[Grampa Dave]

"Clark is sometimes compared to Eisenhower, another general who went into politics. But Ike was beloved. That's a word that never comes up when Clark is discussed."

It will be very interesting to see how the NY Slimes spins and lies to make Clark the DemonicRat Ike in the next few weeks.

[r9etb]

If you filter out Cohen's biases, you get the following:

1. Clark is smart, but an arrogant butthole.

2. He's arrogant, and will bash people around until he gets his way.

And that's about it.

The first one he could probably manage to work around.

The second one spells disaster for him.

[Recovering_Democrat]

Clark is sometimes compared to Eisenhower, another general who went into politics. But Ike was beloved. That's a word that never comes up when Clark is discussed.

Sounds like Adlai Stevenson in fatigues.

[The G Man]

"He won the respect, even the awe, of his colleagues"

The ... "awe"??? I somehow doubt that.

[judywillow]

Wesley Clark is a war criminal and a certified baby-killer. He is responsible for both the Waco incident in Texas and the near debacle in Yugoslavia in 1999, and was shitcanned by the pentagon for trying to start WW-III in the aftermath of Kosovo (the famous incident of the British general refusing an order saying 'I'm not going to start WW-III for you.').

Knowing that Kosovo was another episode of dog-wagging for which he could not plausibly ask NATO airmen or soldiers to risk death or injury, Clark tried bombing Serbian military targets from 30,000' for about a month and, seeing that not working, embarked upon a wholesale campaign of war crimes directed against Serbian civilians and their infrastructure hundreds of kilometers from any legitimate military target. Thousands of little slavic orthodox kids, amongst other civilians, were killed in these mad bombing raids, which included targets such as the bridge at the little market town of Varvarin, the Chinese embassy in Belgrad, and a television station. The idea was to make the lives of ordinary Serbs so miserable that they would somehow or other force Milosevic to hand the ancient heartland of Serbia (Kosovo) over to the KLA/AlQuaeda narco-terrorists. The overall objective, of course, was to take the Juanita Broaddrick story off the front pages of our newspapers.

The laws of war have substantially changed since Hiroshima and Dresden. All of those kinds of things are illegal and have been since 1947, under Geneva conventions and every other law of war.

Somehow or other, I look at those pictures of Milica Rakic and Sanja Milenkovic, and it just seems too high a price for saving Bubba Clinton's ugly face.

All of this is Wesley Clark's handiwork. In fact, it appears to be what the guy specializes in.

In fact, the world outside the United States genreally refers to Kosovo as THE COWARDS' WAR, for reasons which were fairly obvious at the time, and this "cowards' war" was Wesley Clark's supreme accomplishment in life.

I can't believe it would be that terribly difficult to defeat the guy in an election, but Republicans have to take the gloves off, and go after the guy. In particular, somebody in a leadership position has to stand up and say to the world that the war against Serbia was wrong, and the precedent set at Kosovo must be repudiated.

There might still be time to hand Kosovo back to its rightful owners before the UN demands that we hand Texas and California over to Mexico on the same basis.

[Cicero]

This is actually a whitewash job. "He won the respect, even the awe, of his colleagues. . . ." Yeah, sure, that's why they called him the Ultimate Perfumed Prince.

Clark is not nice. He's not likeable. But on top of that, he was corrupt and incompetent, a real clinton stooge.

No mention of almost starting World War II because of his military stupidity. No mention of his complicity in burning the children at Waco.

[capydick]

Has anyone noticed that when he is on TV talking, he doesnt blink? Check it out next time. It could be the Botox.

[SkyPilot]

Much about Clark is both intriguing and exciting. On paper he is almost a perfect general election candidate for the Democrats -- a southerner (Arkansas), moderate, pro-choice, smart as a whip and inoculated against talk-radio demagoguery that equates thought with treason.

Only out of someone like Richard Cohen (and fellow liberals) would these words ooze. I think he has a new SAT Verbal question for candidates:

1. Abortion is to Perfect as Talk-Radio is to:

A. Hate
B. Christian
C. Macho
D. Latte

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

And he can't really remember who he voted for in past presidential elections.

(Uh huh. Sure he can't.)

And of course he's "brilliant" (even though he is completely incoherent at times) - he's running as a Democrat, and all Democrats are "brilliant" if you ask these people. If he sometimes doesn't make sense, it's just that we don't "get it".

This is going to be fun to watch.

[Paulus Invictus]

I watched this guy on TV the other day and I was struck by his cold, dead eyes. This guy is a psycho with clintinoid tendencies.

[q_an_a]

the hit pieces start.

[Mr. Bird]

Clark's candidacy won't survive outside the Beltway. He's a non-person in the eyes of the electorate. There's a reason generals don't gravitate to the power of the presidency: as a group, they are fairly obscure officials in the public mind.

Kosovo was no WWII, and Clark is no Ike, Mac, Patton, or Bradley. The American public have no clue who he is. They are willing to accept this in a candidate who has proven himself in the political ring before (a gov, rep, senator, whatever), but to think even a bare majority would rally to the cause of a general with no prior elective office is absurd.

The DC crowd doesn't see this, because they saw him at the parties, talked about him at work, covered his actions in the news. To them, he's General Wesley Clark, former NATO Commander. That and fifty cents will get him a cup of coffee in Everytown, USA.

[Califelephant]

Here's what I find wierd: a U.S. general who's a Democrat. I know there are probably plenty more like him, but I still think it's wierd. The Dems are the anti-defense party. The Dems are the party that's permanently hung up on Vietman. The Dems are the party for turning the military into a social experiment. The Dems are the "nanny" party and the Pubs are the "kick a** and take names" party. It's not a good fit, and it makes me wonder what it is about him. that identifies with them.

[finnman69]

[Maringa]

Prediction for 2004...

Clark/Hillary win the ticket...

First order of business...troop withdrawal from Iraq and handing over the duties to the UN. Administration change will allow cover for Clark/Hillary to make the Iraq policy change (blame Bush for all evil). It will also allow them to enter back into graces with the UN and apologise to the whole world (will continue to financially support rebuilding efforts). President Bush will be indicted on some fabricated up charge and will face trial in the World Court...Clark/Hillary gladly comply and hand him over to the the World Court System. Saddam Hussein between now and then somehow is able to surrender to some foreign government...probably French, which protect him from US forces. His popularity worldwide skyrockets because he was able to survive two wars against the US. Iraqui people clamor for his return. Somehow I believe this rascal is going to survive and return to power!

I hope none of the above becomes true, but I anxiously waiting for some fight back from the Bush administration. I hope that their lack of response is some strategy and setup for the democrats and that there is some progress in capturing/eliminating Saddam/Bin Laden over the next few months, because right now it doesn't look good. Those two critters are thumbing their nose at us and are regrouping. We can all keep laughing that Clark/Hillary will never have a chance next year, but then we all thought that Bush would easily win the popular vote, and that Hillary would lose the senate election...I deserve the flack for being a nervous twit, but I don't do well when things don't go as planned...