Posted on 09/19/2003 12:20:23 AM PDT by kattracks
The term "stalking horse" has pretty much gone out of favor in American politics, although at one time it came up in almost every presidential cycle. Its decline has reflected the decline of the importance of party conventions. Here's the Safire definition of a stalking horse: "a decoy; a candidate put forward to split a vote or deadlock a convention, concealing another candidate's plan."
Wesley Clark is a stalking horse for Hillary Clinton.
That much is clear, but little else is. For example, there is the intriguing question of whether Clark knows he is a stalking horse for Hillary Clinton. It is entirely possible he is being duped into being a decoy. With no political experience, he would make an easy mark for a team of con artists as skilled as Hillary and Bill Clinton.
But he may very well have been in on the plot all along. There are many rewards for a person in his position that would easily justify allowing himself to be used by the Clintons. His war, Bosnia, was after all, a nothing war, and as of a year ago he was idling away in useless retirement, his crowning glory squeezed between the Gulf War and the War on Terrorism, almost forgotten already and fading like mist on a sunny morning in Arkansas.
In a Hillary administration, he, in imitation of the man who has overshadowed and outperformed him his entire military career, Colin Powell, could be Secretary of State. That'd show 'em. So that might well have been the deal up front. But it's also possible the Clintons put on their sincere masks and convinced the gullible Clark that he was the one who could win and the one who would make a great President. They may have filled his head with comparisons to George Washington, Ulysses Grant and Dwight Eisenhower. And he may have bought it.
Whichever is true, this much you can take to the bank: Wesley Clark is running because the Clintons recruited him and promised him campaign resources and some sort of political reward.
Clark is, as you have heard, from Arkansas. But that doesn't explain why he announced his candidacy in Little Rock. He announced his candidacy in Little Rock because that is still where the Clinton machine can do the best job of putting together the volunteers and the crowd to make for a successful event. And who is his most visible backer? Why good old Clinton Stalwart Congressman Charles Rangel of Harlem, where Bill's office is.
If you want to know why an extreme liberal African-American Congressman from New York is all gung-ho over a four-star General who is being touted as the Democrats' new centrist leader, here is the answer:
Bill and Hillary told him to be.
Avid readers of this space know my principle theory regarding the 2004 election is that the Clintons want Bush to win so there will be an open seat for Hillary in 2008.
They do not want a Democrat to win because then there will be no opportunity for Herself until 2012, which is too long to wait; who knows what might happen by then? Now since I made that statement, a couple of things have happened. First, Bush's position has weakened; his defeat, which six months ago seemed impossible, is now, albeit just barely, possible. Second, Howard Dean's candidacy has caught fire among liberal activists, and precisely those activists least amenable to control by the Clintons.
The Clintons didn't much care if Dean got the nomination (Someone had to.) as long as he was a stone loser, but they don't want him to get it and win in November. It's true they can always prevent him from winning, even at the last minute if necessary, but they don't want to take the risk of being blamed for his losing. And even if Dean loses but runs well, there are risks to the Clintons. They don't need his people in charge of the Democratic apparatus come 2005.
There is also the remote chance that Bush may slip so badly that Hillary's running in 2004 becomes something it has never, ever been: an option to keep open.
All that added up to the need for a stalking horse, and General Wesley Clark was the perfect stooge for the job. Therefore, Clark is in the race, and he will stay in the race as long as it suits the Clinton's fancy, perhaps up to and including winning the nomination itself. (He will not, of course, be allowed to win in November.) It is an insult to Machiavelli to call this scheming Machiavellian. One must never, however, underestimate the Clintons' self-centeredness, venality, or ability to make their evil schemes work. Republicans have been doing that for years, and they've paid the price. If you say of the Clintons, "Oh, they wouldn't do that," you are wrong.
Right now they are playing a four-star General for a sap and working day and night to deny their own political party the chance to win the presidency in 2004. Their current tactic is the old stalking horse trick. If that doesn't work, they'll try something else. Howard Dean, beware. You've never met anybody like them in Vermont.Veteran GOP media consultant Jay Bryant’s regular columns are available at www.theoptimate.com, and his commentaries may be heard on NPR’s “All Things Considered.” .
©2003 Jay Bryant
They could let him win, then make him retire after one term....
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.