Is Clark Running Again?

[Jack_Dawson]

I've heard rumours he is. And try as I might I just can't get excited about anyone else...esp. Hillary. And I sure wouldn't call 200 strangers in TN for her. Has anyone heard anything? Thx.

:beer:

[rsmith6621]

1. Edwards/Clark Works

4-Me

[Jack_Dawson]

2. I think you mean Clark/Edwards

right? Always put the lightweight on second. :beer:

[yodermon]

28. Clark would make a kick-ass SecDef.

But truthfully I am torn b/t Gore, Clark, & Edwards right now.

(Edwards Atty. General??)

[RandomUser]

30. He probably would, but it's illegal.

Clark can't become SecDef because you need to be out of uniform for 10 years to be eligible; that means he won't be eligible until after 2010.

He can't be SecDef, but he would make an excellent President.

[Skwmom]

15. The Ultimate Politician (Edwards) and the Ultimate Non Politician (Clark)

would be a lousy combination. Furthermore, there is no VP that would enable Edwards to win in the general election.

[AmericanDream]

45. Ultimate politician? He joined politics 6 years ago, FYI!

And, frankly Edwards would win regarldless of who his VP is... he has national appeal and connects with people ... two things not often said about Clark. *shrugs* Though I like the General too.... however, he doesn't have the "it" factor, unfortunately.

[Skwmom]

49. National appeal and connects with people?

What PR spin. A personal injury attorney (one who is on record stating "She speaks to you through me. "And I have to tell you right now — I didn't plan to talk about this — right now I feel her. I feel her presence. She's inside me, and she's talking to you."), who only became interested in poverty when he decided to use it as a political platform will not win the Whitehouse for the Democrats. (Of course, if the Republicans have their way, he will become the Democratic nominee.)

6 years? It doesn't take years to become the ultimate politician. I read an article the other day that Edwards shied away from Pelosi's daughter once she overheard him discussing polling to determine his position on an issue. What a politician.

[MoonRiver]

68. Edwards wouldn't win. He destroyed his chances when he supported,

and as far as I know, still supports, the Iraq War and *'s imperialistic bullshit. I believe that Democrats will demand a candidate who has a long record of consistent opposition to the outrageous, criminal, and destructive policies of this administration. Among those who are electable on other counts, Clark and Gore fit the bill. Also, possibly Feinstein. Definitely NOT Edwards, imo.

[AmericanDream]

38. That won't be bad.

I'm all for Edwards; not too sure about clark though.

[rwheeler31]

3. Clinton Clark

or Clark Clinton, I would support that ticket.

[Jack_Dawson]

8. That would be very Geena Davis-like

wouldn't it? :beer:

[yourout]

4. Clark would be great in my book.

[Captain Hilts]

5. I get a lot of e-mails from him. Clark/Richardson in 08 nt

[CarolNYC]

7. Is that really you Mookie?

Loved ya on the Mets. :)

[Captain Hilts]

21. I actually learned to love him as a Tidewater Tide in Norfolk.

Then he eventually followed me to Toronto!

Mook still da man!

[CarolNYC]

58. Even tho

I was a die hard Yankee fan when Mookie was with the Mets, I always a soft spot in my heart for him. I always thought he was one of the good guys.

[CarolNYC]

6. Not yet....

but he "hasn't ruled anything out".

Right now I think he's focused on 2006...and 2005. Check out his "Fighting for Tim Kaine" ad on the home page of this place....and give some money to Tim...Gotta start winning some of these races...and then we'll talk about 2008. :)

[Ilsa]

9. He's getting his name out there. I think he'll run.

He has been on Faux News, writing op-ed pieces, etc.

As much as I like Hillary, I have Clinton-fatigue. I'd be okay with a Clark/Clinton ticket. Clark has the education, foreign policy experience, economic education, military knowledge, and stamina to take on the GOP corrupt spin machine. I think people will like him and appreciate his reasonableness.

[PuraVidaDreamin]

10. Why do you guys like Clark so much? I'm in the learning stages.

Thanks in advance.

