Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Clark --- "When I am president I will go to Iraq and it won't be to.......

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
MIMStigator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 02:23 PM
Original message
Clark --- "When I am president I will go to Iraq and it won't be to.......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
1. Sweet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scott Lee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 02:51 PM
Response to Original message
2. Link won't come up
I'll keep trying...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
3. Hooah!!!!
this is the sort of comment that would leave W spluttering. i've seen W when he's spluttering (as governor) - it's REALLY funny, terribly unattractive, and would cost him a LOT of votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lurk_no_more Donating Member (582 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
4. Gee
would love to see this, no one could make the chimp look so small in comparison.


” JAFO”

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasSissy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
5. Terrific!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
6. He is so good
That's one of my favorite things about Clark. He just lays them in there, nice and easy but oh so searing. lol. This one is really good!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. Did u see on C-Span when he said something about beating the
shit out of the Repubs this fall!

I was crackin...

He and Kerry are a like in that regard. Thats why I like Kerry a lot also.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phillybri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 03:05 PM
Response to Original message
7. Rock on!!!
I love that!!!

:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
curse10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
8. LoL
That's awesome!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark4VotingRights Donating Member (795 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
9. Wow wow, that's the best quote ever!
Ever!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
worldgonekrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 05:44 PM
Response to Original message
10. Kudos to Clark
I'll say this for him: he really knows how to deliver the blows. He is the best of the candidates, IMO, at attacking Bush without coming across as shrill and angry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 07:18 PM
Response to Original message
11. Interesting that no one asks what he would do there

For what it's worth, I am sure that he could kill more Iraqis than bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. hrmm..
you're right. He's probably going there so he can strangle Iraqi women and children with his own bare hands. :eyes:

Someday you're going to make a reasoned, valid point. Then I'll know the apocalypse is upon us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. I think it is a fair question. He has said that bush

is wasting military assets in Iraq.

He is a general, he says he would go to Iraq, why do you feel a question about what he would do there is not a valid one?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. because the premise of your question
was wrong. It presumes he likes to kill people. You're being awfully disingenuous to pretend otherwise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. What do you presume he would do there?

He chose not to be too specific about it.

No one else has even asked.

I stand by my assertion that it is a valid question, although I do not expect you to answer it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. Rack your brain
He might, just might, mean to get hands-on, personally involved in the whole "reconstruction" effort. To take some responsiblity for the situation.

But, I think you knew that.

 
 
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. No, I don't know it, and neither do you. I was not being mean to you

when I said I didn't expect you to answer.

That is my point, you can't answer, because you don't know.

You don't know because he didn't say.

And no one except me asked. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. Well...
It sounds like you're pretty sure..

"For what it's worth, I am sure that he could kill more Iraqis than bush."

How that conclusion is more on target than mine has everything to do with how one percieves Clark and little to do with mindreading. To immediately assume the worst, that he wants to kill more people, even though he has said many times that he wants to resolve this issue with international assistance, doesn't sound like a logical assumption to me. To use the military more effectively does not equate to "more killing force". Especially when they are doing things they are not trained to do, like "nation-building", because Bush refuses to let go of the reins and allow UN forces and international influence into Iraq.

 
 
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Do could and would have the same meaning?

Does could mean the same as wants to?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. Do you mean...
it to be obtuse? Or just to be a veiled accusation? Why don't you just tell us what you mean, instead?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. I will be glad to explain the difference between could and would

I COULD take a bucket of red paint and throw it on my neighbor's house.

I COULD do it better than a 6 year old could. Paint is heavy.

That is not the same thing as saying that I WOULD do that.

COULD is about the capability to do something, WOULD is about one's desire and intention.

Both are conditional.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. Nope
Edited on Fri Jan-02-04 09:17 PM by incapsulated
That's not what I asked.

I asked what you meant, in the context of what you said. Not for the definition of "could" and "would". What is the point of saying he "could" kill more Iraqis than Bush? He "could" because he wants to or because he is a better military commander, or because that is his "real" plan for Iraq? Why even bother saying something, unless you have a point? What is it, pray tell?

