Drudge has his Alert up on Clark...

[wyldwolf]

...but no link to the story...

http://www.drudge.com

[ronzo]

1. what's it say? i won't hit drudge.

ptooey.

[Blue_Chill]

2. it reads:

GENERAL CLARK PRAISED CONDI, POWELL, RUMSFELD AND BUSH: 'WE NEED THEM THERE'

[wyldwolf]

3. Says he praised Bush, Rummy, Condi...

..in a speech... but no link...

[diplomats]

5. Isn't this old news?

I seem to recall hearing this a few days ago, but I don't remember what context it was in.

[ronzo]

10. Yeah...

I think we've heard this one before...

[diplomats]

8. If it was a speech

I wonder how long ago it was.

[ronzo]

113. thanks.

I appreciate that, folks. Just can't bring myself to visit Mitty's site.

[Skinner]

4. Your link is wrong.

Try this one instead:

http://www.drudgereport.com/

[Blue_Chill]

6. Story is on the front page no link needed. It reads:

During extended remarks delivered at the Pulaski County GOP Lincoln Day Dinner in Little Rock, Arkansas on May 11, 2001, General Clark declared: "And I'm very glad we've got the great team in office, men like Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Paul O'Neill - people I know very well - our president George W. Bush. We need them there."

Clark praised Reagan for improving the military:

"We were really helped when President Ronald Reagan came in. I remember non-commissioned officers who were going to retire and they re-enlisted because they believed in President Reagan."

Clark continued: "That's the kind of President Ronald Reagan was. He helped our country win the Cold War. He put it behind us in a way no one ever believed would be possible. He was truly a great American leader. And those of us in the Armed Forces loved him, respected him, and tremendously admired him for his great leadership."

source www.drudgereport.com

[WilliamPitt]

9. Write a thank you note to Drudge

All the conservative-types who are puking sick of Bush - and there are a lot of them - will look at that and say, "Hmmm...Clark!"

[VolcanoJen]

14. Once again, in his attempts to encourage the Dems to eat themselves...

... Drudge is actually encouraging Repubs to take a closer look at Clark in '04.

Thanks, Drudgie!

[diplomats]

15. Hey, Will, I hadn't thought of that!

[WilliamPitt]

19. Think about it

:)

We win by bringing in disaffected GOPers. Clark has this in spades.

[diplomats]

30. Cool!

I can dig that.

[CMT]

32. true

but I think many of our candidates can appeal to "enlightened" republicans and Independents.

[Mairead]

48. But do we really want a pyrrhic victory?

I don't understand the win-even-if-we-sell-our-souls mindset. There's something broken about it.

[WilliamPitt]

53. There is something broken about it

It's called America. Severe measures required.

[Mairead]

119. But why is selling out the right kind of severe measure

That's the problem I have. To me, 'severe measures' are something like sacrificing our evenings and weekends to get the word out about the guy who's being studiously ignored by Media Inc., not something like preemptively selling out. That doesn't make sense to me.

[w4rma]

50. I agree. Clark will make a great Vice President.

And in 2012, he'll likely make a great President. :)

[lanlady]

56. yes, Clark should play it to his advantage

bipartisan etc.

[MIMStigator]

21. yeup. Thank Drudge for bringing Reagan democrats home

n/t

[IndianaGreen]

66. And for driving all the liberals out of Clark's Repucratic Party!

Reagan was a wicked evil man that did horrible things abroad and at home. Voting twice for Reagan is bad enough, groveling at the Reagan idol makes Clark totally unacceptable to me, and I am sure, many others.

:puke:

[Dr Fate]

108. What? Liberals who vote green?

No Liberal who cares about this country would vote against Clark (and hand it over to Bush) if he is nominated...

Rather than taking a stroll down memory lane with Bush supporter Matt Drudge, I'd rather focus on Clark's policies- some of them quite Liberal in fact- the difference is a DEM candidate would actually have a chance of IMPLEMENTING those Liberal policies besides talking about them like...

Clark is not my 1st choice, but we would make a great VP- and I would certainly vote for him if he runs against Bush.

[bearfartinthewoods]

59. i'm retracting my ABB/

i was confident that i could vote for any of the dems running.
i'm not confident Clark is a dem. I'm not sure i can vote for him.

i knew i was a dem from before i cast my first vote. clarks refusal to identify himself as a dem all summer made me nervous. then we hear who he voted for a decade ago. then we hear who he raised money for and praised two years ago.

i don't think he is really a dem.
i think he's an opportunist.

[cprise]

70. Poindexter, Ollie North, etc. must really appreciate it

...that we have politicians under both Party brands concerned about casting them in a positive light.

[dfong63]

72. bingo

[Dr Fate]

109. WOW? Straying from your normally centrist position huh?

Who woulda thunk it- Bearfart- a Left-Wing Democrat!!!!

[Speed8098]

118. Bearfart, if you mean that, then the rw wins

Why do you think the votes for reagan and the comments he made concerning the current administration are so mainstream?

The Right Wing machine wants to cause dissension in our ranks.

My personal choice is Edwards, but I WILL pull the lever for the Democrat that gets the nod, and I hope you would too.

Our main goal needs to be to get this destructive administration out of the White House and hopefully into the Big House.

[diplomats]

11. Gee, that was 2 1/2 years ago

[Freddie Stubbs]

7. Here is the text:

During extended remarks delivered at the Pulaski County GOP Lincoln Day Dinner in Little Rock, Arkansas on May 11, 2001, General Clark declared: "And I'm very glad we've got the great team in office, men like Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Paul O'Neill - people I know very well - our president George W. Bush. We need them there."

Clark praised Reagan for improving the military:

"We were really helped when President Ronald Reagan came in. I remember non-commissioned officers who were going to retire and they re-enlisted because they believed in President Reagan."

Clark continued: "That's the kind of President Ronald Reagan was. He helped our country win the Cold War. He put it behind us in a way no one ever believed would be possible. He was truly a great American leader. And those of us in the Armed Forces loved him, respected him, and tremendously admired him for his great leadership."

http://www.drudgereport.com

[thebigidea]

49. Cheney and Rumsfeld are STILL a great team

GOOD MEN. Friends of mine. Colleagues. We can work together.

[wyldwolf]

12. Yeah, old news...

...it was at the fund raising dinner in 2001. We've known Clark voted for Reagan so these words don't surprise me.

[diplomats]

16. Yes, the Reagan praise is no big shock

[roughsatori]

20. Funny, when I posted that he praised Republicans at the dinner

in 2001, I was called a liar by one of his supporters. In much more colorful language and their post was deleted.

[Pepperbelly]

25. what's really funny is that ...

you are bragging about posting a story that so interests Drudge. That's REALLY funny.

:D

[Blue_Chill]

28. lol true that is funny.

good one :D

[roughsatori]

38. I don't think you would care if Clark praised Bush at the debate

and I think that is not funny at all. Still it is the inconvenient truth.

[Pepperbelly]

44. I think that ...

you should both clean your crystal ball AND learn to see irony. Enlightenment is not that serious a subject.

[Blue_Chill]

27. need a tissue?

I'm not surprised someone called you a liar being that most attack on Clark that I see pop up on DU are lies. This enviroment has made his supporters quick to react. Blame the flame warriors.

[roughsatori]

41. Mine was the truth but you don't care about that obviously

So you don't hold Clark supporters accountable for being wrong when they call facts "lies."? And then you blame others for Clark supporters behavior. That is sad indeed.

[Pepperbelly]

60. I don't know who did what you said ...

about saying something was a lie when it was not but that happens with such regularity on this board that I hardly believe it merits the full 3-nail crucifixtion with the crown of thorns. Just be pleased that you know the truth.

[CMT]

34. but I thought he turned Democrat

under Clinton.

[soleft]

13. interesting timing

[jeter]

18. Can't everyone see how frightened the GOP are?

This makes me want to support him even more. They are targetting Democrats. Why the fuck would Drudge think Clark's support (3 years ago) of Bush is a bad thing?

Jesus, their heads are about to explode from this obsession with Clark. They are scared shitless. That can only be a good thing.

I still say Dean wins. But Clark will be (and should be) the VP.

[diplomats]

24. Exactly

and if he's asked about those remarks he can say that in the 2 1/2 years since Bush has turned this country into a friggin' mess. And he'd be right on the money.