[Jack_Dawson]

11. Because he speaks four languages,

because he repelled down a cliff during the Balkans conflict to attempt to save a colleague, because he swims 3,000 yards every day, because he's a four-star general and a DEMOCRAT, because he was villified by the Bush-Generals for announcing he was a democrat, because he's the fucking real deal I could keep going believe me.

[Tatiana]

25. Because he has a degree in ECONOMICS.

Because he can restore some fiscal responsibility to this nation while balancing our social responsibilites.

Because he's smart, rational, and has an actual plan that can get us out of the quagmire known as Iraq.

Because he believes in responsibility and ACCOUNTABILITY.

Because he'd never ask someone to do something he himself wouldn't.

Because he understands that dissent is PATRIOTIC!

Because world leaders know and respect him.

[Jack_Dawson]

31. Excellent Points

Economics degree...dude is so brilliant I even forgot that fact. :toast:

[Phoebe_in_Sydney]

66. More than just economics degree

Rhodes scholar, graduated from Oxford University in Politics, Philosophy and economics.

Taught economics at West Point after Vietnam duty.

Served as a White House fellow in the Office of Budget and Management in Ford administration.

he's great talking about economics.

[JanMichael]

65. I've met bartenders in Poland that could speak 6 languages fluently.

One was an aerobics instructor too so I imagine she could swim a lot as well.

Lots of people can do those things. I nearly speak Polish as a second language, I've read Camus and Sartre, lived overseas 10% of my life, can cook REAL well, PLUS I'm getting proficient in Judo, can I be pResident too!!!!

I'd leave the physical man-worshiping out of it and focus on the politics and actions personally:-)

[CarolNYC]

12. Hey PVD

Lots of reasons but I've not time to go into them right now...

If you really want to know more about Gen Clark, though, do try my most wonderful "For those seriously curious about Wes Clark" thread for a list of resources:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=235x6296

:)

I think there's also a "why I support Wes Clark" thread floating around here somewhere. I'm sure someone can pont you to it.

[Texas_Kat]

18. Some personal stories and thoughts from Clarkies at DU

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1548301&mesg_id=1548301

[Skwmom]

50. Because Clark made the right choices when it wasn't to his advantage to do

so. Imagine that. Someone that actually puts the good of others (and this country) ahead of his own self-serving interests.

[PuraVidaDreamin]

53. What did he do?

Please remember learning process involved at looking at Clark
websites, but feeling it out among the people.

I am honestly trying to understand.

[CarolNYC]

59. Just a couple of instances off the top of my head...

First there was his pushing to end the genocide in Kosovo when that wasn't the most popular thing to do.

If you haven't already, I suggest you read Samantha Power's "A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide". It's a great book and covers Clark's part in the Kosovo conflict pretty well.

Here's what Samantha had to say about Wes when introducing him at a press conference shortly after he testified against Milosevich at the Hague in December 2003:

"Good afternoon. It’s a real honor for me to be here with General Clark, and with Edita Tahiri. My name is Samantha Power. I spent about seven years looking into American responses to genocide in the twentieth century, and discovered something that may not surprise you but that did surprise me, which was that until 1999 the United States had actually never intervened to prevent genocide in our nation’s history. Successive American presidents had done an absolutely terrific job pledging never again, and remembering the holocaust, but ultimately when genocide confronted them, they weighed the costs and the benefits of intervention, and they decided that the risks of getting involved were actually far greater than the other non-costs from the standpoint of the American public, of staying uninvolved or being bystanders. That changed in the mid-1990s, and it changed in large measure because General Clark rose through the ranks of the American military. The mark of leadership is not to standup when everybody is standing, but rather to actually stand up when no one else is standing. And it was Pentagon reluctance to intervene in Rwanda, and in Bosnia, that actually made it much, much easier for political leaders to turn away. When the estimates started coming out of the Pentagon that were much more constructive, and proactive, and creative, one of the many deterrents to intervention melted away. And so I think, again, in discussing briefly the General’s testimony, it’s important to remember why he was able to testify at the Hague, and he testified because he decided to own something that was politically very, very unfashionable at the time.
(snip)
Third point, just finally, before introducing the General, and our esteemed Kosovar guest, I’d just like to say a word about the testimony that General Clark just offered at the Hague tribunal, and I do say offered because I think he is the only US official on either the political or military side who has actually been banging on the Hague’s door rather than the other way around. And again, this isn’t something that is terribly useful, the timing could not be worse, and I don’t mean just because Saddam Hussein was arrested while the General was in the Hague, but because there’s actually an election, and a primary season back in America, and testifying at an institution like that, while admirable, isn’t always something that enhances your relationship with the American voter. And again, I think it’s a testament to the integrity and the independence of General Clark, and his desire to make sure, not only that the case against Slobodon Milosevic is airtight, and to aid in the prosecution, but also to validate what’s going on at the Hague. With his presence there as the only senior US military officer ever to do such a thing, to grace an international tribunal with his presence, he draws attention to a tribunal that has been forgotten, and to a trial that has unfortunately faded, but that is essential, not only for the people of the Balkans, but for the future international justice. And finally, and crucially, by his presence, he also reminds us of the importance of international justice, not only for American values, and for the sake of the victims and people who had to suffer under tyrants like Milosevic or Saddam Hussein, but also for American interests, to understand that America has to be engaged with international institutions, and that ultimately, nobody on the earth has more to gain from enforceable rules of the road and compliance with international law than the United States of America."

She also wrote this about Wes in her book:
"Yet in Washington Clark was a pariah. In July 1999 he was curtly informed that he would be replaced as supreme allied commander for Europe. This forced his retirement and ended thirty-four years of distinguished service. Favoring humanitarian intervention had never been a great career move."

More here:
http://www.kiddingonthesquare.com/2004/01/the_subtle_art_.html


Second, there was his defedning of Michael Moore at a time when no one else was stepping forward to defend him. Michael writes to the General about it here:

"I've been meaning to write to you for some time. Two days after the Oscars, when I felt very alone and somewhat frightened by the level of hatred toward me for daring to suggest that we were being led into war for "fictitious reasons," one person stuck his neck out and came to my defense on national television.

And that person was you.

Aaron Brown had just finished interviewing me by satellite on CNN, and I had made a crack about me being "the only non-general allowed on CNN all week." He ended the interview and then turned to you, as you were sitting at the desk with him. He asked you what you thought of this crazy guy, Michael Moore. And, although we were still in Week One of the war, you boldly said that my dissent was necessary and welcome, and you pointed out that I was against Bush and his "policies," not the kids in the service. I sat in Flint with the earpiece still in my ear and I was floored -- a GENERAL standing up for me and, in effect, for all the millions who were opposed to the war but had been bullied into silence.

Since that night, I have spent a lot of time checking you out. And what I've learned about you corresponds to my experience with you back in March. You seem to be a man of integrity. You seem not afraid to speak the truth."

more here:
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2003-09-12

Of course, Michael went on to endorse Clark and the General took some heat for not disassociating himself from Michael after Moore dared to mention that Bush was a deserter at a Clark rally.

There are many, many reasons why I like Clark but what I'll tell you right now is that, at a time when it seemed that none of the voices that I was hearing or listening to were speaking out against this war for fear, it seemed, of being labeled unpatriotic, I heard a 4 Star General say exactly what I was thinking about it...and that peaked my interest....I checked into this General and the more I learned, the more I liked. Do read some of the articles, some of his speeches, papers, op-eds, some of the books written about him. It's an eye opener to do so.

Thanks for reading...and for asking. :)

[shenmue]

13. I hope he is

I liked him a lot. I think Clark/Edwards would be a good ticket too. There are some others I like, but if that's who we get, it'd be fine with me.

[Crazy Guggenheim]

14. Though I am not "big" on Clark for President, I think he would be

the darn near perfect V.P. choice. Even during the primaries the first time I saw him on T.V. I said "That's the guy!"

[Jack_Dawson]

16. How come you're not big on Clark?

Juss wonderin' how that's even possible. :beer:

[Crazy Guggenheim]

17. One is political - electoral - experience. The other is how long has

he been in a Democrat? BTW, I think he should run for Governor though.

[Jack_Dawson]

19. Why is that important?

He voted for Clinton, he voted for Gore. And before that he was in the Army where being overtly political is not smart. If he turned democrat yesterday I would still embrace the guy - he's so genuine...have you seen him interviewed?

