ok, wouldnt normally say this but media really do seem scared of wes

[faithnotgreed]

being the vp. granted i really like him (whats not to like) but i tend to be cautiously skeptical and listen to both sides of issues before deciding - but my eyes are being opened i think. ive been hanging back and mostly reading on this forum and the jk blog but even im thinking something is really not right with the media (i mean more than usual which is already far messed up).

seriously blatant. i know theyre right leaning and are owned and driven by greed and censor so much but they seem to be exposing themselves even more if thats possible

the only interest the media show in jk is who he will pick for vp. and most everyone keeps saying edwards but these are the same people not even reporting what a HUGE event f 9/11 is this wknd let alone all their other exposures of what they clearly dont ask or show that are monumentally more important.

wow. i just hadnt thought of it this way quite so strongly as now. when you guys report that cnns rebroadcast of a special on iraq tonight cut out the generals segment which was over 7 minutes then it really gets me thinking about how much theyre trying to manipulate even this situation!

does the media seriously want edwards because they think clark is the one who will really help jk win? i dont know. a lot of voters seem to be excited by edwards and think he would help them win.

im totally confused.

[cosmokramer]

1. He was on this program to present Kerry's side of the issue...

...and it was completely eliminated. This is not just cutting out the General, but cutting out his mouthpiece. It is very, very disturbing.

[TLDHOME99]

36. Cosmo, did you see this thread?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=557883&mesg_id=557989&page=

[cosmokramer]

50. Yes, I did, and I doubt the authenticity pending verification...

...from the Moderators.

[sadiesworld]

2. Edwards is much more vulnerable to RW attacks than Clark.

Hence, the media whores want Edwards.

[faithnotgreed]

5. but im not clear why clark is more a threat than edwards

because they both seem to really inspire people. and i read other threads where multiple people say they know republicans who really like edwards and cant come up with anything bad to say against him. and that even faux news doesnt really go after edwards.

so again im confused. i know the media is ludicrous. i just dont know why (if they do) want edwards over clark.

thanks for the responses....

[dogman]

7. Edwards has said that he believes

there is a link between 9-11 and the Iraq War. This supports the stand of Bush/Cheney and most of the press ownership.

[sadiesworld]

18. Edwards will be much easier to pigeonhole and marginalize.

His career as a PI attorney is red meat to the right. For years the RW has managed to convince a large chunk of the population (and not just the hard right) that "greedy" plaintiff attorneys and frivolous lawsuits are responsible for everything from high health care costs to companies moving jobs overseas. Invariably when I make this argument someone will pop up and argue that tort attorneys actually provide a valuable service. While I might agree with that assessment, the problem is that many do not. Bottom line: Edwards' lucrative legal career IS a RW talking point.

Edwards' youthful good looks are another potential problem. While many will find those qualities appealing, the RW will use terms like "pretty boy", "lightweight", "empty suit".

Edwards' lack of foreign policy experience is simply unacceptable in a post-9/11 world. If Kerry makes the mistake of choosing Edwards, be prepared to hear the RW echo chamber ask, ad nauseam, whether the American people would be comfortable with Edwards' at the helm in the event something happens to Kerry.

Clark, OTOH, has a 30+ year military career (MUCH more difficult to criticize), he oozes gravitas, and his knowledge of foreign policy is beyond dispute.

Finally, I suspect Clark knows quite a bit about the black hole AKA defense budget, and he just may have enough integrity to do something about it.

[LandOLincoln]

22. You bet he will. If you remember, during the primaries he

vowed to cut the Pentagon budget by 25% as president, and to re-allocate the rest to provide much less for expensive (and often useless) toys and much more for the troops themselves.

[faithnotgreed]

25. this is great! thank you! i knew i liked clark a lot but NOW i truly hope

jk will choose him. it makes so much sense.

and i dont believe it completely when people point out how much better edwards is than clark on the stump
yes for different reasons he appeals to a lot of people but ive heard clark (speeches shown on cspan and a couple news shows as the voice of reason!) and this guy is fantastic. besides everythiing here that all of you have pointed out which is sooo true , wes is really energetic from what ive seen

thank you very very much! its helped me a great deal and i thank you for your time

[sadiesworld]

31. You're welcome.

And let me extend a (somewhat belated) Welcome to DU! :hi:

[Darkamber]

49. Personal Injury Attorny...

Just a few points and I'll add that I don't have a problem with Clark as VP. I think they both bring good qualities.

