Peggy Noonan: General Malaise (Stop Wesley Clark!)

Opinion Journal ^ | 01/27/04 | Peggy Noonan

[Pokey78]

Democrats, for the good of the country: Stop Wesley Clark!

Let me assert something that I cannot prove with a poll but that is based on serious conversations the past few months with Republicans and also normal people: 9/11 changed everything. Yes, I know you know that. But it has even changed how people who usually vote Republican think about Democratic candidates for president. Our No. 1 question used to be: Can we beat this guy easily? But now we feel the age of terrorism so profoundly challenges our country, and is so suggestive of future trauma and national pain, that our No. 1 question has become: Is he

[PGalt]

Thanks for the information. Clark's rise to impact Noonan's radar screen is much more interesting than his latest "foot in mouth" comment.

[leadpenny]

. . . based on serious conversations the past few months with Republicans and also normal people: . . .

I love that line. Pretty good read, Peggy.
___________

Wesley:
Hillary's
Girlie Boy!

[Graymatter]

>>what shall we comparatively say of one who starts out as an atrocious general?

I wouldn't call it 'starting out.' Rather he's reached his level of incompetence, at the rank of general. Nowhere to go but down. TV talking head, and, every 4 years, a 3rd party goofball with a messiah complex. Stassen, Nader, LaRouche...Clark. I believe he'll be a recurrent spoiler.

[Amelia]

There may be something to the idea that Democrats in general want to get rid of George W. Bush more than Republicans in general want to keep him.

One could certainly reach that conclusion from reading this site.

[FreedomPoster]

>>Careerism, ticket punching, officers as mere pols and spinners - these things are a little too common and run a little too deep to all be Clinton's fault.

You are absolutely right. Though this was part of it, it was only at the very highest levels.

The Army has always had a lot of political officers who weren't very good as wartime commanders. If you read much about WWII, there were a lot of Regular Army commanders moved aside, and a lot of 90-day wonders who rose quite high.

Just based on a number of news items, nothing scientific or definitive, I think we've had some of that in the last two years, where folks get removed from command positions early and rather unceremoniously. This appears to be a natural event during wartime, and there probably isn't much to be done about it.

You're going to make O-6 just punching all the right tickets and keeping your nose clean, which Clark had obviously done. He was probably not an optimal choice to reach general-grade, but who did, again probably due to peacetime ticket punching. He then rose even higher than normal at that level, perhaps largely because of the Clintons. He is a homie with Bill, after all.

[thesummerwind]

One suspects the Democrats will send him packing. Just as one suspects he might eventually withdraw, saying something like, "You won't have Wes Clark to kick around anymore."

This guy will be in an asylum with a nice lap pool in about eight years.

[maica]

There may be other officers like Wesley, the android, but I think he is in the point one percent category of ability to give the answer asked by whomever he was trying to impress. He might even be an idiot savant in this talent.

Number one in his class at West Point - never a 'wrong' answer!

A recurrent theme in articles about him is that he did not consider the men under his command as thoughtfully as he did those he was answering TO.

I believe that his main talent his whole life has been saying what he thought would meet with approval. This works in hierarchical structures - organizations, universities, bureacracies. It absolutely is not a trait that a CEO should have. He can never be a Number One.

He would be trying to please Kofi Annan and his friends in Europe. In other words he would continue to live as a subordinate.

[maica]

I heard just a bit of the Hannity-Steffi interview - when Steffi said "the president and Mrs Clinton" in remarking on something (I forget what). I am just so annoyed that the dems still think of Slick Willie as "the president." I wish Sean would have called him on that as well.

[OESY]

A mind is a terrible thing to Wes.

[Graymatter]

I've encountered many a Clark supporter, both in cyberspace and in surround.

You could practically infer the man by his glassy-eyed devotees. They spout what they have been told are his beliefs, cite his mesmerizing resume, and you know at once that they've found what they really want---an authority figure. And some adore merely the figure. Puppets worship puppeteers---and statues.

[presidio9]

I believe he'll be a recurrent spoiler.

When Edwards or Kerry locks up the nomination in a few weeks, it will be interesting to see if Hillary inserts Weasley as a third party candidate to insure that there is not an incumbant Democrat president in 2008.

[OESY]

YET ANOTHER CLARK GAFFE

During the Democrat presidential debate in New Hampshire last week, Wesley
Clark blubbered the following statement: "And when the president of the
United States does two things that I agree with -- one of them attacking the
Taliban in Iraq, and the other is not quitting in the use of military force
in the middle of a dust storm -- then I'm going to say so."

Now, maybe I missed it, but I don't recall anyone in the media pointing out
that the Taliban was in Afghanistan, not Iraq. Or does Wes know something
about Taliban operations in Iraq that no one else is talking about? Major
gaffe, either way. Wonder why we haven't heard more about it?

A mind is a terrible thing to Wes.

[petercooper]

Clark has stopped himself - he's done.

[AnAmericanMother]

Good one!

(Jacques-Louis is spinning in his crypt).

[Taliesan]

Our military in the 1990s promoted this kind of guy to the head of Nato. Something diseased happened to the upper reaches of the American officer corps, that this character wasn't passed over at colonel until he retired.

There you go. There's the scary part. A verified lunatic in charge of all the guns.

[AnAmericanMother]

To paraphrase Honest Abe, I think a case of whatever brand Grant was drinking would improve Weasley.

Seriously, Grant had a weakness for the bottle but, as Bruce Catton said one time, somehow not when the chips were down. And while he was a lousy president because he trusted his friends too much, he was an honest and courageous man. He refused morphine while dying in agony of throat cancer so that he could finish his autobiography to provide for his family after his death.

(full disclosure: he married my 3rd cousin Julia Dent. She was struck out of the family bible for marrying a Yankee, but that's another story . . . :-D )

[AnAmericanMother]

I think you've got it exactly right. Peacetime army and wartime army are two different animals and tend to push two different kinds of men to the top. And when war comes, the peacetime "perfumed princes" get dumped unceremoniously. Spike Milligan in his autobiography refers to the "Montgomery Purge" of the British higher-ups.

In WWII, it got to the point that units had two sets of officers - one for the front, and one for "show". Both Bill Mauldin (may his memory be blessed) and my dad confirm this.

[wayoverontheright]

Gen. Clark gives off the vibrations of a man who has no real beliefs save one: Wes Clark should be president.

The democratic party mirrors the General's void of ideology, they are about power and power alone. Clinton was able to DUPE the voters into believing that he shared their ideology, but I don't see any of these candidates as possessed of that magnitude of talent to deceive, and deceive is what they must do.

[wayoverontheright]

Clark will flame out just like dean. You just can't fool all the people all the time. In the end it has to be kerry by default. Even the dims will figure that out and then Pres Bush will spank him badly because kerry is a poser too.

I SO agree.

There's a train wreck looming for the Democrats in 2004, IMHO.

[Graymatter]

Grant was a great American.

Where's he buried?