[Crazy Guggenheim]

22. That's when I was sold on him for V.P. As a matter of fact it was

on Tweety's show and he ripped the script out Tweety's hands. LOL. However, some of this is a trust issue in that he hasn't been around that long. I do know he is progressive though, but just want him to show his stuff in a regular election.

Remember, I *want* him as a V.P. choice.

[PuraVidaDreamin]

26. He is a stunning presence on camera. He says a lot that I like...

But he is not willing to get our kids and National Guard
out of Iraq NOW. This is very troubling to me.

[Jack_Dawson]

32. NOW doesn't work

Yes I wish we weren't there, but we can't exactly bail at this point I mean come on.

[PuraVidaDreamin]

46. How many more have to die for this immoral war?

I mean.... COMEON!

Please focus on Mr Clarks selling points.

[Skwmom]

51. Yeah those with political experience have been doing a bang

up job of running this country into the ground. Leaders need not apply for the Presidency. We only want politicians.

[Crazy Guggenheim]

55. That's not what I mean.

[shavedape]

20. draft wes clark!

he's our man!

[Jack_Dawson]

23. Re-Draft you mean

and I agree. :beer:

[Rowdyboy]

24. I hope so and he seems to be heading in that direction but....

I don't give a damn. I will vote for ANY Democrat running against ANY Republican in 2006 and 2008. General Clark would be my favorite, but that means very little to me. I really am open to all comers in 2008...

[PuraVidaDreamin]

29. If that is my choice, I will too but I'm hoping for someone else to emerge

I'm not thrilled with any of the names out there yet.
I feel betrayed by the Democratic Party.

Sure wish things were easier to discern.

Me- I will fanatically support the candidate who
says we have to get out of Iraq, NOW.

[Jack_Dawson]

35. I take it you're Gay?

I was watching the Harriet Miers thing last night and how conservatives are pissed that she might not be "against gay rights enough" for them. When the fuck are we going to realize that being anti-gay is the same as shoving blacks to the back of the bus? I swear to God this is a real head-scratcher for me. How is this kind of intolerance remotely tolerated in an otherwise first world country?

[Rowdyboy]

57. Its pretty amazing.... I've been a totally monogamous relationship

for 17 years and it was only 2 years ago that the Supreme Court said it was legal for us to SLEEP together. How dare any state make laws regarding which adult can sleep with another adult, much less exactly what they can do in bed! Its seems like such a basic right, but many on the right don't even believe their is a basic right to privacy.

They say they want less government, but they want to tell us who to marry, who to sleep with, what to read, what to do with pregnancies, and when our terminally ill can be allowed to die. If conservatives have their way, we won't have less government, we'll have government in ALL aspects of our lives dictating every major decision.

[Jack_Dawson]

60. I agree

It's a scary agenda. I hate it, and feel powerless. Although I must admit I feel better in October '05 than I did in November '04.

[calmblueocean]

62. One for the ages.

"They say they want less government, but they want to tell us who to marry, who to sleep with, what to read, what to do with pregnancies, and when our terminally ill can be allowed to die. If conservatives have their way, we won't have less government, we'll have government in ALL aspects of our lives dictating every major decision."

That, my friend, is a zinger. You should put that in your sig, and we should all commit it to memory everytime some righty tries the big government smear on us. Well said!

[akarnitz]

27. He's positioning himself very well.....

in those Faux News appearances. He let's O'Reilly do his schtick and beats Billy back point for point. Unlike other folks, though, Wes stays verrrrry calm. It's gonna be tough for the right wing to peg him as a raving hippie liberal.

And, in the meantime, I think Wes is winning over the fence sitters.
Right now I think Wes is not only the best chance we have for taking back the presidency, I think he's the best man for the job.

[skipos]

39. I agree. I feel Clark would done much better than Kerry in 04.

His biggest problem is getting the nomination. Democrats freak out because he voted for Reagan, which is ridiculous in my opinion. Thinking about things and somtimes changing your mind over time is good. Not thinking about things and never changing your mind over time = Bush. The other concern Democrats have is his "lack of experience." Personally, I like the idea of someone who doesn't have the deep political ties (to shitty businesses and shitty people) that seem to come with being a politician. The fact that Perot received almost 20% of the vote in 1992 makes me think there are many people out there, conservative and liberal, who would love to have a non-politician in office.