On the Personal Injury Attorney question. Edwards is also the only one that I have heard a good plan to deal with this problem. His 3 strikes you are out plan. And attacking Edwards for his history has been done before and failed. The reason it will fail this time as Edwards can counter every attack with his own plan to fight against the 'bad' attorneys while preserving the system which protects the victims. And he makes a good argument.

I'm not sure how much weight is put on the bottom of the ticket. Certainly the Repub are not going to call Edwards another Dan Quayle. Only the Democrats are saying that. And if the GOP attacks Edwards for being good looking that seems rather sad. And Clark is good looking as well. Is that really something they will attack with?

I am not 100% certain if they would do that or not. Edwards has the same about or more experience as Bush Jr. did. That argument could be turned against them in a heart beat and also much more weight is given to the top of the ticket. Today was the transfer of power in Iraq. The situation over there could change on dime.

Yes, Clark does bring lots of Foreign policy experience. No one would question that, but I'm also sure the GOP could fine lots of other Generals to come out against Clark if they wanted to attack him. I wouldn't say that he is bullet proof.

In the end, what will matter is what John Kerry wants and who he wants as VP. I don't think that Edwards is any weaker then Clark when it comes to the GOP.

[sadiesworld]

52. Granted, Edwards survived some RW drubbing on his background

during his senate campaign. However, a senate campaign does not generate anywhere near the national media attention that the presidential race will. Will Edwards' "plans" really make a bit of difference when Limbaugh, Hannity, Russert and the NYT are ripping him apart 24/7?

And yes, I think that the media will attack Edwards' YOUTHFUL good looks. They will use that image to reinforce a perception that Edwards is inexperienced, superficial, and not serious.

The argument that Edwards has more foreign policy experience than Bush did in 2000 is SAD.

Sure, some Generals may come out to attack Clark (although it seems that 1 or 2 who attacked him during the primaries have since recanted) but we have NO IDEA who is waiting in the wings for Edwards.

No, Clark is not bullet proof but his military career and foreign policy expertise provide cover, whereas Edwards' lucrative career as a PI attorney and lack of foreign policy experience make him a sitting duck.

[Scoopie]

65. There's an easier way

1.) Judge's should use more discretion during summary judgement hearings and weed out frivolous suits on the merits;
2.) Loser pays court costs. If you're truly injured, you can prove it. If you're suing as a get-rich-quick scheme and waste the judge and jury's time and the jury finds no merit, you should have to pay the court costs. Every other country in the free world does this and none are as litigious as we are.

(OK... my moderate stances just popped out for a bit)..

[Darkamber]

68. Anything is better then what we have now...

One thing about Edwards plan is it would keep the 'frivolous lawsuits' out of the courts to begin with. They would never see light of day and never take up the Courts or the Judge's time. The cost for the pre-trial medical review would be picked up by the lawyer who would pay for the cost out of his own pocket to prove merit before it ever went to court. If he tried to bring forth something that didn't have merit there would be strict penalties against them and eventually a 10 year suspension.

It is aimed at the exact kind of bad lawyers that everyone wants removed but still protects the victims rights and the court system.
Personally, I think it's a good plan. If the doctor's had the same kind of system then the risk pool would drop dramatically and the good doctor's wouldn't be harmed by malpractice rates.

[Skwmom]

70. Edwards plan.

Edwards might have a great plan for tort reform. However, I think the republicans can raise serious doubt about Edward's intent to follow through on these plans because attorneys have provided a majority of his funds for this election.

[Upfront]

35. Edwards

Could he have something to hide in his past that they know about? I wonder. Could he have girl friends in his past? I don't know but I sure see the media wanting him for some reason.

[Sparkly]

44. Frankly, I think it's what is *not* in his background that the media likes

Namely, weighty foreign policy experience. (As in, "Would you trust the nation's security to THIS man?")

[dogman]

3. It's not that confusing, really.

In 9-11 Moore points out the Saudi ownership of media. Add to that the increasing ownership by B$$$ sympathizers, the recent report of The Carlyle Group purchase of Loew's theaters for instance. Clark has predicted most of the outcome of the Iraq War quite accurately. He has also explained the root problems of Mid East tensions. He has answers and they do not support the PNAC outlook for the world. He is a serious threat to their money interests.

[in_cog_ni_to]

4. YES!

does the media seriously want edwards because they think clark is the one who will really help jk win? i dont know.

