It REALLY pisses me off that many Clark supporters have...

[Maddy McCall]

come around to support Howard Dean in his new role, but many of the Dean supporters here can say NOTHING nice about Wes Clark.

I gave Dean a chance, and I've even posted really nice things about him. But when threads about Clark are posted, it's always the same people using the thread to front the same old accusations about Clark. It's predictable and obvious.

I thought (under Skinner's recommendation) we all had agreed to drop the primary wars, at least until 2007. Why is that so hard to do for some people to do? Is resisting the urge to belittle and condemn Clark that difficult?

:grr:

[CarolNYC]

1. Maddy, I understand your frustration...

...but don't let a disgruntled few get you down.

There are lots of Dean supporters who have come around to support Clark too. Those of us who work together will get a lot more done than those who want to choose up sides amongst ourselves continuousy....I don't think the side choosers are the majority here though....they just may sound the loudest.

Shout out to all the Dean supporters who support Clark too and all of the Clark supporters who support Dean too....and all the Kerry and Kucinich supporters, etc, etc, etc, etc....you get the picture. :hi:

[Maddy McCall]

5. That's right. Dividing us is what hands the Republicans victory.

Thanks for your post. I am taking it to heart. :hug:

[CarolNYC]

26. And if you ask me, the pissiest ones...

are pissed because there are Dean supporters who like Clark and Clark supporters who like Dean...Go figure on the motivation for that mindset.

[Andromeda]

125. I don't think there are as as many as it seems.

They're just noisy. :) I was (and still am) a Dean supporter during the primaries but I ALWAYS loved Clark.

I'm not making any judgements about Clark being on FOX because I'm glad that a Democrat with the stature of Clark has been asked to be an analyst.

Before we jump to any conclusions about FAUX's motives we have to remember that General Clark is his own man and I don't expect him to be used as a tool for the GOP.

[Cha]

86. Thanks for your

perspective!

I'm especially grateful that Clark defended Dean after the dinos came out with their whines and had nothing to say when dickcheney said as far as he could see ..Dean hadn't won anything and "maybe his mother loved him but no one he met liked him.

I wish Clark luck on faux..it will be so interesting to read on DU how that evolves.

Like an astute DUer said..Clark's a Four Star General..he should know more about strategy than the average bear(my words).

[CarolNYC]

131. hey zidzi!

:hi:

The Fox thing should be interesting to say the least....but I trust he knows what he's doing.

And as for Cheney and his comments...well, he's just a.....dick! hehe

Hey, I've been getting invites to Spitzer events but haven't been able to afford one yet...Go Eliot! (Sorry for the OT NY sidestep :) )

[wtmusic]

2. You must be talking about me

Is this a favor that I am supposed to return?

I've never supported Wes Clark since he gave his gushy analysis for CNN. And his new gig for Fox confirms for me that Wes is a media whore whose public position follows the paycheck.

The fact that Howard is still saying what he thinks despite massive criticism doesn't really require me to support Clark now, does it?

[karynnj]

21. Shouldn't we wait to see what Clark actually does on FOX

I admit I don't trust FOX, but if Clark is given even reasonable control over his microphone, this has to be good for Democrats. It makes no sense to complain that we have no voice on cable, then to call someone who was very well spoken as a surrogate for Kerry last year names because he has signed with FOX.

I think it's brave of him to venture into such hostile terrain and wish him success in getting out a voice that differs from Bush.

[CarolNYC]

28. well said, karynnj

I agree...Thanks for giving him a chance. I believe he knows what he's doing and I believe it's a very brave thing that he's doing.

[politicasista]

57. You have to have a strong stomach (LOL!) watch Faux

Let's just be glad that he, Kerry, Boxer, Conyers, Kennedy, and Dean are speaking up against this pathetic propaganda sham network.

[wtmusic]

29. That's one way to look at it

but signing with them is a tacit endorsement, is it not? Shouldn't Clark be doing what Dean has done, and tell the truth about FOX--that they're a "propaganda outlet for the Republican party"?

I try to not be mean in these threads, but Clark's actions confirm everything I've been saying about him for over a year, and the faithful still refuse to see it.

[Maddy McCall]

40. You are incredibly naive if you really believe that...

his signing on with them is some kind of endorsement of Fox. Like the poster said above, we gripe that the media has silenced Dem voices, but we insult the Dem who takes the opportunity to speak on a Republican forum.

Maybe YOU think that we can win without crossover votes, but I know that this is not possible. I also spoke to a person with the Clark team yesterda, and he told me that Clark is working toward a strategy where Florida won't be pivotal.

I applaud him for luring crossover votes. But I guess you would rather lose again.

[wtmusic]

62. Well I guess that takes us back to the old debate

of standing up for ideals vs. being a realist, which never seems to get very far.

Maddy, I'm not going to call you naive and I'm not going to accuse you of believing you'd "rather lose". But I will say this--the "crossover" thing works both ways. Perhaps FOX is thinking that by having Clark on their channel they may get a lot of conservative Democrats to turn on FOX. They are, at least to a certain extent, paying Clark for his credibility with Democrats, and you can either believe that FOX has somehow developed an open mind for anti-administration points of view, or they will spin whatever he has to say for their own purposes.

I don't fault Clark for wanting to make a living, but I do fault him for taking money from FOX. It's blood money, and no one with an ounce of self-respect should go near them.

[KittyWampus]

80. Oh Please, People Watch Fox. Get Over It. If Dean Had Signed OnTo Do

commentary on CNN, and there was talk of him doing it, what would be the fucking difference?

CNN or Fox? What's the fucking difference, except CNN is more insidious because some STILL falsely percieve it as liberal or even neutral?

And more people watch Fox and they are not all GOP'ers.

If you stepped outside the Leftist Circle Jerk, you'd realise that.

[wtmusic]

84. Where was the "talk"? From you?

I guess Dean didn't do it and Wes did. There's your difference.

It's hilarious to me that all the Wes supporters are now acting like FOX is not so bad. Whatever paddles your boat. :D

[KittyWampus]

100. The Issues Isn't Fox Isn't So Bad. It's That CNN Is JUST AS BAD.

If not worse since it's still percieved by many as being liberal or neutral.

and if you're going to say DU'ers never discussed Dean having a talk show you're either disingenous or dishonest.

One time I remember VERY well is after he was on tv with Bev doing a demonstration of BBV.

[Crunchy Frog]

117. I agree with you about CNN being worse in some way.

Personally, I hate them both, and that's why I cancelled my cable and never watch watch them. As a matter of fact, I'm currently boycotting all corporate media, and I count NPR in that category too.

That being said, FAUX news veiwers are not all RWers. At my local community college, for example, there is a huge dining/study area that has two TVs on all the time, and they are almost always tuned to FAUX.

To tell you the truth, I'm really not sure about this latest move on Wes's part. I'm going to reserve judgement until I see how it actually plays out.

I think it's nuts to think he's just in it for the money though. For someone with his qualifications, there are ways to make massive piles of money that are far easier than something like this.

I think he's doing what he believes will help advance our cause. It remains to be seen whether he's right or not.

The haters will never alter their opinion of him, and it's futile to try to argue with them IMO.

[windbreeze]

134. I agree with you, etc...

Crunchy...I didn't take out my cable, but when I realized how sneakily biased CNN was....I decided I had had it with cable news, that was almost a year ago...BUT...there are millions out there who live for these news channels...and the trash they sell to the majority as real, honest to god truth...

For those who think Clark is doing this for money...they forget one thing...we are talking about a 4 Star General here...and strategy is what they know best..when you can't fight the enemy from the outside...you infiltrate and fight from within...

I think maybe this calls for stepping back and taking a deep breath..and have confidence that Clark knows what he is doing, and that it is basically about getting his/our point across to those who haven't been thinking so clearly for the last 5 years or so...I wish him the best of luck...and think the move was brilliant...
windbreeze

[FourStarDemocrat]

137. Clark is bringing his arguments over to Fox so it's viewers can hear them.

It's as simple as that. It's part of a strategy that he's had for many months ago (and that I've heard described firsthand from him in fact) to get progressive world views on right wing republican media. It has nothing to do with Faux credibility or legitimacy. It's about getting the message out to people who would not otherwise hear those points, because Faux is the only way they get their news. Clark would guest on the Rush Limbaugh show if offered for the same reason.

[Clarkie1]

124. That's such a naive statement.

It's not an endorsement of anything.

Get real.

[Dinger]

129. Maybe, Just Maybe, The Tide Really Is Turning

When I hear Bill Schneider say how bad this is for bu$h (DSM), and that it won't go away, and it's picking up more steam all the time, well, I'm starting to believe. Faux (Their Faux till I say otherwise) "News" Network doesn't want to lose thier market share, and possibly they see something coming. Come to think of it, this is kind of a nice little "fuck you" to CNN. Ha ha ha! Half of them (or more) will probably start watching Clark when ever they can sneak a peek.
Folk, I feel it, I really do. The tide is turning, and coming from a skeptic (me), that's saying something.

[RetroLounge]

3. Well, genersalize all you want (no pun intended)

but this Dean supporter has always supported General Clark, and I will now wait and see if his jump to Faux News is a sellout or something else.

RL

[Maddy McCall]

7. I'm not talking about you or about Dean supporters as a whole.

It's just that frequently it's the same names from back in the primary wars that pop up now with condemnations of Clark.

I thought we had left all of that behind. I have held no ill will against anyone I volleyed with in 2004 during the Clark/Dean wars. I was hoping that civility would hold.

:hi: :hug:

[RetroLounge]

14. You are assuming they are really Dem supporters

just saying...

:hi:

RL

[Maddy McCall]

15. True...

I have suspicions about a couple, but I'll keep my pie hole shut. :D

[MuseRider]

19. I think if you look

they pop up on every thread about anyone but Dean. Just sayin. There seems to be a rotation with all of the other candidates. Must be the week for Clark.

I like Clark. He has done some really good work for us. He gave a great speech here in Topeka, he was great to listen to. This move to Fox should prove very interesting. I won't be watching anything on Fox but I will be very interested to hear how that goes. This may be a very good move.

:hi: Maddy

[Maddy McCall]

22. Hi, Muse!

Yeah, I had noticed that there is consistency with those posters. I had assumed that it was the first engagement with politics for many of them. But it goes on, and on, and on....

:hi:

[Crunchy Frog]

119. Hey Maddy. They're a tiny minority who seem bigger than they

really are, just because they can be so vocal. Some of them seem to be here for no other reason than to foment divisiveness between Democrats, and to hate on everyone but Dean (something that I can't imagine, in my wildest dreams, that our DNC Chair would approve of).

Whether it just makes them feel self righteous and important, or if they're still bitterly living in the primaries, or whether there's something more than that to it, the important thing to remember is that they are a tiny minority, and represent nobody but themselves.

There will always be a handfull of people who can't let go of their bitterness. The important thing is not to give them the power of spoiling this board for the rest of us.:hi:

PS. Please read my sig lines.

[blm]

4. I think we should all be PROUD that they are all out there sticking their

necks out to challenge BushInc when it's alot easier these days to quit and make money off your name.

Those who bash Dean, Clark, Kerry, Kucinich or Edwards constantly and usually armed with rightwing talking points hyped up by the media, are not here at DU doing their best to serve democracy, imo.

[Cha]

89. I don't like it, either! The freakin'

primaries have been over for a while now..and we need to band together to Get Our Country Back!

Constructive criticism is one thing but this constant harping and dogging threads is not only not productive..it's DESTRUCTIVE!

Thanks, blm! :toast:

[aintitfunny]

6. I supported Dean and Like Clark

Nothing either has done has changed my support or respect. I think Clark should be on Fox giving his assessment, it is about time and it will build his audience. Had he been the nominee I would have supported him whole-heartedly.

[Maddy McCall]

10. Thank you.

Like I said above, it's not everyone, just a choice few.

I appreciate your words. I'm proud of Dean AND Clark. :hi:

[SkepticalThomas]

8. Clark

Maddy, Don't let a few naysayers represent all of us Deanites. I'm a Dean supporter and I have a great deal of admiration for Clark.

I wouldn't mind voting for either one.

