Reply #60: Re: No-- maybe yes [View All]

[andym]

Counterpoints

>>1. Clark is too closely tied to the Clintons.

It would be a gesture of reconciliation with the Clintons.

>>2. Even though odds strongly favor Obama winning the nomination, Clark supported Clinton's attack on Obama regarding his ability to be commander-in-chief (even though the Republicans will use this footage in the general election).

For the most part he has said that Hillary Clinton is the most qualified candidate to be commander in chief. He hasn't said to my knowledge that Obama is completely unqualified. In any case, he has two paths to correct this. One is that he plays up that he and Obama both had the good sense to oppose the IWR. Two, he (Clark) is on the ticket because he brings special insight on international affairs and the military that goes way beyond Clinton (or Obama).

>3. As a former strong Clark supporter, I thought I would never think this about Clark, but I'm worried that he would say something like "I won't be Obama's Dick Cheney" hurting Obama's chances in November.

His political savvy has grown since the 2004 campaign. Probably not much of a worry.

>4. Clark, who decried dirty politics in 04, has remained silent while the Clinton campaign has engaged in dirty, disgusting, gutter politics. They have tried to divide blacks and whites, blacks and Hispanics, the younger and older generation, unions, etc. How Clark could view this as good for this nation is beyond me. It makes me question whether his loyalty to the Clintons has clouded his judgment and question whether he has put loyalty to the Clintons above loyalty to county (or to the Democratic Party).

I am sure Wes Clark is not pleased by some of what he has seen in this election or the last election. However, one pattern that repeats itself is that the Clinton campaign backs off as the divisiveness charge is raised. I'd like to think if they did not back off Clark would have removed himself from the campaign.