Clark had a shot at a home run, hit a double instead

[sasquatch]

When Peter(whore)Jennings asked why he wouldn't correct Micheal Moore and his statement that GWB is a deserter? Clark said he looked at the facts and said they're irrelevent to GWB's record in the White House. He should've said he's looked at the facts and although he was never prosecuted, he was absent from duty. That has what he said earlier and he should've said to Jennings then. Oh well maybe he'll do it next time. I still support Kucinich but after Dean's speech after the Iowa Caucus I'm about to jump on his bandwagon.

[ima_sinnic]

1. couldn't agree more

I was SOOOO disappointed in Clark's response; it was the perfect opening for exposing Bush for the fraudulent little crud that he is. And it would have been particularly impressive coming from a military man. I assume this is a hint of the way things would be under a President Clark: criminal charges would NOT be brought against Bush et al. for anything. I had been feeling favorable about Clark but after seeing him Thursday evening I've relegated him to the also-rans--way too militaristic, but then ironically not concerned that his opponent went AWOL, and not angry enough.

:wtf:

It's still Dean all the way for me, though my impression of Kerry has improved. And sasquatch, I'm heartened to see that after Dr. Dean's infamous and overrated "yowl" or "screech" you are moving toward him and not away, like so many, er, fair weather friends have indicated they're doing -- :thumbsup:

[maxr4clark]

2. Not bad for a guy with a 95 mph fastball! :)

[HootieMcBoob]

3. Actually he said he hadn't looked at the facts

JENNINGS: At one point, Mr. Moore said, in front of you, that President Bush—he’s saying he’d like to see you, the general, and President Bush, who he called a “deserter.” Now, that’s a reckless charge not supported by the facts. And I was curious to know why you didn’t contradict him, and whether or not you think it would’ve been a better example of ethical behavior to have done so.

CLARK: Well, I think Michael Moore has the right to say whatever he feels about this. I don’t know whether this is supported by the facts or not. I’ve never looked at it. I’ve seen this charge bandied about a lot. But to me it wasn’t material. This election is going to be about the future, Peter. And what we have to do is pull this country together…

JENNINGS: Let me ask you something you mentioned, then, because since this question and answer in which you and Mr. Moore was involved in, you’ve had a chance to look at the facts. Do you still feel comfortable with the fact that someone should be standing up in your presence and calling the president of the United States a deserter?

CLARK: To be honest with you, I did not look at the facts, Peter. You know, that’s Michael Moore’s opinion. He’s entitled to say that. I’ve seen—he’s not the only person who’s said that. I’ve not followed up on those facts. And frankly, it’s not relevant to me and why I’m in this campaign.

In my opinion if he'd wanted to hit a homerun he would have said something to Jennings like - "you're a reporter, why don't you do a little research and tell the American public what you come up with, I'm sure Michael Moore would be glad to lend you a hand."

Now, that would have been a home run!

[democratreformed]

9. Thanks, I was about to point this out n/t

[Feanorcurufinwe]

11. I'm sorry, but that's the worst thing he could say to persuade me

to vote for him.

Because straight-up, I do not believe that Clark does not know the facts about Bush being AWOL. It is just not a credible assertion to me.

[xray s]

4. Yeah...I would have said this...

"Peter, it has been reported in the mainstream press that Mr Bush did not report for duty for a period of time while he was in the National Guard. I do not know why that has never been further investigated, or why Mr Bush has never been held accountable for that absence. It frustrates a lot of people, like Mike Moore. Maybe you should look into it further.

But the bottom line is, we have some major issues to deal with. Massive unemployment, American men and women dying every day in Iraq, Al Queda terrorists on the loose, 43,000,000 Americans without health insurance. And many more things that Americans are concerned about. You only give me one minute during these debates to talk to the people. Can you please ask me something that matters, please?"

[KittyWampus]

5. IMO, Jennings Pitched A Hardball Into The Box

The others threw hardballs below the belt.

[webkev]

6. after dean's speech?

http://homepage.mac.com/jonathanbarlow/.Public/howarddean.mp3

[xray s]

7. I think of them more as curves

Clark has to learn to wait on the curves. The questions are awkward, and designed to get an awkward response. He seems to be too anxious (or maybe too polite?) when he gets these questions. He answers them directly when what he has to do is turn it right back at them.
They are actually pretty easy to at least foul off, and even hit out of the park, once you develop some patience and a strategy to make contact.

A good example was the question Kerry got about throwing back the medals when he got back from VN. Kerry hit that one out of the park, IMO.

Hopefully Clark will pick up some batting tips from Kerry.