ST

[Maddy McCall]

11. Welcome to DU, SkepticalThomas.

:toast: Thanks for your kind comment. I would gladly vote for either, also.

[bigwillq]

110. Welcome to DU!

Welcome aboard fellow Deaniac!:hi:

[pacalo]

9. I hear ya, Maddy...

Though I support all Democrats, I share your frustration when I hear remarks against John Kerry.

The way I look at it, I appreciate any help we can get, regardless of who they are. We need to remember that we're all in the same boat with a common goal: To get rid of the albatross in the WH in order to save our country from all the disasters he's created, both domestically & in foreign affairs. Isn't that reason enough to stand by all Democrats?

[Maddy McCall]

13. With few exceptions, I agree.

Unless, of course, it's Zell or Lieberman being discussed. ;-)

[pacalo]

59. Oops! You got that right!

[wakeme2008]

12. I support BOTH....

Clark for President.. Dean for head of DNC....

:)

[Maddy McCall]

25. With any luck...

we will have a great Dem candidate in 08. :D

[DoveTurnedHawk]

16. It's All About Perspective, I See a TON of Deaniacs Supporting Clark Now

So I don't really know what prompted this.

There are a couple of bad apples in every group. But I think a lot of Dean folks have embraced General Clark here, and I'm grateful for it.

DTH

[Maddy McCall]

17. Yeah, it's the bad apples.

I'm sick of seeing their same posts in every Clark thread.

And I am glad to see the posts of people in this thread who support both candidates. It really made my day, and it gives me hope that 2008 won't be a replay of 2004.

[Village Idiot]

18. I dunno...what have you got to say now?

I mean....I supported BOTH, but what can you say now that Dean's kicking ReThuglican ass in the Senate and Clarke is going to be the new military shill....er...advisor for FAUX-News?

[Maddy McCall]

20. Like a moth to a flame.

[Village Idiot]

24. Couldn't help myself, I suppose...

Too late to say "I'm sorry?"

I LIKE Wes Clarke, too.

I was incredibly disappointed over Dr. Dean's loss, however, so I am very happy to see his work in the Senate pay off...

I suppose there's a good reason I chose the "Village IDIOT" userid...

[CarolNYC]

30. hehe, Village I....

Give Clark a chance and see what he does, OK? You don't even have to tune into Fox. My guess is that a lot of his appearances will be up on www.u-wes-a.com.

BTW, it's Clark, not ClarkE. :hi:

And I'm glad to see the good work that Dean is doing as Chariman also. :)

[Stinky The Clown]

102. Dean in the Senate??? Did I miss something?

:shrug:

[Mz Pip]

139. It's a bit too soon

to tell if Clark will be a shill, don't you think?

Dean can rev up the base but we need more than just the base to actually win. We need independents, moderates and yes, believe it or not Republicans to vote Democratic.

If Clark can sway some of those voters to our side then I don't care what you call him - shill, advisor, whatever. If it works and he can provide some insight and balance on a cable channel that has been pandering solely to the Right, more power to him.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[LittleClarkie]

23. I'm posting from a cable kiosk

and so don't have much time.

But let me lend my voice to those calling for unity. Some, some mind you, Dean supporters have a bug up their butt about Clark and Clarkies. And that's a shame. I'm sure with some Clarkies, some mind you, the feeling is mutual. The postings I've seen on some other forums were childish and divisive. I hope they are in the minority.

I support Kerry, Clark, and Dean. Give them a chance folks.

[Maddy McCall]

31. Hi, LC!

Gotta agree with you. Some just aren't giving him a chance and see everything he does as a Republican machination.

Before I am a Clark supporter, I am a Democrat. :hi:

[XemaSab]

27. I'm 100% behind Howard Dean

But I also really like General Clark. It's too bad that such good candidates had to come along at the same moment, and we had to pick between them. I think they would have made a terrific ticket, either as Clark/Dean or as Dean/Clark, and I look forward to hearing a lot from both of them in the future.

I don't know why Clark's decided to join Faux, but he's a smart man and he'll make the best of it, I'm sure. The man's not a sellout, so maybe he'll actually bring some gravitas to the place.

:hi:

[Maddy McCall]

32. Hi, XemaSab

I am hoping that his appearances on Pox will lure a lot of crossover voters to our side. I hope it's a political move for him. I think that the more exposure for Dems, the better.

Thanks for posting. :hi:

[FrenchieCat]

33. Clark AND Dean

are no Tools or Fools.

They are both doing what needs to be done prior to 2006--reaching the voting public....whether it's the base or the middle or the Know-nothings.

It's a dirty job, and somebody's got to do it. The Pink Tu-tus won't....so that leaves us only a few, including Wes and Howard.

My favority MLK quote applies to both men:

The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.--Martin Luther King Jr.--1963

They both examplify MLK's vision by measuring up!

Let some of the Dems run and hide from Howard Dean....
and let others fear that Clark is somehow doing that he shouldn't do.
They are both doing what they can do....based on their capacity.

Like Dr. Fate said....let those primetime politicians get our message out by speaking out on whatever venue they can. If not them, then who?

:hi:

[Maddy McCall]

47. Yes, that quotation applies, as does one that my father oft says.

"A wise man knows when to bend; a fool never does."

[janx]

34. I like Clark. But this Faux News schtick is pretty hard to swallow. n/t

[FrenchieCat]

36. and why is that?

you give your objection without reason.

[ibegurpard]

44. Because they can say "See? We have a former Democratic candidate

working for us. How can we be biased towards the right?"
Anyone who thinks that a message that Rupert Murdoch, INC. doesn't approve of is going to get out is naive.

[FrenchieCat]

49. So to you....it doesn't matter if a few million get to hear a voice of

reason they may not have otherwise heard?

So to you the best election strategy is to sing to the choir and ignore those who might be able to get us back what we want?


You're not interested in attempts to win back congress in red and purple states?

Are you interested in only being "right" about "what" then?

Bottomline is we need the truth to be told.....and Faux viewers need more than most others.

How do we do that? What's your strategy?

[janx]

53. Faux News does not allow Democrats--or anyone else--

to say whatever they want to say. I mentioned this to you in another thread. Those cable programs are *scripted,* Frenchie.