[CBHagman]

102. John McLaughlin went after Clark last weekend.

Yes, the defrocked Jesuit complained that Clark was inarticulate (!) and had a little bit of Ross Perot paranoia about it.

I figured McLaughlin, who has noticeably soured on Bush, was trying to work against Clark's candidacy. He knows Clark is a threat and credible, and he's going after him.

By the way, McLaughlin also attacked the Clintons non-stop for eight years, even running footage of Juanita Broaddrick. Yep, J.M. is nervous at any threat to the White House.

The weird thing is that McLaughlin actually likes Mayor Martin O'Malley (D-Baltimore), so go figure.

[MIMStigator]

17. same old crap all democrats said back then /eom

eom

[roughsatori]

33. I'm a Democrat and NEVER praised the Bush administration

Nor did many others at this site. You must be hanging around with an odd lot of Dems. You could say "I" said that and it might be accurate; but to say "all Dems" said that is patently false.

[tjdee]

37. Me either.

Especially after the recount thing.

But then, I wasn't talking to any Republicans either.

[hedda_foil]

86. Not in May of '01 they didn't!

In May of '01 * was in terrible trouble and the Dems knew it. That shoulder to shoulder business didn't happen until 9/11/01.

[sandnsea]

116. No they didn't

I don't know where everybody else was, but throughout the entire Reagan/Bush years me and everybody else I know was standing around saying "What good economy?" Sound familiar? Sure the stock market was going up, but it wasn't due to real production, it was down-sizing, buyouts and mergers. Inflation was under control in the 80's, but that was the only good thing about that economy. And Bush was worse. They were never as popular as history makes them out to be.

[wyldwolf]

22. WAIT! I sense something... odd...

The text says it was May 11, 2001... 4 MONTHS BEFORE 9/11!

If Clark said this about Bush and crew, what could he have been talking about?

Smells a little bogus.

[wyldwolf]

29. I SAID... WAIT! The Bush remarks seem bogus...

[Blue_Chill]

31. wait for what? If drudge wants to bring Raygun dem back to our side

I say more power to him.

[Zero Gravitas]

39. No he wants to turn Dems against Clark

So Chimpy won't get his butt kicked in the election by him.

[wyldwolf]

40. It's the quotes on Bush...

...the timing seems off...

"President George Bush had the courage and the vision... and we will always be grateful to President George Bush for that tremendous leadership and statesmanship."

I can see someone saying this post 9/11, but not before.

Seems odd... like it didn't happen.

[JasonBerry]

95. So, excuse me, is this CORRECT?

A progressive - on this PROGRESSIVE board - would support a man for PRESIDENT who actually said those words?????? I would question your right to be on this board! The rules make it clear - it's a discussion board for DEMOCRATS and PROGRESSIVES. If Wesley K. Clark said what Drudge is claiming he said --- on tape --- Clark is an impostor and those who go along for the ride are accomplices to a hijacking of the Democratic party. Period.

[tjdee]

23. Obviously, if he felt the same way he wouldn't be running AGAINST Bush.

You know, we can go around and around on this, and I'm sure we will.

Drudge posted this, and this is going to be big news, because they DON'T WANT CLARK TO BE THE NOMINEE. They are trying to PISS DEMOCRATS OFF. Clark would stomp Bush like a tiny bug. In fact, this revelation makes me even surerer of it.

As to my personal feeling about this...I don't like it, but then, he's not my guy anyway. But I see no reason to discard Clark, by any means. If he was so in love with the Bushies, he wouldn't be trying to remove them from their jobs, would he.

Unless someone is prepared to call Clark a liar, and say that he is flatly lying about being pro-choice, pro-affirmative action, anti-Iraq war, etc....
how does this change things?

[JasonBerry]

98. SURE he would!

An OPPORTUNIST who wanted to be president would run for president if they saw an opening and had people begging him to run.

Your statement sounds more like Bush on Hussein. "Well, if he tried to make us think there was a connection between Hussein and 9-11, then he must not want us to think that now!"

Except that....we have video tape.

OPPORTUNISM.

[roughsatori]

26. His supporters wouldn't care even if he did this yesterday

It won't change anything. He will not be held accountable, but his supporters will attempt to hold anyone accountable who is bothered by this 2001 praise of the Republican idiots and has the temerity to mention it.

[tjdee]

35. Are you saying he's lying about his positions?

Do you think he's really pro-life?

Do you think he loves the NRA?

Do you think he wanted to invade Iraq unilaterally?

Do you not care if he's lying or not??

Let's just get to it.

Do you think Clark is lying about what he thinks today?
If not, what difference does it make?

[dfong63]

58. he's fickle

Do you think he's really pro-life?
Do you think he loves the NRA?
Do you think he wanted to invade Iraq unilaterally?
Do you not care if he's lying or not??
Let's just get to it.
Do you think Clark is lying about what he thinks today?
If not, what difference does it make?

these are his positions today. they weren't his positions (relatively) yesterday. who knows that his positions will be tomorrow? he doesn't have to be "lying". maybe he'll just "nuance" his positions.

as another poster said, Clark's convictions have not (yet) stood the test of time. Clark hasn't yet come under the kind of concentrated fire that the eventual dem nominee will face. Clark hasn't yet faced the kind of pressure and temptation that real politicians face in office. nevertheless, Clark has already waffled on his Iraq War Resolution stance. or "nuanced" his supporters might say. but how can we be confident he won't "nuance" his current stance on other issues?

he doesn't have a track record in electoral politics.

[Pepperbelly]

62. What bullshit!

How do you know what his positions were the day before on any of those things? Yet, you are assuming that it was not. And your cannard about the IWR...

First, have you even read the resolution? It isn't exactly sexy reading nor does it condense into 15 second bits. I, for one, had many contradictory thoughts/opinions about the subject at the time. You might call it waffling if you want but for a huge number of people, the issues weren't nearly as black/white as you now contend. In fact, at the time, there was indeed confusion about what the IWR actually allowed.

In addition, if you want Wesley to cheap-shot Lieberman, Kerry, Edwards, and Gephardt over their votes on a rather difficult issue, you will be waiting a long time. He tried, as serious men who aren't pols do, to empathize with the difficulty of the decision without realizing how certain people would run with the comments.

You can call it waffling if you want but I think you are wrong.

[dfong63]

84. i expect a rhodes scholar to be able to express complexity,

without contradicting himself all over the place. yes i call it waffling when someone first says yes, then no, then maybe. an intelligent person who hadn't made up his mind could have said right from the outset that it was a complicated situation and he hadn't decided. but he didn't do that.

remember how Clark stalled for months on declaring his candidacy? he's quite capable of refusing to answer, when it suits his purposes.

so i don't think there's any excuse for his waffling on the IWR. if it was too complicated, he should have just said so from the beginning. if it wasn't too complicated, then why couldn't he make a decision and stick with it?

i don't think it was that complicated anyway. lots of people who aren't rhodes scholars, were able to figure out that giving a loaded gun to a deranged criminal is not a good idea.

but, getting back to my earlier point: Clark's position on IWR changed all over the map within the course of a few days. why should we believe in the stability of his positions on any other issues?

[Pepperbelly]

90. I don't think he waffled at all and ...

I also don't think that you will ever believe any differently.

I guess we just disagree.

[dfong63]

89. i don't buy it

He tried, as serious men who aren't pols do, to empathize with the difficulty of the decision without realizing how certain people would run with the comments.

oh, poor guy, he just didn't realize how people would run with his comments? how do you reconcile that with this:

``"He was a star on the West Point debating team, which was always one, two, or three on the college circuit. He'll be a match for anybody in debate. He's smart enough to know what he doesn't know."'' csmonitor article on clark's entry

could it be he's not quite as sharp as he was being sold?

[Pepperbelly]

91. I realize that ..

your belief is that someone should take whatever shots that they can. Wesley will not do that. So I guess he can't count on your vote, huh?

:D

[JasonBerry]

100. How dare anybody question GENERAL Clark !!! N/T

[JasonBerry]

99. I think he's lying

There are too many statements in the past! Why are you so willing to believe Wesley Clark - when all the evidence points to an opportunist saying what tjdee, and others, want to hear?

[diplomats]

36. You do realize

your response is exactly what Drudge wants. Oh well.

[dfong63]

43. wonderful - the ABBers would embrace Rush Limbaugh with open arms,

... if only he'd wear the "dem" jersey.

[Julien Sorel]

81. Held accountable for what?

He won't be held accountable for beating his wife, either.

[newsguyatl]

42. IMPOSTER!!!!

[wyldwolf]

45. I saw your locked thread about the Drudge story on Clark...

...I will remind you in weeks to come of your claim that Drudge is finally being a journalist.

[WilliamPitt]

52. Hee hee hee hee hee

Credibility...poof!

[WilliamPitt]

46. Heh

A whole bunch of conservatives who are sick and terrified of Bush just saw that and said, "Hmmm...Clark!"

That's how we win...and you think it's a bad thing.

You = One-Note Johnny.

:)

[Egnever]

117. your freaking dreaming

yea they are sick and terified of bushco and they just saw clark say "I am bushco" and they went yea thats what I want more bushco!

I want some of what your smokin

[tjdee]

73. "DRUDGE IS FINALLY BEING A JOURNALIST!"

Seriously, I think that's the funniest thing I've ever read at DU.

[VolcanoJen]

47. This "story" just goes to show...

... that Republicans are probably very pissed that Rove didn't return Clark's alleged phone calls.

Thanks again for the Republican crossover votes, Drudgie!

:D :D :D :D :D

[59millionmorons]

51. Great, thats all we need is a President who plays well with others

Thats just horrible. Get over it. With democrats like you who needs republicans. Where not going to win with just Democrats we need help from Indy's and Reps.

[wyldwolf]

55. Get over it? Did I say I had a problem with it?

... bit touchy, are we? I was just pointing the story out. Be careful who you're replying to, please.

[59millionmorons]

63. I'm sorry

I confused your post with the locked threat on the same subject were the guy had a bunch of bombs blowing up trying to say Clark is finished.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=405184

[wyldwolf]

64. Oh, then, trash him. He needs it.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

54. Know What? I Am Thrilled This Came Out.

Assuming it's true, anyway.

That's because if the worst thing Thugs can find about Clark is that he said nice things about Reagan -- nice things that resonate from a military man, no less -- and Bush Sr., then I'm happy indeed.

This is just more RW efforts to split the base. It's a pity that a decent number here are going to swallow the bait, hook, line and sinker.

I'm also quite happy that, based on my understanding, Independents are able to vote in the Democratic primaries in most of the states out there.

DTH

[IndianaGreen]

68. Reagan did not win the Cold War!

If Clark believes that, he is a complete fool, no different from the people that believe all the drivel that Faux News puts out.

Ask yourself how many Presidents had a hand waging the Cold War, you will find out that many of them were Democrats.

Clark is dead meat!

[DoveTurnedHawk]

74. Reagan Damaged Our Economy By Boosting Defense Spending

But the Russians couldn't keep up, and that's one major reason in their collapse.

I hate a lot of what Reagan did, but that one maneuver was smart, and it paid off, IMO.

DTH

[Julien Sorel]

83. Re-read the story.

He did not say Reagan won the cold war.


Another example of true journalism: hysteria affects cognitive abilities -- the evidence mounts.

[MattNC]

93. he didn't..

win it on his own, but he certainly drove the final nail in the coffin.

[cprise]

78. LOL Pot to Kettle: "Splitting the base"

Clark is splitting the base already without help from any of his GOP friends.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

79. Umm, No

Clark is saying all of the right things. It takes RW shills like Drudge and LW hacks like CounterPunch to stir the pot.

DTH

[JasonBerry]

101. It takes Drudge to stir the pot?

If what Drudge is reporting is TRUE, are you going to blame the messenger? Why not blame the opportunistic general who thought he could waltz in with his medals, pretty hair, nice smile - and HIJACK the Democratic party?

[tinnypriv]

57. What is this fucking bullshit about America having to bail out Europe?

Blow me Clark. :puke:

My family demonstrated against those bases and missiles.

And as for the Reagan praise? Jesus H Christ in a chicken basket.

REAGAN?

And you guys want this bloke to increase respect for the US around the world?

Bombed Kosovo, Voted Reagan. Great resume. Not.

[Snellius]

61. Is Clark praising W. or H.W.?

One of these quotes in praise of "George Bush" is obviously in reference to George Hebert Walker Bush:

Clark on President George Bush: "President George Bush had the courage and the vision... and we will always be grateful to President George Bush for that tremendous leadership and statesmanship."

Drudge is obviously trying to sow the seeds of misinformation, but Clark's praise for Republicans will only enhance his ability to attract independent voters.

[wyldwolf]

65. GOOD POINT!

[DoveTurnedHawk]

67. Clearly HW

And what's more, he might praise certain members of the Shrub Admin, but I don't see Drudge highlighting any praise of Shrub himself.

DTH

[JasonBerry]

103. Wellll....

Are you going to support somebody who TWO YEARS ago was speaking at a GOP fundraiser praising CHENEY, RUMSFELD, CONDI RICE?? An yes, HW Bush? Has he become a saint that "progressive" people would have been praising TWO YEARS ago? Please.

[IndianaGreen]

69. He is praising George W.

Otherwise he would not have mentioned Condi Rice, Powell, and Rumsfeld in the same sentence!

Had Clark spoken about Poppy Bush, he would have mentioned Dick Cheney and James Baker, who served as Poppy's Secretaries of Defense and State respectively.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

71. It's a Different Section, IG

Drudge is just playing selective quoting.

DTH

[IndianaGreen]

75. Well, I'll like to see the entire source that Drudge is quoting!

This is a very unsettling development!

[DoveTurnedHawk]

80. Me Too

I want to read it all, too.

DTH

[IndianaGreen]

114. MSNBC showed the RNC video of Clark's speech

Clark was speaking of George W. Bush, not Poppy!

[Julien Sorel]

85. You mean you can become *more*

unsettled about Clark? I'm tempted to go through some of your other posts to see how unsettled you were, and then simply try to imagine what impact this 'very unsettling development' would have on your attitude. Now that really is unsettling.

[RamboLiberal]

77. It's HW I think

I read it 3 times - I think it's HW he's praising. Yes, Drudgie is playing games.

And geez it's about all he has up on his site. Drudgie think's he's found Clark's Blue Dress.

I'm not thrilled about these remarks, and it does take Clark down a notch in my book, but I'd still vote for him. I'm not sure I'd want him as Prez but I'd love to see him on Dem ticket as VP.

[IndianaGreen]

115. In the video, Clark is speaking of George W. Bush!

We should have suspected that Drudge's source was a RNC video, which MSNBC showed tonight, that beyond a reasonable doubt proves that Clark was referring to George W.

I am starting to suspect that Clark voted for George W. Bush in 2000!

[dfong63]

76. gee, can't Clark find anyone in his own party to praise?

... besides himself, i mean.

[Snellius]

105. Consider that these remarks are from May 11, 2001

It's inconceivable that Clark would have praised George Jr. with "we will always be grateful to President George Bush for that tremendous leadership and statesmanship" when he had done little at that point, especially in "statesmanship" (other than kowtow to the Chinese over a spy plane), and after only five months in office.

[RobertSeattle]

82. Just a Prediction (Since this is via Drudge)

SHOUT the big LIE
whisper the apology

[althecat]

87. Worth adding to the mix - Clark has a record of opening his mouth...

.. and talking complete crap apparently.

From the latest undernews.... Sam Smith's newsletter on progressive politics. Seems he has had a bit of mail from Clarkies... He responds talking about the politics of First Impressions.

******

"Wesley Clark is the latest manifestation of the politics of first
impressions. The job of the Review, however, is not to foster the latest
myth, report only things that support readers' hopes, or - in the words
of Russell Baker - serve as a megaphone for frauds. If you want that, go
turn on your TV.

Our job is to tell you, as best we can, what the hell is going on.
Unfortunately, the facts about Clark simply do not fit the fantasy that
has quickly developed around him. This is not a revelation for me. I
have been following Clark ever since a high Clinton administration
official told me during the Bosnian business what a problem the guy was
to all around him. I would subsequently learn that one reason these
people were around him was that Richard Holbrooke told them to be there,
to reduce the chances of Clark saying something stupid to the press. "

******

[TLM]

88. This really gives lie to Clark booster's claims that Clark

is some kind of great progressive liberal hope.


Clark is, at best, a centrist. Now there's nothing wrong with being a centrist, but at least be honest about it and stop trying to make Clark out to be some deeply heartfelt progressive liberal democrat. The man was voting for, and heaping praise on, republicans just a few months/years ago.

So obviously this guy is not a "from the heart" liberal progressive. He's a centrist, and frankly, if I'm voting for a centrist, I'm voting for one with a policy record, experience, and one who was not military brass with very questionable actions and associations in his past.

I still think Clark would be a good VP, but not president...not for 8 years anyway.

[JasonBerry]

92. Blame The Messenger, HUH???

I don't like Matt Drudge, but if he's got this story - it's nothing less than HUGE. This would expose Clark for what he is - an opportunist taking many Democrats along for the ride. None of the other candidates could get away with praising the imposters in office now - just 2 years ago!!! Neither should Wesley Clark.

[Robin Hood]

94. Why do people give a rats butt what Drudge has to say?

???!!!

[JasonBerry]

96. Because it's not DRUDGE who "said" it....

If what Drudge is reporting on his site is true. Aren't you glad SOMEDODY let you know? Surely you wouldn't support a man who actually said those things (if true)???? Anybody who can would be an accomplice to the hijacking of the Democratic party by an impostor. Would there be any doubt at that point? It would prove what some of us have said FOR MONTHS - the man is an opportunist...plain and simple.

[eileen_d]

97. No kidding

I can't believe how many references to Limbaugh and Drudge I've read on this site already. I can understand opposition research, but some people are actually buying this crap. Not that Clark is some kind of untouchable saint, but at least realize that these people are famous for pulling quotes out of context in smear campaigns.

[Kool Kitty]

104. Good point, eileen, and welcome.

It was not so very long ago that there were Congressional Democrats standing with Bush and praising him to the skies. And not questioning anything because they were afraid of having their patriotism questioned. That may bother me more than a two-year old speech on Matt's site.

[Dr Fate]

107. 2 years old- Many DEMS were being "diplomatic" towards pukes...

Let's see how Clark plays out on the ISSUES- he seems to have good postions on several of them.

He worked for Clinton, so I really doubt he is some kind of right-winger-it looked to like he was being diplomatic.

I dont know if its wise or a good strategy for us DUers to attack DEM candidates on areas where Rove cannot...

It's on DRUDGE- so that should tell you somthing- this info was dug up to HURT DEMOCRATS. Why eles would it be on that site.

I remember when DU was not a dumping ground/vomitorium for right-wing sites and talking points...sighhh

[Kool Kitty]

110. That's right, Doc.

Matt Drudge, blech...

[Jolene]

106. How many of us supported LIEberman

as VP in 2000?

Sometimes we learn the hard way, huh?

[Donna Zen]

111. Marshall's TPM adds context

Clark moved back to Arkansas after leaving the Army to get into business and make some money and in all likelihood to get into politics. He got politically involved and basically kept people guessing. Republican scuttlebutt had him running for office as a Republican; Democratic scuttlebutt had him running as a Democrat. He gave this speech to a Pulaski County Republican Committee dinner. But a little context from a May 20th, 2001 article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette … A hot-ticket guest speaker, Clark plans a similar appearance before the Democrats, his wife, Gert, confided......Now, one final point. There's this idea afoot that Clark got into the Democratic party out of some sort of opportunism, and that this happened after 9/11. Frankly, this makes no sense. Is there really any time over the last two years that getting into the Democratic party would have seemed like a good way to get into office or advance politically? Particularly in a state like Arkansas which has been trending Republican?

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/

Personally_Reagan didn't do it for me, but then I'm not serving in a devasted military that Reagan was promising money to. Nevertheless, there are thousands and thousands of people who have had enough of bush and want a change, but don't want to think they were wrong for supporting the regime or his war. I know...I know...we don't run our party for them, but I'll take their votes.

[kayleybeth]

112. This is getting so silly

I commend Clark for leaving the repukes. Just like I commend Jeffords for leaving the repukes, and Robert Byrd for leaving the repukes. Sometimes people see the light. That's a GOOD thing.

I would not for one minute trash any of the other candidates. Whoever gets the nomination has my vote, period. In the meantime, I am supporting Clark because I like that he has served his country honorably, I like the fact that he is brilliant and well-spoken and a natural leader. And I like the fact that he shares many of my liberal views. If any of you disagree, don't vote for him. It's not necessary to wage a campaign to try and destroy the man. The repukes will be doing plenty of that.

Kayeleigh