Clark in 2004? I'm leaning that way

Anthrax Coulter writes the following:

CNN's favorite general, Wesley Clark, has also been heard to opine that our troops are getting bogged down in Iraq. His competence to judge American generals is questionable since his command was limited to working for NATO. We prefer to hear from American generals. Clark's contribution to international relations consisted of mistakenly bombing the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. In his zeal to prevent troop casualties, he ordered pilots to fly at such high altitudes that the pilots complained that they were being forced to incur unnecessary civilian casualties.

Coulter is upset that people are upset that our boys are dying. And Clark has been one of the strongest critics of the Chickenhawk warplan that Coulter so enthusiastically endorsed (though it didn't include "conversion to Christianity" as Coulter would've liked).

But in trying to discredit Clark, she takes three shots: 1) he was NATO Supreme Commander, 2) US forces accidentally bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, and 3) bombers were forced to fly high to avoid casualties.

The fact this is the worst she could do (remember, US forces did not lose a single man or woman defeating Serbia in the Kosovo conflict) makes me more likely to jump on the Clark for 2004 bandwagon. Clark's criticisms of the current war effort are directly on target, and are a big reason the Chickenhawk neocons are suddenly on the defensive.

This war would supposedly seal Bush's 2004 reelection. Instead, it has the potential of sinking it long before it begins. But the Dems need someone who can clearly elucidate such criticisms from a position of authority. Clark fits the bill.

The achilles heel of this plan is, of course, Clark's positions on domestic issues. But early indications are that he's acceptable in that regard (reportedly a fan of Michael Moore's Stupid White Men). Remember that the military is the ultimate socialist system -- free food, housing, and affirmative action ensuring equal opportunity to all, regardless of race, class or socioeconomic status.

So I'm having fantasies of either a Dean/Clark or Clark/Dean ticket. At this point, and considering the way the war is going, this ticket would probably offer the strongest challenge to Bush.

And keep in mind that I don't want to just beat Bush. I want to destroy him. I want him to lose by epic proportions, repudiating everything he and his Chickenhawk, neocon, and paleocon allies stand for.

So who wants to join me in a "Draft Clark" effort?

Posted March 30, 2003 01:26 PM | Comments (173)