Wesley Clark=Good Democrat?

Wesley Clark Goose Steps Across the Constitution just like any "Good Democrat" would.

[ 10-16-2003, 09:25 AM: Message edited by: Keta ]

[Joe Schwab]

Good article Keta.

But I can already hear your detractors. They will say Koresh was an evil man (sound familiar?)

They will say we gave them more than enough time to surrender. (sound familiar?)

They will mumble something about the need to get this situation over and go back to the routine of running the government.

If the question is asked of Clark it will somehow turn out to be the fault of the right wing zealots. Trust me!

[Cool Texan]

People are still crying about what happened outisde of Waco?

Which raises another point...why is Waco the town this is attributed to, when it was Mount Carmel? I realize its a small town...but its not like Waco some big metropolis with a lot going on, other than the university.

Anyway, I would not hold that incident against Clark. It was an odd situation which came to a sad end, but....

CT,
Once a **** always a ****. This man is not a good choice to run the country.

PS: There is no "Death Sentence" for tax evasion, the crime these people committed.

[ 10-16-2003, 08:56 AM: Message edited by: Keta ]

[Cool Texan]

Keta, I never said I planned on voting for the guy....but I'd be willing to hear him out.

Death sentence for tax evasion?!?

[Straydog]

Once a **** always a ****. This man is not a good choice to run the country.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Heck of name to call a U.S. Vet........

CT,
Class III firearms (Full Auto) are legal to own in most states. All it takes is a background check and an endorsement from a judge, chief law enforcement officer or governor. Then you pay the $200 tax and it’s yours. Koresh skipped this and was murdered for it.

Dog,
US vets can be criminals too.

[ 10-16-2003, 09:24 AM: Message edited by: Keta ]

[Straydog]

Read the article.

Wow. Some ready to call him repulsive names and dismiss his credibilty with no proof of anything but him being in command of the base.

I guess if it were Rush we could all be content to have him confess and go into rehab.......

Not defending him. Simply pointing how some are way to ready to accuse and convict.

What about due process and the Constitution? Dosen't it apply to those that the name callers lable "****"?

Further, just as some add lots of salt to some commentators on NPR, I add tons of salt to anything from this biased news source.......

[Straydog]

vets can be criminals too.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">So, your saying all criminals are *****????

No, ***** are Criminals

[Cool Texan]

No Keta, David and his followers shot at ATF agents, and were killed for it. Dont make Koresh a hero.

[Straydog]

Originally posted by Keta:

Once a **** always a ****. This man is not a good choice to run the country.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">So, how does this fit into your equation?

When did he become a ****?
While dodging bullets in Nam?

"Show some respect"

CT,
The ATF started the fire fight.

Dog,
He became a **** when he (allegedly) authorized the illegal use of the military in civilian law enforcement. "I vas just following orders". He deserves no respect.

Another thing, what was he removed from the Supreme Commander of NATO post for?


PS;
CT, Koresh was not a "Hero" and does not deserve to be treated as one.

[ 10-16-2003, 09:53 AM: Message edited by: Keta ]

[Cool Texan]

I think that who shot first will always be disputed. One thing is certain...the firefight didnt erupt due to legal activities at the compound.

And yeah, the **** comparison to Clark is shameful. Vietnam was unpopular too...so are all of those vets "****'s" in your book? There are certain descriptions/associations which simply should not be used when addressing people, and I believe that to be one of them.

[Silver Hilton]

Originally posted by Keta:
No, ***** are Criminals

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Technically, no, not even close. In this country, ***** are members of a political party, and are guaranteed the right to speak and assemble. It's one of those things that is supposed to make us special as a country.

The commentary on Waco is interesting. Seems like Clark is damned if he follows orders (Waco), and damned if he doesn't (Bosnia). Under the principles used at Nuremburg, they who gave the orders are most culpable. I can see holding him accountable if those higher up are also held accountable. Who did he report to, and what is the status of the prosecution of that individual?

The Waco situation is just insane. We have a group of whacko nutbars led by a guy who thinks he's Jesus Christ, holding off a bunch of GI Joe wannabees, led by a conflict averse president who just wanted things to go away and an attorney general who needed to look tough. I find it hard to assign blame to one side or the other in the dispute.

Keta, I think you've oversimplified the situation just a tad. Koresh and company violated the law, which I agree hardly warrants them getting gunned down. But they then escalated the situation by barricading themselves in. While the FBI had no more right to shoot than a mad dog has to bite, Koresh and Co could have de-escalated the situation at any time, up to and including as the fire was spreading. Instead, many of the people opted to die rather than spend a couple of years, tops, in jail. Hardly the act of rational people, in my mind.

