Carville asked Wes Clark to run for DNC Chair-- Clark said NO

[FrenchieCat]

The rumor was that Pres. Clinton had someone ask Wes Clark to run for DNC Chair. That rumor appears correct....and it was Carville that did the asking. Wes Clark said no.

Chris Matthews feels that Wes Clark could unite the party. CM Asked Wes Clark if some Dems are trying to take the party to the left, while others are trying to take it to the right. Wes answered that it's not about left or right....but about communicating Democratic party ideas and policies in a context that all Americans can understand.

It has been rumored that he will run in 2008, and I am happy about that, if it turns out to be true. Clark is the real uniter....who can take ideas from the left and present them clearly to the center.

[Cha]

1. chris matthews should stay the

fuck out of it.

[LittleClarkie]

132. Why?

I would imagine he has as much right as anyone to express his opinion.

[Cha]

142. He can express anything he wants and usually

does..that doesn't mean Democrats have to listen as if he knows anything.

I'm not saying Clark wouldn't make a good Chair..I like Clark..but he obviously doesn't want the job so it's moot.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. I hope he runs again.

And that Howard Dean becomes DNC chair.

[autorank]

143. That would be true Heaven. Hi FrenchieCat!

[FrenchieCat]

170. Hey, Hey.....

Autorank!

[RafterMan]

3. Carville?

That makes no sense. Did this come out in the hardball interview?

I don't remember Carville as being especially pro-Wes during the primaries. Another case of 20/20 hindsight, maybe.

[madfloridian]

4. Carville is anti-Dean.

.

[ClarkUSA]

35. Carville is in love with Edwards

[MADem]

57. Carville and Begala helped Dean prep for Debate #1

They filmed some of the debate prep and used it in George Clooney's K STREET show on HBO.

[madfloridian]

74. I saw it. I also heard them on Crossfire during the primaries.

I was stunned and sickened at the things they said about Dean.

[NYCGirl]

96. I was under the impression that K Street was scripted.

They didn't really help Dean prep.

[janx]

97. That is correct. It was comedy, if I remember correctly. n/t

[MADem]

154. No, it was a political drama

Not funny at all, at least not deliberately, it was the story of a consulting firm run by Cajun and Mary, playing themselves, and one of their partners was a nice Catholic guy whose marriage was falling apart and who consorted with hookers, was a little kinky, and was close to suicidal...a bit of a drunk, too. One of the other workers in the firm was a closet lesbian who was having a fling with a power woman in DC--a lobbyist or some such, and she got dumped by the woman, In the meantime, all these other guys are chasing after her. There was Saudi intrigue, a lot of subplot...towards the end of the series, Mary was getting subpoenaed to appear before the grand jury over the Plame leak, she had to hire a lawyer who was charging her up the ass, and they had to close the firm and sell the furniture.

Oddly enough, the real reason the two of them did the show is because they had sunk a bundle into a restaurant in DC, which should have done well, but then came 911, the Bush economy and no one was going out to high toned new places in DC, they just stuck with NORA and some of the more established hot spots, so they had to unload the asset, they took a bath, and needed cash.

[MADem]

153. Yes, they did

It was quasi-scripted. They would use actors, plus Carville/Matalin, follow them around with cameras, and film whatever interaction happened. Then, after they had the footage, they'd write the story around it. They did this on the fly, every week. There was a baseline script that was laid out in broad strokes, but they used the news to jink the story in different directions.

It's why you saw quite a few Hill rats, including Congresscreatures, on the show. They had to give permission to get on, and no doubt got ye olde standard appearance fee for their trouble, but for the most part the real people were not fed lines. And the Dean debate prep was for real, as was the line they fed him (re: lack of racial diversity in VT, or something on those lines). When Sotenberg/Clooney saw the debate, they had to cut the script to fit the footage they already had--it was just too good to pass up, and made the show more of a "Does he or doesn't he?/Is it or isn't it?" exercise.

I enjoyed the show, but it was too much of an 'inside baseball' type effort for the masses, so it only lasted for that one run.

[Renew Deal]

66. He was pushing Kerry just before the caucasus.

[candy331]

40. Was downright vicious on Dean, much worse than any republican

I heard during the primaries. I suppose he sees the handwriting on the wall for him with Dean in place.

[Renew Deal]

65. I would agree with that.

I remember him being all pissy with Dean. Dean had been bashing Clinton at the time and Carville didn't appreciate it.

[Cheswick2.0]

5. he's pro-clinton and probably did this for Clinton

what in heaven's name could Clinton be thinking? Off all the strengths Clark might have...party politics is probably not one of them yet.

[FrenchieCat]

7. Keeps him out of Hillary's way in 2008?

I like Bill and Hillary, and hope that this was not the motive.

[Kahuna]

19. Yepper! I love Bill and Hillary. Even though I do believe..

this would probably be the motive, it's just politics. No reason to think any less of them.

[mattclearing]

52. It's certainly the logical one. n/t

[RogueTrooper]

78. Of course it was their motive

If Dean becomes the DNC chair and Clark runs in 08 then who do you think all those Deaniacs will support? Clark will clean up on the internet fundraising as well.

[x_y_no]

107. I think you got it in one ...

n/t

[Geek_Girl]

162. I think your right about that

But what if Gore runs as well?

[David Zephyr]

99. It's Pretty Obvious That It Was.

Sad.

[ClarkUSA]

38. Probably thinking the Party needs to get organized...

and Gen. Clark has alot of experience, having run NATO successfully as a hands-on
operational leader.

Glad he said NO.

[Cheswick2.0]

51. he didn't run NATO

He ran the Nato forces... and that's a military job not a political one.

[Sparkly]

54. He was working with the White House, the Pentagon, AND other nations.

And there were plenty of political maneuvers involved.

[poe]

155. 77 straight days of bombing- NATO, Clark and Clinton

like bombing radio and television headquarters with precision. Clark is a well documented war criminal as is billy c. dean is only perceived as a "progressive" cause the Dem's have moved so far to the right precisely where the likes of Clinton and Clark position their politics. pretty sad how narrow the political spectrum is in America. celebrity politics.
consider NATO's collusion with pentagon and criminal role in Yugoslavia. Michael Parenti dedicates many articles and an entire book on the heartbreaking misery brought to the Yugoslav people. Why? cause they managed to avoid the strictures of the IMF, the EU and US transnationals. so, break it apart and blow it up. Clinton and Clark oversaw and managed alot of the carnage.
'

[FrenchieCat]

157. You are full of it....

again, many who want to point fingers.....didn't really give a damn about the 1.5 million Muslim albanians who's lives were saved....No use in complaining about that....cause they didn't die. Had they been slaughtered, I am sure that you and Mr. Parentis would be blaming Clinton for doing nothing.

Spare me Mr. Parenti....like why should I be impressed from the likes of him? He loves carnage and genocide.....after it's done...so that he can blame everyone and their mother for any and every interventions there has ever been. I'm sure he blames Clinton for Rwanda....cause there's dead bodies he can point to.