The media is owned by RW corporations who support the idiot-in-chief. The WH KNOWS that Wes Clark is their biggest threat. The man has worked at the Pentagon. He know Rummy, Wolfowitz, Cheney, ect....Wes Clark has had conversations with those people about Iraq. Rummy told Wes that they were going to invade Iraq long before the war was planned. Wes Clark KNOWS where the bodies are buried. They FEAR him. Wes Clark is the ONLY presidential candidate to say that he would open the 911 report to the public....ALL OF IT. Wes Clark is the ONLY candidate who said he would have this administration INVESTIGATED. YES, they fear him and the WH wants him stopped. The only thing is...once he's a VP candidate, they can't ignore him anymore. The media also knows that the WH wants Edwards because he will be an easy mark for them. A Trial Lawyer? I can see the dirt they will fling already. The media works for the WH. The WH threatens them with NO ACCESS if they do or say anything "bad" about the chimp. Yes indeed. They ALL fear Wesley Kanne Clark. Their blatant bias is proof.


on edit I want to add something about Moore's F911 movie. I said last week that the media would blackball MM and keep him off the air because he has shown them to be illigitimate and they are PISSED off about it. They act indignant when they are accused of not doing their job. Puhleeeeze. They were/are cheerleaders for the WH and this illegal invasion of Iraq and THEY KNOW IT. I'm not at all surprised that they aren't reporting how well F911 did this week-end. I expected it. :grr:

[faithnotgreed]

6. oh im with you on this but let me ask. so what youre saying is

that lets just say both wes and edwards are even in certain ways. but that since wes knows so much about them and has actually said he would investigate the current wh (did he really?) that theres more to fear from wes. that not only would he help jk win possibly but what differentiates him from edwards is that wes knows a lot of the skeletons in their closets and would call them on them if he is part of the team that gets into the wh.

is that close at all to what you are saying? i just want to sort this out.
thanks so much

[in_cog_ni_to]

8. BINGO!

That is exactly right! THEY know he knows and they are scared shitless. Period. YES, he did say he would have this administration investigated for 911. They took out how many pages from the 911 report? 22 pages? He said he would release those pages and open the entire report to the public. He also knows a LOT of things about the planning of the Iraq invasion and the WH knows he knows...he has stated it all in public. He put them on notice and now they are trying their hardest to stop him from being in a position to do anything about it.

[faithnotgreed]

9. wow. ok let me ask you this since you have good knowledge of all this

my other thought about why clark just doesnt seem to be mentioned in the vp running (except for online boards like this) is because of his experience

he has awesome experience in military and foreigh affairs and clearly has experience with this administration! but if something were to happen to jk would he be able to take over the country as president?

again i am really impressed with clark. he is so smart and a fine decent man on top of all his experience. but for the oppsoite reason as edwards, does wes not have the government or domestic experience that jk would want?

i had just thought of this the other day and thought that made sense. because i could not figure out why no one was talking about him seriously

what do you think?

[in_cog_ni_to]

10. The man is BRILLIANT.

He's an Economics Major. He use to teach Econmics at West Point after he served in Vietnam. He graduated 1st in his class at West Point. He's a Rhodes Scholar. He was Supreme Allied Commander of Nato and led a coalition of 19 countries. He was in charge of the families of those who served under him. He was responsible for the children's schools, health care, food, ect...He's more than qualified to lead this country if something would happen to Kerry. Moreso than Edwards, IMCPO. Here...look at THIS. Pretty impressive.

How does General Wesley Clark compare to legendary West Point Generals? See for yourself.

1. General Robert E. Lee - Class of 1829 #2 in class of 46
(Civil War)
2. General Ulysses S. Grant - Class of 1843 #21 in class of 39
(Civil War)
3. General John J. Pershing - Class of 1886 #30 in class of 76
(World War I)
4. General Douglas MacArthur - Class of 1903 #1 in class of 94
(World War II + Korea)
5. General George S. Patton -Class of 1909 #46 in class of 153
(World War II)
6. General Dwight Eisenhower - Class of 1915 #61 in class of 164
(World War II)
7. General William Westmoreland - Class of 1936 #112 in class of 276
(Vietnam)
8. General Norman Schwarzkopf - Class of 1956 #43 in class of 480
(Dessert Storm)
9. General Wesley Clark - Class of 1966 #1 in class of 579
(NATO/Kosovo)

Definitely one of the smartest generals in U.S. history.


