General Wesley Clark: my personal 180 on him

[American]

While Bubba Clinton was toking up and learning to be a marxist planning to take down our system from within, Wesley Clark was doing push-ups, shouting like a dog, and getting duct taped to his matress which was flipped and pounced on, the event never being reported in order to ensure completion of the vital bonding process that the Academy system calls "Teamwork".

This has an effect on a person. In this case that person is our man-of-the-hour, General Wesley Clark.

I'm going to tell you this only once, and don't you ever forget it:

If Arnold Schwarzenegger is a Trojan Horse liberal, ready to let slide all slacker state-worker illegal immigrant fake-workman's comp, phony lawsuit-filing, porn industry-supporting, pinko Hollywood fag, unemployed gangster-rapping criminals who deflorate the daughters of good valued, hard working professionals in the suburbs... then Wesley Clark is OUR wolf in sheep's clothing, carefully planning to flush the scum out of society in a masterfully executed conservative global conspiracy.

Trust me on this. The man spent his life in the thresher, a spearhead of "the System". No man with an honor code can be a real democrat. The officer corp is overwhelmingly conservative. Everybody knows it.

He would have used "leverage" on Iraq. Right. :rolleyes: :roll: Clark would have opened a 3-front war. We'd be in 10 different countries by now if he'd had his way. Hell, you'd see a McDonalds and Starbucks in every Afghan city right now! Sure, there'd be a grenade lovingly tucked in every Happy Meal, but most of them are former Soviet duds anyway. The kids are a lot tougher over there.

That's why American kids are FAT!

[Shinytop]

Anytime somebody says everybody knows it you can bet they don't have a clue. What is your vast military experience that you know this?

[Cain]

While Bubba Clinton was toking up and learning to be a marxist planning to take down our system from within,

How does a person come to believe this crap? Maybe you're just trying to be provocative, but I want to remind you that stupidity is not a prerequisite for the role of provocateur. At least that's my helpful suggestion for the day.

As for Wesley Clark, well, yeah, he's a pro-establishment figure. So was Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and practically every other person in a position capable of capturing the Presidency.

[corplinx]

I think what most people are missing with WesClark is the fact that his most rabid liberal supporters are against everything his career represents.

The assumption is that Joe Twelve-Pack will vote for him because he was a General. The egghead will vote for him because he was a rhodes scholar. And finally, the liberal will vote for him because of his social stances.

This is why he is the candidate of hope, not because he represents the liberal paradigm but because they feel he can win.

[LucyR]

Originally posted by corplinx

The assumption is that Joe Twelve-Pack will vote for him because he was a General. The egghead will vote for him because he was a rhodes scholar. And finally, the liberal will vote for him because of his social stances.


Which category are you in?

[corplinx]

Originally posted by LucyR


Which category are you in?

The category of "i dont vote for candidates from arkansas which is the only state in the union with more inbreeding than kentucky and more racism than mississippi"

[Zep]

Gee! A presidential candidate trying to appeal to the maximum number of voters instead of going with the policies! Who'd a thunk!

:i:

[Crossbow]

Originally posted by American
...

Trust me on this. The man spent his life in the thresher, a spearhead of "the System". No man with an honor code can be a real democrat. The officer corp is overwhelmingly conservative. Everybody knows it.

...

Tust you? No thanks!

I doubt that I will ever trust you on anything of any real import.

[Tricky]

Democrats support Clark for the same reasons that Republicans support Schwarzennager; Because he is a member of their party. Everyone knows (sorry, Shinytop) that in order to win a highly contested election, you have to capture the undecided middle. Clark is good for that because he appeals to the people who want us to have a strong military, but don't like what we have done in Iraq.

Clinton was the expert in this role. He slashed welfare and benefitted the rich like no president in history, meanwhile keeping the liberals in tow by tossing them a bone every now and then. That infuriated the Repubs to the point that they would do absolutely anything to discredit him.

Both parties, more than even their desire to press their idelolgies, want to win, and they want the candidate that has the best chance to win. This is how US politics works.

[Clancie]

Posted by Tricky

Democrats support Clark for the same reasons tha tRepublicans support Schwarzennage...Both parties, more than even their desire to press their idelolgies, want to win, and they want the candidate that has the best chance to win. This is how US politics works.
Well, yes, Tricky, I agree that everyone wants to win. But there's no comparison between these two men beyond that. If Schwarzenegger wins it will be because he has great name recognition as a famous movie star and body builder, despite a total lack of intellectual or political accomplishments of any sort, ever.

Clark, on the other hand, has shown himself to be intellectually accomplished throughout his life, and he has repeatedly demonstrated sophisticated military and diplomatic skills in his career.

I find it insulting that a man with Schwarzenegger's limited administrative experience and minimal intellectual interests (see his answer to Larry King when asked "what book did you read most recently?") thinks he's suited to govern my state just because he's a wealthy movie star.

Of course, there's the old saying (wasn't it Barnum?) about never going wrong underestimating the intelligence of the American public. If Schwarzenegger wins, it'll just be yet another example of how true that saying still is.....

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Clancie

Well, yes, Tricky, I agree that everyone wants to win. But there's no comparison between these two men beyond that. If Schwarzenegger wins it will be because he has great name recognition as a famous movie star and body builder, despite a total lack of intellectual or political accomplishments of any sort, ever.

Clark, on the other hand, has shown himself to be intellectually accomplished throughout his life, and he has repeatedly demonstrated sophisticated military and diplomatic skills in his career.
I don't disagree with you, Clancie, on the relative qualifications of Schwarzenegger and Clark. My point was that either party is capable of overlooking idealogical differences to get "their guy" elected. Arnold is against a whole lot of what most Republicans are for (maybe not in California), just as Clark's stand on many issues seems to conflict with traditional and recent Demorcratic positions. If Clark were a Republican and Arnold were a Democrat, their parties would be assailing them unmercifully for their positions.

[Clancie]

Posted by Tricky

My point was that either party is capable of overlooking idealogical differences to get "their guy" elected. ]If Clark were a Republican and Arnold were a Democrat, their parties would be assailing them unmercifully for their positions
Well, you may find this naive, Tricky, but I just can't picture the majority of Democrats being so opportunistic to support someone as unqualified as Schwarzenegger, just because they thought he could definitely win.

But, more to the point (because I know we have a lot of general agreement) I've got to ask....which positions of Clark's would be so objectionable to Dems, do you think? I know he voted for Reagan long ago (as many Dems and Independents did in the Reagan landslide)...and he's said nice things about GW Bush in the past...not a big issue imo. Fundraising for Republicans? Well, maybe he saw it as patriotic to support Bush post 9/ll.

With the conservatives dominating the Republican Party now, I think he's absolutely right that he would have been "a very lonely Republican" with his views...pro choice...pro environment...pro health care,...pro an internationalist foreign policy...against the Bush tax cut for those earning over $200,000/year...and on and on....

I'm wondering which views of Clark's do you think are inconsistent with being a Democrat? He seems far less conservative to me than Lieberman or Graham.

[American]

bump