Name removed
(0 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 10:38 PM
Original message |
|
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
|
grasswire
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 10:41 PM
Response to Original message |
|
....have some sort of security clearance in his military position?
|
burythehatchet
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
I'm undecided and there is something about him besides his policies that really appeals to me.
|
Jackpine Radical
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
13. ...but think of White & Enron. |
|
Any military guy needs to be checked out for corporate (esp. defense industry) connections.
|
madfloridian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 10:44 PM
Response to Original message |
3. There were discussions here last ( or at BC)...and some were wondering. |
|
I can not remember what they were about. I can't find them. I am surprised at the eagerness people feel, and he has not even declared.
Do I like him? I think so. I sure wish I could find those really thoughtful discussions from here from last year. It concerned me, and I can't remember why. Something to do with Kosovo? Not sure. Could have been at Bartcop.
He comes across well, and seems to have all the right stuff. I just want to reread the discussions.
|
Pastiche423
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
"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.
You want a guy w/a hair trigger temper be the one to have his finger on the red button?
|
madfloridian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
12. Yes, I think that was it. |
|
But there was a whole web page, which could have been skewed against him, I don't know. We are skewed here in some ways. I remember the webpage concerned me, but was not anything you could say for sure.
I think all candidates need to be thoroughly checked out.
|
Pastiche423
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
|
of links out there. Just google clark + kosovo. Most are not flattering, unless you like someone who's best achievement is killing.
|
11cents
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 10:44 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Rove would "drop a bomb" on Mother Teresa |
|
Your concern is not unwarranted, but has Howard Dean been "vetted?" John Kerry? Any of the candidates may have secrets, and if they don't the Republicans will make something up. What we know about Clark is that he served for decades under the military's code for personal behavior without hint of scandal, and did so in an environment in which he had enemies who would have loved to "drop a bomb." We also know that he has experienced Democratic campaign advisors working with him behind the scenes, so they're presumably going over his history. These aren't guarantees, but they're really the best we can do with any candidate.
|
mot78
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 10:47 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Clark is in better shape than the other 9 Candidates |
|
However, no candidate can truely be "vetted" just look at Clinton in '92.
|
spanone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 10:49 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Good question and I would certainly hope so. |
moondust
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 10:49 PM
Response to Original message |
|
People who reach high office have all made some mistakes and some enemies along the way. I've read Clark's impressive bio but have never seen anything resembling a Rovian dissection of him.
Whose job is it to do that?
|
Pepperbelly
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 10:51 PM
Response to Original message |
8. I expect he is the best vetted since forever ... a long, long time ... |
|
he had clearances up the wazoo ... and they take a hard look at some of those clearances.
|
ilpostino
(238 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 11:04 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I saw Russert interview him and ask why he was relieved of his duty when he was so close to his retirement date, and he gave a very vague and unconvincing answer about how these things happen sometimes in the military. Obviously there was nothing out there, because Russert let it go at that, but it sure was the weakest I've ever seen him....and might be the reason he's been hanging back.
|
HawkerHurricane
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 11:06 PM
Response to Original message |
11. Don't worry, if they can't find something to smear him with, |
|
They'll just make something up. See Clinton/Whitewater, Gore/Liar, etc. The Late J.C. could come down from on high and run as a Democrat and Rove et. al. would smear him with something. Maybe his felony conviction, maybe his relationship with Mary M., something.
|
SavageWombat
(187 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
|
JC himself is known to associate with drunks and prostitutes - and his father says JC's not really HIS son.
|
HawkerHurricane
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
18. Not to mention that TAX COLLECTOR! |
|
and the socialistic stuff he keeps on saying about helping your neighbor...AND he says nice things about those dirty Samaritans!
|
JasonBerry
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 11:23 PM
Response to Original message |
16. SINCE his clearance... |
|
Edited on Fri Jul-25-03 11:25 PM by JasonBerry
I know the Clark supporters are tired of hearing from some of us, but the man is known as an arrogant, pompous, hothead - which in the military REALLY tells you something.
- Pristina Airport - Cluster Bombs - Landmines - Blowing trains filled with civilians off bridges - Relieved of duty EARLY and says when asked why, "I didn't ask." Right.
The list is long.....Being vetted for a security clearance and being vetted by the voters is two different things. Rumsfeld was "vetted", so was Ashcroft, and going back a long way - Haldeman, Ehrlichman, GENERAL LeMay, on and on and on.....vetting for security has nothing to do with legitimate campaign issues.
Get in General Clark! We'll talk about MORE than the above.
|
sally343434
(628 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-25-03 11:28 PM
Response to Original message |
17. What's with all this Clark idolatry? |
|
First, this ain't the Eisenhower era. Clark has no elective political background. He has the same chance to go anywhere (none) as any other person who has run for President these days with similar (lack of) political credentials, such as Al Haig, Ross Perot, Steve Forbes, Ralph Nader, etc. Let them hold some lower political office first. That's the way it works. You just don't get elected President as your first political campaign.
Besides, who wants a "khaki election?"
|
Eloriel
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-26-03 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #17 |
19. I don't get it either |
|
Most of the people here know absolutely nothing about him, except that he wore a uniform with a handful of stars on it. And perhaps that he's nice looking, and talks nice (if you ignore what he's saying -- or not saying, as the case may be).
I might be okay with him for Veep, but I for darned sure am not comfortable jumping all up and down over this guy without any real knowledge of him. Yeah, he's pro-Choice, and a few other very basic things. But that's ALL people know.
It's not just silly, it's embarrassing.
Eloriel
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sat May 04th 2024, 11:40 AM
Response to Original message |