But, I really hate semantic games, they are the ultimate forum timewaster. So, unless you want to stop pretending you don't understand my question, I'll bow out.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. To my knowledge, bush has never fought a war

I do not doubt that Clark would be capable of killing more Iraqis, or Canadians, for that matter, than bush.

According to his website, and what I have heard him say, his "real" plan for Iraq is to have soldiers from many different countries join US soldiers in their activities there.

This position is not unique, assuming the other candidates who say the same thing are sincere.

The position of the candidates differs from that of the bush regime in that the bush regime insists that there are already many many countries there, and more are pouring in every day.

My point is that Clark said he would go to Iraq, and he would not deliver turkeys. He did not say what he would do. I found it interesting that no one else asked the question.

I find it even more interesting that the question seems to have hit a very sensitive nerve.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. nonsense...
Again, you're being deliberately disingenuous. The "sensitive nerve" was not hit because you asked what he would do there. It was hit because you implied in your question that he was going there to kill people.

Do you really, in your heart, think this is an honorable debating tactic? I don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 09:42 PM
Response to Reply #32
35. 1) I'm not debating, and 2) I did not imply any such thing

I don't support any of the candidates, so I have no axe to grind, and the only "debating" I could (note, could as in possible) would be to debate the variation of the status quo that the candidates share on this issue.

However, that was and is not my intention on this thread.

My intention was to express an opinion that it is interesting that Clark said he would (intention) go to Iraq but chose not to say what he would do there.

I said that I believe that he could (as in possible) kill more Iraqis than bush. I acknowledge that saying anybody could do much of anything more than bush is damning by faint praise, but in this context, we are talking about a war, and we are talking about a general's stated intention to visit a country where US soldiers are currently engaged in hostilities.

To ask what he would do there is a reasonable question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. ok...
it's clear you enjoy this silly semantic game a lot more than I do, so go at it. Enjoy. Knock yourself out. Please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. No
The only "nerve" you hit was the "my guy is under attack on DU" nerve. I think we have all discovered this new nerve in the past few months.

It has nothing to do with some hidden fear that Clark has "plans" for Iraq that are questionable.

I think Clark was simply taking the opportunity to bash Bush for his photo-op, which was a completley self-promoting exercise that did nothing to help or progress the situation in Iraq, and to imply that he would go over there for more substantial reasons than an election-year stunt.

K?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. I don't have a guy, and I don't know anything about Clark's secret plans

The only plans I have seen are the ones on his website, and what he has said publicly.

It never occurred to me that he or any of the other candidates have secret plans for Iraq.

What other information is available about that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. You left out the possibility that Clark will go to Iraq
...so he can bathe in the healing waters of the Tygris River. No one knows, could be. Could be he wants the freqeunt flyer miles. Impossible to disproove. Could be. It is just SO hard to sort out the likely reasons from the less likely ones...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. I have no idea what he intends to do there

I think it is interesting that he chose not to elaborate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scott Lee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #26
33. Scare off Iraqi insurgents by posing in a speedo
But then again that might violate some international standards of human treatment, so he may be advised against it....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-04 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #26
43. He's going there to solve some problems, it doesn't take a genius...
Edited on Sun Jan-04-04 12:39 PM by familydoctor
I am sure that's what you would infer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jerseycoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-04 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #24
45. Why would he go to Iraq?
Canada's so close by. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turkw Donating Member (521 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #14
38. It is a fair question to ask what he would do in Iraq, and here it is
1. End the American monopoly. From the beginning, the Administration has insisted on exclusive control of the Iraqi reconstruction and occupation. This has cost us the financial and military support of other nations and made America a bigger target for terrorists. Ending the American monopoly will change the way this enterprise is viewed-in Iraq and throughout the world.

* Re-incorporate our allies. Fixing the Administration's missteps will require skilled diplomacy at the highest levels. General Clark will call a summit of leaders from Europe, the United Nations, Japan and the Arab world to launch a new, internationalized effort in Iraq. They will be more willing to help if America works with them on issues they care about: climate change, the International Criminal Court and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

* Create a new international authority. The Coalition Provisional Authority, which is the American-led de facto government of Iraq, should be replaced. But the United Nations is neither able nor willing to assume the daunting task of governing Iraq. General Clark would create a new international structure to govern Iraq-the Iraqi Reconstruction and Democracy Council-similar to the one formed in Bosnia. The interim government would have representatives from the European Union, the United States, neighboring countries and others who support our efforts to build a democratic Iraq.