If y'all are worried about the constitution, I think the current administration has bigger plans in that area than any of the previous administrations. The first amendment, fourth amendment, and tenth amendment are under heavy fire.

CT,
I did an edit to address the hero part.

**** is as **** does. He did (again it is only alleged) authorize the illegal, and unconstitutional, use of the military in civilian law enforcement.

SH,
I agree with most of your post above. Even ***** have constitutionally guaranteed rights.

[ 10-16-2003, 10:00 AM: Message edited by: Keta ]

[Cool Texan]

I remember being on the top floor of the business school studying when off in the distance....smoke. We all knew what it was. Amazingly sad, but at least it meant that it was ending.

[Silver Hilton]

Originally posted by Keta:
CT,
Another thing, what was he removed from the Supreme Commander of NATO post for?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">My understanding is that he was removed because he clashed with his superiors, including Clinton.

SH,
Do you know what over?

[Boedy]

The only reason Clark is even in this race is because the brain trust over at Democrat central seem to think that they can get him elected.

They are hoping that his Military record will overshadow everything else and are trying very hard to pass him off as some war hero moderate. It’s a big snow job and just shows how desperate the Dem are to regain the White House at any cost.

[El-Kabong]

First one must consider the source? WorldNetDaily. More Fair and Blalanced covereage.

Second Koresh was endangering children and stockpiling weapons without permits.

Koresh was given repeated chances to comply with the law.

Koresh and his people started firing at law enforcement officials.

Not one of his smarter moves.

Outcome was tragic, too many cases of mackos wanting to go out in a blaze of glory. Koresh was another wacko.

[BrionLutz]

Keta,

In light of Bin Laden and what happens when armed religious fanatics get loose, certainly any connection Gen. Clark's campaign can make to stopping Koresh would be a plus.

However the right wing media source you reference doesn't seem to be able to help Gen. Clark with any real connection to his preventing Koresh from more acts of terrorism.

Brion

Right-wing media? Now there is a group that's "fair and balanced"
Typical right-wing hysteria
The GOP is afraid of Clark and of course they are going to use their attack dogs and smear him.
Same old

[ 10-16-2003, 11:59 AM: Message edited by: Stew ]

Lutz,
We still have to do things legally and follow the Constitution. Now I realize that SOME feel that the Constitution can be ignored “For the Greater Good” but this is wrong.

El,
Check your "Facts" The ATF opend fire first.
This is in no way defending Koresh.

Stew,
Are we also afraid of WND?
A free and independent news media is the fourth leg of our political system. The alphabet channels do not cover news in an unbiased manner.

[ 10-16-2003, 10:49 AM: Message edited by: Keta ]

[Cool Texan]

Keta, for every source you you can show that says the ATF fired first, I can probably find at least one saying they did not or that they dont really know who fired first. Sorry.

[Straydog]

"Follow the constitution". Stop calling people **** before they are even considered a suspect, let alone tried or convicted.

Just because one recognizes any news medias or entertainer as being biased, does not mean they "fear" said sources.

If some have to ask why others "fear" the right wing media, then it only logical to ask why others "fear" left wing sources........

Good for the goose, good for the gander.......

[Straydog]

Keta, for every source you you can show that says the ATF fired first, I can probably find at least one saying they did not or that they dont really know who fired first. Sorry.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">May I politely say I agree?

[Silver Hilton]

Originally posted by Keta:
SH,
Do you know what over?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I think he wanted to be more assertive in the conflict. Here's one link, I don't know how biased the source is. I've seen similar material in other places, including Newsweek.

link

Dog,
May I say "His behavior semed to me to be a little bit ***** like"

*Note: This is only an opinion based on **** like behavior and alleged disreguard for the US Constitution. It in no way reflects on the total disreguard for the Constitution that his boss had.

SH,
Thanks

Dog,
I have the right to call him anything I want, read the First Amendment. The Constitution only limits government, not "The People".

[ 10-16-2003, 11:15 AM: Message edited by: Keta ]

[Cool Texan]

The ****'s murdered millions of innocent Jews in their attempt to eradicate them.

The Davidians broke several laws, failed to comply with the ATF, and ultimately burned their own house down.

I'm still not seeing the comparison. And I do still assert that it is shameful to draw such a ghastly parallel, when even you know it is way too extreme.

