In Light of Recent Revelations RE Clark's Praise of Bushies:

[Gringo]

Who do you plan to support now?

[flamingyouth]

1. Didn't Dean want Clark as his running mate?

And suddenly he's the devil incarnate? Interesting.

[Gringo]

2. Maybe some are saying that. I'm not.

I think it merits some skepticism of his motives, that's all.

The devil incarnate is already in the White House. We couldn't POSSIBLY do worse.

[nolabels]

34. We could do a multiple choice question

http://www.lsg.musin.de/Geschichte/natsoz/der_weg_in_den_krieg.htm

[LoneStarLiberal]

3. It's All Part of the Crow-Eating Game

Running mates have a way of being demonized in that time when they are competition before they are absolved of their sins and annointed as "the best person for the VP job."

As usual, there will be plenty of crow to be had by those who support the winner but have demonized his rival once he is chosen as running mate...it's either eat your crow or extend your righteous indignation and vote for another candidate entirely.

I've kept the comments generic since these rules apply to most primary races...and it may not even happen as it is suspected at this time...but...

[MercutioATC]

4. That was the media hype...the campaigns deny it, though.

It sounds SO much more interesting if we say that Dean and Clark were talking about being running mates rather than reporting the boring (and, apparently more accurate) fact that they were talking about who Clark would support if he decided not to run.

[RandomUser]

16. According to Dean

on his Face the Nation interview Sunday, he says he consulted with Clark on foreign affairs, and also claims that Clark consulted with him on domestic affairs (has Clark confirmed this?). If that's the case, you should see Clark's signature in Dean's foreign policy, and Dean's advice in Clark's domestic policy.

[gully]

17. No, he said he'd consider him and many others when asked the ??

by reporters. He never offered him any such position.

[nolabels]

5. I am so glad you included other

I have a bad record on figuring out if someone is a silly candidate or not. A few months ago I posted that Arnold (to the poster Neomonkey) was not really an alternative candidate for the GOP / Hollywood set to consider for us people in California. Boy did I ever eat my hat on that one. Who would have ever thought it would come so soon? I am trying to keep my lips closed and my typing on other subjects after this one.

[Khephra]

6. What Clark statement?

???

I've been busy with work this week. I musta missed something?

[Gringo]

7. A Video Of Clark was Unearthed from 2001

Where he praised "President Bush, Condi Rice, Powell, and the Bush Team". It got some airplay on TV over the weekend.

We all knew Bush was Evil & Stupid in '01. Why didn't Clark?

[Mz Pip]

9. "We all knew"?????

So much for all of the Dems that voted to confirm the Bush appointees.

Prior to 9/11 there certainly were people who were attemting to work with this administration and they were Democrats, too. So I guess we need to condemn all of them.

Maybe Clark was hopeful things would be ok. I know I didn't like Bush, didn't vote for him, but really hoped things wouldn't be as bad as I thought they would be. Turns out they were worse. Seems Clark realizes that as well.

MzPIp
:dem:

[Zero Gravitas]

20. Yup

I figured that Bush* would not be a good president and really resent the theft of the 2000 election, but at first I assumed that the team put in under him would at least be competent even if I did not like their politics. I had no clue what a total friggin nightmare this Administration would turn out to be, I had no clue how callous, shameless and greedy these people were and I had no clue whatsoever that they would completely neglect the national interest simply to line thier own pockets. The depths of dpravity of this bunch has no comparison in US history so Clark can be forgiven in giving them the benefit of the doubt in early 2001.

[CoffeePlease1947]

23. My thoughts exactly. Just because someone is Evil doesn't mean that

they are incompetent. Bush is both. Never thought Powell, Rice, and Rumsfeld would be such a disaster.

Mike

[KittyWampus]

10. You Need To Read Benjamin Franklin:An American Life

Wherein you will learn what it takes to be an EFFECTIVE diplomat and political advocate.

In part one must learn to APPEAR moderate even while one's agenda might be quite radical.

