Military.

[fshrink]

Isn't the fact that America might elect a military man as President somewhat scary to you? Not because of the personalities of the candidates, but because of the mass reflex "we're at war, we need a professional" type heuristic. In the end military never win wars. Civilians do.

[bicentennial_baby]

1. No

[laruemtt]

2. if you're talking about Clark

he's more than a military man. he's a philosopher, an economist, an all around brilliant guy. and he has also said he has seen the horrors of war and will do all he can to keep us out of them. *'s not military, he can't appreciate anything since he's never done anything or seen anything more horrible than one of the ducks he kills on his "ranch," and look how he's mucked things up.

[TreasonousBastard]

10. I agree...

and I have said that many times.

Cincinnatus, Lee, Eisenhower... many have been called by the military, but not all are simply warriors.

I don't know how Clark measures up to Lee, and we never did find out how Lee would do as head of state. We do, however, know how Eisaenhower did.

As the man who ordered millions of men into battle, and who took over the Korean war from Truman, he knew firsthand that war has no glory, and is never to be waged lightly.

No one knows better than the soldier the misery of war, and that it is the last resort when all else fails. It was Ike who warned us that we should defend the country, but never let the military-industrial complex get too powerful.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

14. please, lay off the Roman references

It's *beyond* creepy. If Clark thinks of himself as an heir to the Roman tradition of warrior/philosopher/caesars, or you think of him as one - help his campaign and keep quiet about it. Please.

A dictator is still a dictator.

[not systems]

3. Better than a chimp...

but I prefer a doctor because it is obvious that some
science learning could help them evaluate data quality.

[lastknowngood]

4. It's the same argument for the shrub

he has experience so he must be good. I have had the experience of getting to fat by eating wrong but I keep doing so much for experience.

[MrSlayer]

5. Nope.

It's a lot better having a real military man in there who's seen the horrors of war to one who is an impostor and doesn't care for anything more than when his cheeseburgers will be served. Bush is a disgusting, pathetic excuse for a person let alone a President. Wesley Clark knows the true price of war and would keep us out of it except as a last resort. I'm perfectly comfortable with him in the White House.

[Catch22Dem]

6. I would have said something on my own...

But MrSlayer nailed it.

[Leilani]

7. Agree Completely

Our non-military guy in the WH sure did a fine job.

[pinkpops]

8. As military men both Clark and Kerry

offer some insulation from the Dems image of soft on defense, so that equally or more important issues can be discussed seriously - these are my beliefs. Clark adds to that some ambiguity as to if he is pure Democrat or Republican, which is meant to appeal to independents, and if you believe he is telling the truth in his position papers, that shouldn't scare you away, because they are pretty liberal. If you don't you don't...you have to go with your gut and/or what the media tells you. Can Clark or Kerry defrock the Admiral Saint Bush playing the soldier card? John McCain didn't, but he was competing in the primaries, could be different.

[funky_bug]

9. Since we are already in a war, Dear Poster

I feel that Wes has much to bring to the table, not as a military man, but as a negotiator and a peace broker.

Dear Poster, you have no doubt felt the shame at being mocked by countries around the world. Last week we were mocked because George Bush wants to put a man on Mars. British papers report the countdown for the year 2010, "unless GW does the actual countdown from 10 to liftoff, in which case it will be longer." Today papers around the world were reported to be quite certain Bush will win the election, and went on to bemoan what that will mean for world peace. If I go to a red state, I have to order "Freedom Fries," and the very people GW said he would liberate, are crying for democracy every single day.

What we need in office is not so much a military expert (although I could go into detail as to how that might help us finish this war once and for all), but a peace maker... a unity bringer. Wes Clark has done that. He's negotiated peace talks, and he's shown character that appeals not only to members of all parties, but to people around the world.

I do not fear a military man in the Oval Office. I do not support Clark because of his military experience, but because of his potential to mend the fences that GW has burned.

[tabasco]

11. Do not stereotype military people.

I'm always dismayed by the anti-military attitude of many on this board. I'm a "military man" and I deplore war more than most. IMO, the last person that wants a war is someone who has been to one.
I would also state that the military has a great deal to do with winning wars. There weren't too many civilians on Little Round Top.

[TexasSissy]

12. Not to me, no. Kennedy was in the military, John McCain...

Bob Dole, Al Gore, wasn't Bill Bradley?,and many, many people in leadership positions around the country. Colin Powell, as you may recall, was more hesitant to go to war than Bush (non-military) or Cheney (also never in the military).

No one knows the horror of war more than a military man. General Clark would never use force unless it were a last resort. Really. And if necessary, at least he'd know how to plan it and win it! And the rebuilding afterwards, as well (well, he'd get the right organizations on board for the rebuilding, since that's not military expertise).

[bigtree]

13. Service in our military

adds to the character of a candidate. Servicemen, at times, have less freedom than civilians, but their duty doesn't obviate their obligations as citizens. Therefore their service is an addition to their character, not a liability as you suggest.

We are all in this country together. We all have a great deal to contribute, individually and collectively. Those who choose to serve in our military should be considered just as any other citizen would be. On the totality of their qualifications.

[adadem]

15. No

Not at all because they know what war really is. Unlike the current idiot in the WH who skipped out of town, Clark and Kerry have been in battle...they know what they are sending our kids into.

And I don't want to hear about Kerry and IWR, thank you very much. I belive Kerry when he says he didn't think shrubby would go to war without merit.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

16. Damn shame about some of our presidents....

...and the military