In addition, you need to read this report and get informed. Also need to forward it to Mr. "I'm concerned only after people are dead" Parenti.

http://www.un.org/icty/pressreal/nato061300.htm
Here's the table of content for the curious who actually read things other than "investigative journalists" who have their own agenda...which doesn't always include "saving lives".

Final Report to the Prosecutor by the Committee Established to Review the NATO Bombing Campaign Against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

Table of Contents

I Background and Mandate
II Review Criteria
III Work Program
IV Assessment

General Issues
Damage to the Environment
Use of Depleted Uranium Projectiles
Use of Cluster Bombs
Legal Issues Related to Target Selection
Overview of Applicable Law
Linkage Between Law Concerning Recourse to Force and Law Concerning How Force May Be Used
The Military Objective
The Principle of Proportionality
Casualty Figures
General Assessment of the Bombing Campaign
Specific Incidents
The Attack on a Civilian Passenger Train at the Grdelica Gorge on 12/4/99
The Attack on the Djakovica Convoy on 14/4/99
The Attack on the RTS (Serbian Radio and TV Station) in Belgrade on 23/4/99
The Attack on the Chinese Embassyon 7/5/99
The Attack on Korisa Village on 13/5/99
Recommendations

[poe]

158. war criminals

it's important to look at a wide range of evidence as well as historical patterns and investigate motives. michael parenti is just one source and it is pointless and mind deadening to get caught up in personalities. so here are a few more sources, if you care to expand your research. lastly it is sad to come up against the "liberals" time and again who parrot the sources they claim to distrust when it comes to other issues.
further reading: Bosnia to Bondsteel and Beyond- Balkanization, American Style by Diana Johnstone found in Covert Action Quarterly #74 Fall 2002; and go to www.icpj.org to read Karen Talbot's Former Yugoslavia: The Name of the Game is Oil and her article The Real Reasons for War in Yugoslavia: Backing up Globalization with Military Might.
now also take a step back into the late 80's and early nineties and examine how the world bank was involved in the breaking up of this nation which was 80% self contained economically. that's a bad example for the rest of the world. same old song.
divorce yourself from the need to believe in heroes Clinton, Clark, Bush 1&2 all war criminals.

[FrenchieCat]

159. Divorcing myself

from your opinions......is what I will be doing, pronto.

Clark is not a War Criminal....neither is Clinton.

Like I said, you like to save the people after they are dead! Shame on you! Extremists are dangerous! The pricetag on your conspiracy theory is too high.

Waiting for the General
By Elizabeth Drew
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/16795
Clark displeased the defense secretary, Bill Cohen, and General Hugh Shelton, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, by arguing strenuously that—contrary to Clinton's decision— the option of using ground troops in Kosovo should remain open. But the problem seems to have gone further back. Some top military leaders objected to the idea of the US military fighting a war for humanitarian reasons. Clark had also favored military action against the genocide in Rwanda.

http://www.crookedtimber.org/archives/001104.html
Clark was almost alone in pushing for a humanitarian intervention in Rwanda.

Pulitzer award winning Samantha Power for her book "A Problem from Hell" : America and the Age of Genocide
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/006054164...
endorsed Wes Clark http://www.kiddingonthesquare.com/2003/12/redeeming_wes...
The following excerpts from Power's book give the details. The narrative surrounding the quotes was written by another person commenting on the book. Note especially Power's last comment below on Clark's pariah status in Washington:

General Clark is one of the heroes of Samantha Power's book. She introduces him on the second page of her chapter on Rwanda and describes his distress on learning about the genocide there and not being able to contact anyone in the Pentagon who really knew anything about it and/or about the Hutu and Tutsi.

She writes, "He frantically telephoned around the Pentagon for insight into the ethnic dimension of events in Rwanda. Unfortunately, Rwanda had never been of more than marginal concern to Washington's most influential planners" (p. 330) .

He advocated multinational action of some kind to stop the genocide. "Lieutenant General Wesley Clark looked to the White House for leadership. 'The Pentagon is always going to be the last to want to intervene,' he says. 'It is up to the civilians to tell us they want to do something and we'll figure out how to do it.' But with no powerful personalities or high-ranking officials arguing forcefully for meaningful action, midlevel Pentagon officials held sway, vetoing or stalling on hesitant proposals put forward by midlevel State Department and NSC officials" (p. 373).

According to Power, General Clark was already passionate about humanitarian concerns, especially genocide, before his appointment as Supreme Allied Commander of NATO forces in Europe.

She details his efforts in behalf of the Dayton Peace Accords and his brilliant command of NATO forces in Kosovo. Her chapter on Kosovo ends, "The man who probably contributed more than any other individual to Milosvevic's battlefield defeat was General Wesley Clark. The NATO bombing campaign succeeded in removing brutal Serb police units from Kosovo, in ensuring the return on 1.3 million Kosovo Albanians, and in securing for Albanians the right of self-governance."

"Yet in Washington Clark was a pariah. In July 1999 he was curtly informed that he would be replaced as supreme allied commander for Europe. This forced his retirement and ended thirty-four years of distinguished service. Favoring humanitarian intervention had never been a great career move."

[poe]

160. Samantha Powers adds to ....

....the pantheon of the American historical mythology.
what were the motives for western involvement in that part of Africa to begin with? what are the material resources? who was supporting and arming and abetting internecine rivalries? i guess it's all devoid of context. poof! it just happens. oh well shadow boxing in the political bubble. i suppose the fact that these patterns repeat themselves should lead one to believe in coincidence theory. and of course these greedy well manicured barbarians don't get together and hash things out (conspire). too far out for the imagination to conceive.
"The CIA station in Bosnia is now reputed to be one of the largest in the region" according to that conspiracy rag the LA Times. Camp Bondsteel is the largest military base on earth. KBR, Cheney's outfit,built it and services it. i'm sure the CIA and US military are handing out gum and doing the usual reconstructing.
protecting the corporate interests particularly one of the most valuable mineral assets in the world. Kosovo alone has the richest mineral resources in all of Europe west of Russia. the state owned Trepca mung complex, is worth at least 5 billion, producing gold, silver,pure lead, zinc, cadmium etc. the coveted northern Serbian Province of Vojvodina is a major breadbasket for Europe. now the west is profiting off of these areas and many others. look it up. it has nothing to do with saving anybody.
now look at the US funding of the KLA in Macedonia. Why? now look at the pipeline under construction from the port of Bourgas to the Vlore port on the Adriatic. it's a US project run by the US owned AMBO (Albanian, Macedonian and Bulgarian Oil Corp.)
that's realpolitik not this fuzzy party politics abstraction.

[FrenchieCat]

161. You can rest now.....

Really, you can.

I don't believe that there is a giant conspiracy that involves everyone except for you and your Dear friends Parenti Angel-like guy friend.

But remember that we need extremists like you. Look under your bed...quick....there's a midget doctor with the microchip that will be implanted in you while you sleep....so that you can be re-programmed.

I don't give a F*ck what the reason was that those hundreds of thousands of Rwandans were murdered...and neither did they. The fact that they were is what I am talking about. I also don't think that the Albanians Mulims cared as to why they were next on the chopping block....they cared that they were on it though.

Truth is when you are running for your life, you are glad if and when someone shows up to save your ass.

Now asked to be "beamed" up. K?

[poe]

168. thanks for the photos-i mean that

as one who went to monitor the recount in ohio and grew up near east st. louis i am deeply aware of and directly involved in the rectifying (in my minuscule way) the gross inequities of our deeply racist nation. don't know what your implying. anyway if you wish to work in the attorney generals office in mexico city you are required to have a microchip implant for security purposes, as always. this courtesy of the giuliani group (another american hero). all dogs who are purchased at the humane society are required to have implants. make a call find out. Alzheimer's patients are getting implants make a call find out.
well you haven't refuted any of the material facts. do this one thing read the 80 or so page report that was held in a senate subcommittee hearing chaired by cynthia mckinney on US involvement in Rwanda and neighboring nations. be well.

[FrenchieCat]

169. "don't know what your implying"

is your question?

I am a black woman who immigrated to this country and I am implying that when minorities are being killed and murdered throughout the world....it's people like you, who really don't give a flying f*ck...

Your energy is spent on calling the one who at least had the tamarity to try, "war criminal". The one who ruined his career doing it. You want to appear to know about something that you don't....you go around reading stuff, and you adopt other's point of view although they are just like you.

You talk the talk.....but honey, where I come from, when action was required, where were you?

Go ahead and smear the one person that I know cared about DYING MINORITIES before they were lying in a heap.......all so that you can selfishly make your deluted point...that "they are all war criminals".

And please....do not put Guliani in the same category as Wes Clark....who is a hero! He's my hero, and the hero of many others. Just cause he wasn't a manufactured presstitute MediaHo hero....he still did the right thing and at the right time in Kosovo (I know you would have prefered to have seen a whole lot more bodies first...sorry he disappointed you).


I can clearly see that you just see what you want....and what fits in your small little mind that so closed that a microbe couldn't get in if it was needed to save your dumbass "talk so much till he can't hear anything" life.

All extremists are dangerous. But the most dangerous ones are the ones that don't even realize that they know very little about a lot.

[Sopianae]

166. You have no clue what you are talking about.

"The coveted northern Serbian Province of Vojvodina is a major breadbasket for Europe.: LOL! It's a small and rather poor region populated by the Hungarian minority and nobody is coveting it. Btw, they are pretty lucky considering they were probably the last minority that wasn't actively cleansed by Milosevic. Though their young men were dragged away to fight the Albanians in Kosovo.

"now the west is profiting off of these areas and many others." Hello!? They are much better off now. Don't even try to reason that they were better off with Milosevic in power. Take it from someone who lived 50 miles from the Serbian border during the 90's and spent that decade dreading what that murderous megalomaniac would do next.

[ClarkUSA]

67. Being Supreme Allied Commander of Europe required alot of political

adroitness and savvy. He had to get the approval of 19 heads of state for every
bombing target during the Kosovo War....and that really is like herding cats.

I understand what you're saying, Ches. However, his organizational experience heading up NATO forces included nearly every corresponding duty that a civilian governor or mayor would have.

Military leadership is mostly taking the day-to-day care and oversight of your people, both soldiers and civilians, and responsibilities include everything from taking care of potholes to potlucks.

Nonetheless, I am glad he said no. As I said before, maybe he likes the idea of Dean as DNC Chairman. I know I am tired of business-as-usual candidates and
in private conversations with supporters this past summer, Gen. Clark frankly said that the Democratic Party is strategically hampered by its outmoded ways (not a quote, just paraphrasing).

[x_y_no]

110. I'm also glad Clark said no.

Yeah, the more I think about a Dean chairmanship, the more I like it.

We need to shake things up, and we need a real message of Democratic values to get out there instead of the Republican charicature of our ideas. I think Dean could do a lot about making that change.

[janx]

87. Yeah but Ches, just because Carville is a Clintonite (or was),

it doesn't necessarily follow that he did this for Clinton. The talking heads are stirring up this rumor and another one about Clinton's urging Blanchard to run for the chair as well.

It's sloppy D.C. gossip.

It might be true, or it might not be true, but it's gossip none the less.

Do you remember what Dean warned us about yesterday? He warned us about this very thing.

I think that the Clarkies should wait to hear what Clark has to say.

[FrenchieCat]

6. Yep....

The show reruns at 10:00 p.m. ET...and I am sure that Ice will have the video on her site soon. I will post it when it becomes available...as well as the transcript.

I also remember Carville loooooving John Kerry, and dissing Clark. Maybe it was during the convention that Carville realized what he had done.

[indie_voter]

13. Yes, but..

If Clark was DNC Chair he would have trouble running for president in 2008, which might be what Carville wants?

I am not one who thinks Hillary is thinking about 2008. She is not a stupid woman, she has to know she has no chance. She is divisive even among Democrats.

[DemExpat]

8. I hope that Clark runs too...

for the reason you state - being able to present Democratic party ideas clearly and attractively to the center.

DemEx

[FrenchieCat]

9. I was reading some other threads....and

many posters were saying that Dems need to think "out of the Box" when selecting a candidate in 2008. But then went on to list the usual Governor/Senator suspects.

I do believe that Wes Clark is definitely an "out of the Box" candidate--not a Southern Governor (a la 1992/1996), not a blue state senator (a la for-e-ver). I don't think that we have had a Democratic General as the nominee during wartime. Sounds like that could be the best and only "out of the Box" idea to date!

Clark's National Security experience is the strongest of any Democrat in the party. And we need that....since the Republicans are not going to give away that "gravy train" calling card.

Although unsuccessful at capturing the nomination in 2004, this scholarly progressive General did not fare badly considering that he was a political neophyte who came in late, raised a lot of money, did not contest Iowa (missed the big momentum jumping off point and the media coverage that came with it) and still ended up winning a primary, placing second in a few, and bowing out gracefully at the right moment.

With campaigning experience now under his epaulettes, Democratic credentials more firmly established (as a candidate and as a major Kerry surrogate), and a "war won" still on his resume, Arkansas' second favorite son becomes a strong values added potential runner.

His stellar convention speech and his later televised and in-person appearances have taken the edge off the reputation gifted to him by the media as "not ready for Primetime".

An outsider whose grassroots is still strong and loyal with a petition currently circulating to draft him again in '08, Clark is actually one of the few "full service" (his term) possibilities.

[Capn Sunshine]

20. You know, it might be about keeping us apart

since they've noticed that many Clark and Dean supporters are working together again, maybe in their minds, that's a threat? We're all outsiders convinced the insiders must go.

I don't buy the wind machine's attempts to make out Hillary as the candidate in 08. I don't think she's got the backing of the base.

Clark said no for a bunch of reasons , but "what does this mean for the Clintons ?" is not one of them. He's a general, not a suicide squad.

I really think Gen. Clark should run for Arkansas Senate. THAT would be the right move for a presidential aspirant.

[dogman]

25. I think you're right about being a threat.

I think you're wrong about the Senate. Clark is 60. We need him where he can do the most good as soon as possible. Who knows if it's his desire to run for President. Just like when he was drafted to run last time, it's our desire.

[Gloria]

36. Boy, that was some speech at the convention!!

Of course, CNN was interviewing Cahill as Wes was delivering it! But at least it was on other channels...