Also, one must learn not to burn bridges or alienate someone with whom one might have to work with later.

Franklin never cut himself off from England and was therefore able to play England and France off against each other before and during the Revolutionary War. It was his communications and seeming negotiating with England, that pushed France to aid us militarily and financially.

I believe this might be called "triangulation"?

Alot of Franklin's editorials were, in fact, written with psuedonymns precisely so that he would be able to maintain his viablilty as a diplomat. In fact, MOST politicians of his time wrote critiques and "slams" anonymously for that reason.

And there were a few pols who Franklin had public feuds with who he actually worked TOGETHER with later on.

In short, only a political novice would "smack down" an opponent.

There's a world of difference between critiquing or lampooning the opposition and insulting them.

[Toucano]

39. That is a brilliant

lesson from history. Thank you for pointing it out.

[Kahuna]

28. Uhhh. Clark has a life? Uhhh ..Maybe he doesn't waste his life..

at DU and Buzzflash? Ya think? :eyes:

[im4edwards]

8. for Edwards before, for Edwards now

I've gotten nothing but negative vibes from Clark from the start. That there is so much questionable regarding him is not surprizing and just comfirms my feelings. I do, however accept that he is a Democrat and I don't begrudge anyone changing their affiliation. It comes more to trying to plot him on the scale of Democrat and figuring out what would appear to be paradox in his stance on things.

But he never had any support from me anyway.

[damnraddem]

11. The same as always: Dean.

Now, ask who we want for VP.

[maveric]

12. When will people realize that Clark is the ONLY electable Dem!

I tend to work with and aquaint myself with repug and swing voters that think that Dean and Kerry are "too liberal" and that the rest of the field are lame.
Clark is the one and only dem that is capable of beating bu$h.

[Gringo]

13. piffle-paffle

Most swing and repug voters have yet to hear of Dean yet. He's no lib. Kerry's a bit of a harder sell.

If you like Clark, that's fine, but I suggest you be wary of a man who's only been a democrat for a month, who found the Bushies very admirable 2 years ago.

I for one, will not vote for a man just because Tweety thinks he'll appeal to "swing voters". Prove to me that swing voters WHO HAVE HEARD OF DEAN AND HIS PLATFORM dislike him.

[Pepperbelly]

27. What platform?

Clark is far better on jobs. Right now, that's what matters to me.

[Kahuna]

29. I think after dean attacked naughty Clark for cavorting with..

evil republicans he can forget about any dems for dean. Her can also forget about a lot of swing voters who don't see anything wrong with being non partisan or bi-partisan.

You apparently don't realize how many voters are offended by Dean's attacks on Clark. Dean is chastizing Clark for the very crime that most Americans over the age of thirty are guilty of.. Voting for republicans. Got it now?

[StopTheMorans]

14. they are all capable of beating

*, at least all the top-tier ones, and if you simply look at the poll from last week, Dean, Kerry, and Clark are all within the margin of error of beating *, so what grounds do you have for that statement? Do you see the economy improving in the next year? Do you see us gaining 3 million jobs? Will the war in Iraq improve? Enlighten us!

[JNelson6563]

15. this is opinion

not fact. To state your opinion, which is no more valuable than any other, as fact is the way the trouble starts around here. FYI.

Julie

[gully]

18. Bull Crap.

Why is Clark electable? Because he has 4 stars? What experience does he have in Politics. NONE

[Kahuna]

30. What experience does dean have being Commander-in-Chief?!

That's part of the job too you know. Wesley Clark has served in that capacity.

[im4edwards]

51. Clark has never been commander-in-chief

hes hoping to get the nomination that will give him the opportunity to run for that but he wasn't even Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. Just some NATO spot that he got fired from. His leadership had lesser generals refusing orders. How impressive !

Dean at least was the top dog of a state government. With real authority.