It's like that time I mentioned Judy Woodruff. The questions she asks and the things she says are WRITTEN in advance. They have writers for these things. Hell, even on that God awful Crossfire, which strived to look spontaneous, they had a teleprompter for pete's sake.

If--for instance--I thought for one minute that Clark would be given, by Faux News, a venue by which to state that the reasons for the Iraq War were bogus, that the war itself, from its conception, was a disaster, I'd believe as you do.

Do you REALLY think they're going to do that?

[FrenchieCat]

63. I've seen Clark on Fox before....and on CNN and MSNBC

He has always said what he wanted to say. He spoke of PNAC on MSNBC....and on CNN.

You haven't seen a "contract"....yet you know what's in it? I think that you are presupposing based on very little.

Again, don't give Clark the benefit of the doubt...afterall, you never truly have.

I say again....that time will tell all.

As I consider you a liberal, I am surprised that you would judge beforehand....as opposed to keeping an "open" mind and waiting to see what happens. It's not like it won't be long from now.

In addition, what's your strategy in winning congressional seats in purple and red states? Is it to ignore a segment of the population that is misinformed and not hearing Democratic voices.....but rather hearing Republicans describe Democrats as "caricature".

If I recall, Howard Dean said that we had to appeal to the south...have a 50 state strategy......

Please let us know your strategy in achieving a victory for Democrats in 2006. I'd like to know what your ideas are.

[janx]

67. Don't tell me what I have and have not thought about Clark.

I've always liked Wes Clark and have refrained from critizing him. The fact that you pounce on anyone and everyone who might not agree with him on any one point is very telling.

There are die-hard Clarkies who are less than pleased with this decision. It's not just me.

[FrenchieCat]

70. If this is pouncing.....

then so be it. I apologize to you if that's what you read from my posts.

You have always liked Clark? K....

I am really glad though...that you got rid of the "4 Stars" you had in your sig line for a minute or two....and decided to only adopt one.

As I recall the exact post when your 4 stars showed up as part of your sig...and how you ridiculed Clark supporters in stating that they are shining and twirly, etc...

So now I know that it was all in good fun, and that you have "always" really liked Clark.

In that case, I say....Peace to you and Yours....and again, accept my apologies for unfairly "pouncing" on you. I was obviously "out of line". :hi:

[janx]

108. I have a sneaking suspicion

that my fun and games with RummyisFrosted and spinning star graphics did not ridicule most of the Clark supporters on this board.

[Larkspur]

35. I don't trust Clark and he's given me no reason to do so.

And won't support him for any Prez run until he runs as a Democrat for a civilian political office lower than Prez, wins that office, runs the affairs of that office well, and wins re-election at least once as a Democrat.

That has always been my condition for considering to support Clark's higher ambitions. He needs to prove himself to me that he's made the transition from military governance to civilian governance and the Prez office is not the office I want him to practice with.

[FrenchieCat]

38. I know that you have never "liked" or trusted Wes Clark.....

Having said that.....what do you think of him going on Faux?

[Larkspur]

39. Check my post on this Clark on Faux News thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1859223&mesg_id=1859239

[FrenchieCat]

46. Your post only shows that you are not willing to give Clark

any benefit of the doubt....not even about running for Prez, mind you...but for everything that he might do.

I guess that we need some of your type (give benefit of doubt to Dean only)....to call ourselves a "Big tent".

No problem...because in the end, time will tell all.

[Larkspur]

56. That's right. I won't give Clark any benefit of my doubts about him

because he hasn't earned them.

[FrenchieCat]

65. PoppyCock.....

Your bias and lack of true liberalism are showing.

But that's no surprise.

Afterall, this thread was for those who have "principles" like yours.

[Larkspur]

78. Being a liberal doesn't mean blindly following leaders

I gave you my legit requirements for Clark to earn my support. You can ignore them all you want, but I won't change my position on Clark for Prez until he shows that he is willing to do what I suggest.

[wtmusic]

87. key word: "blindly"

seems to be particularly apropos in this thread

[FrenchieCat]

91. or reactionary.....

that might be an even key word.

That is, those who form opinions based on predisposed ideas and prejudices, but want to call themselves Liberals.

[Name removed]

104. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Crunchy Frog]

120. See Maddy? Only a tiny handful of really loud ones.

Not representative at all, and not anything to get upset about.:D

[Warpy]

37. Clark's not doing you any favors

by signing with Fox. That's going to make it even more of an uphill battle to win support for him on this board.

As it stands, Clark was brought in by the DLC to counter Dean, an independent who switched his registration when they approached him to run.

He may be supremely qualified to run, but he's been tainted by his association with the DLC.

There is a power struggle going on in the party right now. If Clark ends up on the winning side, he'll have plenty of support if he decides to run again.

[FrenchieCat]

43. Should Clark be pandering to the base and only playing safe?

Is that what you want from a leader?

Maybe Clark doesn't care so much about the primaries to where he feels like he just has to "Please" the base (I'm sure he knows how we feel about Faux....after all his son knows this very well as he posts on Kos and on DU). Maybe Clark understands that it's not just about the 2008 primaries.

Maybe Clark is not doing himself and his supporters any favors...but maybe a voice of reason on a channel like Faux will get a piece of the Democratic message out to the dodo heads. Maybe that will help those running in 2006....especially in Red States, where Faux is everywhere (including the gyms).

So some will judge Clark as having nefarious motives....while others will understand that he is actually doing the opposite of what might be "good for him" primary wise. Bottomline is that Clark has never done what was easy. Why should he start now?

[Maddy McCall]

45. Clark has something that some people here don't.

Foresight.

[Larkspur]

58. Ha Ha Ha Ha. That's a good joke.

[Jai4WKC08]

74. He who laughs last.... n/t

[CarolNYC]

50. Bingo!

More important to Clark than how his moves will look to other people is how he can best help save this country. You listen to Clark talk about the state this country's in and you can see he thinks we're in dire straits and something needs to be done to save it.

He's not one to play it safe or shy away from doing whatever he thinks it will take. Apparently, lots of others here, even those with all the fire and bluster, are.

