Lib Author Regrets Voting (TWICE!) for clinton
"Sickened" by clinton's Failure to Protect America from TerrorismMUST-READ BOOK FOR DEMOCRATS:
How clintons' Failures Unleashed Global Terror
(Who in his right mind would ever want the clintons back in the Oval Office?)The Man Who Warned America
(Why a Rapist is Not a Fit President)UDAY: "The end is near… this time I think the… Americans are serious, Bush is not like Clinton."
 |
||||||||||||||
|
The clinton calculus, that the clintons' utter failure, which unleashed global terror, would be neutralized (or at least mitigated) by any general -- and no less a general who, himself, exudes critical elements of clinton dysfunction -- is ludicrous on its face and yet another example of that unique brand of clinton rube arrogance rooted in stupidity. Mia T, RAPIST SHOWING LEG:
|
|
www.washingtontimes.com
Tracing Clark's military mapBy Jack Kelly
Retired Gen. Wesley Clark has thrown his helmet into the ring. He has improved the Democratic presidential field by entering it, just as he improved the Army by leaving it. Gen. Clark is a brilliant man, and a brave one. A Rhodes scholar, he was decorated three times for heroism as commander of an armor company in Vietnam. "Those of us who knew him as a captain thought the country would be shortchanged if he didn't rise to very high rank," said a retired Army colonel who was a student of Wesley Clark's when Gen. Clark taught at West Point. But Gen. Clark's kindergarten teacher probably noted he doesn't play well with others. Gen. Clark "is able, though not nearly as able as he thinks, and has tended to put his career ahead of his men to the point of excess," said a defense consultant well acquainted with the Army's senior officers. "He is opportunistic and lacks integrity. He will be an absolute menace if he gets into a position where he can exert influence on the Army because he lacks true vision and is prone to be vindictive." Gen. Clark "regards each and every one of his subordinates as a potential threat to his career," said an officer who served under him when Gen. Clark commanded a brigade of the 4th Infantry Division in the 1980s. An officer who served under Clark when he commanded the 1st Cavalry Division said he was "the poster child for everything that is wrong with the general officer corps." Gen. Clark doesn't get along terribly well with superiors or with allies either, which lead to his premature departure as commander of NATO. Gen. Clark was CINCEUR when the Kosovo war began, and bears much of the responsibility for President Clinton's decision to try to bomb Serb dictator Slobodan Milosevic out of Kosovo. Gen. Clark argued that after a few days of bombing, Mr. Milosevic would fold his tent and slink away. When the Serbs didn't budge after months of bombing, Gen. Clark lost Mr. Clinton's favor. As the war dragged on, Gen. Clark advocated the use of ground troops. This put him at loggerheads with Gen. Henry Shelton, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and with Gen. Eric Shinseki, chief of staff of the Army, who thought this was a terrible idea. These generals faulted Gen. Clark for getting America into an unnecessary war, and for having done a poor job of preparing for it. "NATO did not expect a long war," wrote former Clinton national security aide Ivo Daalder. "Worse, it did not even prepare for the possibility." The conduct of the war drew unprecedented criticism from Gen. Clark's predecessor, Gen. George Joulwan, and a quiet rebellion by subordinate commanders. "Clark found his control over ongoing operations eroding," wrote retired Army Col. Andrew Bacevich. "Rather than the theater commander, he became hardly more than a kibitzer." What may have triggered Gen. Clark's early departure from NATO was a confrontation with the British general who was to command NATO peacekeepers. After a Serb surrender had been negotiated with the help of the Russians, Gen. Clark ordered British Lt. Gen. Michael Jackson to parachute troops onto the airport at the Kosovar capital of Pristina, so NATO would hold it before Russian peacekeepers arrived. Gen. Jackson refused. "I'm not going to start the Third World War for you," he told Gen. Clark, according to accounts in British newspapers. Shortly after the confrontation with Gen. Jackson, Gen. Clark was told his tour as CINCEUR would end two months early. Neither Gen. Shelton nor Defense Secretary William Cohen attended his retirement ceremony, a remarkable snub for a four-star general. Gen. Clark read Mr. Milosevic wrong, helping to provoke the Kosovo war, which he then fought badly. Gen. Clark picked up where he left off in his second career as a television kibitzer of military operations. As an analyst for CNN, Gen. Clark harshly criticized the war plan for Iraq devised by Gen. Tommy Franks, the CENTCOM commander, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Gen. Clark turned out to be completely wrong. It says something fascinating about the Democratic field that this failed general is the class of it. Jack Kelly, a syndicated columnist, is a former Marine and Green Beret and a former deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force in the Reagan administration. He is national security writer for the Pittsburgh (Pa.) Post-Gazette. Copyright © 2003 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved. |
A signpost to this trait is often a smooth lack of concern at being found out." [Hare, 35].
and see themselves as the center of the universe, as superior beings who are justified in living according to their own rules."
Sometimes they pair up with other psychopaths and become a close team, one may be a "talker" while the other is a "doer," and so forth,
They can be "amusing and entertaining conversationalists, ready with a quick and clever comeback, and can tell unlikely but convincing stories...