[im4edwards]

19. as soon as it is realistic

I agree that Kerry is to Mass and Dean is too Dean but with the baggage Clark has I feels he is about as electable as (I'll avoid hurt feelings here) my dog.

You have to believe that Powell can destroy his military record. And that was basically his trump card.

Its no secret who I think the only electable Dem is. Thats based on the qualities he has and his message and their proven success in past elections. If you can't see what got Clinton and Carter elected in this guy then you're just not trying.

[Kahuna]

32. According to the polls Edwards is as about electable as your dog..

According to the same polls, Wesley is the MOST electable. I hate to let truth interfer with your fantasy.

[im4edwards]

50. I was checking Polling Report dot com as it has a nice selection

there was no poll showing Clark and Edwards as competing options and only one showing Edwards at all. It was from July and shows him leading frontrunner Dean by at least two points for a comprable time period and beating Clark as late as September. Maybe its some other poll you're referring to ?

I can't help but view this as more proof of the CONSERVATIVE OWNED media stiffling Edwards because THEY know who to fear. They don't mind asking about Gore or Clinton (who repeatedly avow that they are not running) but strangely avoid him. And apparantly your guy understands who to fear as well since he felt like he needed to interfere with his well advertised announcement. Class with a capital "K".

Clark will make Dukakis look bad if he's given the standard. All he has is a military career and that ended with a firing. God knows what other ammunition the GOP has queued up to rip him apart with but you can bet its zesty.

I fully realize that Edwards is becoming a long shot but its not for lack of ability on his part but more for fear on the part of a lot of others. But theres a long time till January and I believe that Clinton trailed at this point as well. Let me see, I think that things wound up OK for that non-military southerner in the end.

[tencats]

35. I see the field like like this too, although none of us know ....

Although none of us really know at this early time much detail about what Clak's positions are on the important issues. I'm thinking he will not disappoint me over the next few months as his position on the issues become more defined. If he goes under or takes ambiguous positions, i'm just as comfortable with someone else like Dean.

[robbedvoter]

21. For Clark before, for Clark now. Asked and answered at the debate:

> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A433-2003Sep25.html
>
On May 11th of 2001, as reported in US News and World Report, you addressed at the
Republican Party Lincoln Day Dinner in Arkansas, expressed your support for the leadership
of Ronald Reagan, for that matter, the leadership of our current president, George W. Bush,
his immediate staff and Cabinet, and indicated they were needed in place.

Did you believe it then? Do you believe it now?

CLARK: I think it's been an incredible journey for me and for this country since early 2001.

We elected a president we thought was a compassionate conservative. Instead we got neither
conservatism or compassion. We got a man who recklessly cut taxes. We got a man who
recklessly took us into war with Iraq.

I was never partisan in the military. I served under Democratic presidents, I served under
Republican presidents. But as I looked at this country and looked which way we were headed, I
knew that I needed to speak out. And when I needed to speak out, there was only party to
come to.

I am pro-choice, I am pro-affirmative action, I'm pro-environment, pro-health. I believe the
United States should engage with allies. We should be a good player in the international
community. And we should use force only as a last resort. That's why I'm proud to be a
Democrat.


SHARPTON: Well, first of all, as the only New Yorker, I want to welcome General Clark to New
York and I want to welcome him to our list of candidates.

And don't be defensive about just joining the party. Welcome to the party. It's better to be a
new Democrat that's a real Democrat, than a lot of old Democrats up here that have been
acting like Republicans all along.

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

[Gringo]

24. If Clark was EVER dumb enough to believe

that there is such a thing as a "Compassionate Conservative", he's off my list for good. You want someone that naive and foolish in office? We all knew the filthy shenanigans that got Bush in office - it's the reason this site came into being. Not one of us saw him as legitimate before 9-11. Clark apparently was living in some sort of rose-colored, uninformed haze at the time, or as I suspect, he was an establishment insider, assuring the Powers that Be that he will NEVER upset their apple cart one little bit.

The Clark supporters' flimsy defenses convince me ever more that he should be avoided.