[Kazak]

33. Is Gore?

They're both posturing, I can tell ya that.

[Jack_Dawson]

36. Gore is over

I'm sorry but his rollover act in 2000 really pissed me off. And I'm not going to get over it.

[Kazak]

41. You'll cast your vote for 'em and you know it.

;)

[Maddy McCall]

34. Yes, he's going to run. And he's developed his own "southern strategy"

I was talking with a friend of mine who worked on his 2004 campaign, as a paid advisor. I'm relaying to you what he said.

[Jack_Dawson]

37. And the strategy is...

I'm all ears. :beer:

[Maddy McCall]

40. Honesty, I'll have to get back to him to ask.

IT was a crazy night when I talked to him. We were at our town courthouse where votes were being counted for mayor and city council. There were many people around, and I was exhausted from my work on the local level.

Anyway, my friend Warren was a campaign advisor for Clark in several southern states, and he was stationed in Tennessee. He is still in pretty constant contact with Wes, and he told me that Wes WILL run in 2008, that he began his campaign too late in 2004 to implement a good strategy to bring in southern states, but that he is working on that strategy and will use it in 2008.

We are on the Dem executive committee together in our county. I'll see him soon, and I'll ask him to precisely tell me about this "southern strategy" that Clark will implement.


Edit to add: he said that, with this strategy, Florida nor Ohio will matter as it did in 2000-04. HE wants to pull in Arkansas, Tennessee, and a couple other southern state, which will give him the electorals he needs, if he can hang onto reliably Democratic states. Now, just how he plans to do that, I don't know, but I'll PM you after I talk to Warren again.

[Jack_Dawson]

54. Keep me in the loop!

Exciting! PM me anytime you want. :beer:

[nvliberal]

42. I seriously doubt it.

Sure it was a year ago, but when I saw Clark in person, campaigning on behalf of John Kerry, he seemed to be perfectly happy being out of the pressure cooker of campaigning and enjoyed spending time with his family.

I don't see it ever happening, for he wasn't a serious contender in 2004 anyway.

[SaintLouisBlues]

43. Then who was a serious contender in 04?

Clark won as many primaries (one) as any other "contender".

[Auntie Bush]

47. What do you mean by that? "he wasn't a serious contender in 2004 ."

I disagree!!!!!!!

[Crunchy Frog]

44. Officially, he is "not ruling anything out" and focusing on '06

but unofficially it looks extremely likely that he will run again. If you want a good place to see many of his recent TV appearances, check out this site. http://www.u-wes-a.com/

Check out this link to see his latest appearance on O'Lielly. http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/10/03.html#a5214

Also, check out his official blog. http://securingamerica.com/ccn/ You'll hear plenty on there.:)

I like the new avatar on you by the way. :toast:

[jonnyblitz]

48. yeah i would hate to have to call strangers in a red state for

Hillary. nobody will galvanize and "get out the base" vote for the GOP better than a Hillary run for president.

[wiley]

52. Yes, there is a God

He'll run. But he's doing so much for 06 contenders he should be nominated even if he doesn't outright declare at this moment.

[moondust]

56. Delete.

[OfireitupO]

61. Clark is one of the best options

IMO and based on polling, most people are not for the christian RW social agenda but instead for increased security. Of course, the PERCEPTION of increased security. The RW stole that perception and the only person who can really get that back is Clarke because he was NATO general and led a successful war. He also presents his ideas very well and has plans for what needs to be done. Anyone see him vs O'reilly? O'reilly didnt stand a chance.

[Jack_Dawson]

63. O'Reilly wouldn't STFU

I think Donahue schooled O'Reilly much better than Clark did, only because Clark is so damn polite and a gentleman. But I love Clark and would call another 2,000 rednecks if I needed to.

[DanCa]

64. clark clealand

[Adelante]

67. Very likely

After 2006, if he sees he has the support, I feel certain he will run.