[PATRICK]

8. Analogies!

More like an "innocent" beanball. Actually to get wood on the ball is a remarkable achievement when ambushed by an unintentional wild pitch. Someone mentioned "The Daily Howler" on this travesty and it's a welcome trip to the acid showers for Jennings.

[lurk_no_more]

10. I've said it before

None of the candidates will come out and say that * is a deserter or was AWOL. It would be political suicide.

Main stream America does not believe bush did not fulfill his military obligations, the only ones that really believe * was AWOL are those that have taken the time to research fully into it, and some of those don't think it was actually AWOL since he was never officially charged.

Clark went as far as any candidate could go by not dispelling the accusation yet not embracing it either, it's out there now and will be out there for awhile.

Clark did good, and while it may wake some folks up to the truth, it takes away from Clark as being the voice of an unsubstantiated rumor about a sitting President, better this way than to be labeled a liar.


And then there were none!
” JAFO”

[Kahuna]

12. Oh Please. Clark said exactly what he should have said..

He doesn't care. Adults learn to pick their fights. This isn't his fight.

[Tactical Progressive]

13. Exactly right, he sidestepped the issue and the opportunity

Wesley's my guy, but he goofed. There are a million ways to approach every issue, and while I'll grant that this was a kind of blindside, it's not something that Wes, especially, shouldn't have been prepared to respond to forcefully. He evaded with moderate grace; that was certainly not the best he could have done.

Those of you that think that he should play it safe, or 'pick his issues' aren't seeing the larger picture. These are being made the issues in real-time by a right-wing media. They are also opportunities though.

This is what Wes should have said, to the word:

"Peter, the media has avoided reporting on George Bush's military service, so I've never been sure of exactly what happened. I know he didn't report for duty for months on end. Whether he should have been charged with desertion or being AWOL, I don't know, and I'm not going to correct anyone on their feelings about that one way or the other. Perhaps the media will take this opportunity of a second election to examine the issue this time around."

That's non-committal, like his actual response, but offensively evasive, not defensively evasive like he was. It also puts the shame where it belongs: on the media and their whitewashing of Bush liabilities.

[gulliver]

14. Sorry, but that is just completely wrong.

The facts are wrong and so is the conclusion.

Clark never said "he looked at the facts and said they're irrelevent to GWB's record in the White House." On the contrary, Clark said specifically that he had not looked at the facts and said the issue was not relevant to why he (Clark) was running.

Clark is running because Bush is a bad president and because we need someone who can win the White House for the Democrats. It's that simple, and Clark is the guy to do it. None of the other candidates compares.

And Clark's response to the Moore issue was a "home run." AWOL lives to fight where it is needed, in the general election. Don't be an ingrate. Clark deserves our thanks. Moore and Jennings too.

[NNN0LHI]

15. You ever stood in the box against a major league pitchers fastball...

...coming in at 90+ MPH and put wood on it, much less than hit a double? Or are you like me? I have only heard a few go by.

Don

[bain_sidhe]

16. I disagree

It's my understanding that according to the UCMJ, the terms AWOL and Deserter apply to *active duty* personnel. For Clark to even suggest he agreed that Bush was either would open up a field day for reporters to ask "how come a general doesn't know that?"

He answered it perfectly... "I've heard that charge, but haven't looked into it because it has nothing to do with why I'm running. However, I defend Moore's right to state his opinion."

Frankly, I'm more pissed that Jennings framed it as an "ethical" issue. So, now it's not only unpatriotic to criticize the resident, it's unethical not to defend him when others do? That sucks worm piss.

[grisvador]

17. Totally agree

He hit a bases clearing double on what was one of the nastiest sliders to be thrown last night. It is really easy to hit home runs when you have time to think about it and ponder for hours. Now lets get Jennings to do his job and investigate the facts.

It is the media's job to investigate the facts...

When will the main stream media do this since it is not popular? When we clamor for the answer. Write Peter Jennings and ask him to give the report as a 30 minute special - maybe Michael Moore can do a piece on it too.

http://more.abcnews.go.com/onair/worldnewsnow/wnn_email_form.html

Here's Michael's email and what I sent to him.

'[e-mail]'

Being a center talking point in a Presidential debate is an amazing accomplishment. I applaud Clark’s answer at deftly turning the question into a talking point on the future, not turning his back on a supporter (your support does not come cheap and he treasured it), and for staying out of the fray which made him look even more Presidential. I have been a silent Clark supporter since before the Iraq war – so, I am perhaps not 100% objective.

But getting into the fray is the media’s job – and you as a media person have done a great service by bringing an apparently dead issue back to the table with your association with Clark. I look forward to George being asked about this – and the rest of the country should demand an answer. Having made the debate I assume that you are going to pursue this issue even further – continue your pursuit for truth.



Thank you for being the controversial figure that you are.

m