Friday, January 09, 2004

Hot on the heals of the Madonna endorsement, several recent polls have hit the news suggesting Gen. Wesley Clark is gaining some ground in the Presidential race, and benefiting from mounting doubts over Howard Dean's electability. I still regard Dean as the dream candidate to face Bush in November, but I wouldn't quibble if the Dems swoon for the Four-Star Phony come primary season.

An article by National Review's Jay Nordlinger tears Phony a new one today. In it, Jay highlights the growing volume of loony, paranoid rhetoric Phony's been using on the stump with increasing frequency, not to mention a fantastic collection of stunning policy flip-flops, conflicting statements and logical contortions. Here's a sample:

The general has told us, "I'm one of those people who doesn't believe in occupying countries to extract their natural resources. I think you buy them on the world market." Because, as you all know, the United States is in Iraq to extract their oil, and not buy it on the world market. You did know that, didn't you? Haven't you read your Noam Chomsky, or the speeches of Wesley Clark?

Clark is almost never "credited" with being as flaky and offensive as he is. He repeatedly charges President Bush with personal culpability in the death of 3,000 people on September 11. He completely exonerates the Clinton administration, saying that it had no time to do anything about al Qaeda (seriously). He claims that the Iraq war was a great diversion from our alleged failures against al Qaeda, and that this diversion was the trick of "neocons." (The general has gotten with the lingo.)

Check out Clark: "I suspect [Bush's] advisers said, 'Now, Mr. President, you know, there's no guarantee we could ever get [bin Laden]. You know, it's, you know, you ought to go somewhere, you know, go somewhere easy, do something easy like taking care of Saddam Hussein, and he's probably connected . . .'"

Wait a second: Saddam was supposed to be easy? What happened to quagmire?

Like I said, I wouldn't quibble if...


0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home