[MoonRiver]

22. Not "in light of" but in spite of those spins I STILL support Clark,

100%! :kick:

[bicentennial_baby]

25. Same here!

:bounce:

[DemExpat]

31. Me, three.....

He's the only one that can easily beat the Shrub.... IMHO.

:kick:

DemEx

[Kahuna]

37. Yep! He can make it more difficult for bush to steal.

Thankfully, not only is he the strongest challenger to bush but he's a decent man who wants to do the right thing by ALL Americans. Gasp! Republicans too???? Yes, Grasshopper. Republicans too. For how else can we stop this partisan infighting that got us to the place that our election was stolen in 2000 in broad daylight.

[Zuni]

26. In 2001 I was mistaken too

I just thought Bush was just a bit of a dim bulb--I had no idea how extreme his administration would become.
I assumed they would be isolationist tax cutters--essentially the Buchananite image that bush gave during his campaign.

[rucky]

33. I don't really support Clark

but I voted for him in yer lame-ass poll.

[catforclark2004]

36. why Clark is running for President

My Theory of why Clark is running for President
(this is not a conspiracy theory):

I believe that Clark's disenchantment with the Republican party occurred long ago, and it is a fact that since 1992 has been voting Democratic. That is when he realized that there was a real battle going on in the Bush I administration, the state dept and the military. Neo-cons were battling Bush I (who was from the old school), who although had a lot of neo-conservative influence in his administration, was not totally on board. General Clark, based on his experience and knowledge must have understood that it would be only a matter of time before the neo-cons would gain ground(Dan Quayle is a neo-con).

General Clark became an outspoken critic of the Neo-con military henchman imbedded in Clinton's military (career military neo-cons)who where strongly attempting to influence the Clinton foreign policy (remember the 1998 letter written by wolfowitz, etal. in reference to the Iraq policy). General Clark, broke rank and went over the heads of his superiors in the military branch (as they were all neo-cons) and spoke out against them directly to the Clinton administration and the State department.

In 1999, the entrenched Neo-con bureaucratic military was able to engineer the firing of General Clark (retiring him 3 months early)with a manipulative plan aimed at Clinton and Secretary of Defense Cohens. President Clinton later did find out what had occurred, and attempted to make it up to General Clark by awarding him with the Medal of Freedom (highest civilian award medal).

What we have here is a General, the anti neo-con ideologue, who truly understands what these neo-cons are planning (reads the PNAC plan). He understood that 9/11 gave the Neo-cons the kind of power that would not have been possible otherwise. He also understands what it will take to stop these Neo-con...to have someone who knows the Military inside and out....who has the power to redox the military bureaucracy (he knows who they are) to oust those who are in positions of power. The military is not an easy entity to reign in....and it has to be done in the most strategic manner straight from the upmost top, i.e. Commander in Chief. As we have witnessed, the State Department and congress have little power to leverage against the Military...who are now stronger than ever.

As one of the many voices criticizing the war in Iraq (part I of the Neo-Con plan), Clark realized that he was just one of too few voices at a time when dissent was being gagged and those opposing the administration were being branded as traitors. Although his appearance on CNN provided him with somewhat of a voice, it wasn't not enough. In fact, he was shocked how easy it was for the Neo-cons to have it their way.

General Clark is currently mad as hell and for the good of the country, has decided that he is not going to allow the PNACers to have it their way. Those sympathizing with him, the DLC wing/Clinton, etal...determined that General Clark could do something.....He could run for President on the Democratic ticket and stop the Neo-cons "dead in their tracks".

General Clark himself cannot be a Neo-con....as he is too intelligent, too patriotic, and took too many bullets in Vietnam and is no chickenhawk.

The Neo-Con plan affect all of America and the world. The American economy is being syphoned to the larger industrial complex and will starve off the treasury, i.e., the Government. The affects to Social Security, Health Care, education, and most all other social programs will be unreversable within the next few years (if Bush is reelected). With a large percentage of the budget going toward military operations, the Project for the New American Century of Military Global dominance is well on its way of achieving its written purpose.

