Reply #5: Oh, and Matt Taibbi [View All]

[FrenchieCat]

is not just a disinterested observer who masquerated at a Clark meet-up in a neckbrace posing as a porn producer. Matt Taibbi an American journalist who lived for a while in Russia in 1999 where he basically published in the Russian equivalent of the National Inquirer. Looks like he wrote quite a few articles back for some Russian "Enquirer" magazine, and may have a ulterior motive against Clark?
http://www.agitprop.org.au/stopnato/19990509exilewalker.htm
His assertion that the Serbs may have been set-up to appear to be slaughtering the Albanians and the anti-NATO tone of the Website in general probably reveals his bias. So the guy is kinda looney. A reporter who writes in the first person narrative and who mainly interviews himself is not my idea of a good read, considering that this was not an "article" but an subjective essay from an adjective driven asshole!
----------------------------------------
Now here's a 1st person narrative to read from a sane UCLA Political Philosophy Professor and prolific writer.....
http://www.ospolitics.org/usa/archives/2003/11/26/how_i_beca.php
November 26, 2003
How I became a Clark supporter
By By Andrew Sabl

My support for Clark has not come naturally. I'm a partisan and liberal Democrat, no great lover of old Clinton staffers and smug New Democrats. I'm prone to value experience in democratic politics over the hierarchical values of military service. And when I heard that Clark had voted for Reagan, praised Bush, spoken at a Lincoln Day dinner, and said that he'd have been a Republican had Karl Rove returned his calls (no, I don't believe that he was joking -- though he may have been trying for sarcasm), I judged him an amoral opportunist and borderline con artist. In angry e-mails to a pro-Clark friend, I called the general an "ambipartisan" and summarized the Lincoln Day revelation as "Game Over."

But I figured I owed the largely unknown candidate a chance. Being a professor, I decided to read his book, Winning Modern Wars. After finishing it, I figured out what Clark is about, and why his candidacy is both baffling and compelling.

Bottom line: Clark is a throwback, a Rip Van Winkle, a pluralistic, optimistic, Greatest Generation-style politician lost, like Howard the Duck, in a world he never made. He's further outside the mainstream political culture than can possibly be imagined. This is what makes him so striking, so hard to parse, and so clearly the best candidate.

Sabl teaches political philosophy in the Department of Policy Studies at UCLA.