* Transform the military operation into a NATO operation. General Abizaid, commander of US forces in the Middle East, would remain in charge of the operation, but he would report to the NATO Council, as General Clark did as commander of NATO forces in Kosovo. If we take these steps, we can expect NATO countries to contribute around 50,000 troops. With NATO support and U.N. endorsement, we can also get Arab countries in the region to step in. Their presence would prove that this is not an American occupation, but an international and regional effort to stabilize Iraq.

2. Force Mix. The Bush Administration has failed to formulate an effective tactical plan. No such plan will be viable without substantial contributions from military leaders on the ground. Still, General Clark would approach the problem as follows:

* Consider adding troops. General Clark will look at whether adding forces will help the effort in Iraq. He will not measure success in Iraq by a reduction in troops or failure by an increase. It's more important to do the job right so all the troops can come home sooner.

* Adapt to guerilla war. One mistake in Vietnam was trying to use conventional forces to fight an unconventional war. The more unarmored humvees we have, the greater our vulnerability to roadside bombs. We have suffered more losses in routine patrolling and transit than in active counter-insurgency efforts. We need to ensure the right mix of forces to fight a classic guerrilla war. That means more Special Forces and other light forces better suited for counter-insurgency.

* Better use of intelligence resources. To protect our soldiers we must do all we can to find out who's attacking our soldiers. That means better intelligence work and improved relations with the civilian population. Yet intelligence specialists and people who can speak to Iraqis in their own language are scarce. We need to take the linguists and intelligence specialists now involved in the search for WMDs and assign them to our military counter-insurgency efforts. International inspectors are willing and able to take over this mission. We must also augment our intelligence capability with new technologies and better recruitment in the Arab-American community.

* Train Iraqi security forces, freeing up U.S. troops. We need to empower Iraqis to provide routine security so American soldiers can focus on urgent tasks like counter-insurgency. General Clark will implement a comprehensive two-tier plan: train police first, then military.

o Summon the old Iraqi army for duty at the local level. We need more Iraqi paramilitary units and police at the local level. General Clark will use thorough background checks, generous pay rates, and real political control for Iraqis-as well as appealing to Iraqis' sense of nationality-to put Iraqis in charge of basic security, freeing up US soldiers to focus on our most urgent tasks, including counter-insurgency.

o Reconstitute the Iraqi Army so that it eventually can do the work the occupation force now does-guarding Iraqi borders, keeping order, and fighting insurgents. It will take considerable time to have an Iraqi Army trained enough and integrated enough to do the job.

* Engage neighbors for better border security. Iraq is now a magnet for every jihadist in the Middle East. Closing the borders requires cooperation from the countries bordering Iraq. But currently, Syria and Iran don't want us to succeed because they fear they are next on our invasion list. General Clark will engage Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia with both carrots and sticks. We have serious issues with each of these countries, but closing those borders is the most urgent priority right now. We must show Iraq's neighbors that cooperation with us is in their interest and will help their region.

* Secure Ammunition. Today, 600,000 tons of ammunition from Saddam's arsenal have yet to be secured, and thousands of shoulder-fired missiles remain at large. Terrorists have used these stockpiles to attack our forces. We should destroy that ammunition immediately or else secure it with surveillance technology and troops from other countries willing to come to Iraq.

3. Give the Iraqis a rising stake in our success. Iraqis will be more likely to meet the security challenge if we give them a greater stake in our success. That means establishing a sovereign government in Iraq right away. Because Americans chose the current governing counsel, many Iraqis see it as illegitimate. General Clark believes we cannot transfer full authority to Iraqis before they have the capacity to succeed, but we should help the Iraqis quickly establish their own government to replace the existing counsel.