CT,
Each individual German **** didn't do all of these crimes. Some were only guilty of joing the wrong party. Others were far more involved.

Clark broke the law (again allegedly)here and was never charged with the crime.

[Straydog]

I have the right to call him anything I want, read the First Amendment.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Indeed.

People have the right to protray themselves as ugly or as good as they choose through their speech.

Carry on........

**** is as **** does.
Not defending Koresh, but the Constitution was trashed here.
Do we want someone (else) as president who has a disregard for the basic rules that keep our government in check? You might but I certainly don't.

[Cool Texan]

C'mon SD, keep it above the belt.

Keta...there is no valid comparison between the two. Granted, opinions may vary, but it seems that you are either down-playing what happend in Germany, or over hyping what happened in Waco. I recognize that you dislike Clark.

I really dont know that much about him right now...but I am always willing to listen to balanced and objective critiques. Lets just leave the **** comparison out of the equation.

Did we ever cover the NATO thing? What happened there Keta (honestly dont know)?

[Straydog]

Originally posted by Cool Texan:
C'mon SD, keep it above the belt.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Excuse me???????????

I think it is ugly to call a decorated war veteran a **** and I, like anyone else, have the right to express that.

Your version of keeping it "above the belt" seems to be to hold others to different standards.

Why not ask others to "keep it above the belt" when they choose to place ugly, villifying lables on others??? I don't get it.

[ 10-16-2003, 11:33 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

CT,
I too don't have enough information to "Dislike Clark" It is looking like I will though.

I was in no way "down playing" what the ****'s did in the 30's and 40's. Using helicopters and tanks against a small group of people when a sheriff deputy with a warrant would have been more appropriate is, in my opinion, “Nazi Like” behavior. It all began with small steps.

Dog,
So if someone does good early in life then kills someone this is ok with you? I don't think so.
He allegedly broke a law that he knew about, and he should be called onto the carpet for it.

Again **** is as **** does.

I think that others on this board have called Rush a ****. Is this comparison what's causing you to fall back on your use of insults?

[ 10-16-2003, 11:40 AM: Message edited by: Keta ]

[Cool Texan]

Keta, so what happened with NATO?? I started to read the one link that someone else posted...but got bored with it. Do you have a Cliff Note summary of what happened, or what appeared to happen?

SD, you have every right to defend a vet from being called a ****. We agree on that. I was referring to the subtle jab at Keta. Lets just keep it on topic and constructive...that's all I am saying. I was not taking any shots at you, dont worry.

[Silver Hilton]

In NATO, he brokered the peace in Bosnia. That meant he got something like 20 countries to agree on the solution, and implemented it. This despite having an indecisive president who did not want to make the hard choices. Sounds pretty impressive to me.

To balance that, his reputation includes strong points and weak points.

Strong points:

1) Clearly strong managerial and leadership skills

2) Demonstrated political skills

3) Intelligence (first in his class at West Point)

4) Well educated and experienced in foreign affairs, probably head and shoulders over the other democrats, as well as Bush.

Neutral points (at least in my mind)

1) Lack of affiliation with any political camp - leaves little record to go on.

2) Fairly middle of the road on hot button issues such as gun control and abortion.

3) Has said he will think about some issues, rather than insist on some firmly held past opinion. This could be political weaseling, or could indicate that he has an open mind and will collect data before he decides, in stark contrast to the current and past administration.

Negative points (some are just from the Democrats viewpoint)

1) Is a Johnny com Lately Democrat - not clear how loyal he will be to the party's past agenda. I personally don't see this as a flaw.

2) Hasn't got his message straight, and has changed his tune a couple of times.

3) Has been a bit of a prima donna in the past, which has contributed to his getting ousted from NATO. I don't have a problem with that, but it will interfere with getting party support.

4) No history with Congress. But then, neither Bush nor Clinton had that, either. And that fellow Eisenhower turned out OK, I hear.

I'm mildly pro Clark right now, but more information needs to come out.

[Straydog]

CT,

Fair enough.

I guess if Clark had disobeyed orders, some would have been quick to call him a traitor, too.

As someone said, damned if he did, damned if he didnt.......

SH,

I'm mildly pro Clark right now, but more information needs to come out.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I am neither pro or anti Clark, but I'am starting to lean anti. Thanks for the information. The Dems need to come up with someone other than the skum they have so far or I will have to hold my nose, AGAIN,when I vote.

CT,
Read above.

Dog,
Tough call. Only a traitor when it involves other countries. Eisenhower and McCarther used the military against citizens in the same manner after WWI.