[DemExpat]

38. Great explanation of the thoughts, ideas, and feelings

I have about Clark's potential Presidency.

This is how I see his motivations as well.....absolutely!

:hi: CatforClark!

DemEx

[Gringo]

40. The common thread of Cark posters:

"So he's a quasi-repug who appeals to quasi-repugs. Who cares? Silly me, expecting to converse with democrats at a site called democratic underground. Why are you Clarkies so terrified of having a democrat get the democratic nomination? Do you think our philosophy is that wrong, that it can't resonate with your holy "swing voters"? I disagree.

[5thGenDemocrat]

41. Aw, what's the matter, Gringo?

You didn't get the results you wanted on your slanted little "poll" and now you're going to accuse those who don't agree with you of being "quasi-repugs"? Maybe some here don't like the idea of a four-star general as President. Maybe some here don't like the idea of a bullying, snot-nosed, money-grubbing, draft-dodging, ski-bum rich kid as President either.
Much is made of Dean being a "healer." Well, as both a survivor of two heart attacks and an army veteran I guess I could note that the only people more self-assured and arrogant than career military officers are, yes, doctors.
I am a fifth generation Democrat -- not a "quasi-repug." I will vote for Dean if he is the nominee and I'll vote for Clark should he get the nod. But this busting the chops of those who don't agree with you stinks.
John
I saw all the hoopla about Dean closing in on yet another fundraising mark ($15 million this quarter). If he makes it before midnight, do we get to hear him or Jerry Lewis sing "You'll Never Walk Alone"?

[Gringo]

42. Wow! Clarkies are vitriolic!

"You didn't get the results you wanted on your slanted little "poll""

You're right, I don't like the results, and it's hardly slanted - and "poll" needn't be in quotes as though we were talking about "president" Bush.

"and now you're going to accuse those who don't agree with you of being "quasi-repugs"?"

No, acid-breath, I said that you people like him because he APPEALS TO quasi-repugs. IE you are too cowardly to commit to a democrat. It doesn't make you repugs, it makes you cowards.

Maybe some here don't like the idea of a four-star general as President. "

Not me. But a conservative, untested one may be problematic.

"Maybe some here don't like the idea of a bullying, snot-nosed, money-grubbing, draft-dodging, ski-bum rich kid as President either."

He bullies Bush - I like that. He's a grown man - hardly snot-nosed, got a totally legit deferment, and isn't near as rich a kid as JFK was. And I don't care if you don't support Dean - there are many other fine DEMOCRAT candidates, I just don't get the infatuation with the doe-eyed general.

"the only people more self-assured and arrogant than career military officers are, yes, doctors."

I never generalized about military people - why are you smearing doctors?

"I am a fifth generation Democrat -- not a "quasi-repug.""

Again, I didn't call you one. I Implied that your ilk are cowards.

"I will vote for Dean if he is the nominee and I'll vote for Clark should he get the nod. "

I'll do the same.

"But this busting the chops of those who don't agree with you stinks."

I'm hardly busting anyone's chops. I'm expressing dismay at the ascent of this Clark character. I feel like I don't know this board anymore.

"I saw all the hoopla about Dean closing in on yet another fundraising mark ($15 million this quarter). If he makes it before midnight, do we get to hear him or Jerry Lewis sing "You'll Never Walk Alone"?"

Bush has what, $200 million. Deanie or not, you should give credit where credit is due for a campaign that's been run damn well thus far. If Gore had campaigned like Dean, it would have been a landslide far beyond Cruella's ability to steal.

Your vitriol is puzzling. The poll went your way. I expressed dismay at that fact. Are all Clarkies bitter when they get their way?