If Clark runs, I'm ready to work even harder for him next time than I did last time.

[ticapnews]

60. I went to New Hampster for a week last January...

When Clark makes it clear he's running I'm taking a leave from work and moving there to work full time. We're going to win this time :)

[Nashyra]

69. If and when he declares

I'm doing the same. My dad and I will work anywhere we can or where were needed. I'll work 24/7 to make Nevada a Clark state

[femme.democratique]

10. I Love Wes....

....he's so smart and confident, and I hope this doesn't sound weird but for an older man he's....um....well,hot.

;-)

There is only one thing that troubled me, there was a report from Drudge that he encouraged the plan to go to war in front of congress. Is this true? I hope its just a vicious mischaracterization.

[Sparkly]

11. Absolutely

false. That was a now-infamous hackjob on his testimony, taking a sentence here, skipping down eleven pages for a few more there, going back six pages for a snippet of somethine else, etc... It was quickly refuted for what it was, but naturally not before the msm and others got ahold of the meme that he'd been pro-war.

[RafterMan]

14. Here's what Prince of Darkness Richard Perle had to say

as he testified with Wes in the very same session:

"So I think General Clark simply doesn't want to see us use military force and he has thrown out as many reasons as he can develop to that but the bottom line is he just doesn't want to take action. He wants to wait."

http://www.iraqwatch.org/government/US/HearingsPreparedstatements/hasc-092602.htm

That pretty much covers it, but you can read the whole thing if you're unsure.

[FrenchieCat]

22. According to Factcheck.org.....it was an RNC planted story to Drudge....

RNC's Gillespie Gets It Wrong on Clark and Iraq
He claims Clark's House testimony in 2002 shows he supported military action, but Richard Perle was there and he didn't think so.

Republican National Committee chairman Ed Gillespie has been saying retired Gen. Wesley Clark was really for war in Iraq -- but the record doesn't bear that out.

“Wesley Clark claims to have always been against the war in Iraq. Y et, testimony he gave to the House Armed Services Committee two weeks before Congress passed the Iraq Congressional Resolution says otherwise,” Gillespie writes on the RNC website. Gillespie made similar remarks in a speech given Jan. 15, saying of Clark ’s testimony “There was no stronger case made” for going to war.

But Gillespie gives only selective excerpts of Clark ’s testimony to the House Armed Services Committee Sept. 26, 2002 . Actually, Clark repeatedly urged patience and diplomacy, criticized the Bush administration for undercutting "friends and allies" and said “I think it's not time yet to use force against Iraq .”

Don't take our word for it: Pentagon adviser Richard Perle, a strong supporter of going to war, testified with Clark at the same hearing and said, “I think Gen. Clark doesn’t want to see us use military force . . . . The bottom line is he just doesn’t want to take action. He wants to wait.”
http://www.factcheck.org/article130.html

[indie_voter]

12. Good. We need him as President in 2008

I think Dean is a perfect choice for DNC chair. I think his energy and ideas would be a perfect fit.

Clark told Matthews he wasn't ruling out a run in 2008, this latest news makes me very happy.

[Eloriel]

15. Ummm, Clark's not a uniter whenever he's being sent in to

STOP DEAN, or in this case merely asked to step in and STOP DEAN.

Pity, too. Just when I was warming up to him the slightest little bit.

Wish Clinton and Carville and whatever other old has-beens who might want to try to continue to run things would realize they're OVER. It's a new century, and they've made themselves obsolete. (I'll never again trust Carville after he went to work for Chavez's opponents in Venezuela.)

[BootinUp]

16. Sent in or asked?

Do you know something the rest of us don't?

Far as I can tell, he said no.

[Eloriel]

29. I said asked -- in this case

Did you miss it?

[BootinUp]

44. So then whats your point?

That he has the power to stop people from asking? :shrug:

[Sparkly]

17. He didn't say a word against Dean! n/t

[Larkspur]

83. Clark admited on the Charley Rose show that his Prez bid was

a stop Dean campaign.

Clark will never get my vote or support.

[Sparkly]

91. They were all trying to stop each other --that's what primaries are about.

Are we going to hold grudges for everything different candidates did or said about each other a year ago?

[Crunchy Frog]

115. Well,

it looks like some of us are.:eyes:

In a primary, your job is to try and stop all of the other contenders.

Hey, does that mean Dean was the stop Kerry, stop Gephardt, stop Lieberman, stop Edwards and stop Clark candidate? The nerve of the guy.:grr: He sure has alot to answer for.

[txaslftist]

150. "In a primary, your job is to try and stop...

all of the other contenders..."

I agree that the definition of the job has been what you say up until now, although the rancor that primary candidates hurl at each other recently has exceeded that of the past IMO.

What about the '08 primaries? The pukes showed that they can use primary contenders attacks against each other quite effectively to wipe out whomever emerges from the primaries the 'winner'.

Might a little interparty civility be in order?

Maybe focus on the positives? Or are we all going to fight against each other in the same way that Rove went after McCain?

And before you say I'm a silly idealist, I KNOW politics is a dirty business. I'm talking strategically here. Is it really in our best interest to engage in circular firing squads before we select a frontrunner?

Just musing, I suppose. I guess the genies already out of the bottle on this one. But lets not pretend that tearing each other down in the primary contests isn't damaging to the party as a whole, shall we?

[RafterMan]

165. Who did Clark attack in the primaries?

[Kahuna]

139. If Clark had felt that Dean was "electable" he wouldn't have run..

Clark believed that the majority of Americans would find it hard to replace a war time president with one with no national security experience. He was right.

[Clark2008]

145. No he did not

eom

[robbedvoter]

146. Link? haveing the videotape - he "admitted" nothing of the sort

But you've been trotting this lie ever since.

[dogman]

18. And how is that his fault?

Your attitude makes no sense.

[Kahuna]

21. deleted

[Kahuna]

23. Here we go again. The whole world revolves around Dean...

:eyes: Anything that anyone else does, especially Clark, must be about, stopping Dean!!! :eyes:

[msgadget]

101. It does seem to have gotten to that point.

Dean is such a favorite that anyone else suggested is damned near an enemy combatant. I'm surprised Clark's name hasn't come up before for DNC chair.

[ClarkUSA]

24. He was asked and said NO. Maybe he likes Dean.

Carville is a hack. And the Clintons got their answer.

[LizW]

26. I'm not certain yet, but it looks like Clark wants to be more than

the STOP DEAN guy. I'm just guessing, but it looks like Clark didn't really enjoy being the second string STOP DEAN candidate (the guy they would go to in case the Kerry/Gephart/Edwards alliance couldn't put Dean down). And who could blame him? Once KGE was successful, the DLC left Clark swinging in the media wilderness.

Did that piss him off enough to tell them to go to hell? Maybe. Time will tell.

[ClarkUSA]

30. No one likes being used, right?

Besides, we really don't know why the Clintons wanted Gen. Clark to consider running as DNC Chairman. Maybe they thought he'd be great at running the DNC the way he ran NATO.

In any case, Gen. Clark said NO. The guy does have a mind of his own, y'know.