[ 10-16-2003, 11:48 AM: Message edited by: Keta ]

[BrionLutz]

Keta,

We still have to do things legally and follow the Constitution.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Well perhaps Bush Jr and Ashcroft will start doing that but don't get your hopes up. I think it will take regime change.

Brion

"A monarch’s neck should always have a noose around it. It keeps him upright" ibid.

I feel that this should be for all politicians too.

[lost_sailor]

The guy's only been a Democrat for a few hours.

I seem to recall Janet Reno is the designated scapegoat for the "Waco" thing.

Good one LS. Did he change his party yet?

[Snapset]

KETA, I agree that Clark would be a rotten president because of his obviously lackadaisacal commitment to the Constitution, but **** is a word whose impact has not only been leached by overuse but is too strong to defend in a counter argument. I.E. Wesley Clark is not likely to ever participate in the extermination of millions of Jews, nor is he likely to cause the deaths of millions of others in a World War. Keep up the good fight, Keta.

[freespool]

Disobeying orders from a superior officer is insubordination. Not showing up for guard drills for a year is dissertion.

"I was just following orders" is not a defense. Look up the Nuremberg Trials if you don't know this.

The military swears to "Uphold the Constitution of the United States of America". Clark chose not to do what was Constitutional. Clark trashed the Constitution and he should not be President.

[DanS]

Clark trashed the Constitution and he should not be President.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">So, tell us what the "Patriot Act" is doing to uphold the Constitution.

[freespool]

He should have refused a lawful order from a supirior officer? Come on this is clearly 20/20 hindsight. Talk about grasping at straws,you guys must be really afraid of this man. Hello,he hasen't even been nominated yet. What's Bush's
approval rating? Oh ya 53% and falling. If this makes Clark a ****, what do suppose Janet Reno is?

[lost_sailor]

Originally posted by Snapset:
...Wesley Clark is not likely to ever participate in the extermination of millions of Jews, nor is he likely to cause the deaths of millions of others in a World War. ...

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Now Bush, I ain't so sure about.

DanS,
The only thing I can say is, "They had help from Congress "

Freespool,
It's the primary duty of a officer in the United States Army to Defend the Constitution of the United States of America. He should have known that, seeing as he is so inteligent. He chose to suck up to politicians.

what do suppose Janet Reno is

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">As for Janet Reno, I won't even go there.

I am wary of a man that will ignore his pledge "To defend the Constitution", for political gain.

The Democrats HAVE to do better than this.

[ 10-17-2003, 04:28 PM: Message edited by: Keta ]

[Cool Texan]

Keta, unless I am missing something, you still have not explained what exactly make this guy a bad person. Did I miss it somewhere?

[Thumper]

**** --- "A member of a political party distinguished by its extreme national socialist philosophies." Now that didn't hurt, did it?

Without the old tapes of WWII or the holocaust, many of today's leaders could fall into that pot.

CT,
Read edits above.

He might not have known what the outcome of his actions would turn out to be but he chose to break his pledge. He also was responsible for the actions of the people under his command.
He didn't reprimand or court marshal anyone involved. Thus he must have approved of what they did.

[El-Kabong]

"The Democrats HAVE to do better than this"

Maybe the dems should find a drunk cocaine abuser who disserted from his duty in the air force.

That would be much better.

El,
This person would be a bit better than the ones they've come up with so far. Who is he? Must be a Kennedy.

Any one would be much better than the "Manchurian President" that left the country and went to Moscow (and he is still abusing cocaine).

[ 10-18-2003, 07:41 PM: Message edited by: Keta ]

[monoman]

The FBI or the attorney general do not order a Army general to do anything!
If it were an order it would have come through the Army. I would bet it was an asking rather than an order and I'd bet it was ground level not upper level. I would also bet It was not Clark who was asked. He would have had to OK it, but I'd bet you it came up the ladder not down the ladder. Those people at the top have lots of people handling them and something like this would not pass by them without some hand raising. It would have been a much larger deal if Reno would have sent in the tanks on her orders, and as many people who wanted to flush Willy, this would have been front page news.

I would also bet Clark does not last to the convention, micromanager, can we say Carter!!!

[Thumper]

Monoman, the scary part is that the Carter micromanager got elected president. Clark could too. But I hear that he is a flaming drunk!!! (I am trying to start that rumor anyways).

[ 10-18-2003, 06:39 PM: Message edited by: Thumper ]

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/jatras12.html

[freespool]

So Stella Jatras is a liberal peacenick. Strange bedfellows don't you think?