* Elect a truly representative government. The Iraqi people have already elected 50 city and regional councils in Iraq. These councils could elect a new interim government in Iraq just as state legislatures once elected members to the U.S. Senate. This new government would represent Iraq internationally and control oil revenues, funds and any frozen assets through a transparent, internationally audited process. Transfer of government functions to this new government would progress week by week. The interim government would launch a new process to write a Constitution This constitution would be an Iraqi document-not written by Americans or people appointed by Americans-and would set the terms for free and fair elections.

* Promote information exchange to advance civil society. To encourage the growth of civic organizations, media, neighborhood groups-and promote reconstruction-we should open the West to Iraq for exchange programs so that Iraqis who have been isolated for years can see the what the rest of the world does with its economy, schools, health care, media and government.

Preventing Foreign Misadventures

* Promote security through multilateralism. No nation will ever have veto power over our security. But turning our back on our allies makes it harder to protect ourselves and our interests. Despite our overwhelming military, economic and political strength, we cannot pursue Arab-Israeli peace, support reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, deal with the challenges of North Korea, track down Osama bin Laden, fight the global war against terrorism, face the problem of Iran, and return to prosperity in this country, unless we have allies to help us.

* Modernize international institutions to combat new threats. General Clark will pursue a new Atlantic Charter to repair and modernize our security partnership with Europe. The Charter that will define the threats we face in common and demand action from our allies to meet them while offering a promise to act together.

* Create a new agency for international assistance. General Clark believes America should lead the world in addressing the causes of human misery by attacking the problems of poverty, disease, and ethnic conflict with the same energy and skill we have brought to the challenge of warfare. A new agency would combine the existing development efforts of our government with a real budget for research and development, planning and the ability to draw on the new national Civilian Reserves that General Clark proposed in October. These efforts will reduce the anger and alienation that gives rise to terrorism, and win us more friends and partners around the world. It will be far easier to ask gain international support for our concerns when other countries see us helping them on theirs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. thank you

My views on Iraq strategy are at

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=55708

I am telling the link instead of putting it all here because this thread is not about my views on Iraq strategy :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-03-04 12:02 AM
Response to Reply #13
40. ROTFLMAO
That's good stuff. lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 08:53 PM
Response to Reply #11
22. Or, get us out. You only need to read
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. He does not say "get us out." He says the same as the rest, namely

Convince other countries to send their soldiers to do the same things that US soliders are currently doing.

What US soldiers are currently doing is covered in many other threads and many websites, newspapers and news channels.

Is your speculation that he feels he would need to go to Iraq to do that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark Can WIN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 07:55 PM
Response to Original message
15. Oh man I needed a good laugh today.
Thanks, that was great. Clark kicks ass. I love how he communicates things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow mix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
18. for some reason, i think its supposed to read..
"and it wont be to deliver a midnight turkey"

but maybe im remembering wrong... probally am.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 08:40 PM
Response to Original message
19. My favorite Clark line: "what's the difference between you and Bush?
Edited on Fri Jan-02-04 08:45 PM by robbedvoter
"I read"

I also like this from Face the Nation:

"I'm not running to bash george bush. A lot of Americans really love him. They love what he represents, a man who has overcome adversity in his life from alcoholism and pulled his marriage back together and moved forward."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turkw Donating Member (521 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-04 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
41. Here is what Wes Clark just said he would do when he goes to Iraq
GEN. CLARK: When I go over to Iraq, I'm going to talk with the people that are on the ground. I'm going to consult with the military leaders. I'm going to consult with the Iraqi leaders. And we'll have a political success strategy that turns this problem back to the Iraqi people in a way that brings us out of there with success, with honor and gets our forces back and reconstituted to meet the real national security challenges facing America.

MR. RUSSERT: Isn't that what the president did, met with military leaders, met with Iraqi leaders?

GEN. CLARK: Well, he was on the ground for about two hours, as I read the report. I don't think he had any substantive discussions with either military leaders or Iraqi leaders during that period. He only met, as far as I could determine, with some of the very pro-American Iraqi leaders like Chalabi. To my knowledge, he did not meet with Sistani. There's been no real discussion with the Shia leadership and certainly not by high-level U.S. authorities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddezmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-04 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #41
42. great response by Wes n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MoonRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-04 01:23 PM
Response to Original message
44. GO CLARK!!!
I think that "turkey" is bush! :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 12:41 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC