Hillary is full of it. She's no Wes Clark and she will lose big time in the event of an attack

[calteacherguy]

unless, perhaps, just perhaps Clark is her VP. In that scenario she *might* still have a chance eventhough it's the top of the ticket that really counts. Having Clark on the ticket would make a lot of voters feel more secure in such an event. Irregardless of one's opinion of Clark, that's the reality.

Anyone who tells you that one political party has a monopoly on the best defense of our nation is committing a fraud on the American people. Franklin Roosevelt said it best: "Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth." -Wes Clark address to Democratic National Convention, 2004

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/vote2004/demconvention/speeches/clark.html

Edit: Without Clark as their VP, Obama and Edwards would have no chance either in such a scenario. If anyone has a suggestion for a VP candidate that could serve as well as Clark in such an event, please make your case...

[Colobo]

1. Obama/Clark is what you are looking for. Let's make it happen!

[mike_c]

2. fear fear fear fear fear fear fear fear....

OMG what will do "in the event of an attack?" :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared:

[calteacherguy]

3. Just be prepared. nt

[Kagemusha]

4. I've had it with VP's who think they're the real Commander in Chief.

The VP's military experience or lack thereof should have absolutely no bearing on anything; the President gives the orders. What's hard to understand about this?

[calteacherguy]

5. There is "should," and then there is the matter of getting a Democrat in the White House. nt

[wildhorses]

6. the veep is a heartbeat away from being the pres...

what is so hard to understand about that?

[Perry Logan]

17. Seconded. The OP makes no sense whatsoever.

Thanks for saying Hillary is "full of it," though. That's just the kind of Republican rhetoric we need around here.

[sandnsea]

7. You just made Clark a liar

He is saying that it's a lie that Republicans are better for our defense - and you just contradicted him by saying no Dem can win without Wes Clark.

Republicans don't keep us safe because they don't know how to create the conditions of peace and harmony, even if they know how to win militarily - which they don't know how to do either.

Republicans know how to be CEO's and Gouge Other People and live off the fat of their corrupt capital.

[calteacherguy]

8. I did not, and there is no contradiction.

There is a difference between the truth and the politically possible. You need to think this through because you are mixing apples with oranges.

Saying no Dem can win in the event of a terrorist attack without Clark does not contradict the truth of what Clark said. There is truth, and then there is politics. It is the presence of Clark that could potentially convince enough voters of the truth of what he is saying. The effectiveness of the message does depend on the messenger.

[sandnsea]

13. Clark is the only Dem expert on defense??

Is that what you're saying?

[calteacherguy]

15. No, that is not what I am saying.

Do you have a proposal for a more effective VP candidate in such a scenario?

[sandnsea]

16. I propose the candidate is the CiC

And better be competent in that role, as well as crafting an international vision that will bring the world to our side again.

[Mythsaje]

9. In that event

I'd think a smart response from ANY candidate would be to say "this bunch hasn't shown itself to be able to protect an ice-cream cone from a three-year old. That's two attacks on their watch and what have they to show for it? A quagmire of a war and a bunch of inefficient security measures that did nothing to actually PROTECT us.

"We don't need a military genius--we just need someone with a lick of sense--enough to focus on things that will REALLY help secure our country and not spin our wheels with a bunch of pointless 'feel-good' measures."

[calteacherguy]

10. I'm not sure you read the OP. You seem to have replied to a different topic.

[Mythsaje]

11. I misunderstood initially...

So I inserted a place-holder until I could address the REAL OP rather than my misunderstanding.

[calteacherguy]

12. Well, that's a start.

But I doubt it would win the election.

[Mythsaje]

14. After TWO attacks

their security cred would be what, exactly?