AND here is a list of Ambassadors who endorsed him when he was running. THEY should know if he's qualified to lead a country I would think. ;)


Little Rock - Fifty-five former U.S. ambassadors and diplomats, women and men who have served in some 36 countries during the last four administrations, believe that Wesley K. Clark is the right choice to lead America at this critical time in the world.

"Serving as representatives of the United States has allowed each of us to meet with world leaders and see what terrific leadership looks like," said Cynthia Schneider, Ambassador to theNetherlands and co-chair of Ambassadors for Clark. "We know that the world is more interconnected than ever before, and so the impact of good and bad leadership impacts America and the world more than ever before. Wes Clark appreciates that and ambassadors understand the interconnectedness of the world and the critical need for a new leader to repair and strengthen our global ties."

"I am thrilled by the endorsement of those that have the respect of world leaders on every continent," Wesley Clark said. "They understand the importance of rebuilding America's alliances and restoring our country to a position of leadership based on cooperation and respect."


Ambassadors and Diplomats for Clark grew out of the unique phenomena of the Draft Wesley Clark movement. Not only did Wes Clark receive encouragement to run from thousands of individuals from across the U.S., the letters of support came from people, both U.S. citizens and citizens of many other nations, who understand that Wes Clark is the person we need to lead America at this crucial moment in history. The full list of ambassadors and diplomats is below.

Morton Abramowitz, Ambassador to Turkey and Thailand, Assistant Secretary of State
Brady Anderson, Ambassador to Tanzania.
Christopher Ashby, Ambassador to Uruguay.
Jeff Bader, Ambassador to Namibia, Senior Director National Security Agency
Robert Barry, Administrator, Agency for International Development; Head, OSCE
J.D. Bindenagel, Special Envoy for Holocaust Issues.
Donald Blinken, Ambassador to Hungary
Amy Bondurant, Ambassador to OECD
Avis Bohlen, Ambassador to Bulgaria, Assistant Secretary of State
George Bruno, Ambassador to Belize
Paul Cejas, Ambassador to Belgium
Tim Chorba, Ambassador to Singapore
Bonnie Cohen, Under Secretary of State
Nancy Ely-Raphel, Ambassador to Slovenia
Ralph Earle, Deputy Director of State, Chief U.S. Negotiator, SALT II Treaty
Thomas H. Fox, Assistant Administrator, U.S. Agency for International Development
Mary Mel French, Chief of Protocol
Edward Gabriel, Ambassador to Morocco
Richard Gardner, Ambassador to Italy & Spain
Robert Gelbard, Ambassador to Indonesia & Bolivia, Assistant Secretary of State
Gordon Giffin, Ambassador to Canada
Lincoln Gordon, Ambassador to Brazil, Assistant Secretary of State
Anthony Harrington, Ambassador to Brazil
John Holum, Under Secretary of State
William J. Hughes, Ambassador to Panama
Swanee Hunt, Ambassador to Austria
James Joseph, Ambassador to South Africa
Rodney Minott, Ambassador to Sweden
John McDonald, Ambassador to the United Nations
Stan McLelland, Ambassador to Jamaica
Gerald McGowan, Ambassador to Portugal
Arthur Mudge, Mission Director for Agency for International Development
Lyndon Olson, Ambassador to Sweden
Donald Petterson, Ambassador to the Sudan, Tanzania & Somalia
Kathryn Proffitt, Ambassador to Malta
Edward Romero, Ambassador to Spain & Andorra
James Rosapepe, Ambassador to Romania
Nancy Rubin, United Nations Commission on Human Rights
James Rubin, Assistant Secretary of State
David Sandalow, Assistant Secretary of State
Howard Schaffer, Ambassador to Bangladesh, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State
Teresita Schaffer, Ambassador to Sri Lanka & Maldives
David Scheffer, Ambassador at Large for War Crimes
Cynthia Schneider, Ambassador to the Netherlands.
Derek Shearer, Ambassador to Finland
Richard Schifter, Assistant Secretary of State
Thomas Siebert, Ambassador to Sweden
Richard Sklar, Ambassador to the United Nations
Peter Tarnoff, Under Secretary of State
Peter Tufo, Ambassador to Hungary
Arturo Valenzuela, Senior Director, National Security Council
William Walker, Ambassador to El Salvador & Argentina, Head, Kosovo VerificationMission
Vernon Weaver, Ambassador to the European Union
Phoebe L. Yang, Special Coordinator for China Rule of Law, State Department
Andrew Young, Ambassador to the United Nations http://clark04.com/press/release/221 /

[cosmokramer]

12. You forgot to mention that he was the Commander in Chief of the

European Command, and the South Command (all of South America), and that he also has a degree in politics and philosophy.