He knows what he's doing. It won't be easy. And it's not the "safe" move but he knows what he's doing. He's willing to take more than a little heat to do what he thinks is right.

[returnable]

51. Excellent point.

Clark's presence on Fox could help Dems in 2006, and that really should be the focus.

I stated in another Clark-on-Fox thread (in LBN) that I have concerns about his new job's impact on a potential 2008 campaign, but I suppose that's putting the cart before the horse.

[AaronforAmerica]

54. News to Me

After all my time working for him in Little Rock, this "association with the DLC" sure is news to me....

on another note, check out this petition site that several of us former clark staffers recently put up:

www.stopjohnbolton.com

[Maddy McCall]

60. Hi, Aaron.

Welcome to DU! :toast:

Do you know any of Clark's staffers that worked in Tenn. during the last election? A good friend of mine, an African American from Mississippi, was on his staff in Tennessee. We talked about Clark's strategy yesterday. Seems like everything is falling in line. :D

[KittyWampus]

83. If Clark Is "Tainted" But Whatever Mythical Assoc. W/DLC You Dreamed Up

then Dean is 'tainted' two fold for the Koch Bros. money that he is factually known to have recieved to seed his Primary Campaign.

[ibegurpard]

41. What kind of support are you looking for?

What do you want from people? When he gets lambasted by the right and the media for saying things that I agree with, then I will be right there defending him.
Other than that, what am I supposed to support? His decision to go to work for FOX News? Thereby lending a certain amount of legitimacy to its claims of being fair and balanced? Sorry, no can do. I would be extremely disappointed if Dean were to make a similar decision.
It seems to me that what some of you want is a commitment to support him in a run for '08. That's the last thing we need to be thinking about right now, in my opinion. The party is in bad shape and that's what we need to concentrate on right now.

[FrenchieCat]

52. Or maybe Clark is thinking about 2006?

Is that possible?

Looking at Red and Purple states.....and the hundreds of congressional seats at stake for us to regain power....

What do you suggest? What's your strategy to winning back congress?

[Larkspur]

61. Or he's thinking about a Frist/Clark '08 run

:evilgrin:

[FrenchieCat]

66. Yeah...right....

You understand how ridiculous that sounds, don't you?

I think, as a Clark hater and basher, you are hurting you own cause.

Pity that your strategy lacks any real suggestion on how to win back the congress in 2006. shouldn't that be your goal?

[Larkspur]

77. You have no sense of (dark) humor.

As far as winning back Congress, I support Dean's vision for a better, more people orientated Democratic Party, and a Party that will offer real opposition to the Repuke horde.

[FrenchieCat]

90. My "dark" humor is really "Black" humor....as that is what I am....

But back to the topic.

How is Dean's vision a different strategy than what Clark might be doing on Fox in getting a message different from the RW message to those who might not otherwise hear it? Didn't Dean say that we need a 50 state strategy....and that we need to appeal to those with confederate flags on their trucks?
Did he change his mind?
And if not, how is that done?

[Larkspur]

94. The difference is that Dean is willing to do the nuts & bolts of

rebuilding the Dem Party from the grassroots up. A lot of those nuts & bolts are not glamorous.

Clark feeds his ego by going in front of the cameras on Faux News.

If Clark wants to be the Dem Prez nominee, he should do what Arnie did, run for governor of his state of residence but as a Democrat. If Clark doesn't want to be Prez, then fine, he can go on Faux News but he won't convince Faux viewers to support Dems. I work with some of those people and nothing you say or facts you show them will convert them to supporting Dems and progressives. I use those people for debating practice.

[Jai4WKC08]

107. Clark is doing more than his share of the heavy lifting

Clark is working with Hill Democrats, helping draft legistlation, teaching what he knows about how to make Democrats look strong. He is participating in conferences, discussions and working groups. He is writing op/eds for national publications. He is raising money for the party and for Democratic candidates. He is speaking out, in person and in the media.

Taking our message to Fox is another way Clark will serve our party and our cause. A lot of Fox viewers will have to vote for Democrats in 2006 or we stand NO chance of taking back all or part of Congress. And I don't care how many of "those people" you work with, if you think a significant percentage of them cannot be brought back to our party if they can only hear the truth, you're delusional.

Both Clark and Dean are doing what they do best for the Democratic Party. They have different talents and experiences. It would be stupid to suggest they should contribute in identical ways.

Do you honestly think for a minute that Dean would criticize Clark for going on Fox News? Not a chance. Dean is far more interested in winning elections than attacking other Democrats.

[Mz Pip]

142. You know all the

Faux News viewers personally? That is truly amazing. Maybe "some" of the viewers won't be swayed by Clark. Maybe some will. I suspect that that is what he is counting on.

It does sound like he has a better shot of swaying some of the Faux viewers than he does you. So don't watch him. Don't bother to make an informed decision based on what he does or does not do on Faux News.

Mz Pip:dem:

[Crunchy Frog]

121. Or maybe he wants to do what he can to support a future Frist/Dean

ticket. I apologize for stooping to the level of the post I was responding to, but I just couldn't help myself.:evilfrown:

For the record, I don't really think that Dean is any more likely than Clark to team up with Frist. Some kinds of posts just bring out the worst in me, which I'm sure is exactly what their intention is.

[longship]

42. It's natural and normal to draw lines on candidates

I think and hope that we will all fully support any Democratic Presidential nominee. But there are so many choices for the nominee it's natural for all of us to draw lines somewhere. For instance, I like Clark and Gore but not Kerry or Clinton. That doesn't mean that I won't support Kerry or Clinton, but that I wouldn't choose them as the nominee.

I have not always kept my keyboard quiet about my oppositions to Kerry and Clinton in these forums. But I will start doing so now. I will no longer interject my opposition to Democratic candidates unless that opinion is specifically solicited.

[Jai4WKC08]

48. Gee, it's not like he doesn't have a track record at Fox

It's beyond me how anyone can assume that he'll roll over to the Fox agenda and not speak the truth. Clark is a fighter, with that "great streak of integrity" as Sy Hersch described. Seems to me the people who won't give him a chance now, never have and never will.

