Skip to comments.
Give me a break, Clark
The Chronicle: Duke University ^
| 9/30/03
| Nathan Carleton
Posted on 10/01/2003 1:27:37 PM PDT by riskyscheme
Indeed, the inexperienced Clark seems to have appeal for only two reasons: He is a renowned military official and he is perceived as being a straight shooter. And that's precisely why pundits don't like his chances; because as more and more information about Clark surfaces, it becomes evident that his military record is imperfect and his shooting anything but straight.
(Excerpt) Read more at chronicle.duke.edu ...
TOPICS: Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2004; excerptmadness; wesleyclark
To: riskyscheme
Welcome to FreeRepublic
To: riskyscheme
Forget Hillary.
Clark was pushed into the race by Al Sharpton, because Al was tired of being the looniest...
3
posted on
10/01/2003 1:37:39 PM PDT
by
Izzy Dunne
(Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
To: riskyscheme
Mary Help!
4
posted on
10/01/2003 1:39:38 PM PDT
by
Spruce
To: riskyscheme
"...The real reason for his quick start became obvious last Thursday when the Associated Press ran a pro-Clark story titled "Clark Takes Spotlight at New York Debate."
The debate had begun at 4 p.m.
The story hit the wires at 4:30 p.m. Nathan Carleton is a Trinity junior. His column appears every other Tuesday. "
That's a smart junior that Nathan Carleton!
5
posted on
10/01/2003 1:45:18 PM PDT
by
mrsmith
To: riskyscheme
Story up on Drudge that I couldn't link to.........Clark calling on ABC to fire Rush Limbaugh.
Guess if Rush had only said how ashamed he was of President Bush, all would be well.
6
posted on
10/01/2003 1:51:57 PM PDT
by
OldFriend
(DEMS INHABIT A PARALLEL UNIVERSE)
To: mrsmith
There's more here than meets the eye. Why would General Hugh Shelton say that Clark was relieved of duty for reasona of integrity. Two points: (1) Integrity is holy to the American officer corps. (2) Why did Shelton bring this up in public? This is against the code of omerta for the officer corps. I am baffled.
7
posted on
10/01/2003 1:55:11 PM PDT
by
basque69
To: basque69
Simple, Clark broke the code first. He was passed over for the fourth star and whined directly to Billary. They now see him as the usurper of military decorum and he is outside the clan. The military would have no more respect for him as C-in-C than they did for the Fornicator.
To: WilliamWallace1999
Thanks. You turned the lights on. His lack of coherence in organizing (failed to register as a democrap), foot in
mouth,etc, indicate to me that he is in the race as a Charlie Macarthy for the Clintons who have provided his handlers. Is he getting his feet wet in order to be Billary's new Algore?
9
posted on
10/01/2003 4:20:04 PM PDT
by
basque69
To: OldFriend
I wouldn't doubt it one bit that Clark is calling on "ABC" to fire Rush. The problem is Rush works for ESPN.
To: Terry Mross
ABC is the parent company of ESPN........
I had no idea but it explains a lot......
11
posted on
10/01/2003 4:51:34 PM PDT
by
OldFriend
(DEMS INHABIT A PARALLEL UNIVERSE)
To: riskyscheme
Clark wants Rush fired. But when a certain democrat running for Governor in California used the N-word last month, there was not a peek. Same for the press. Double standard? Bet on it.
12
posted on
10/01/2003 5:37:22 PM PDT
by
GOPJ
To: WilliamWallace1999
Answer me this one, WilliamWallace1999:
If General Clark was the one calling for ground troops in the 78-day bombing war against Serbia, and General Shelton (a former commander of SOCOM) sees fit (in one statement to the press which he has yet, a week later, to clarify) to criticize him, and Clark didn't get what he wanted in Kosovo, then...
Who is REALLY responsible for the allegations that the high-level bombing campaign killed more people than necessary:
http://www.fair.org/extra/9907/kosovo-crimes.html http://www.nationalreview.com/lowry/lowry082603.asp And in light of Shelton's own defense (and rubberstamping of the falsification of the air attack's success, see below) that the campaign worked, is Clark's line of bulls**t here any more reprehensible, since he still took orders from... General Hugh Shelton himself?
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/milosevic/story/0,10639,520177,00.html Yeah, Clark might have broken the bulls**t code that requires more people to die in order to make the JCS look all Colin Powell-like, but you know what he did? He appealed to the Commander-in-Chief instead, and still got rebuffed. Or did he?
And strangely enough, that's where the story ends. SOCOM members of 1997, how was the weather at Fort Bragg that summer?
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson