Tommy Ates Online©: Clark and Waco: Back to the Future

Already, a storm is brewing. The game of slander and innuendo against the Democratic contenders from outside the Democratic Party began, not as a Thanksgiving surprise, but like rolling thunder, directed at Democratic presidential contender retired General Wesley Clark, and its name is Waco. Theres only one problem: he didnt have anything to do with it.

Already, a storm is brewing.

The game of slander and innuendo against the Democratic contenders from outside the Democratic Party began, not as a Thanksgiving surprise, but like rolling thunder, directed at Democratic presidential contender retired General Wesley Clark, and its name is Waco.

Theres only one problem: he didnt have anything to do with it.

But the mainstream medias interest is not because of where the rumor and accusations are about (Clarks role of the Branch Davidian disaster) but where the charges are coming from: the far left-wing of the Democratic Party.

It seems some liberals want the supremacy of a Dean candidacy at any cost.

The first rumblings of trouble came from the internet on political message boards and conspiracy websites that suggested that Clark somehow pulled the strings, when the General simply was told to authorize the sending of military supplies and equipment to Fort Hood, Texas. The controversy of Clarks role goes into effect not over the question of whether he was directly involved, but what was military hardware sent and if the equipment he authorized used in the final assault on the Branch Davidian compound. As if the General Clark had decision power over military tactics or had any say in the F.B. I. invasion.

Luckily, retired Army Lt. General Horace Grady Pete" Taylor, who at the time was in charge of Fort Hood, has come to his defense as the rumors bubbled for into several media outlets (as it seems Clarks candidacy may make it to the nomination). He, too, has repeated his the same line that the F.B.I. and other government panels have concluded, that the army had no input into the Waco debacle, but they were in a position to provide assistance if asked.

Of course, the revelation to the general public that one of the candidates 'deemed most electable might have skeleton of scandal is newsworthy in the minds of editors, ever searching for interesting angles in an already, topsy-turvy election campaign. Having ultra-liberal activists and far-right patriots bring speculation forth is puzzling. After all, General Clark is by all means politically liberal. He has spoken in speeches and the cable news outlets about his platform and his concern for the state of the armed forces, appearances with galvanized the Draft Wesley Clark" movement (especially his good poll numbers with white men) and led to Clarks late decision to run. There is a dilemma among hard line liberals as to the veracity of the Generals statements regarding social issues, such as gay marriage (he prefers civil unions), economic policy (slightly non-specific), and the future direction of the military budget (supporting a Rumsfeldian defensive realignment complementing the goals of Homeland Security).

In other works, is he truly a liberal or the ghost of Clinton with a military uniform?
Based on his word, he is a liberal through and through. Will his repeated assertions sit over well with the ultra-left? Perhaps, given time. But appeasing grass-roots activists (post-Naderites) will only be accomplished through actions, not rhetoric. However, the right-wing patriots will be another story.

Though Wesley Clark is a military man and would be thought of as expert with national security, the fact that his independent streak in the military gained himself some Republican enemies will not sit well with die-hard absolutists who cannot equate military career with liberalism besides closeted gay servicemen. Among some patriots, General Clark is a viewed as an oxymoron at best, a mutinous personality by others (for his relationship with superiors leading to his sudden retirement during the Bosnian conflict). In this vein of thinking, subversive behavior against the Davidians would not be a far-fetched idea, dealing with cowboy-style attitude of the A.T.F., F.B.I., and Republican-loathed former U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno.

As the President grapples with his real demons (over the Iraqi occupation and the jobless recovery), the politics of personal destruction worm their way into distracting Americans from becoming more aware of the presidential candidates and the real issues that the Democratic field are trying to put forth. In following the campaign spirit of Howard Dean and Dick Gephardt, the Clark campaign needs to stay on message and attack their enemies head on, the reflection of the Bush administrations head first approach to government.

Granted, it hasnt worked on foreign, nor domestic policy; but it is the new 'standard of political manhandling those Democrats is not used to. White House Political Advisor Karl Rove will play rough using illusion and allusion to mischaracterize and disregard the platform of the Democrats, starting with the most similar perceived" candidate, former retired General Wesley Clark.

Patriots get ready; the war of 'fact versus fiction has begun.