Reply #74: As I've said before, you're one of the good guys [View All]

[PurityOfEssence]

(If that sounds like the flimsy disclaimer of the bigot that "why, some of my best friends are blankety-blanks", then I fully admit the validity of that feeling: the extremist Clarkies have gotten way under my skin, and it's plain to see.)

The Clark-Edwards feud is tiresome, and I know I'm a part of the problem. Many of us get bent out of shape due to the seriousness of the situation: the reactionaries have had a temporary setback in their 27 year run of atavistic control, but they're far from out of commission. Couple the perceived direness of the situation with the hopes we partisans have for our respective champions, and things can get very nasty. It's human nature.

My missive was directed at David, since he doesn't seem to want to respond to direct questions from me on a thread he started; he's been traditionally VERY rough on Edwards, and to go into a flamboyantly dramatic screed of personal betrayal, accusing Edwards of opportunism and callousness to the literal agonizing deaths of the innocents got my dander up. The fact that he also gushes praise for Clark--whose stance on the issue and willingness to even stand up and be counted on this issue is MARKEDLY WORSE THAN EDWARDS'--is ridiculous. Obviously, there's more at play here, or he wouldn't shriek with the wounds of the deeply wronged about the transgression of someone who's more of an ally on this critical issue than his own champion is or has been.

In the endless struggle with the extremists of the Clark camp, I've always tried to express it as such: the problem is the extremists of his supporters. Yes, I DO have many problems with him, but the scorched-earth zeal of the most combative is my real problem.

I'll stand by my statement about his lies, and I'd like to hear some kind of response. To date, you're one of only two that I've seen who have admitted that his deliberate lie about Kerry's and Edwards' votes on the Bush tax cuts was just that: a calculated and deliberate lie. His statements about school vouchers are also well documented, as are his statements about how he would have voted on the IWR and his counseling of another politician on how she should vote if given the chance. The distortion of Edwards' voting record when being asked to apologize for the tax vote lie is another good example.

For all of the slagging that went on in the '03-'04 primary season, there were very few outright and provable lies; the only other one that really comes to mind would be Dean's distortion about the tax cut votes, and it should be pointed out that he got called out on this in a big way. Thus, not only was Clark's rehashing of the same lie an obvious lie, it was an idiotic tactic in light of Dean's having been found out. One problem with very smart people is that they often overestimate the stupidity of others, and among the traits necessary for a good president is TACTICAL SENSE.

Couple all this with the lavish praising of the Bush Administration's foreign policy that Clark made in a very important speech early in '01, and there's a lot of explaining that needs to be done. Remember: by the time that he spoke praising Junior, Dick, Colin and Donnie, they had already shown their true colors in an obvious and imperious way.

I'll give Clark a few breaks along the lines of having seen the error of his ways and having realized where he wanted to be in the political spectrum, and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and presume that these are sincere, but it's tiresome in the face of extremist and confrontational acolytes who demand a MUCH higher standard of consistency and morality from everyone else than their chosen champion.

Hero worship annoys me, and there's a cult aspect to his appeal that is unmistakable; I'm hardly the only one who sees this.

Backing off for a second, I will say this: if he's going to run, he'd better do so immediately. The blush of the newfound savior is gone; that trick only works once, and he misplayed it the last time. To jump into a race after many have been standing up and taking the hits smacks of a bit of unfairness, and whether that's fair or not to say (politics is a nasty business, after all) many others will feel the same way.

Playing the fad/star card is risky, and time works against it. This is happening to Obama as we speak, and it'll be interesting to see if he's got the staying power.

Much of Clark's appeal was that he was OUR military guy, thus dispelling the fear that we were all too weak to deal with international war. Well, that time is past: people are weary of the war and wary of the war-makers; there's really no need to be "tougher" than them. All of the masculine puffery that brought us "For a Stronger America" and Kerry's "reporting for duty" are relics of a time when the war wasn't such an albatross.

Personally, I'm very worried that the Hillary bandwagon is just going to steamroller us all and give us her as a candidate; I truly believe that, barring some kind of extreme circumstance, she's unelectable. Clark entering the race now would probably splinter the factions supporting her chief viable rivals, and I think that's a terrible thing.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply, and thanks for being able to chide and still keep the channels open; in a black and white world, some thoughtful greyness is much valued.

(edited for punctuation and diction)