They can be very effective in presenting themselves well and are often very likeable and charming. To some people, however, they seem too slick and smooth, too obviousely insincere and superficial. Astute observers often get the impression that psychopaths are play-acting, mechanically "reading their lines." [Hare, 35].
...They may "ramble and tell stories that seem unlikely in light of what is known about them. Typically, they attempt to appear familiar with sociology, psychiatry, medicine, psychology, philosophy, poetry, literature, art, or law.
One psychopathic individual I knew claimed that he had a genius IQ and that he was studying several different majors at college.
"When I found out I had a genius IQ, that's when all my trouble started" he said. I asked him, "Why?" He replied, "'Cause I'm too smart for my own good."
In the end I found out these were lies because he was, in fact, a high school drop-out.
Despite their failures, psychopaths have a very "narcissistic and grossly inflated view of their self-worth and importance, a truly astounding egocentricity and sense of entitlement, [Hare, 38].
They often come across as "arrogant, shameless braggarts--self-assured, opinionated, domineering, and cocky. They love to have power and control over others and seem unable to believe that people have valid opinions different from theirs. They appear charismatic or 'electrifying' to some people." [Hare, 38].
I know exactly what Hare means when I recall one person I used to know (who had been diagnosed); he always seemed to be charming everyone around him, although in the end every woman who fell for him ended up becoming hostile when they realized all he had been doing was leading each one on simultaneousely.
The psychopath is callous, remorseless, and unempathetic, although at first glance he may not seem that way. He is often exceedingly witty, chameleon-like, charming (but not always, especially when not in a "good" mood), the person who attracts a circle of admirers around him at every party, but more often that not, he is usually avoided -- once people find out what he's really like.
Psychopaths often end up associating with others like themselves, although in some cases they don't always get along that well.
Sometimes they pair up with other psychopaths and become a close team, one may be a "talker" while the other is a "doer," and so forth, although I strongly believe that these roles are interchangeable when dealing with a psychopathic duo. Hare states, "As long as their interests are complimentary, they make a formidable pair." [Hare, 65]. It has also been reported that some acquaintances may never really discover their truly dark side.
http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/psychopath.htm
But, I'll believe she's unelectable when she and her wife, Billy J. Pervy Boy, are both gone from the political scene forever. Never underestimate the power of the complicit media to sway half of the 'Merican Public to "like" her.
I don't even like calling her "her", since that is such an insult to real women.
|
NEWS FLASH! Is She or Isn't She? (Hillary electronic filing with FEC done by DraftHillary)
She's said it more than 140 times - and counting - despite hints, wants, wishes and hopes that she's not running for the White House in 2004. Then what to make of ID # P00003392, an electronic filing to be found at the Federal Election Commission (FEC) database? "Clinton, Hillary Rodham - Office Sought: President; Election year 2004; State: Presidential Candidate; District 03; Party: DEM (Democratic Party)." A call to Sen. Clinton's Washington office elicited a surprised reaction from a spokesman who said: "I don't know anything about it." The FEC, when contacted by Insight, explained the "odd" entry in its database as having been filed on Sept. 17, 2003, by an outfit called "DraftHillaryforPresident2004." This group, which the FEC calls "an unauthorized" draft committee, lists Eric Leondard as its treasurer and he and/or it are located at 504-17th Road South, #201, Arlington, VA 22204. An FEC spokesman explained that under the agency's procedures, once a filing is made - by anyone, on behalf of anyone - then the filing gets an ID and automatically enters the name of the "candidate," in this case the junior senator from New York state. The FEC further notes that no other supporting documentation is available on this item found at www.fec.gov. And, yes, the FEC confirms that it has started receiving a number of calls from inquiring minds. So rather than rely on gossip, your intrepid editors have gone to the sources and asked what's up. End of story. Right? [Editor's Note: Following up with Clinton's office, a spokesman said they were relieved by the news. "I knew we had nothing to do with it. Thanks for clearing that up."] |
|
"This much is certain: She's foolish to think she can bide her time, strolling effortlessly to the Democratic nomination five years from now. If she wants to make history as the first woman in the Oval Office, her time has arrived." MSNBC begs Hillary to run |
|
... An end run is her only option. And contrary to conventional wisdom, time is not on her side. Not only are the clintons in general decline, not only is she vulnerable in '06, but in this post-9/11 world,  as more clinton failures and betrayals are documented, increasingly favorable demographics will prove insufficient to resuscitate disfavored, dysfunctional, dangerous democrat demagogues like the clintons. Look, therefore, for the clintons to make their move in '04. Susan Estrich, Al From and The Times aren't on the same "Get the clintons off the stage!" page for no reason. RAPIST SHOWING LEG: |
|
|
- Lib Author Regrets Voting (TWICE!) for clinton
"Sickened" by clinton's Failure to Protect America from Terrorism
- MUST-READ BOOK FOR DEMOCRATS:
How clintons' Failures Unleashed Global Terror
- The Man Who Warned America
(Why a Rapist is Not a Fit President)
- UDAY: "The end is near… this time I think the… Americans are serious, Bush is not like Clinton."
