Credo
"Sign on, young man, and sail with me. The stature of our homeland is no more than the measure of ourselves. Our job is to keep her free. Our will is to keep the torch of freedom burning for all. To this solemn purpose we call on the young, the brave, the strong, and the free. Heed my call, Come to the sea. Come Sail with me." -- John Paul Jones
"Pardon him, Theodotus; he is a barbarian, and thinks that the customs of his tribe and island are the laws of nature" --George Bernard Shaw, "Caesar and Cleopatra"
"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music."--Friedrich Nietzsche
"A kind Providence has placed in our breasts a hatred of the unjust and cruel, in order that we may preserve ourselves from cruelty and injustice. They who bear cruelty, are accomplices in it. The pretended gentleness which excludes that charitable rancour, produces an indifference which is half an approbation. They never will love where they ought to love, who do not hate where they ought to hate."--Edmund Burke
“You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.”--General Sir Charles Napier
"Μολὼν λαβέ" -- Leonidas
"Blogito Ergo Sum" -- Neptunus Lex
…Actually, when i saw the headline, I thought I’d find that it was Merill McPeak who made these asinine comments.
Mike
“Do not these petty attacks diminish the attacker more than the target?” You got it correctly, Lex – except that the attacker is ‘diminished’ from the starting point and, for a lot of us, that point is already pretty darned low for Wesley Clark. The guy is a whore for what he craves, which is a place on the national stage. Otherwise, how can a military guy say such things?
Another Clinton-era ass.
““I don’t think getting in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to become president.””
As opposed to trying to start a war with the Russians.
Thats OK. Ol’ Wes Clark lacked the ability to be an effective Army General. Glass houses.
Gen Clarks policy ideas are consistent though…..
http://www.militarycorruption.com/Images/clark-cover.jpg
Indeed, the argument is self defeating. If we look at the executive ability of Sen. McCain, it IS thin. So we look to his opponent, Sen. Obama. Well, he was a community organizer. Let’s just turn the country over to HIM!
If Gen. Clark is that stupid (all evidence points that way), how in the hell did he rise to prominence in the service?
Back in the day, I knew a fella that served under the good general in Europe. His (the general)’s nickname was “Windsock” because whatever way the political winds were blowing was the position he totally believed in, what an a__ wipe he is for a human being.
ELP- I’d qualify that statement and say CINC or combatant commander vice “general”. He obviously went through the other 3 stars commanding something….If he was as bad as you said he should have been culled early.
Am I sore at him for what he said? Hell ya. Am I gonna get worked up about it? Nahhh..He’s a pol hack Desperately Seeking Susan..er “relevance”.
The Perfumed Prince is a jerk. Always has been. A small man with a small intellect for all that education he has. Dishonest, he probably read The Prince and put what he read into practice. He has been told he was special since he was 18 and entering the Point from Arkansas…Problem is, he believes it, the arrogant prick. Col. David Hackworth, until he passed several years ago, the most highly decorated soldier since WWII, coined the phrase Perfumed Prince for good reason. Despite all I diagreed with about Hack, I salute him for nick-naming one of the most onerous 4 stars ever confirmed by the senate…
The best anyone can do is ignore and shun the little guy.
BTW- more of this to come..much more. Notice they’ve sent out the “big BB guns”- Wes and McPeak..when they bring in the little unknown clowns like Black Nathman is when I’ll really laugh…
However, if Colin Powell joins this Cabal of Clowns I’ll be crestfallen.
I’m older than you XBrad..Live long enough and you’ll see. True honor is rare in many 4-stars of their caliber..They sort of sell their souls to the devil to get those last couple billets and when they don’t, some “turn”.
People always let you down. I put my faith in the canine world. I won’t follow anyone riding any color horse. LOL.
b2
It occurs to me that Wesley Clark sold his soul a long time ago, and is now touting a foolish young man who has never run a company, never run a city, never run a state, never served in the military, has apparently never done anything except be a “community organizer” for the Daley political machine. And Gen. Clark [Ret.] wants to turn over the management of the greatest free-market economy in the world to his totally inexperienced hands.
And P.S. What kind of egotist writes his autobiography while he’s still wet behind the ears?
Marianne
Likewise, would not also attacking Gen. Clark similarly diminish that respective attacker?
I believe exceptional intelligence and academic achievement are necessary traits in any prospective Chief Executive. Therefore, I would certainly value the recommendation of one whom, aside from a most distinguished and incomparable military career was also a Rhodes Scholar and Valedictorian of his class at West Point.
