Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Columnist Farah: "Why Wesley Clark Is Dangerous"
WND.com ^ | 09-19-03 | Farah, Joseph

Posted on 09/18/2003 10:09:04 PM PDT by Theodore R.

Why Wesley Clark is dangerous

Posted: September 19, 2003 1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

Gen. Wesley Clark may be the most dangerous person in the presidential race.

More dangerous than Howard Dean? More dangerous than Al Sharpton? More dangerous than Dennis Kucinich?

Yes, more dangerous than any of these men – because he could win the Democratic nomination and the presidential election in 2004.

Mark my words: You are going to see a huge shift of support for Clark in the polls. He will become an instant front-runner in the next few days. It's as if the other nine clowns in the race have simply been setting the stage for the anointed one. I wouldn't be surprised.

Clark isn't just dangerous because he can win and replace President Bush. Frankly, I didn't vote for Bush and he has been, overall, an even worse president than I had feared he would be.

But make no mistake: Clark would be much, much worse.

How much worse? Remember Bill Clinton?

Clark has attributes Clinton never had. He is better looking. He has a strong military record that would fool most people into thinking he's a genuine hero and patriot.

And, like Clinton, he will say and do anything he needs to say or do to be elected. Clark is raw ambition personified.

Clark is a pro-abortion, pro-homosexual tax increaser. If you need any more reasons to oppose him actively, consider these:

He nearly started World War III when serving as NATO commander in the unconstitutional, immoral war on Serbia. When the Russians took control of Pristina airport before NATO troops, Clark, at the behest of NATO Secretary-General Javier Solana, ordered 500 British and French paratroopers to take it away from them. Thankfully, his order was disregarded by British Gen. Sir Mike Jackson, who told Clark: "I'm not going to start the Third World War for you."

It was Clark, once again, at the center of the Waco massacre. He was in charge at Fort Hood and was only too happy to cooperate with Attorney General Janet Reno in providing the armor and personnel needed for the military-style assault on the Branch Davidian church.

Clark attended Oxford as a Rhodes scholar with Bill Clinton. But the relationship hardly ended there. It was under Clinton's watch that Clark became a rising star in the military. And once his military career was over, he found a home working for the Stephens Group in Arkansas – the same business incubator that fostered the Clintons' rise to power.

Clark's nickname among those who served under him should give you an idea of the extent of his megalomania. He was referred to as "the Supreme Being." Col. David Hackworth called him the "Ultimate Perfumed Prince" and added "he's far more comfortable in a drawing room discussing political theories than hunkering down in the trenches where bullets fly and soldiers die."

If this isn't enough for you, there's plenty more. But, consider the distinct possibility that he is, in addition to being a serious candidate in his own right, potentially a stalking horse for the other Clinton – Hillary.

Can you not imagine Clark-Clinton or Clinton-Clark as the ultimate dream ticket for the Democrats in 2004?

It could happen. We could find our nation back where it was between 1992 and 2000. I have a feeling, because of his utter ruthlessness and predisposition to kill innocent civilians in Serbia and Kosovo, that Clark is potentially even more dangerous than Clinton.

As one of Clinton's enemies, victims and targets, that's a disturbing thought.

What can we do about this threat?

Clark has the ability to fool people. He's said to be charming. He's said to have charisma. He is undoubtedly the pick of the globalists like George Soros, currently raising $75 million to pick the next president. It's time to sound the alarm – to alert your friends, your neighbors and your co-workers to the real Wesley Clark.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2004; ar; clark; clinton; democrat; electionpresident; farah; forthood; hillary; janetreno; javiersolana; megalomania; mikejackson; president; stephensgroup; supremebeing; waco; wesleyclark
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last
To: SAJ
I hear ya buddy!

I'm keen on sitting home myself next November. I'm really getting tired of the pullback and the fact we aren't publicly slapping around some jerks like Chirac. Heck, I'd take slapping some Saudi but won't hold my breath.

But Clark isn't "all that" and I think many Americans (the dolts we both know) might be fed up with the media hype that followed McCain and Hillary in 2000 and even the Jesse Ventura stupidity. You have to have hope when even Madonna and a non-wedding for Ben-Lo (or is it Jenafflack?) aren't considered big news like it used to be.

I don't think the voters are stupid enough...nevermind. What was I thinking?

Of course they are.
21 posted on 09/19/2003 12:45:29 AM PDT by Fledermaus (Democrats have stunted brain development!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Once-Ler

22 posted on 09/19/2003 12:48:30 AM PDT by Terp (Retired US Navy now living in Philippines were the Moutains meet the Sea in the Land of Smiles)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: HitmanNY
Actually the Left is begging Hillary to run. If she does, Ashley Clark will be yesterday's news along with the rest of the Nine Dwarfs.
23 posted on 09/19/2003 12:52:37 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Way to go Joe!

VP/POTUS Clark would be the t-minus countdown to an American Civil War.

POTUS Hillary and/or Clark and you can rest assured that he who shoots straight and has the balls to fight to the death wins.

We're getting closer and closer to game on.
24 posted on 09/19/2003 12:55:11 AM PDT by ApesForEvolution ("The only way evil triumphs is if good men do nothing" E. Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
Yeah, you're right.

Slipping ever further down the shi**y slope into the crappy creek, but of course with the right intentions, is what some people were cut out for.