[RafterMan]

31. Or maybe he wan't ever the STOP DEAN guy

and he just lost the way everyone else, including Dean, lost.

[txaslftist]

151. nice reality check, rafterman. n/t

[Eloriel]

37. I think you're right, Liz --

and well said.

[FrenchieCat]

27. Just when I was starting to warm up to Dean.....

and wished that he would get DNC Chair.....one of his supporters comes and starts the whole "stop Dean" lament.

What about the "Stop Clark" movement headed by the RNC and embraced and adopted by the "He was a Republican until 25 days ago" or "I'm the only one against the Iraq War" 2004 primary candidate?

I forgave Howard Dean for his lies, because I understand the nature of competition and doing whatever it takes to win....including lying on people.......

But yet you want to bring back a grudge because Wes Clark chose to run for President TO BEAT BUSH?

Jeeze, get over it!

[Eloriel]

33. Get over it?

Like you have?

Uh-huh. I see.

[FrenchieCat]

41. I have....

Just cause I have to remind you that Howard Dean is not above dirty tricks and smears, when you come in to talk about the "stop Dean" thing.......

Howard Dean was not a perfect angel with a halo and all during the primaries.....but that doesn't mean I don't admire the guy. I think Dems need a little bit of that competitive devil in them anyway.

So yeah....I'm over it.

[knight_of_the_star]

106. Everything is NOT about Dean!

Last time I checked the earth didn't revolve around him.

[ClarkUSA]

28. Carville's no friend of Wes Clark

He pushed for Edwards the whole way. He egregiously accused Gen. Clark of being a Republican during the primaries when he knew better.

[Texas_Kat]

149. Carville can no longer open his mouth with the "Clark is a Repub" meme

Carville (on more than one occasion) trotted out this tired Repub talking point.

There are 2 possibilities:

1) Carville did it on is own. If so, since Carville was an Edwards supporter, it was probably just 'politics' . (again!) A quick and easy way to get Clark out of Edwards way in 2008.

2) The Clintons were indeed behind the question.

This whole thing puts a quietus on any pundit bringing "Clark is a Repub" up in the future.

Since Carville is one of the most visible 'rabid' Dems on TeeVee, any future attacks on Clark's Democratic credentials can be answered with "Well, since I was approached to be DNC chair, I don't see how that applies".

Maybe Clinton (if he was behind it) had more political savvy to recognize that just the request (that Clark consider it) could innoculate him against this ugly, unfounded and untrue talking point.

[Crunchy Frog]

32. So somebody supposedly asked him

to do something to "stop Dean". He declined. But you're mad at him for it anyway? Would you have been happier with him if he had said yes?

I simply don't get the logic of what you're saying. Please excuse me if I seem dense.

[FrenchieCat]

39. I guess since Clark decided

to run for President because he was MAD AT HOW BUSH WAS DESTROYING OUR COUNTRY, it was an insult to Dean and his supporters? Maybe Wes Clark was supposed to "endorse" Howard Dean.....and short of that, he should sit in the "Dean corner" forever.

I hope Howard Dean gets the DNC Chair....and I hope that his supporters get over wanting to make all of the actions of others about stopping Howard Dean.

I was one of the 70,000 who wrote Clark a "Please run" letter. I didn't think about Howard Dean one bit during the whole time I was writing the letter....although I was thinking about Bush and his f*cked up adminstration starting in 2000!

[LuLu550]

119. I seem to remember it the way you do, Frenchie!

The first time I heard the name Clark floated was by a fellow Move-on person I had to interview almost two years ago. She told me about the "Draft Clark" movement, I found out more and signed the petitions and wrote letters. I also attended Dean meet ups, early on, read Kerry position papers, watched c-span coverage.

When he threw his hat in the ring, saying it was the Draft movement that convinced him, I jumped on board.

I'm not sure why anyone would think a guy like Wes Clark would put himself on the line the way he did just to "Stop Dean" and because the Clintons out him up to it.

But the bottom line is, if we are ever to take this country back, we have to stop this in-fighting and unite to push the right back to the margin where it belongs.

[Kahuna]

138. I don't hope he gets the DNC chair. The repukes will run ads in..

2006 of Dean's nasty and mean statements about how useless the Dems are and how he would shine a light on them and make them scamper like cockroaches... :eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

[NYCGirl]

46. I'd be angry at Carville, and the one(s) who asked him to approach Clark

with that idea. They seem to have little respect for General Clark.

[LittleClarkie]

49. Is every other candidate for DNC Chair a "stop Dean" candidate?

Is no one allowed to run against him without being considered an obstructionist?

[robbedvoter]

62. yeah, dear, the whole draft movement was a sham - hundreds of thousands

of us covered for the stop your guy thing. I am so f*ing tired of this! :argh:

[janx]

85. There's also a RUMOR that "Clinton" asked Blanchard

to run for DNC chair.

The rumor mongoring is in full swing. It seems that if there's a rumor that anyone who was ever connected to President Clinton in any way urges someone to do something, the rumor then morphs into Clinton's asking the person to do something.

That's how out of control the media have gotten.

I don't like Carville either (have never liked the guy), but that's another story.

[Clarkie1]

144. Clark doesn't get "sent in" by anybody; he's a general, not a foot soldier

Your negative spew is just as bad as the anti-dean thread I criticized last night.

[Sopianae]

34. Clarkies! There's a diary on Dailykos that needs some info on this

They misunderstood Tweety and they think Clark is interested. I just created an account there but I can't post for 24 hours. Could someone with an existing account go over there and set them straight?

I don't want them to spread this rumor. He said NO. Period.

Here's the link

[FrenchieCat]

42. Tell them to watch it at 10:00 p.m. ET, when it repeats....

and have someone post the transcript when it arrives.

They must not have had the volume turned on.....Jeeze!

[ClarkUSA]

43. Some ignoramus is calling Gen. Clark a Republican

:nuke:

[Pithy Cherub]

45. Geez, Clark said NO...

two little letters that those who don't listen carefully repeated and posted.

No, nyet, nope, no not gonna do it. Not for anybody and I think that is why JC asked because Clinton hates being told NO.

[AmerDem]

47. Clark is going to be much better prepared for 2008

than his campaign was in 2004. He entered at the very last minute with no organization at all and in a very short time amassed a huge following. Over this past year he has refined his message and is clued into the traps the MSM purposely set up for him during the 2004 campaign. I expect Wes Clark to be the last man standing the next time around. Let's hope we still have a country by then.

[Kahuna]

50. I can see that. he kept trying to get a message out with his..

in spite of his laryngitis and Tweety's constant interruptions.

[janx]

48. Frenchie, where are you getting this shit?

Do you not understand that you and we are being played by the media?

[Kahuna]

53. Tweety kept repeating it and asked Clark about it twice. Clark...

didn't deny it. Knowing how honest Clark it, it's easy to assume that it must be true or he would have flat out denied it.

[janx]

55. You guys have to see my thread...

Stop being programmed by the media, please.