[5thGenDemocrat]

47. Well, like I said, Slick

I don't have a horse in this race yet. It's still ten months until we vote here in Michigan.
The poll didn't go my way because I couldn't possibly care less who comes out on top. I voted for Carter, I voted for Mondale, I voted for Dukakis, I voted for Clinton and I voted for Gore.
But if you like Dean, I'll certainly keep that in mind on Election Day.
John
Isn't it nice that we live in a country where we all used to have a voice?

[Kahuna]

43. Ditto this...

<<Maybe some here don't like the idea of a bullying, snot-nosed, money-grubbing, draft-dodging, ski-bum rich kid as President either.>>

If Clark wasn't running I still wouldn't support Dean. I just don't like him. Pretty much because of how you described him. He is smug and arrogant. After bush, I've had enough of smug and arrogant to last me a lifetime. I don't care if a smug and arrogant does have a "D" after his name.

[Forkboy]

46. "But this busting the chops of those who don't agree with you stinks."

Yet you just engaged in it also.

[5thGenDemocrat]

48. Got me there, Forkboy

I guess I did.
John
I can be as stinky as anyone, I suppose.

[Kahuna]

49. You do stinky, good.

:evilgrin:

[union_maid]

44. They're all democrats

If you want someone with more Democratic values than Clark, you're going to have to go with Kucinich or Mosely-Braun or Sharpton, because those are the ones that are more liberal, not any of the rest. Clark has the potential to make this whole country a bit more liberal. Dean has the potential to possibly prevail against the conservatives, but we'll still be at war with half the country. I'm voting for the guy that I think can marginalize the extreme rightwing, and I believe that's Clark.

[Gringo]

45. That's the first rational reason I've heard all day

I disagree with it, but I'll accept it. Still the only thing that indicates he is a democrat is the fact that he announced it a few weeks ago. Most of the issue in the platform MATTER to me, and I've been putting effort into them for years. The fact that he apparently has never seen the need to get involved until now makes me wonder about his motivations. Clarkies are entitled to believe him because of their 'hunches", but I need a bit more than that. I never thought I would see DU go this way. NOBODY here supported Lie-berman, whose politix are roughly the same (okay, so he's unelectable because he's a jew, but still...) But they are drooling over someone who may be just as far to the right.

I don't trust the DLC. I believe they aim to destroy our party. cannot support their candidates in the primaries.

[union_maid]

53. I don't know about that

I mean that. I don't know about the DLC's motives one way or the other. I didn't like moving the Democrats so far to the right and I didn't like them for that, but I really believe that Clark, together with the amazing cooperation we're getting from the Bush administration lately, might change that, somewhat. If they have a winner who can get liberal agendas passed, they might turn a bit left themselves. Remember, Clinton campaigned on a lot of promises that turned out to be suggestions once congress started shredding them. With all the damage that's been done by this administration there's only so much that any new administration is going to be able to do right away in any case, but I think that Clark can be more effective in getting more of it through congress if he's as popular as I think he can be.

I don't see Lieberman's policies and Clark's as the same. They certainly didn't approach the war the same way. Lieberman seems to totally buy into the idea that Iraq is all about the war on terror. Clark seems to understand what most opponents of this administration have been saying all along - terrorists operate in many countries including some who are allies. He understands that just because it's more convenient to have a whole country to go to war against doesn't make it the right thing to do. I honestly haven't paid that much attention to Lieberman's domestic policies so I can't comment on those. His unelectablity is not really because he's Jewish, but Orthodox is kind of a stretch for our first Jewish president, but most of all, besides the fact that his policies aren't going to resonate with his own party, he's got zero presidential persona. That, unfortunately, counts.

[Gringo]

52. It just occurred to me: The poll IS slanted -and invalid

By putting a qualifier with Clark's name in it, I significantly increased the likelyhood that Clarkies would read the post, and thus vote/respond. I'll have to be more careful with wording in the future.

So in the end, a near majority of DUers WHO ARE INTERESTED IN CLARK plan to support Clark.

It may be that the overall DU membership doesn't feel the same.

www.deanforamerica.com