In addition, he was a Chief Negotiator for the Peace Accords that took place in Dayton, Ohio in the mid-90's, and is a strong, strong environmentalist that wants to invest in clean air technologies and drastically reduce dependency on oil.

[in_cog_ni_to]

13. Thanks Cosmo.

There's so many things to remember about Wes! Thanks for the input.

[cosmokramer]

15. Good grief, I can't remember them all!

:dunce:

Your lucky you got that much out of me at 1:15 a.m.! LOL

[Dinger]

47. NO Soldiers lost either,

Foreign policy is exremely crucial, and I'm sorry, but Edwards can't hold a candle to Clark in that area, and others as well.

[faithnotgreed]

17. youre right - he is incredible. so its not accurate to say he doesnt have

domestic government experience ie the day to day knowledge and experience of the government machine? i thought that was a basic "requirement" of sorts

because as i mentioned i was thinking that he has the opposite problem (to a degree) of edwards. i should say he hasnt held this kind of office but im just going with what are the criteria for someone as vp (incl taking over the presidency if needed)

BUT if you are saying that the rw cant legitimately call him out on the fact that he hasnt held that kind of political office than thats news to me and i thank you for your expertise.

because i really like clark and all this time i was thinking he unfortunately doesnt have the domestic experience to be chosen as vp.
and i thought that must be why the media isnt talking about him.

this is what i was honestly thinking but you guys are telling me its actually he is toooo good and really is a threat to this wh

wow thanks

[in_cog_ni_to]

19. I'm just a long time supporter of Wes Clark.

I tried to read anything and everything I could about him. I NEVER miss him when he is on TV and he is without a doubt qualified on the domestic front. SOME people, including the media, would like us to think otherwise. It's just not so. He is so intelligent, he can handle ANYTHING that comes his way. Have you ever read any of his policy papers? Here's a link to his "issues" page from his web site...if you're interested in reading about particular issues.

http://clark04.com/issues/

[faithnotgreed]

23. thank you! this has been great. there is no contest then

with clark. so its just how the media is spinning it (with a little help from their friends!)

wow.

thank you again and i will look at your link.
i appreciate the time and attention to my questions....

[in_cog_ni_to]

27. You're Welcome!

It's MY pleasure to talk about Wes Clark. :)

Another thing. After Wes dropped out of the race, someone posted a "Media Watch" report here on DU. It showed how many times Wes was covered/talked about/seen on TV compared to all the other candidates. Guess who had the least amount of coverage? YUP! Wes Clark. The margin was quite large when compared to the amount of coverage Edwards, Dean and Kerry got. It was proof positive that we Clarkies weren't exaggerating. ;)

[faithnotgreed]

28. ok one last question - promise!

you are clearly well informed and intelligent. if you dont mind my asking a foolish question (another one!)..

may i ask you what you think his chances are of being chosen. ijust saw cosmokramer posted that wes has about a 20% chance and this is from someone who is clearly also a huge wes supporter.

what do you think and i promise i wont ask anything else.
thank you

[in_cog_ni_to]

29. Cosmo said that?

:spank: I think he has a VERY good chance of being VP because of the Iraq mess and his Foreign Policy experience. I give him a 95% chance at being chosen. That's just MY opinion, I could be wrong. :shrug:

I don't mind answering questions about Wes Clark! I LOVE talking about him because I admire and respect the man more than ANY politician I have ever known.

I hope you are a regular visitor to DU. It's nice to have you here! :hi:

[faithnotgreed]

30. thank you! gosh i hope i had that right. i thought he/she posted that

and im trying to find the thread but as you know there are soooo many about clark! i think its in the one about edwards charming the base for kerry - ill go look. but if im wrong i sure apologize to you and cosmo.

at any rate it was someone who really likes clark that recently posted that...

[in_cog_ni_to]

32. Don't worry about it finding the thread.

It's no big deal. Really. I'm sure I'll come across it sooner or later. :)

[faithnotgreed]

33. ok sounds good. im having no luck with it! lets just scratch it...

i know someone said it but i shouldnt have said cosmos name without being 100% certain.

but i sure am glad to hear of your confidence.

im signing off now. thank you again for all the information. i have a lot of catching up to do here....!

take good care

[cosmokramer]

46. Let me explain...

...I think Clark has a much better chance than anyone except Gephardt--and the reasoning is that Kerry and Gep are long time friends and Kerry really trusts and likes Gep (not that he doesn't feel the same about Gen. Clark, because they are clearly friends and it is crystal clear that he trusts the General or he wouldn't be putting him out there as his surrogate). But his friendship with Gep is long and deep, and that may be the difference if Gep is indeed chosen.