Take a look at this account from News Hounds ("We Watch FOX So You Don't Have To"):

Way to Go, Wesley Clark!
General Wesley Clark proved that a Democrat CAN hold a FOX host at bay.

During an interview that aired June 25, 2004 (5:03 PM) Gibson consistently tried to interrupt the General's comments. But Clark just kept talking and Gibson never got to ask his usual "big" questions, ones that frequently mimic the RNC's talking points.

Clark had some pointed and important things to say to the FOX viewers about the war in Iraq and how it was bungled. He also elaborated on the dismal job we've been doing in our foreign relations and briefly presented the European side of the issues.

This did not go over well with Gibson, who is a total xenophobe (which means "one fearful of foreigners"). He seems to think that everyone in the rest of the world is out to get us, especially - dare I say it? - France! The title of his new book sums it up: Hating America: The New World Sport.

It was refreshing to see an articulate, experienced guest express a moderate viewpoint concisely and clearly.

It was especially gratifying to hear it with no FOX Partyspeak interjected at inappropriate times!

http://www.newshounds.us/2004/06/27/way_to_go_wesley_clark.php

[janx]

55. He is working for Faux, not the other way around. n/t

[FrenchieCat]

68. Which means?

That? and?

What's your 2006 congressional strategy? Cause I know what Clark's is.

How do we get Democrats to win in places where Republicans currently hold seats? How do we reach them? Do we sing to the choir and cross our fingers and hope they also hear? Do we just wish that bad things happen to our country to prove our point? That more service people die in Iraq? Please do tell!

[Jai4WKC08]

73. You have no basis to say that

Clark has always used Fox for his own purposes. There's no reason to think he's not doing so now.

And fwiw, he's an independent contractor, not an employee.

[Larry in KC]

76. I thought you knew Wes Clark?

In the semantic sense that they'll give him money, he is "working" for them.

In the much more important senses of what he'll actually do (based on his past, ALL of his past), he'll be working for us. The "Daniel in the lions' den" analogy going around is pretty good. He's taking risks for us, and very few other Democrats have the mental gifts, the credentials, and the sort of charisma to make it succeed (some whom most of us respect would be a disaster for us in that setting). Wes Clark has those gifts, and the will to use them for us.

He'll be speaking truth to power, as always, and also truth to a large audience, many of whom aren't the caricature of Faux viewers that we so often assume (TRUE STORY: I have a strongly Democratic friend, a middle-aged schoolteacher, who's quite interested in politics but not a highly analytical person; I just learned she often watches Faux because it's handy, although she had vaguely wondered about their apparent bias. There are more like her out there watching Faux regularly or occasionally than we'd like to think).

Clark's commentary there brings a liberal viewpoint to these masses of viewers from someone they'll respect and learn to know as a no-nonsense voice of reason, and one who has certainly walked the walk.

By the same token, it makes him real and respected to those many viewers, not an unknown quantity that right-wing propaganda can turn into a cartoon character, as they've pretty handily done with our recent nominees. Not bad as 2008 approaches, not bad at all.

And they're paying him to do it.

Maybe they're not working for him, but I do think they're playing into his hands (and ours).

[Maddy McCall]

79. Brilliant post.

If I've never told you, WELCOME to DU. :toast:

[Larry in KC]

92. Thanks, Maddy! I'm proudly blushing.

And thanks for your welcome. Let me return the compliment by saying that yours are some of the messages I thoroughly enjoy reading.

[janx]

93. It's less that I don't trust Wes Clark than it is that I don't trust Faux

News. n/t

[Jai4WKC08]

103. Oh well... I don't trust Faux either

But I think Clark is smarter than they give him credit for. Probably more than you do too.

The media has to be dealt with. When it comes down to it, CNN, MSNBC and the rest aren't much to the left of Fox, and not at all more to be trusted. They take their talking points from the WH too, they just have to be a little more clever in how they present them.

So should Democrats just roll over and say, "the media is unfair and can't be trusted and too powerful to change"? Or do we do the best we can to beat them at their own game?

I don't think there's anyone better prepared to play their game than Wes Clark. And probably no one who could take it to Fox.

Don't get me wrong. Media reform has to happen many different levels. Clark knows that too. One of his first actions after the Nov election was to take a slap at the FCC, and to do it in such a way it was hard for even the most rightwing nut-cases to argue with.

I think this is just one more way he's trying bell the cat.

He told Tweety (paraphrasing here): "No Chris! You play hardball with ME!" And he backed it up too. Clark has never taken shit from the media, and he's not about to start now.

[demokatgurrl]

64. Well you'll never see Dean signing on with Fox-

Clark apparently has done so (see LBN board). What a disappointment.

[FrenchieCat]

71. What are you disappointed about?

That maybe by 2006.....purple state voters will have heard the truth about the Iraq War and the rest of our F&cked up Foreign policy?

What's your "strategy" in winning back congress in 2006?

Apart from you, I read many being disappointed...but no one answering this question that I keep on posing.

[wtmusic]

75. Did Clark tell the truth on CNN in 2003?

Though I saw him many times, I must have missed that episode...:eyes:

[Jai4WKC08]

82. Yes, he did

Every damn time he spoke.

But I suppose you think you know more about military stuff than Clark does.
:eyes:

[wtmusic]

97. Oh, I wasn't referring to how many cruise missiles we have

I was talking about whether or not we ought to be going to war. Don't recall him offering an opinion on that.

BTW, you could use a few more pics of Wes in your sig. :eyes:

[Jai4WKC08]

105. Too bad you missed it

Pay closer attention this time and you might learn something.

Clark testified before BOTH Houses of Congress that we shouldn't be going to war. He published thousands (probably tens or hundreds of thousands) of words that said we shouldn't be going to war. Everyone who listened to him knew he thought we shouldn't be going to war. In the very NYT article where he caught shit for an alleged (and always out of context) flip-flop on the war, he is very specifically quoted as saying, "But Dean was right" (about not going to war). I'd venture to say Clark has more time on air and more lines of print saying we shouldn't have gone to war than any other Democrat alive.

