any of the current crop of challengers to obtain it, I wonder if they could do as good a job and President Bush and his people have done? Somehow, I tend to doubt it. I wonder if anyone else will make that connection?
Consider it; yes, we’re involved in a war, one that was brought to us, and had we had someone more vigilant in office during the 90’s would have been avoided. Yes, we must be vigilant, more so than we have in the past. But as I say, we could have used a little more vigilance anyway.
However that may be, it is indisputable, that the Islamofacists, who sought to bring us to our knees as a nation and as a culture, have not succeeded. It is they, not us and our friends, who are on the run. We’re in a state of normalcy that few would have predicted, two years ago today…. a state that had we had different leadership, would certainly not exist today.
There is no other conclusion that may be drawn here, but that the President and his people are doing an excellent job; does anyone seriously think if they were not, that we would not be under attack as you read this? Does anyone seriously consider that they’re holding back on the goodness of their hearts?
No. They only available answer is that thanks to the leadership of President Bush, Al Quieda’s leadership has been all but destroyed. bin Laden is likely dead. But even if he is alive, he’s been reduced to threats delivered by audiotape of questionable origins. The training camps have been shut down, most of the leadership is dead, jailed, or on the run. Instead of attacking our citizens, they’re forced to defend themselves from our military, which is why the attacks outside of Iraq (and Israel) have all but halted.
The rabid dogs that saw us as fear- filled, soft, gutless, who saw us as an easy pushover, and so attacked us, have had their heads returned to them via parcel post. This is no small accomplishment, though the left tries to separate this victory from its import, and from the man who led us to it.
To my mind there are some serious questions about the reason behind the willingness to so seriously question President Bush’s obvious leadership ability and motives. Given what is clearly at stake, here, it seems clear that the President’s leftist opponents at the very least are placing their own political power needs, over the needs of the country.
These people have been about denying the danger we were and are in, apparently to try and wrest power away from the center and the right that they hate so much. Yet these too are being less than successful.
Recent polling data suggests that the connections between Saddam Hussein and Al Quieda that have always existed, are now seen and understood by all but the loudest 30% of Americans, including the anti-American left. In this grouping, I include the anti-Bush at all costs Democrats… Including all of the Democrats currently running for the Presidential Nomination of that party.
The reason the steady drumbeat of “it’s all Bush’s fault” has fallen off the front page is really rather simple: The American public isn’t buying the usual Democrat/socialist Mantra. Regardless of what this very vocal and very desperate minority claims, The people know there is no longer any question that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq was training Islamic terrorists south of Baghdad at a place called the Salman Pak Training Facility. This point has been repeatedly confirmed both by documentation found by our troops as they wade through the mass of documentation, but also by Iraqi defectors. We also know, through financial records, that Saddam Hussein was paying millions to Ayman al-Zawahiri, who was bin Laden’s chief deputy.
It’s only the anti-Americans who claim this is false that the troops and the defectors are lying, else that it’s been “exaggerated.” Again, in this title of ‘anti-Americans” I include liberal Democrats.
As an example of the anti-Americanism, I offer a quote that Andrew Sullivan points up in his blog the other day; a quote from Jonathan Schell, which seems to say it all; it sums up the anti-Americanism embedded in the left wing:
“Biden says we must win the war. This is precisely wrong. The United States must learn to lose this war Â- a harder task, in many ways, than winning, for it requires admitting mistakes and relinquishing attractive fantasies. This is the true moral mission of our time (well, of the next few years, anyway).” – Jonathan Schell, saying out loud what many on the Left believe, and have long believed. Good that some of them are finally being more honest about their loathing of the West.
The Democrats should not be trusted, having been exposed as liars,and as anti-American to the core.Those who vote for Democrats are electing the enemies of America. It’s really that simple, that direct, and that profound…. Their goals, if realized, will weaken us to our destruction. They should certainly not be allowed anywhere near the reins of power.
To give this point some focus, (this cannot be overstated) consider that we’d not be discussing this at all, that 9/11 would never have happened at all, had their hero Bill Clinton, actually done what he swore to do when he took the oath of office…. being vigilant enough to protect our country, not simply to divert attention from his latest lie.
Which brings me to an offer; those making all these claims against the President; I say, let them come forward. But let them do so with the same levels of proof in hand that they demanded for the charges of most Americans, against Bill Clinton.
091503224531 Rochester NY —
It is something of an indication of where we are, in the state of the western world, when we can pass our time, and our anger in relative minutiae. As someone else recently noted to me; when the exact location of Madonna’s tongue, or the on again off again wedding plans for Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez are considered front page news, you can pretty much figure we’re still here; that the threats we face are not larger, at least, than they were the day before.
One conclusion to be drawn from this is one you’re not likely to see mentioned in the press of today, given their leftist lean. Specifically, that the White House is doing a far better job than they’re being given credit for by the leftists who desperately want back into the place. Indeed, were any of the current crop of challengers to obtain it, I wonder if they could do as good a job and President Bush and his people have done? Somehow, I tend to doubt it. I wonder if anyone else will make that connection?
Consider it; yes, we’re involved in a war, one that was brought to us, and had we had someone more vigilant in office during the 90’s would have been avoided. Yes, we must be vigilant, more so than we have in the past. But as I say, we could have used a little more vigilance anyway.
However that may be, it is indisputable, that the Islamofacists, who sought to bring us to our knees as a nation and as a culture, have not succeeded. It is they, not us and our friends, who are on the run. We’re in a state of normalcy that few would have predicted, two years ago today…. a state that had we had different leadership, would certainly not exist today.
There is no other conclusion that may be drawn here, but that the President and his people are doing an excellent job; does anyone seriously think if they were not, that we would not be under attack as you read this? Does anyone seriously consider that they’re holding back on the goodness of their hearts?
No. They only available answer is that thanks to the leadership of President Bush, Al Quieda’s leadership has been all but destroyed. bin Laden is likely dead. But even if he is alive, he’s been reduced to threats delivered by audiotape of questionable origins. The training camps have been shut down, most of the leadership is dead, jailed, or on the run. Instead of attacking our citizens, they’re forced to defend themselves from our military, which is why the attacks outside of Iraq (and Israel) have all but halted.
The rabid dogs that saw us as fear- filled, soft, gutless, who saw us as an easy pushover, and so attacked us, have had their heads returned to them via parcel post. This is no small accomplishment, though the left tries to separate this victory from its import, and from the man who led us to it.
To my mind there are some serious questions about the reason behind the willingness to so seriously question President Bush’s obvious leadership ability and motives. Given what is clearly at stake, here, it seems clear that the President’s leftist opponents at the very least are placing their own political power needs, over the needs of the country.
These people have been about denying the danger we were and are in, apparently to try and wrest power away from the center and the right that they hate so much. Yet these too are being less than successful.
Recent polling data suggests that the connections between Saddam Hussein and Al Quieda that have always existed, are now seen and understood by all but the loudest 30% of Americans, including the anti-American left. In this grouping, I include the anti-Bush at all costs Democrats… Including all of the Democrats currently running for the Presidential Nomination of that party.
The reason the steady drumbeat of “it’s all Bush’s fault” has fallen off the front page is really rather simple: The American public isn’t buying the usual Democrat/socialist Mantra. Regardless of what this very vocal and very desperate minority claims, The people know there is no longer any question that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq was training Islamic terrorists south of Baghdad at a place called the Salman Pak Training Facility. This point has been repeatedly confirmed both by documentation found by our troops as they wade through the mass of documentation, but also by Iraqi defectors. We also know, through financial records, that Saddam Hussein was paying millions to Ayman al-Zawahiri, who was bin Laden’s chief deputy.
It’s only the anti-Americans who claim this is false that the troops and the defectors are lying, else that it’s been “exaggerated.” Again, in this title of ‘anti-Americans” I include liberal Democrats.
As an example of the anti-Americanism, I offer a quote that Andrew Sullivan points up in his blog the other day; a quote from Jonathan Schell, which seems to say it all; it sums up the anti-Americanism embedded in the left wing:
“Biden says we must win the war. This is precisely wrong. The United States must learn to lose this war Â- a harder task, in many ways, than winning, for it requires admitting mistakes and relinquishing attractive fantasies. This is the true moral mission of our time (well, of the next few years, anyway).” – Jonathan Schell, saying out loud what many on the Left believe, and have long believed. Good that some of them are finally being more honest about their loathing of the West.
The Democrats should not be trusted, having been exposed as liars,and as anti-American to the core.Those who vote for Democrats are electing the enemies of America. It’s really that simple, that direct, and that profound…. Their goals, if realized, will weaken us to our destruction. They should certainly not be allowed anywhere near the reins of power.
To give this point some focus, (this cannot be overstated) consider that we’d not be discussing this at all, that 9/11 would never have happened at all, had their hero Bill Clinton, actually done what he swore to do when he took the oath of office…. being vigilant enough to protect our country, not simply to divert attention from his latest lie.
Which brings me to an offer; those making all these claims against the President; I say, let them come forward. But let them do so with the same levels of proof in hand that they demanded for the charges of most Americans, against Bill Clinton.