[faithnotgreed]

54. thank you cosmo - i only brought it up because i trust what you think

and i thought it was you who had said 20% chance. i value the honesty and discussion but that was my only thought in bringing that up. i really just wanted to see what strong clark supporters think of his chances.

[cosmokramer]

66. Thanks...just wanted to explain where my head was on that...

:bounce:

[cosmokramer]

20. In addition...

...he has testified before congress on several occasions, and was a White House Fellow in the Office of Budget Management?--he definitely understands how the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government work. He is supremely qualified, and has a far better 'resume' than any of the other serious contenders out there.

[Lefta Dissenter]

51. WOW, Incog,

You almost make me want to vote for Clark... Oh YEAH, I DID!!!

Truly, though, what a nice summary of who the man is.

[in_cog_ni_to]

53. Thanks, Vote_Clark

I just love Wes Clark and could talk about him forever. My husband thinks I'm obssessed?! For the life of me, I can't figure out why he would say such a thing. :evilgrin:

[Lefta Dissenter]

56. It couldn't be because you

have the Speedo picture hanging over your bed, could it? :shrug:

[in_cog_ni_to]

58. It's just a picture!

Just because I kiss it good night every night ....I'm obsessive? Sheesh! Men!:eyes:

[cosmokramer]

67. Lol...

:bounce:

[cosmokramer]

14. Commander in Chief of:

The European Command, and the South Command (all of South America), and that he also has a degree in politics and philosophy.

In addition, he was a Chief Negotiator for the Peace Accords that took place in Dayton, Ohio in the mid-90's, and is a strong, strong environmentalist that wants to invest in clean air technologies and drastically reduce dependency on oil.

Foreign policy being very grave at the moment, I honestly do not believe that in the event of an emergency that Sen. Edwards would be capable of handling this aspect of the job. General Clark can clearly handle foreign and domestic issues, and is ideal for the job.

[cally]

16. Hey

What made you decide to join DU? So who did you support in the primaries? Did you see the flame wars during the primaries?

[faithnotgreed]

21. i joined du because there are so many great thinkers and idealists here

its such a great forum.

as for who i supported in the primaries i have to admit that i watched little tv (except for the 2000 election debacle) for about 10 years (im in my 30s) because i just couldnt deal with the junk thats out there. its so hollow. so i didnt even know who was running until for some reason i started watching about february. and the primaries from that part on really took me in. i just wanted someone to beat * and thats what has drawn me into this forum and back into politics.

but i was political science minor in college and am a member of the green party/dc statehood. i want everyone to be involved to the degree they can.

and im sorry no i dont know about the flame wars and in fact as im sure is evident im pretty new to all this online stuff.
i do apologize for my ignorance and i really appreciate people taking their valuable time to help me along here. i really am just trying to catch up here.

thank you

[cosmokramer]

24. Welcome to DU!

:hug:

[faithnotgreed]

26. thank you! and thank you so very much for the wes information!

[juajen]

69. Welcome to DU

You're right. It is a great place to hang out; get your thoughts together; and, educate yourself on many issues.

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[Tom Rinaldo]

11. For the record

It is easy to make a strong case for why Corporate media may be opposed to allowing Wes Clark gain furhter influence in American Politics without having to also make the case that they WANT John Edwards to gain influence. Clark knows critical things that none of the other Democrats are nearly as familiar with, and he may be more of an independent voice because Clark never had to become beholden to special interests to fund prior runs for office.

I prefer to approach this question that way, personally. Possibly they see Edwards as a safer bet than Clark, but that really is not automatically saying anything negative about Edwards, though in my book it says a lot positive FOR Clark. I get put off a bit sometimes by what I experience as John Edwdard's personal ambition, but I know that is a subjective thing than can be argued any number of ways. I fully accept John Edwards as a more or less Progressive Democrat with great ability and a sincere desire to make positive changes in this country. I support Wes Clark for Vice President.

[DaveSZ]

34. I've noticed it too

They are afraid of Clark, and they control most of the media as well.

[chimpymustgo]

43. And they must also control all those Democratic voters, and party

officials who have been tricked into thinking they overwhelming want Edwards to be Kerry's VP. These Democrats must really be stupid. Sheeple, I tell ya.