But you asked about CNN in 2003. Here's how one right-wing source reports it:

Wesley Clark: General Issues
By Lowell Ponte
FrontPageMagazine.com | August 25, 2003

"THE GUY MUST HAVE A BEDROOM AT CNN,” my wife would joke. It seemed true, because at every hour of the day or night during the Iraq War, retired General Wesley K. Clark could be seen on the Cable News Network as a “military expert” criticizing the Bush Administration.

A quick victory in Iraq “was not going to happen,” he told viewers on March 25 <2003>, shortly before the quickest blitzkrieg victory of its size in military history occurred. But his words doubtless brought comfort to the fans of a network slanted so far to the Left that the most asked question about its name is whether the “C” in CNN stands for Clinton, Castro or Communist News Network.



http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=9522

And whadya know. A "quick victory" didn't happen. And never could. Another Truth Clark has told over and over again.

Did he speak the same truth, every day, every segment that aired? Do you really think CNN would have allowed that? Remember, he was just another retired general in 2003. He didn't have the power to set the terms of his contract the way he does now.

But isn't it funny that the RW goons understood what Clark was saying, even back then, but you missed it. And now you would do their work for them by tearing him down for what he did say.

You asked did Clark tell the truth on CNN. Your turn. Why don't you tell me when he ever lied?

[wtmusic]

114. Is FrontPageMag the best you can do?

Yeah, I guess to some wingnuts it sounded like Wes was really a damn libruhl, for saying radical things like a "quick victory was not going to happen," then picking up a big paycheck.

Do I give a damn if CNN would have allowed him criticizing the war? I don't even care about him hopping on CNN's gravy train, no questions asked, while they were cheerleading the troops on to slaughtering 100K Iraqis. I just don't see any particular difference between him and Halliburton, except with Wes there seems to be some myth that he was outspoken against the war. He wasn't.

Wes said "Dean was right", not "I was right". That should tell you something.

[Name removed]

118. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FrenchieCat]

88. I refutiated this comment of yours before....

or have you just forgotten?

You called Clark a "Whore" in a previous post....even before the fact that he would do "faux" was announced.

If I recall, you didn't respond when I posted PROOF about the fact that Clark did speak out on CNN.... and provided you with evidence.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1845057&mesg_id=1846900

So now, please tell us. What's your real agenda?

[wtmusic]

99. I called Wes a whore *before* FOX was announced?

I'm more prescient than I thought...;-)

[FrenchieCat]

140. Not a clue.....

not a clue....

and the beauty? Time will tell all.

[roguevalley]

113. Who better to diss a war than a four star general? If the people

who watch fox are superficial and shiny object oriented, that will count. That they hear the truth from him is icing on the cake. My boy, Josh, served under him in Kosovo and he told me that not only had he met the General and loved him, he trusted him with his life. That means much to me. General Clark could give a rat's ass about the idiots at fox. Its his forum to reach people who will be swayed. GO, CLARK!

[Maddy McCall]

72. You can try to turn this into a Clark vs. Dean thread.

Division seems to boost some DUers. However, I'm not going to argue with you about this.

[janx]

81. There are a few that seem to be heading in that direction, yes.

Why it is so is beyond me, Maddy.

[tishaLA]

69. I'm not going to let it bug me

Besides, I haven't really supported the Party Chair. But I sure as FUCK haven't bad-mouthed him, either.

Some people just use every opportunity possible to bad mouth others. It's seemingly their raison d'être.

[Adelante]

85. I don't care, Maddie, honestly

We've always known who the Clark-haters are. I'd just as soon they show themselves than not.

[formernaderite]

95. I'm sorry....are you referring to Clark of Fox news?

Cause I don't watch fake right wing news...but I'm sure he'll feel right at home there.

[LittleClarkie]

115. No actually

I anticipate that he will start a few forest fires, and if they can't take it, he will go bye bye very soon.

What you say is not fair to Clark at all. We cry because there is no one to rebutt the bastards, and when someone steps up whom they will have a hard time striking down, we call that person a turncoat.

Clark will give them what for, and how. I expect fireworks.

[sendero]

96. I've always ..

... been a staunch supporter of both. What do they have in common?

They are outside the establishment Dem structure in outlook, in rhetoric and in vision.

[Adelante]

98. Another thing they have in common is strategy

Reaching out to the lost Democrats and bringing them back home, in all 50 states. Dean can do that as Chair of the Democratic Party. Clark can do it as a Fox news commentator. Both have the same goals -- winning for the Dems in 2006 and 2008.

[Cha]

101. AMen to that Sistah!

Heretofore unheard of strategies!

[ArkDem]

106. yes

[bigwillq]

109. I support Wesley Clark

I got his back!;-)

[wyldwolf]

111. I'm loyal to the DNC

Unless the really screw up, I support them thick or then. And that includes whoever their chair is.

[Sparkly]

112. Ironically, your post brought out some fine examples.

I supported Kerry wholeheartedly when he won the nomination, I support Dean wholeheartedly as our current DNC chair, and I have enormous admiration for General Clark.

Perhaps all we can do is accept that some people -- for whatever reason -- feel a need to dredge up stale criticisms every time his name is mentioned. I think it stems from rigid-minded, narrow definitions of what "President School" has to be and what a "Military Man" must be, etc...

Not much we can do about that. People have a right to hang onto their little boxes.

(I also think some bait Clark supporters for sport.)

[WonderGrunion]

116. Sorry, I don't post much.

I think Clark is our best current option for 2008. With the General in the White House and the Doctor as our chairman, I see many years of good stuff from my party.

[stickdog]

122. Well, I like most of the things he is saying.

Not sure about this Faux News move, though, but I'm willing to give the man the benefit of the doubt.

[mandyky]

123. Let me humbly suggest

support for Dean from many (not just Clark supporters) was mainly because as chair of the DNC he promised not to run in 08. In other words, supporting him now, keeps him out of the way next prez election.

As for Clark, I still have hard feeling there, but usually do not go out of my way to discuss them. And this new gig with FOX has me really wondering.. I hope Clark represents well.

As for election 2008, we need to run Governors, not Senators or people with little political experience. Right now I am more concerned with House and Senate races in 06 and helping Dean get his 50 state strategy in place.

[Crunchy Frog]

130. Let me humbly suggest

that you are wrong about that, and that, in general, it is a mistake to try to read other people's minds, or to ascribe motives to people you don't even know.

