No matter who or what his ancestors were, I believe that Wesley Clark was persuaded to join the presidential race by Clinton and others of the Democratic National Committee and their minders in order to STOP the Dean momentum. His "opinions" such as they are (in formation in real time) about foreign policy issues certainly reflect the neo-liberal, neo-conservative views of the contending candidates who voted for the war resolution -- i.e., pragmatic reasons to now be against it, not a strong philosophical stand against preventive or preemptive war or strong support for the Charter of the United Nations which outlaws such national policy.
His domestic economic agenda is nowhere to be found as yet, but let's remember he was a REPUBLICAN -- voted twice for Nixon, twice for Reagan, and has lately announced his sea change to Democrat. His philosophical stands certainly would be reflected in his policy priorities (not in his coached election rhetoric, but certainly if he were to win the presidency).
The revelation about his Jewish ancestry (priestly caste of Kohens, no less) smacks of election pandering for the Jewish vote (Lieberman should be worried that Clark appears MORE Jewish) and his stand on the Palestine/Israel conflict is very close to that of the Bush-Rice policies. (As are those of Kerry, Lieberman, Edwards, Gebhard with minor nuances.)
So we should stick to our issues and stick to our guns and support the real candidate who so far presents the authentic anti-war alternative. (Dean, of course.)