/sarcasm (?)
25 posted on 09/19/2003 12:56:53 AM PDT by ApesForEvolution ("The only way evil triumphs is if good men do nothing" E. Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus
Yeah, and you just took 5 minutes of your precious, important life to read his article and respond with a post.

Aren't you brilliant...
26 posted on 09/19/2003 12:58:25 AM PDT by ApesForEvolution ("The only way evil triumphs is if good men do nothing" E. Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus
That's what my friends in Minnesota said about Nick Janos, aka Jesse 'the body' Ventura being elected governor.

Maybe the Titanic Principle shall be revisited yet again?
27 posted on 09/19/2003 12:59:53 AM PDT by ApesForEvolution ("The only way evil triumphs is if good men do nothing" E. Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ApesForEvolution
Yes, I'm very brilliant.
28 posted on 09/19/2003 1:02:43 AM PDT by Fledermaus (Democrats have stunted brain development!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus
A legend in your own mind? I seem to be reading an article that Joseph Farrah wrote - with your 2 cents from the cheap seats added in for 'flavor'.
29 posted on 09/19/2003 1:05:25 AM PDT by ApesForEvolution ("The only way evil triumphs is if good men do nothing" E. Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ApesForEvolution
No legend, but my mind has been completely tested and documented. I also write. But unlike Farah, I don't need to for income.
30 posted on 09/19/2003 1:11:36 AM PDT by Fledermaus (Democrats have stunted brain development!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Taiwan Bocks
Is there nothing left of your hate you can spew for Hillary or Bill?

Bill and Hill are not running Dubya and Clark are.
Farah didn't vote for Dubya the first time and now seems enamored of Clark.

Farah sucks. Clark sucks. Dubya will crush Clark, because the rats will not vote for Clark. The Iraq war is ripping the rat party in two because the rats don't like hawks.

Clinton Dukakis Mondale Carter McGovern Humphry

Rat warriors have run before but they have not won the nomination in modern times. That is why Vietnam vet Sen John Kerry and Vietnam vet Sen Bob Kerrey got there hats handed to them by a basketball player as the only competition to Gore in 2000. Do you remember Gore and Bradley fighting for votes by promising the most homos in the military? You have to go back to Kennedy's "sexed up" military record to find a successful rat Hawk.

Clark is a joke. He is the flavor of the week that none of the rats has tried yet.

What must be done to complete a great victory Can anything be more moving than the joyous throngs swarming the streets of Baghdad? Memories of the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the defeat of Milosevic in Belgrade flood back. Statues and images of Saddam are smashed and defiled. Liberation is at hand. Liberation — the powerful balm that justifies painful sacrifice, erases lingering doubt and reinforces bold actions. Already the scent of victory is in the air.

I may agree with some of what Clark has written here but I will never vote for a rat. The rats will not agree with Clark's already stated opinions and do not think that Dean or Kerry will not inform the rats. The rats will not vote for Clark. Every rat except Lieberman has distanced himself from the Iraq war. There is a reason why they are doing this. It is because they want to win the nomination and unfortunately for Clark he needs to win the nomination before he can run against Dubya in the general election.

31 posted on 09/19/2003 1:48:32 AM PDT by Once-Ler (Proud Republican and Bushbot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
But, consider the distinct possibility that he is, in addition to being a serious candidate in his own right, potentially a stalking horse for the other Clinton – Hillary.

That actually could help defeat him. He's indicated through secondary sources that he would be willing to serve as her #2. He would then go down with her ship.

32 posted on 09/19/2003 9:41:54 AM PDT by inquest (World socialism: the ultimate multinational corporation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Once-Ler
Dubya will crush Clark, because the rats will not vote for Clark.

They'll take him over W, that's for sure.

If your point is that they won't nominate him, don't be so sure. They'll nominate whoever they think will get the swing vote. And they do seem to appreciate his sense of presence. Consider this little contribution from an irresolutely anti-military cartoonist:


33 posted on 09/19/2003 9:48:44 AM PDT by inquest (World socialism: the ultimate multinational corporation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Once-Ler
Farah didn't vote for Dubya the first time and now seems enamored of Clark.

Your numerous points run over my head, and I must say I don't think you read the article in question.

The article, "Why Wesley Clark is Dangerous?" Farah tries to scare America about the dangers of General Clark's potential candidacy?

34 posted on 09/19/2003 9:57:08 AM PDT by Taiwan Bocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus
Good answer.

But who says Farah requires the income he gets from operating his website/writing and is not independently wealthy from outside sources?

35 posted on 09/19/2003 10:09:39 AM PDT by ApesForEvolution ("The only way evil triumphs is if good men do nothing" E. Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Taiwan Bocks
Farah tries to scare America about the dangers of General Clark's potential candidacy?

Have you heard of a back handed compliment? Farah offers front loaded criticism designed to tell the enemies of Dubya that Clark is a winner, all while he pretends he is not taking sides because he doesn't like Dubya either.

Farah claims Clark can win because of his good looks and "strong military record," all while pointing out the reasons why conservatives should dispair an inevitable Clark nomination.

I'm sorry my points went over your head.

36 posted on 09/20/2003 12:33:39 PM PDT by Once-Ler (Proud Republican and Bushbot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson