From the WSJ Opinion Archives

by JAMES TARANTO
Friday, September 12, 2003 2:12 P.M. EDT

William Jefferson Clark?
Has anyone else noticed how unimpressive are the Democratic presidential candidates' chief claims to fame? Howard Dean balanced a budget in Vermont. Joe Lieberman was almost elected vice president. Dick Gephardt climbed the ladder of House leadership, advancing from majority leader to minority leader. And of course John Kerry served in Vietnam.

They may soon be joined by retired general Wesley Clark, who won a war in Kosovo. Granted, the liberation of Kosovo from Slobodan Milosevic's dictatorship was a worthy effort, and Clark and Bill Clinton deserve credit for it. But c'mon. As wars go, they don't get much easier than this. Wesley Clark isn't exactly U.S. Grant or Dwight Eisenhower.

The New York Times reports that Clark "is moving closer toward a run for the White House, having put together the frame of a campaign organization." And the Clark campaign is trying to shoot down reports, which we noted yesterday, that the ex-general is interested in being Dean's running mate. Indeed, according to U.S. News & World Report, Clark's supporters call the veep rumors "a dirty-tricks campaign" by the Dean camp. We must say, it's refreshing to see some real conflict in a campaign that up till now has been little more than a contest to see who can most witlessly insult the president of this great country.

Is Bill Clinton orchestrating the prospective Clark campaign? There are intriguing hints that he is. The Times reported earlier this week that at a cocktail party at the Clintons' home in Chappaqua, N.Y., Clinton said "that the national Democratic Party had 'two stars': his wife, the junior Democratic senator from New York, and a retired general, Wesley Clark." The U.S. News report cites numerous "Clintonistas" who are "ready to join the Clark Brigade," including "the former president's handyman, Bruce Lindsey, scandal spokesman Mark Fabiani, and maybe even ex-deputy chief of staff Harold Ickes."

How much will Clinton's backing help Clark? The former president boasts a singular political talent, but there isn't much evidence that it's transferable to other candidates. Clinton had no coattails in either 1992 or 1996, and in the 1994 congressional elections his party suffered its worst drubbing in decades. Unlike Ronald Reagan, Clinton's popularity was not enough to get his vice president, Al Gore, elected--though whether Gore was hurt by his association with Clinton or his campaign's distance from him is one of the great imponderables of recent American history.

Last year six Clinton administration officials ran for office. Only two won: Rahm Emanuel, who sought a safe Democratic House seat, and Bill Richardson, who had previously held elective office. Of the other four, two lost in primaries (Janet Reno and Robert Reich), one dropped out under pressure from the Clintons themselves (Andrew Cuomo), and one lost the general election (Erskine Bowles). The offices those four sought are all now held by Republicans.

Clinton did manage to help his wife get elected to the Senate, something no other president has done. And you can credit him with some modest down-ballot victories in the 1998 congressional race, when Democrats defied expectations by picking up several seats. Those gains, though, were a consequence of a backlash against President Clinton's impeachment. To give Wesley Clark a boost next year, maybe Clinton can persuade Congress to impeach him again.

What a Cowboy!
If Clark does throw his beret into the ring, expect this story to get more attention. From the Aug. 3, 1999 issue of London's Guardian:

If Nato's supreme commander, the American General Wesley Clark, had had his way, British paratroopers would have stormed Pristina [Kosovo's capital] airport threatening to unleash the most frightening crisis with Moscow since the end of the cold war.

"I'm not going to start the third world war for you," General Sir Mike Jackson, commander of the international K-For peacekeeping force, is reported to have told Gen Clark when he refused to accept an order to send assault troops to prevent Russian troops from taking over the airfield of Kosovo's provincial capital.

Hyperbole, perhaps. But, by all accounts, Jackson was deadly serious. Clark, as he himself observed, was frustrated after fighting a war with his hands tied behind his back, and was apparently willing to risk everything for the sake of amour-propre.

Do we really want such a macho unilateralist cowboy as president?

What Timing
National Journal's Hotline (link requires subscription) reports that Washington lobbyists Jim Albertine and Jack Albertine held a $1,000-a-plate fund-raising breakfast yesterday--that's right, Sept. 11--at Washington's tony Monocle restaurant for Washington state's Sen. Patty Murray, she of the Osama bin Laden Day Care Center.

The Hotline adds: "One source notes that the funder took place from 8:30 a.m. to 9:30 a.m.--'the precise moment of the attacks two years ago.' "

Kinder, Kirche, Kooken
Andrew Gimson reports in The Spectator on a convocation of crackpots in Berlin:

The several hundred people who were present believe the American government is to blame for the attack on the World Trade Center, which it either carried out itself, or else allowed others to carry out, in order to have an excuse to invade Iraq and establish world domination. . . .

One speaker described at length how the airliners had been controlled by propeller-driven aircraft that appeared in the sky near them. A British student from East Anglia University, who had started to find out about these conspiracy theories on the Internet and had helped to put up posters for the conference, said in tones in which one might describe a religious conversion, "This stuff is the truth, the real world." Nobody found my suggestion that the Americans were taken by surprise on 9/11 the slightest bit convincing.

The conference Web site notes that the keynote speaker was none other than Cynthia McKinney, the former congresswoman who, as blogger Scott Koenig pointed out last year, received $13,850 in donations on Sept. 11, 2001, from donors with Arab- or Muslim-sounding names, and whose father blamed her primary defeat last year on the "J-E-W-S."

Cornell University recently named McKinney Frank H.T. Rhodes Class of '56 Professor. The Cornell Daily Sun quotes one prof who defends the appointment:

Prof. Ronald Herring, government, admittedly has not followed the controversy closely. However, he said, it may be overblown.

"There's a huge gap between the knowledge of University faculty, especially in the social sciences, as opposed to those who watch Fox News, which is a source for the public," Herring said. "They are not overwhelmed by three-word slogans and bumper stickers."

Isn't this wonderful? He admits his own ignorance about the matter, but because Herring swims in a school, he still feels confident disparaging the knowledge of "those who watch Fox News."

Palestinians Drink the Kool-Aid
"Yasser Arafat stormed out of a meeting of the Fatah Central Council in Ramallah on Thursday after a bitter confrontation with Gen. Nasser Youssef, the nominee to be interior minister in the new cabinet," reports the Jerusalem Post:

According to well-informed sources in Ramallah, an enraged Arafat left the meeting after Youssef described him as "the most incompetent revolutionary leader in history." The sources said Arafat hurled insults at Youssef as he walked out of the room.

The same article describes a mob scene outside Arafat's compound:

Arafat told the rally that the Palestinians will march towards Jerusalem until they achieve victory. The crowd responded by shouting, "We will sacrifice millions of martyrs on the road to Jerusalem."

Seems to us Arafat is indeed incompetent if the best he can do is lead his people in a mass suicide several orders of magnitude bigger than Jonestown.

Arafat won a Nobel Peace Prize in 1994.

Reuters reports that both Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak and Jordan's King Abdullah are warning Israel not to expel Arafat. Abdullah says expulsion would be a "grave mistake," while Mubarak says: "Nobody can tell what would happen in the Palestinian territories if Arafat is expelled. Terrorism, violence will erupt everywhere."

One suspects that the real reason Arab rulers want Israel to hang on to Arafat is that they don't want to have to take him in themselves. This unsympathetic profile notes that Arafat has previously been expelled from Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. Other than suicidal Palestinians, no one wants this guy.

What Would Students Do Without Governors?
"Governor Reminds Students That Date Will Be Seared in Their Memory"--headline, MSNBC.com (from WWBT-TV, Richmond, Va.), Sept. 11

Do They Hate Us on Other Worlds Too?
"Jupiter Homeowner Faces Foreclosure for Flying U.S. Flag"--headline, South Florida Sun-Sentinel, Sept. 11

What Would Canada Do Without Experts?
"Canada 'Fading off the Map of the World,' Experts Say"--headline, Ottawa Citizen, Sept. 12

Nimby Babies
The Associated Press reports from Raleigh, N.C., that some people in eastern North Carolina are fighting the Navy's plans to build a landing field for FA-18 Super Hornet fighters:

Among those opposed to the landing field are farmers, schoolchildren, environmentalists concerned about migratory birds, and retirees who moved to Washington County for peace and quiet.

Why is the opposition of "schoolchildren" even worth noting? Are schoolchildren now a major political force in America? What's next, movements to outlaw science class and broccoli?

You Don't Say
"Catholic Bishops Oppose Gay Marriage"--headline, New York Times (third item), Sept. 11

Why Doesn't He Just Sign With the Devils?
"Satan Set to Wait Out Sabres While Playing in Slovakia"--headline, Associated Press, Sept. 11

Don't Call Us, We'll Call You
Humorist Dave Barry recently penned a column about the telemarketing industry, which included this exhortation:

So what's the answer? Is there a constitutional way that we telephone customers can have our peace, without inconveniencing the people whose livelihoods depend on keeping their legal right to inconvenience us? Maybe we could pay the telemarketing industry not to call us, kind of like paying ''protection money'' to organized crime. Or maybe we could actually hire organized crime to explain our position to telemarketing-industry executives, who would then be given a fair opportunity to respond, while the cement was hardening.

I'm just thinking out loud here. I'm sure you have a better idea for how we can resolve our differences with the telemarketing industry. If you do, call me. No, wait, I have a better idea: Call the American Teleservices Association, toll-free, at 1-877-779-3974, and tell them what you think. I'm sure they'd love to hear your constitutionally protected views! Be sure to wipe your mouthpiece afterward.

The Associated Press reports that "thousands of Barry's readers have done as they were told, forcing the association to stop answering its phones." Callers now get a recording saying: "Due to overwhelming positive response to recent media events, we are unable to take your call at this time." Perhaps Barry will pen a follow-up column with the home numbers of the association's executives.

(Elizabeth Crowley helps compile Best of the Web Today. Thanks to Barak Moore, Hampton Stevens, John Dodds, Rick Melanson, Larry McCarthy, S.E. Brenner, Joel Goldberg, Steven Getman, Michael Segal, Carl Sherer, Yehuda Hilewitz, Gershon Dubin, Pearl Ladenheim, Amir Agam, Jeff Fuller, Tom Linehan, David Weintraub, C.E. Dobkin and Steven Mason. If you have a tip, write us at opinionjournal@wsj.com, and please include the URL.)

Today on OpinionJournal:

And on the Taste page:

Click to email this article EMAIL THIS Click to format this article for printing FORMAT FOR PRINTING
ARCHIVE