Edit:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1490359

[Kahuna]

56. Huh? I'll be happy to see your thread if you provide a link..

And, I'm not programmed by the media. I filtered through the bullshit in case you couldn't tell by my statement above. :eyes:

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Crunchy Frog]

59. Frenchie is about the last person in the world

you have to worry about being "played" by the media. I've never seen anyone who had their number down like she does, except maybe a professional like David Brock.

[robbedvoter]

63. Ha!ha!ha! "except for NPR"? Money? BS!

No dear, you got it wrong. When it comes to politics/news, money goes to pump losing propositions - it's propaganda 100% - your darling NPR included. (read about Armstrong Williams)Before you get to quote yourself on that matter you need to understand a bit more.

[janx]

98. Quote myself?

Can you explain?

[robbedvoter]

147. You send us to read YOUR thread - which is quite clueless - the

Franken way. The truth is much darker - and all here know it.
As Clark supporters we've seen all the dirt.

[janx]

164. The thread isn't "clueless" at all.

I had hoped to remind people to stop believing the media. If you'd like to continue to believe them, that's certainly your right.

The problem is that people believe the media gossip when the gossip suits their purposes and disbelieve the media when they don't. the media know all of this and bank on it.

As for the reference to Franken, I have no idea what you're talking about.

[janx]

129. It's about money. Rumors like this create buzz and (as the

media see it) ratings.

This is the perfect example of what the media will do. It's rampant and dishonest.

LOOK:

DNC Chair? No Way. (4.00 / 7)

Trust me on this one, he is not running for DNC Chair. The thought has never crossed his mind and I really doubt the Clintons are pushing him for the job. "Journalist" Chris Matthews is pulling this one out of his ass.
DHinMI - hope all is well with you.



by WesClarkJr on Wed Jan 12th, 2005 at 17:54:25 PST

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/1/12/2075/28388

[msgadget]

103. Point taken but you insulted FrenchieCat by assuming she leaps on

every bit of gossip she reads as legitimate and I've found just the opposite to be true.

[janx]

105. I think that we *all* have to take a step back and look at

the sick state of our media.

[msgadget]

108. I couldn't agree more.

Reading and filtering the news is a full-time job these days and even with that effort we'll be lucky if we discover the truth a couple decades from now.

[Kahuna]

140. He especially insulted me, since it was my post he responded to.

nt

[janx]

141. Check again, Kahuna. My first post in this thread was to

Frenchie. I just didn't think that she would believe the rumor stuff--I hoped she didn't. That's not an insult. It's the opposite, in a way.

[Kahuna]

156. Okay. My bad.

:hi:

[Sopianae]

61. Here's a post from the DU Clark Group

DUer Incapsulated was at a Clark event today and says that the General told someone that there was nothing to the DNC chair thing.

link

I think Tweety repeated the rumor first mentioned on IP and Frenchie just wanted to clarify things.

[JoseRizal]

70. Just want to post here in support of Gen.Wesley Clark

I just want to post for all the people who were,are and still supportive of the General as a person,a leader,a strategic thinker,human rights champion,and as a proven military leader. To be specific this is more for Frenchie i have been lurking here for quite a while now but just chose not to participate and post on this forum. I have been researching quite extensively about the General's background read his two books and the biography and also found some info with regard to the question of his stance with respect to the IRAQ INVASION POLICY. There is a site The Connection and hp.com it has audio clip interviews with the General. Clips about his first book Waging Modern War,clips after Sept.11 attack dated Sept.12,2001,then his subsequent interview on Sept.8,2003 with regard to his stance on campaigning for the Presidency. As a matter of fact the interview dated Sept.12,2001 and the subsequent Sept.8,2003 interview reflected his consistency on the TERRORISM AND IRAQ SADDAM HUSSEIN ISSUES. I posted this to clear things up to those who are still uninformed about Gen.Wesley Clark's consistent stance on these very important issues the very ones we now face. P.S. I was gonna post this up on the Wesley Clark group but I have to be a donor so I cant so apologies to those who think my post have no relevance on the subject matter. Thank you

[Crunchy Frog]

71. Welcome to DU.

I hope you'll stick around here for awhile.:hi:

Could you post the URL for the site you're talking about?

[FrenchieCat]

72. Thank you JoseRizal and

WELCOME to DU! :headbang:

Don't hesitate posting....ever!

Do you know how to post links? You are mentioning specific sites, but not posting the links to them. Let me know if you need assistance.

[JoseRizal]

77. Sorry for not posting the URL for the site

but here it is http://speechbot.research.compaq.com/wbur/theconnection?q=Wesley+Clark&dr=* and Frenchie and to all Wesley Clark supporters thank you very much for welcoming me on this wonderful forum.

[Renew Deal]

64. Clark is a great face for the party.

And a great strategist, but he's not a politician. I'm not sure how that would work.

[FrenchieCat]

73. It wouldn't....

Clark is a leader....not a PR man, which in my mind is what is needed as DNC Chair. I think that Howard Dean and Rosenberg could do this job. McAuliffe played the game the old ineffective way.....scared of his own shadow. We need a voice that clear and strong to go and clean up the McAuliffe PR mess.

Clark is clear and strong, but needs to be outfront hopefully running for President. We need an "out of the box" nominee in 2008.....and that would be Wes Clark. He has all the attributes you want in a nominee: Strong, Clear, articulate, southern, telegenic-charismatic, competent, smart, calm, an accomplished modern man who is self-made, heroic, a public servant, an outsider non-pol, with a smart attractive but sassy yet dignified wife (who's met many heads of states) of 35 years, not easily labeled but certainly a progressive with a conservative veneer to attract a variety of voters, but who takes no shit and knows the world.

Can it really get any better than that?

PS: I'm glad he is NOT a politician, but still has put campaigning experience under his belt.

[robbedvoter]

68. Glad Carville is not harping on the "not a real democrat" anymore

Some turnaround, huh? other than that, who listens to matalin/CNN whipping boy?

[Hippo_Tron]

75. Can't Carville get his ass back where it belongs? Winning Elections!

Instead of worrying about the DNC Chair, Carville needs to find us a superstar candidate and make him the next POTUS.

[FrenchieCat]

76. Hopefully so....

considering that Crossfire will be no more "not" soon enough, he's going to need a real gig!

[FrenchieCat]

79. Video of Hardball show where this topic is discussed with Wes

Now available for viewing at the U-Wes-A video site....

http://www.u-wes-a.com/mediaclips-post.html

[Larkspur]

80. I won't support Clark for DNC chair or Dem President nominee

He's a carpetbagger Dem and he has shown he'd rather make big bucks working for lobbying firms for the military industrial complex than serve the public as an elected public official.

Unless Clark humbles himself and runs for elected civilian public office, like governor of Arkansas, he won't get my vote period.

[RafterMan]

81. President is an elected civilian public office

Humble your own self.

[Larkspur]

82. Not for Clark it's not

He sees it as the highest office in the land and as an ex-general, he likes the title "Commander-in-chief".

No, if Clark is really humble, he'd run for a lower political office first to demonstrate the 1) he can win an election, 2) manage the affairs of that office competently, and 3) get re-elected.

Clark has no experience governing or leading civilians, like me, who'd tell him where he could shove his big ego.

[RafterMan]

89. For Clark, or...

You seem to be the one putting the office on a pedestal. Calling someone arrogant for thinking they can do the job strikes me as royalist grovelling. What's so magical about it? It's a tough job, but just a job.

The fact that you will only entertain the thought of someone pedigreed in the political caste to sit upon your golden throne is, I think, part of the problem in this country.

[DaveinMD]

102. you really don't know anything about General Clark

he is one of the most decent people I have ever met in politics. He's a wonderful human being who treats people well. He's exactly the kind of person who should be President.

[Jai4WKC08]

137. There were something like 60,000 civilians

working for him in NATO/EUCOM. How many people work for the average state governor? How many in a Senate staff office?

I think he can handle it.

[JoseRizal]

88. I think your mind is fixed about Wes Clark

Frankly speaking sir if I was Wes Clark I would consider you a lost cause. When you throw in the word humble himself down or hes just working to make big bucks with the usual Military industrail complex you keep on repeating a mantra that is false a mantra that is a contradiction Gen.Wesley Clark stature as an American soldier period. Serving the nation for 38 years, the U.S.A interest and the interest of its citizens that includes you sir or maam wether you are conservatives or liberals gays or lesbians black or white. Gen.Wesley Clark stood for our constitutions and the American ideals. That is what I call humbling himself to sacrifice one's financial aspiration to pursue a public service to the people and for the people of U.S.A.
Your comment infuriate the heck out of myself frankly it shed a bad light against the democrats in general as against or labeled as anti defence. We democrats should not shy away from our responsibility as a full pledge party not an attitude of your not good enough for me party. The perils of the party in order for it to survive and become strong must adopt a policy of strong defence not villifying it. I am a kind of democrat that believe in strong defence that is just. So pls. What do you call 38 yrs. of serving in the military? fought in Vietnam shot FOUR TIMES bled for our country, rehabilitated himself for a year. Stayed in the Army at a time when the Armed Forces were scorned by very public it tried to protect. Stayed in the Army to develop and maintain it to its glory. Stayed in the Army despite the allure of making big money in the private sector. Fought for the human rights for the Kosovar Albanians as a moral obligation to his duty as a soldier,duty to his President,duty to uphold the essence of humanity over tyranny despite the protest of his superiors and subordinate. As Gen.Wesley Clark himself said if you cand do good you shoud and that's what he did, to deliver the oppressed from the oppressor. Ran for president to shed light on the Bush administrations mismanagement and still to this day continue to speak up against the administrations blunders. That is what I call public service a culmination of what West Point Academy stands for that the Gen.Wesley Clark proudly carry and stands for to this day "DUTY,HONOR,COUNTRY".

[Larkspur]

92. Clark wasn't a registered Democrat until public pressure made him do it

Clark ran a fundraiser for Republicans in 2001, 2 years before he decided to run for the Dem nomination. And that is why I find Clark suspect as a Democrat and why he won't get my support.

Clark is a political jackal who thought that the Democratic Party was weak enough for him to steal the 2004 Prez nomination. The Clinton's stroked his ego in 2003 to egg him to run for it because they saw the Dem Establishment Dems being beaten by Dean, whom they would not be able to control, at that time. Like Kerry in the general election, Clark thought waving his general's rank would mesmorize rank-and-file Democrats to vote for him. Clark's inexperience at campaigning killed his chances. Oh, and his aides also conspired in the dirty tricks that helped bring down Dean's campaign in Iowa. So that is another reason why I won't ever vote for Clark.

[Sparkly]

93. Nice story.

Any proof?

[Name removed]

94. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Adelante]

111. "Clark wasn't a registered Democrat until public pressure made him do it"

Bullshit and you know it by now.

[DaveinMD]

113. good job

[x_y_no]

112. Quick, check your email ...

Karl Rove has some more phony talking points for you.

And he says to tell you you're doing a fine job of practicing your contempt prior to investigation.

[FrenchieCat]

117. Wes Clark spoke

at one Republican Fundraiser....and a week later spoke at a Democratic one.

His speeches were similar to both fundraisers.....about foreign policy, considering he had just completed his SACEUR duties the year before (Clark retired in 2000). In addition, he was still an Independent....as active duty military officers tend not to choose a party....and most, if not all are "independents". Upon retirement, some choose a party, and others don't. Clark claimed the Democratic party as his own, and for that, I am grateful. Considering that he has voted Democratic since 1992, I welcomed him a long time ago.

Your overdramatization of this "old and tired" (Drudge sourced)theme shows how insecure you are about the political skills of your chosen Howard Dean. To be forced to exaggerate and "make up" sh*t about Wes Clark (you say that he RAN a Republican fundraiser and called him a Jackal?), in order to elevate Howard Dean in your own mind....is not worthy of the type of folks who I believe support and/or represent Howard Dean. I hope that you are of a rare breed.

During the primaries, many things were said and done....whether Dean calling Wes Clark a Republican (when he knew that he had never been...as Clark one of his Foreign policy advisors) or kept trying to insinuate that he, Dean, was the only anti Iraq war candidate....or things said and done in the Kerry vs. Dean, Edwards vs. Clark, Kerry vs. Edwards, Edwards vs. Dean, Dean vs. Clark, Kerry vs. Clark......it's all water under the bridge at this point.

Lord help us if Howard Dean carries grudges against some of the best Democrats around....a la Larspur.

I can imagine Howard Dean saying to you...."Wouldn't want be ya! That chip on your shoulder is gonna bring us down".

Some advise Larkspur...pick your battles wisely so that you don't get your head cut off. Discussing politics without a brain is a hard task...so I have heard.

[knight_of_the_star]

109. What lobbying firms?

Please provide links and put up or shut up.

[Crunchy Frog]

118. I agree he needs to humble himself.

Frankly, I won't support or vote for him unless he spends an entire year travelling about the country in sackcloth and ashes, mortifying his flesh, and begging for alms.

He also must run for, win, and get reelected to an office that will keep him busy until he's safely past the age to run for president. Then and only then can he prove to me that he's worthy.

Oh, and he has to buy me a pony as well.

[Adelante]

120. I'm with you, Crunchy

Just who does he think he is anyway?

I won't vote for Wes Clark until he shows me he has a high intellect and a great big heart, is awarded at the very least 20 medals from other nations, after that - the French Legion of Honor and the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and an honorary knighthood or four, earns a masters degree in philosophy, politics and economics from Oxford, after graduating first in his class at West Point, has no fear of the liberal label, damns racial profiling, upholds affirmative action, defends a woman's right to choose her own reproductive life, insists that dissent is patriotic, demands alternative energy sources, leads an army in a winning war, brokers a peace, has the balls to appear on an Advocate cover, promises to take back tax breaks for the rich, writes his own books, tells the truth even when it hurts him, speaks out loud and clear for the Democratic Party all over the country and on TV .... and so forth.

When he can do all that, he can have my vote and not before!

[LuLu550]

123. LOL

you are so funny!

[Sparkly]

124. Don't forget the important value of being a politician!!

People like politicians; people trust politicians! He has to go out and be some kind of politician for a few years, no matter how many years he's done stuff with the White House, the Pentagon, halls of international diplomacy, NATO, ambassadors, etc...