Damn that right wing media. They are controlling our PARTY!!

[democratreformed]

45. I think it could be argued that they (the media) help our party leaders

to control our party. I wish I had a dollar for every time I heard "Well, I'm voting for Kerry b/c everyone wants him."

I don't mean that derogatorily toward Kerry at all and I am happy with Kerry's candidacy.

But, I did hear that OFTEN.

[Freddie Stubbs]

37. Why would the media be scared?

They have prospered under both Democratic and Republican administrations.

[Dr Fate]

39. They are scared of Clark for the same reason they are scared of Moore...

...because they dont like having their lies contradicted. They know that the more face-time Clark gets, the more media myths they so carefully presented are destroyed.

[Freddie Stubbs]

41. Which media myths will Clark be able to destroy better that another

VP candidate?

[Dr Fate]

42. General Wes Clark: "Iraq is a strategic failure"

Somehow, when that comes from a Westpoint Graduate, NATO Commander & decorated Vietnam Vet, it seems to really shake up the media guys who having been lying about it.

[Darkamber]

63. What lies have they been saying and why would it matter?

I'm sorry..media reports the news. They try to get the most exciting stories and best plot lines for ratings.

But I'm not sure what kind of threat Wes Clark is to them. We don't even know if the final outcome of the war will be a failure. The power transfer happened today. What happens from here on out will be important and quite frankly for the sake of all those young men and woman who have died over there I hope we succeed in something.

I don't want their deaths to have been for nothing.

The Media might put on guests who have opposite views of Clark and they might express some personal opinion one way or another, but I have heard the left media too. And on those shows, the conservatives claim the "Liberal media" is out to get Bush.

You can call the Media 'whores' if you wish as they are interested in making a buck, but I don't see any great feeling out there that Clark is a threat to them. Doesn't make any sense. How would having Clark as VP threaten their ability to report the news?

[Qutzupalotl]

72. If the Democrats win,

Michael Powell won't be head of the FCC, and won't allow the media to consolidate as freely as they had planned. Granted, their plans were recently thwarted by a court decision, but Powell is still alive to fight another day.

Clark on the ticket practically guarantees the Democrats will win. Edwards would give them a run for their money, too, but I think they see Kerry/Edwards as beatable.

As to what lies the media have told...do you really have to ask? How about...we had to take out Saddam...he was threatening the United States...the weapons inspections weren't working...he had ties to Al Qaeda...Bush is a strong leader in the War on Terra...Iraq is part of the War on Terra...they reported Iraq violated UN Res. 1441, but not the irony that we went in against the UN's wishes (violating the UN to support it)...we have an international coalition (technically true but very misleading). The media were mouthpieces for the administration.

You are correct that the media goes for ratings first. Unfortunately, that means that they supported Bush when his ratings were over 50%, whether he was violating international law or not. That is an unforgivable dereliction of their duty to question authority and provide a balanced debate.

[tom_paine]

38. I would then choose the OPPOSITE of what the Media Whores want

Sounds like Wes Clark is a great pcik if the Whores say the opposite!

[Dr Fate]

40. If the media told me "sex is good" I would cut my wee-wee off.

I've noticed the media's caution concerning Clark too- it was one of the red flags that made me like him so much...

[in_cog_ni_to]

48. This is what killed me.

From the MSNBC Veepstakes poll thread...It was posted that the talkings heads had announced that Wes Clark was the winner of their Veepsatkes Poll for the 6TH week in a row. They then proceeded to discuss the VP possibilities of who would be Kerry's VP choice and DIDN'T EVEN MENTION WES CLARK AND THEY HAD JUST ANNOUNCED THAT HE HAD WON THEIR FRIGGIN' POLL! :nuke: You can't tell me they aren't ignoring him and you can't tell me that they aren't doing it on PURPOSE!

[faithnotgreed]

55. this is getting VERY interesting for me.

as ive mentioned in this thread, i havent watched the media for a long long time until about february or so. then i started watching the news which i hadnt done for about 10 years (except i did watch the 2000 election and it only sadly confirmed what i had feared from the media)
anyway i was watching (have since stopped) but i get links to news stories from DUers and its blowing my mind a little. they really are purveyors of mistruths and censorship and bias etc. im getting quite a lesson.

i agree with the person who just said that they want to do opposite of what the media says.

incognito: just to let you know, cosmo responded to our posts of last night and confirmed what i mentioned. but explained he thought gephardt likely only because he knows kerry has a deep relationship with gephardt
anyway just wanted to clear that up and thank you again for your involvement here and on this thread. youve really helped me a lot.

