 At the outset, only George Washington
and Andrew Jackson were inspired presidents. Dwight David Eisenhower was
at his best on the golf course. Taylor, Hayes, Arthur and Harrison aren't
known by most, while US Grant is remembered for his corrupt administration.
So what would make any sensible citizen think that General Wesley K. Clark
could ever aspire to be on the staff of Douglas MacArthur?
-
- According to former Joint Chiefs Chairman General
Henry Shelton, Clark flunks another promotion: "I will tell you
the reason he came out of Europe early had to do with integrity and character
issues, things that are very near and dear to my heart." He added
that he would not vote for General Clark. But that infamous old war horse
General Alexander M. Haig Jr. said of Clark's service under him during
a NATO tour: "Major Clark is an officer of impeccable character with
a rare blend of personal qualities and professional attributes which uniquely
qualify him as a soldier-scholar." Who should you believe?
-
- Actually the question itself begs the issue. What is
a retired military careerist doing running for the job of commander and
chief? Not to say or imply that having served in the military is a disclaimer
in and of itself, for residence in the oval office. But what skills does
an officer and gentleman have in becoming a partisan politician? Especially,
those who rise in rank to such a level that few command them to do the
dirty work. The notion that four stars will make you a nova is puzzling.
More likely the glow of celebrity status will reside into the back streets
of a veterans retirement community.
-
- It seems that both political parties like to recruit
a former general when the military pendulum shifts from faint praise to
a John Philip Sousa's march. Clark is no Andrew Jackson and certainly won't
rival for the affection as the father of our country. So why has he come
out of no where to climb to top some poll charts? At the risk of cynicism,
maybe the explanation lies in a stealth campaign. Substance is trite, when
politicians present a media message. Shaping the agenda, defining the character
and molding the image has more to do with manipulation than with authentic
demand. Being tabbed the Hillary candidate should be the kiss of death.
Nay, not for DemocRATS . . . keep the dream alive!
-
- From Global Research - Stephen
Gowans writes: "Clark's alleged antiwar credentials were apparently
established by a few reservations the former general expressed about the
Pentagon's tactics in Iraq, as in "I would have done it differently,"
so to say Clark is opposed to war is like saying the former executioner
is opposed to capital punishment because if he were still in charge he
would have used a noose, not the electric chair."
-
- Some voices out of the mainstream claim he is a WANTED war criminal: "During
the war on Yugoslavia, Clark proposed bombing oil pipelines in Hungary,
as well as Russian ships in the vicinity. During his stand-off between
NATO and the Russian troops, Clark attempted to have British paratroopers
storm the Pristina airport."
-
- A peace maker or a warmonger, take your pick! What can
be said with certainty, a real leader he is not . . . Those who enjoy the
parlor game of primary party politics become engulfed in trivia. Spin is
meant for the likely voter, while believed only by the neurotic zealot.
It's all show for another round of diversion. Rid the process of Howard
Dean and allow John Kerry to
become the compromise selection. The next general election will be between
"skull and bone" alumni.
-
- The central criticism regarding Clark is that he believes
in only himself. He was a poor military commander and would be a disaster
as a presidential nominee. No doubt this conclusion hasn't escaped the
Clintons. An inflated ego is not unusual to those who are attracted to
power. A Napoleon who rules with the best interests of the ordinary populace
would be refreshing to the idiocy of a mass pure democracy. To our credit,
the history of the United States has produced neither. However, electing
selected candidates, when there is no real contest, has been our curse
for decades.
-
- MacArthur was more capable than Ike, but he was never
acceptable to the forces that control the political culture. Clark would
be a puppet on a string, that's why he is allowed to register in the polls.
Forget about a white knight riding to save the day, he won't pass the demographic
profile. It's too late in the tragic decline of the Republic to rally behind
an elected political savior. The generals are off conquering colonies and
have forgotten about defending the homeland. Wesley Clark is a fraud and
deserves an unceremonious eulogy.
-
- SARTRE - October 20, 2003
-
- "The article published originally at Rense.com;
republication granted with this tagline and hyperlink intacts"
-
-
- "I deplore the need or the use of troops anywhere
to get American citizens to obey the orders of constituted courts."
General Dwight D. Eisenhower
-
-
- © 2000-2003 by BATR All Rights Reserved
-
- http://batr.org/wrack/102003.html
|