That a man of such experience and credentials should endorse one who similarly graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School and was President of the Harvard Law Review should not be dismissed………. Especially when the opponent graduated 894 out of 899 from the Naval Academy, fifth from the bottom…. and who recently claimed he “doesn’t work weekends.”
PS: B2, you should see what the late Col. Hackworth had to say about McCain,
here
That a man of such experience and credentials should endorse one who similarly graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School and was President of the Harvard Law Review should not be dismissed……….
Now thats the bona fides that will prevail in this dangerous world.
*None* of this year’s 3 top candidates have much in the way of executive experience. But McCain has more than Obama or Hillary.
I’d be happier if we could chose choose someone who had run a state, or a major corporation, or commanded a carrier battle group. We’re not electing a chief speechmaker or a chief policy wonk; we’re electing a chief executive.
The willingness to accept candidates whose experience has been purely or almost purely legislative reflects, I fear, a society that increasingly values words over actions.
I’d like to resurrect B2′s point from earlier-running VA-174 in the 70′s was a mangement challenge unlike any other.
No parts, short on people, drug use, and yet……Naval Aviation still put out RAG students who went to the fleet. There’s no doubt it was a big job. Running the squadron, with its 1,000 personnel and fleet of 75 jets, was like managing a small corporation. With one hand tied behind your back.
Interesting though-I always thought VF-101 was the largest jet squadron in the Navy. Guess in the 70′s though, the F-4 RAG was still putting out all the fighter pilots.
Whoever coined the word chickens#^t must have been looking at a picture of Wesley Clark. Forget his bona fides! No decent individual would say the things that I’ve heard him say the last two or three years. It’s one thing to pummel (sp?) your opponent with unwelcome facts; but, it’s an entirely something else to flat out lie regarding your opponent.
b2, I bow to your wisdom, accumulated through your many years of toil. And I expect no halos ’round the heads of our leaders. But I’ve been thinking and posting lot about the rebirth of the Army in the post Vietnam era. Names like Abrams, Dupuy, Starry. That’s a group that history will treat with a far kinder pen than Clark and McPeak.
Fliterman,
Took the liberty of perusing the Vietnam Vets against John Mccain site.
Nasty stuff. Lots criticism of things that happened 28-41 years ago. Yep, McCain’s done some things he’s not proud of. And he has said so on many occasions. He has apologized and tried to do what he could to set things right when he could. His first wife still stands by him. After the way the marriage ended that speaks volumes IMO.
There is quite a lot of difference between being a flawed human being as is John McCain, and being a Naval Officer who openly libelled his fellow servicemen in the halls of Congress while working to bring about the ignominious retreat from Vietnam that led to millions of dead South East Asians, as John Kerry did. And I have yet to hear an apology from JFK for any of the things he did.
But the dems are out to get even, so it’s Vietnam Veterans against McCain. Well, I’m a Vietnam vet and they’re not speaking for me. I mentioned that to them on their comments site.
“I believe exceptional intelligence and academic achievement are necessary traits in any prospective Chief Executive. Therefore, I would certainly value the recommendation of one whom, aside from a most distinguished and incomparable military career was also a Rhodes Scholar and Valedictorian of his class at West Point.”
Off the top of my head, Harry Truman never graduated from college and Reagan (who I hope you’ll at least admit was a good President) went to a second tier school. On the other hand, for all Carter’s fault’s, he was a pretty bright guy academically and Herbert Hoover (Stanford grad) was a bit of a prodigy.
There are about 800 Harvard Law grads per year and I’m fairly certain out of the numerous Rhodes Scholars and HLS grads, you might find just a few who support McCain rather than Obama.
If you have trouble finding them – again, off the top of my head, Romney received a joint JD/MBA from Harvard Law and the Harvard Business School and Giuliani went to NYU Law (not Harvard, but it’s up there). As to Clark’s actual point about executive experience–both of these men have more executive experience in their pinky than Obama has had in his entire career. They don’t support Obama.
Specifically with respect to Rhodes Scholarships, I’ll also add it seems to lend itself (in my own opinion, take it or leave it) to supporting and rewarding sycophancy. A person can’t easily distinguish between the brain-power of someone just below the cut and just above the cut. The key factor at that point can become whether or not you’ve sucked up enough to the right deans and professors to get their backing.
I’d assume you’d agree with me that the last thing this country needs over the next four years is overwhelming arrogance in a President. That’s something Wesley Clark has shown a ton of and that Obama has also been starting to show a bit of lately.
Least we forget,
Pretty boy Clark nearly got us into a shooting war against the Russians in Bosnia over who was going to occupy an airport.
He has been a known looser for decades now.
Geeze, fliterman… “there you go again!”
Remind me to never disagree with WAL.
I’d probably take the opinion of Clarke more seriously if he didn’t think a Douglas A-4 Skyhawk was a fighter.
But while we’re talking about proven intelligence and all that sort of jazz, here’s something you can ponder: Remember Abe Lincoln? He started a couple of unsuccessful business ventures, lost his bid for the Senate from the House, by all accounts wasn’t exactly the creme of the academic crop. One of the better presidents we’ve had. I’ll add to that Ronald Reagan, Teddy Roseveldt, and as mentioned before Truman.
Let’s contrast with the best and brightest, at least on an academic scale, that we’ve seen. Hamilton. Carter. Kennedy. Clinton.
I’m not sure where to put Washington, Jefferson, or others from that era (though I mention Hamilton). Education then was much more liberal in the classical sense of the term.
Point here is, one cannot equate academic performance to ability in public office. At best one might say the excellent academic is good at one set of skills, learning and reciting, but that doesn’t necessarially translate into a skill at the soft science of politics (1) or the ability to lead. I’d much rather see a demonstrated ability to lead others, or direct the efforts of others, than some transcript. If you come into my office with a 4.0 from Harvard asking for a job, at best that 4.0 tells me you’re studious and devoted, but it tells me nothing about your ability to do that job.
Hamilton, by the way, was mostly self-taught prior to his college years. Were I to wager I’d suggest he was the most intelligent president we’ve ever had, at least in academics.
So, my point. I had it here somewhere…
McCain led a squadron in wartime, doing so without a lot of support upstream from Congress. He’s been performing the administrative tasks in the Senate for four elected terms. He may not have the executive experience of a state governor, but he sure has more than a one-term senator who’s only previous experience was community activist or governor’s mansion hostess.
Certainly if all we wanted was executive experience we’d recruit Carly Florina who, albeit most successful at driving HP into near-bankruptcy, was at least CEO of a Fortune 500 company. Oh, and female.
If we were to disqualify people based upon youthful indiscretions we’d have kicked Gregory Boyington out of the Marines, we’d not have a Kennedy within 30 miles of the US Congress, and I’m pretty sure even such a man as Eisenhower would have ruffled a few feathers.
You’re given a couple of choices, once the primary process is done. It’s no longer who can you get, it’s who do you vote for.
All this silliness about academic scores and supposed impugned intelligence, wishing to party while age 20 when the candidate is over 60, likewise accusations of being Muslim or talk of the candidates wives…
I’ve seen this before — around here it comes out the back end of a manure spreader. When thrown in your face it is annoying and offensive. When ignored and allowed to decompose under the weight of its own stench, it becomes beneficial.
Which is to say, if you’re flinging crap up against the wall to see what sticks, by definition the first one covered in crap is you. People might just pay attention to those sorts of things and weight their opinion accordingly, General.
– Max
(1) I’m of the opinion that Political Science. even if one can earn a BS (2) or MS or Ph.D in it at many fine universities, is an oxymoron.
(2) Which makes the BS degree even more appropriate.
Max,
Alexander Hamilton never served as president. Aaron Burr put paid to that notion.
Typo: 600 not 800
Flit,
I stick by my- “A small man with a small intellect for all that education he has. ”
An attack? You bet. I always attack B.S. in any form it takes… Does it diminish me? Sure…OK…
IMO, this is one issue you shouldn’t have responded to in defense, knee-jerking..Should have let it pass. I expected more of you. IMO, you diminish yourself defending the Perfumed Prince’s outrageous statements with your non-judgemental and condesending tone- trust me, he wouldn’t return the favor if your roles were reversed…
BTW, if education and cirriculum vitae (sics) were pre-requisite to the presidency God help us all. And oh yeah GW had a higher GPA than JfnKerry and higher SATs to boot! SATs in those days were IQ tests so one can assume he’s smarter, right? Your own logic.
McCain is human. A self acknowledged flawed man but a man tested in a crucible no Dem since J. Kennedy has ever seen. On the other hand your boys are arrogant phonies with padded resume accomplishments and egos a mile wide.
There I go- “diminishing” myself again.
re- Hack-
You obviously didn’t catch my…. “Despite all I diagreed with about Hack”…This is one of them among many…We emailed back and forth and disagreed quite a bit. He was a jerk though I greatly admired his service and spunk he didn’t respect aviation much, naval aviators in particular. Read what he wrote again- that is a SPECIOUS article if ever there was one.
b2
Max,
Well said, even if I don’t agree with all of it.
As for “All this silliness about academic scores and supposed impugned intelligence, wishing to party while age 20 when the candidate is over 60, likewise accusations of being Muslim…”
Agree.
“or talk of the candidates wives… ”
I think respectful discussion about candidates wives are important. Who is a president’s #1 advisor? As much as I hated Hillary, I never faulted Bill for giving her an “Official” position as advisor on health care because he only made official what was happening anyway.
If you and Sen. Obama think the Mrs. should be left out, then the Mrs. needs to keep her trap shut, you can’t have it both ways.
“I don’t think getting in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to become president.”
Wow, for being such a laughably stupid and facile strawman (I have yet to hear anyone espouse the theory that getting shot down is a qualification for anything in the first place) it sure is an offensive one. He manages to do the same thing Kerry tried to do, which is to not only denigrate the nerve and guts it took to fly the damn thing in the first place, but to imply that the pilot was an incompetent boob besides.
Can I use the word ‘douche’ on this blog?
MaxDamage,
Great post. One little nit to pick, tho. Hamilton wasn’t our smartest President, because he wasn’t our President. He was first SecTres.
RE: Wes Clark. Like Bill C. I had a bud who worked directly for him at EUCOM. My bud was charitiable but the impression I got of the man was less than complimentary. The guy has more grey matter than me but I would rather be humble than enamored with my own God-Given intellect.
” How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, Son of Dawn!”
BTW, Alex Hamilton was a proven combat leader in the Revolution.
“I don’t think getting in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to become president.”
General, as far as that sentence goes, you’re right. However, what happened for the next 6 years after that event, demonstrated commitment, courage, honor and character levels that we would be very well served having in a President. Maybe you’d care to elaborate on exactly what event Mr. Obama has experienced that might also yield those characteristics?
“I don’t think getting in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to become president.”
Oh – and getting yourPT boat cut in half is? (Relevant here because of the JFK affectations BHO seems to be fond of). Wes is an insufferable (unprintable).
/break
b2 – drop me a line, have something I’d like to run by you…
- SJS
Interesting how Mr. O’s spectacular intellect and attendant oratory skills are measuring up to containing dangerous adversaries…
Puts a whole new context on “Mr.O”…
Sorry, didn’t finish thought….
So, I’m glad he is surrounding himself with such stellar military talent.
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the – Web Reconnaissance for 06/30/2008 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often.
Winston Churchill said it in another context, but it fits Gen. Clark: “a small man, with much to be modest about.”
XBradTC, you are correct. Ummm… Mea Culpa. It was late, I was young and needed the money, it’s all the fault of those tax cuts!
I should have remembered the Hamilton-Burr duel.
Looking back, it’s interesting to note how many of our presidents had little experience outside of politics and practicing law.
– Max
There’s a reason that any reference to Wesley Clark raises the hackles of folks who served over, under, or with him.
To us, he’s a living, breathing, Courtney Massengale. And that’s why his career ended when it did. With his integrity and character impugned, not by blog commenters, but by his own superiors who got tired of his act.
Guys who were, like him, Clinton appointees. It wasn’t political, and it wasn’t because he was stupid; he’s not. But his intellect was never used for anything but self-promotion. Still isn’t.
Definition:
Political General – Wesley Clark, Tony McPeak, etc.
Jim Geraghty on Gen Clark, from 2004:
“Interviews with a wide variety of current and retired military officials reveal that Clark was disliked by only three groups: Those whom ranked above him in the chain of command whom he ignored, his peers at the same rank whom he lied to, and those serving beneath him whom he micromanaged. Other than that, everyone liked him.”
http://www.nationalreview.com/geraghty/geraghty200402020857.asp
Cheers
O’Brien- I enjoyed the Massengale reference. That was a great book.
“…are they tedious?”
Oh yes, they are.
Looks like I’m close to being Blue-4 here….I am also class of 66 like Wes Clark and also have my PhD in Int. Relations–and boy do I cringe when I think of what that man is doing to the reputation of we Route 66ers.
GEN Clark deserves praise for his service to our country.
Too bad he got fired as SACEUR, never received the respect of NCOs and Field Grade Officers nor even run a respectable, efficient Presidential Campaign.
John McCain, for all his many foibles, is a far better example of a military veteran than the last Democrat contender, the ever boring, ever nuaunced treasonous gigolo John F. (Kohn) Kerry.
Dammit, it’s not a fighter plane, it’s an attack bomber! It’s a very fighter-like attack bomber, but it’s an attack bomber. I get really upset when people don’t call things by their right names.
An autistic person would never make such a gross category error in a public statement.
Justthisguy, I’ll let ‘em slide on that little bit. He hung around the AirForce too much. If you fly tactical in the AF, you get to call yourself a fighter pilot. I know, low standards.