[in_cog_ni_to]

57. You're welcome, faith!

I read cosmo's post above. I understand her/his thinking. Gep and Kerry have been friends for a long time.

For the media....they are not to be trusted any more. The days of honest journalism are gone. No more Edward R. Murrow or Walter Cronkite. I even remember the days when TV News anchores didn't offer ANY personal commentary after their news reports. Now it's commonplace for them to give their opinions...like "I" care what they think? I would rather make up my own mind...Thank You very much!

Anyway....I'm glad you're back and hope you're a fixture here on DU!

[FrenchieCat]

59. More evidence of the media bias against Clark right here....

Newsweek Poll on MSNBC website. Notice that Clark is not listed as a VP contender....although he has been winning the VP poll at MSNBC for the last 6 weeks in a row. I know that others are also left off....but they didn't come in first in the Sister website poll, either.

Since when is Dean in the running for VP? There is an "interesting" article in Newseek about how to run for VP and there is a poll about the choices Edwards, Geppy, Dean, & someone else are the 4 choice. Of course Edwards is winning by 60%. Needless to say there is no mention of Clark....as I guess he is "someone else".

It's a pitiful shame. Had Wes been given his dues......More people would want him on the ticket...as President during the primaries...and as the VP pick now. This is absurd and oh, so Obvious!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5305082/site/newsweek/

[faithnotgreed]

60. ok. can i ask everyone: does the media give one (or any) reason

why wes is "not" in the running? i hadnt heard them speak to this

to the extent that we can "know" - does wes want to be vp?

has he ever seriously said he doesnt want to be vp? i know he has said he is happy where he is but i know everyone has to say that

they only seem to have him on because of his awesome intelligence in relation to this iraqi debacle but yet NO ONE speaks of him for vp?????

im surprised and grateful that they even have him on at all

[in_cog_ni_to]

61. They will not say Wes Clark

and VP in the same sentence. They don't ever explain anything they say or do...they just manipulate with their slanted rag reports...er...journalism.

Wes Clark has been asked many times if he would accept the VP position and he always says no, he's happy in the private sector. They ALL say that though so, I don't believe it. When he does say no, he says it with a grin ole' grin on his face. If he was asked, he would answer the call to serve his country once again. I don't doubt that for a second.

[PATRICK]

62. Yes he scares them

and that is personal more than electoral calculation. Clark represents the defection of the military back to the Dems, removing whole columns of supposed GOP and corporate from the underpinnings of their bias. He not only a straight shooter but a clear and lethal one. Their game would not only shot down but shot up and messed up. Edwards can beat them too but Clark threatens the very games they play.

Consider his polar opposite, Colin Powell, the darling of the media should they, not the Supremes, have a choice for president.

Whatever the motivations, I think the press fear(not dislike, disagreement, worry about a military background) is visceral and nearly impossible to attack honestly.

I think this is separate from public support for Clark or Edwards. The main issue of great triumph here is that Kerry does not NEED one or the other, nor will he fall under their shadow. They may be pumping up a shadow of Edwards to cast over Kerry, but that is an insane backfire strategy at this point. The public's support of Kerry is becoming a growing background sentiment the press also simply will NOT publicize.

[faithnotgreed]

64. if the media fears wes then i REALLY love him!

like others ill support whomever jk chooses but the unfolding of all this is just incredibly interesting to me (and many others of course)

thank you all. i didnt know i could get any more interested in this race...

its like having inside information and youre just watching it unfold when these interviewers or other guests try to knock him down

[Qutzupalotl]

73. That big ol' grin when he says he can't talk about the VP process

is a dead giveaway, IMO. I saw him on Hardball on Friday when Campbell Brown asked about VP chances. He started to smile during his answer, saying he's consistently said he's not interested, can't talk about it, blah blah blah...but then he started laughing. He knows something we don't, something that makes him happy, something that will make a lot of us very happy, very soon.

Kerry's no fool. Wes Clark has already been chosen for VP. I just have a feeling.

[cosmokramer]

71. General Clark is being vetted by the Kerry camp...

...which is a clear indication that if he is asked, he would accept. One is not 'vetted' for a job without submitting their 'resume' to the employer. If he would not accept the job, he would have told Kerry this long ago and his vetting would not be taking place.