If he hasn't spent a few years droning on for long periods of time to mostly-empty seats, how on earth could he be Commander in Chief? If he hasn't spent the years getting "strings attached" (as robbed so aptly put it), how can he be leader of the free world? I mean there's only THREE "President Schools," right? The House, the Senate, and Governorship. Nothing else could possible matter because, well, because.

/sarcasm

[Adelante]

127. So right!

We love all politicians!! :loveya: They've done so much for us: 2000; 2004.

I forgot.

[Adelante]

121. Dupe

[dogman]

126. Well he'll just have to win without you.

The people asked him to run and he did. We are asking him again and hope he will. You can support whoever you want. Since you seem to have made up your mind about Clark, what is the point of your post? It has nothing to do with this thread.

[CWebster]

84. Typical Clinton string pulling

Ordering the general to play stalking horse to dissipate momentum.

[El Fuego]

86. Getting him out of the way for Hillary in 08???

That is what the right wing hacks will say.

[marc_the_dem]

90. it sure smells that way

[janx]

95. And many around here

will believe it! ;-)

[JoseRizal]

100. Conspiracy theorist is what gonna bring the party Down

I have been lurking here for quite sometime now, just an observation I have found that some of the people here are more eager to make conspiracy theories and believe them rather than to examine reality with reality based answers.

I dont hate Pres.Bush because I am Christian nor it's my duty nor right to bash him endlessly. True I dont like him nor agree with his policies but my dislikes of the person are not based on him being the anti-Christ like figure. I dislike him for what he had done and continuing to do in the U.S.A and around the world. I have been to many blogs such as the arch enemy of this site the Freerepublic.om,military.com,and many others. I have done this to get different perspective on many different things. I for one do not subscribe to the idea that every individual have to think like me or have to agree to every thing I think is right.

I am kind of discourage that some liberals are becoming like our counterparts. This site must strive to different, different in terms of discussion of issues not to be petty or pick every little things that are not productive but detrimental to the goal of this site. I am the kind of person that does not think Liberalism have the best idea in the world nor it should be that way. Conservatism already take a mantle on that idea, what I am more interested in is what is best for our country and if it so happens that conservatives have better idea than mine so be it.

They are my brothers and sisters who think differently than I am,who seek not to destroy me or my ideals but whose mission is the same as mine and that is to better the republic which I loved so dearly. I seek not to harm them for I know that is not their purpose, some of them think to the extreme but we must not allow ourselves to follow that path. As for Howard Dean he was and still is a very good part of the Democrats an integral one, but I don't mean to belittle he's lack of knowledge in foreign affairs may it be Terrorism,Iraq,Sudan,Bosnia,Iran,the Korean Peninsula, etc. Here's what I do know that Gov.Dean can lead the party if hes willing to guide the party with a better message,a clarity of purpose for the people and not to alienate the people from the other side as evil doers. After all they are still Americans our brothers and sisters in good times and bad times.

[janx]

104. Welcome to DU!

Gov. Dean is very good at bringing people together. Half of those who support his organization, DFA, aren't Democrats. :hi:

[FrenchieCat]

114. Well put!

Absolutism must go. It's killing this country.

[Crunchy Frog]

116. I think that statement

could have been lifted word for word from Free Republic. Clark as Hillary's stalking horse? The mighty Clenis strikes again?:eyes:

[CWebster]

131. Then you haven't been following the progressive press either

Truly a lose-lose situation.

[Crunchy Frog]

134. Sometimes I go around looking at websites

and have a really difficult time telling whether they're from the extreme left or the extreme right. When I see a left wing site that looks exactly like a right wing one, it tends to kind of discredit it in my eyes.

When people on the left are reduced to utilizing Karl Rove talking points in order to push their agenda, I find it really sad and disturbing.

I don't suspend my own critical faculties for anybody. Not even if they call themselves "progressive".

Anybody who's swallowed the idea that Clark is trying for DNC chair as a stalking horse for the Clintons and in order to "stop Dean", has in my opinion, abandoned their critical faculties, and is letting ideology or knee-jerk prejudice shape their beliefs rather than any actual evidence.

I choose to be a part of the reality based community. Show me the evidence and you may get somewhere with me. Simply pointing out that a "progressive" publication said it means absolutely nothing.

Edited to post a picture that they have up at Free Republic and employs your exact imagery.



When so called "progressives" use the exact same language and imagery that is found on Free Republic, I know that we're in real trouble.

[CWebster]

135. Specifically

I was thinking of "The Nation", "The Progressive" and "Commondreams". I don't get the impression there could be any confusing their common political perspective. I suggest you research Hillary's positions on the issues and then you would know that Hillary is not the liberal the Right paints her as. The enlightened Left is aware of that fact.

[Crunchy Frog]

136. Hell, I know Hillary's no liberal.

I'm not even planning on voting for her if she gets the nomination in '08.

I also know that the Clintons don't engineer everything bad that happens in the world, and that Wes Clark is not their personal stalking horse. That is what I was taking issue with.

I also know that something isn't necessarily valid just because it was written in a progressive journal. I read and appreciate those journals too, but I also use my own critical faculties to evaluate what's said in them. I don't just swallow something uncritically just because it's in a progressive journal.

By the way, please look at the edited version of my post above to see why I find the imagery that you used so offensive.

[LuLu550]

122. Wes Jr. just posted on Kos

that the general is not interested at all in DNC chair, so stop getting your knichers in a buntch, kids!

[LittleClarkie]

125. If Carville was talking to him, does that indicate DLC involvement

Or is Carville not really a part of that?

[roguevalley]

128. a group had a conference call to Dean about running for DNC

chairman. Hook up here to hear it.

http://americablog.blogspot.com/howard_dean_conference_call.mp3

[LittleClarkie]

130. Not Dean, Clark.

And is Carville considered an extention of the DLC?

I'll try listening from home. Can't at work.

[janx]

133. This deserves its own thread! There is another one tonight--

I'm going to try and call and catch it!

[madfloridian]

152. Have you got another link.?

This one does not do anything for me but just sit there. Thanks.

[BlueInRed]

148. Clark good for pres rather than DNC

I think Clark's experience and talents are much more suited to president than party leader. Unlike Dean, Clark was essentially drafted into the presidency and the Clark followers used the internet to build it up. Dean (or Trippi) came up with the internet/grassroots model.

I just don't see Clark as the kind of guy who would like to play politics and fundraise, as opposed to solving the country's problems. I really like Clark for pres, just not for DNC. Although, he would clearly be better than any of the mainstream DLC folks.

Plus, it "taints" Clark's biggest appeal as a presidential candidate -- a no nonsense outsider who came to the party because his country needed him.

DNC and pres are two completely different kind of jobs.

[Clarkie1]

163. I agree it would have tainted Clark's appeal to independents and he would

have lost his "I'm not a politician" appeal.

I frankly see this as an attempt by some to shortcircuit a Clark 08' candidacy.

It's kind of amusing, in retrospect.

[illbill]

167. ....

Everyone can hail that Clark is the man for the job, but Biden should be his VP.

a Clark/Biden ticket would destroy.