September 20, 2003
Clark Flip-Flops on Iraq War
Wesley Clark needs to stick to a single stance. One day he’s telling a reporter that he would have supported the Congressional resolution authorizing the United States to invade. A mere 24 hours later, and he’s on the other side of the argument: “I would have never voted for war,”. Watching Clinton and Bush work their wand with words in this manner has made me skeptical of any candidate who seeks to do the same.
Posted by Stephen VanDyke at September 20, 2003 08:54 PMFor the Democrats out there who want to vote for someone “real”, I would say that Dean is much closer to that than Clark. At least Dean says what he means to some extent. Clark is a “plant” who was fired by Clinton to begin with and had to take an “early retirement”. The buzz in the Army circles that I listen to is that Clark is EXTREMELY unpopular.
Clark was floated into the kiddie pool to take out Dean by the Clinton’s. Dean pushed Terry Mcauliffe down a flight of very steep stairs when he dissed the DLC. Bad move Howard.
I have been right all along when I said that the Dems would find a way to torpedo Dean.
Kerry couldn’t get it done and I was wrong about him being able to (apparently). Clark is the next guy to “bling bling” his way to the top of the polls. If anyone thinks that Clark is going to get the military vote, they are “smoking crack”. It would be like running shinseki, who is widely despised by (most) in the Army as being too liberal in an organization that cannot afford to be.
I stand by the theory that Hillary will run in 04 if she believes she can defeat Bush, an impossibility statisticly and a final blow to the Democrats.
Remember: I am never wrong about political forecasting because I am some kind of genius or something. I am evil as well, which makes me all the more likely to be right…if you watched the Empire Strikes Back you would know that.
Posted by: pete at September 21, 2003 03:02 AMYou are hilarious pete. I think the Hillary idea is wild, but I agree that Clark is a plant by Clinton. My hypothesis differs slightly, because I think Clinton and Bush (or at least Clinton and the neo-cons) are connected as well.
Fact of the matter is, I don’t trust Clark any more than Bush, and I intend to expose him as the “perfumed prince” and “waco warrior” moniker that he earned on his own. Dean may be loud and anti-war, but Clark’s history makes him extremely dangerous to the constitution if elected.
Posted by: Stephen VanDyke at September 21, 2003 04:00 AMWhoa! Steven, I think thaat you might really be on to something here. Clark is as bad for the constitution as Ashcroft and his band of wierdos.
I wish you lived by me. I would have a beer with you….but I would never admit it you commie bastard! Just kidding.
-pete
Something else that I should mention is that Steven and I disagree on a lot of stuff.
The difference is that Steven has the best intentions of the country at heart as well as our troops. That makes him “cool”.
Even though I am a Super Genius and Steven is a mere genius, we both have the country on our minds and its interests… not too much rhetoric (please don’t read my posts) but seriously folks.
That is something good for America!