I have been reading the many threads there have been here recently on Dean, and have seen many posters whom I know to be strong Clark supporters sounding like the most rabid Deaniacs that I've seen. That's not about wanting Dean out of the way, it's about genuinely supporting someone who they see as a genuine fighter, which is what drew many of them to their support of Clark in the first place.

I have not been weighing in on the Dean threads for the most part. I'm a little more cautious and am still in the reserving judgement phase. I'm also a little bit tired of having my motives impugned every time I post something, so I've been doing less of it lately.

I respect that for the most part you have refrained from fanning the flames of divisiveness, and find it unfortunate that you have chosen to contribute to divisiveness on this thread.

I just want to reiterate that you cannot read people's minds, and it is very insulting when you attribute motives to others whom you don't even know.

I can assure you that there are some Clarkies who don't like Dean. These people did not support him for DNC Chair, but the ones that I know of pretty much refrain from saying anything at all because they choose to not contribute to an atmosphere of dissention on this board. I have my own list of Democratic politicians that I don't like (not because they might be "competition" for Clark, but because I don't like their political positions, or the way they've chosen to lie down for the Repukes). I refrain from posting my opinions of them though, because I don't think that all of this divisiveness is helpful to anyone but the Repukes. I certainly don't try to read the minds of the people who support them.

[mandyky]

133. So I am wrong because you can read my mind?

I have responded to exactly 2 threads about Clark since the primaries, however I read a lot of them. The 2 I responded to were today. I observe, and I draw opinions.

BTW, Deaniacs aren't rabid. Rabid connotates mad dogs. This thread is divisive, read the original post again. I passed on this post all day but it kept bubbling to the top.

I reiterate that you can't read my mind. There is little inflection in posts. No offense was meant by what I said.

I am not sure not calling our own out is a good idea. (I refrain from posting my opinions of them though, because I don't think that all of this divisiveness is helpful to anyone but the Repukes.) When Democrats go against Democratic unity to side with this administration they deserve criticism. Just criticizing some one because you don't like their tie is one thing, but passing some of the stuff that has passed the last 5 years is not good.

[Crunchy Frog]

143. Sorry about my poor choice of words.

I have seen many Clark supporters, as well as people who supported other candidates in the primaries expressing very enthusiastic support for Dean in many of the recent threads. I don't believe that this expression of support has anything to do with wanting Dean "out of the way" for their own candidates. I felt that suggesting this as a motive for people's support for Dean was an attempt at mind reading, ie, attribution of motives to people who you really know nothing about. I felt that it was insulting to people who are genuinely supportive of the DNC Chair, despite the fact that they may have supported other people in the Democratic primaries, which are now acient history. I hope that what I was saying was not construed as an attempt to read your mind. I was merely responding to what you had said in your post.

I agree in theory with the notion of constructive criticism of Democrats on this board. In practice, all it ever seems to do is devolve into pointless flamewars that just generate bad feelings all around and leave everyone feeling pissed off. That's why I refrain from it, even though I've been angry enough at this party myself to consider going Green.

If I do criticize a Democrat, it will be over a specific issue, or position they have taken, not just random bashing.

Not to try to read the mind of the OP, but I think she was reacting to the small number of people who seem to enjoy Clark bashing for its own sake, and are not even taking issue with his positions or his actions, but hate him simply for being him, and enjoy pissing in any thread about him. I think she may have been responding to the fact that the most notorious examples seem to be Dean supporters, although it probably was a poor way of expressing her feelings in that it contributed to the divisiveness on this board.

Once again, I apologize for my clumsiness in expressing myself.

[Beacho]

126. Deaniac here, and I love Clark

I was a delagate, to the state convention, for Dean and love what he's doing right now

Wes Clark is aces in my book and I don't understand why one can't admire them both for what they bring to the table.

Even during the primaries I would not have been upset with a Clark nomination

He was my number two choice from a great crop of candidates

[ClarkUSA]

135. You are obviously a rarity at DU and you see the big picture

Bless your heart.

[zulchzulu]

127. It's Apples and Avocados

Just find the wind and keep it in your sails. Fuck the landlubbers. You have your own journey to find.

[autorank]

128. Doesn't piss me off, but it is a glaring inconsistency. Odd...

Contact the DNC and Tell Them to Do More to Stop Election Fraud

NEW LEADERS FOR A NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY

[CarolNYC]

132. see Maddy

Lots more good guys than bad guys, so to speak!

Thanks folks for chiming in...I knew there were more who chose to be united than divided.

[ChiciB1]

136. I Like them Both...

But for me it's JOHN EDWARDS! I don't dis either one of them and as long as they stay true to us here at DU, I say we need to stick together.

Heavens knows, we need ever able body we can find. We are fighting for our FREEDOM & Democracy right here in AMERIKA!!

[depakid]

138. Hey- The guy went to work for Fox news-

ANYONE who did that- I mean ANYONE- would have taken a round of well deserved shit.

[FrenchieCat]

141. That's the beauty of it all.....

I am proud that Clark cares more about this godamn country than he does about how the base will judge him for going into the Lion's Den!

For his detractors...they now have an excuse. Why? Cause he gave them one. Why? Cause he understands that personal pandering to potential primary voters is not how this country will be saved.

He knows that the Left hates Faux. He knows that this will not win him any popularity contest with those who vote in Democratic primaries. But he also knows that based on his skills, this is something that he can do to affect some change. It may not be a lot, to some....But it's really the only way that we are going to save this country....bit by bit.

Because Clark is not the DNC Chair. Clark is not a Senator. Clark is not a millionaire with a poverty center. Clark is a retired NATO Commander and General who has spoken, written and done commentating on the various aspect of this War and the ramifications of it. Clark is doing what Clark can do help and bring some sanity back to this country.

There's a thread on GDP that in where the OP authors says something to the effect: I don't know if I could support Dean if he went and worked for FAUX. So blatant an implication, without once mentioning Clark's defense of Howard Dean.

It's all very sad and disheartening that some are so petty...when the real issue is this country....and not the issue of picking on the few who are doing what they can to help save it.