Deciding to piss into the wind....

[kalian]

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles8/DVNS_Wesley-Clark.htm

There are some rather disturbing links here about Clark.

[OrAnarch]

1. Youll be banned for such blasphemy around here!

:) Thanks...Ill edumacate myself

[kalian]

3. Don't think I'll be "banned"....but...

I am expecting to be flamed rather harshly. :evilgrin:

[Brian_Expat]

2. This strikes me. . .

. . . as just efforts to tear down Clark to boost Kucinich, when Kucinich also has some non-progressive positions in his past on women's rights/right to choose.

Just pointing this out as a Dean supporter who has misgivings myself about Clark and his campaign (which sometimes strikes me as "too perfect" -- especially around his relatively recently-unveiled campaign platform).

[kalian]

4. At this point....

I'm still very much undecided as to whom I will support. The dems
need to lay off the personal bickering and concentrate on
"spreading the word" about shrub and his minions. Each candidate has
a following...and its their duty to educate the masses...so that
when the final candidate is selected, the masses can stand united.

[R3dD0g]

5. That site also has this

Howard Dean

Seems like a good home for the Kucinich folks.

[Clark4VotingRights]

6. Perhaps you're unaware of the right wing's attack plan on General Clark

Gene Lyons, Political Columnist and Co-Author of "Hunting of the President," knows as much about attack politics as anyone.
He discussed why and how the right will attack Clark on Buzzflash on
October 22, 2003

"BUZZFLASH: You're probably one of the most well-informed journalists on how attack politics play themselves out with a culpable media, based on your extensive research and writing on the Clintons. How do you think the right wing is going to go after Clark? What can he expect? What advice would you give Clark and the people who are working for him?

LYONS: Well, the outlines of it are already evident. They're saying he's too tightly wrapped, which is kind of akin to what they tried to do with John McCain. They're saying he's a zealot and tends to become unhinged. They're suggesting he's crazed with ambition.
I wrote in a column a couple of weeks ago that one of their lines of attack would be to portray him as sort of General Jack D. Ripper, who was the megalomaniacal general in Dr. Strangelove who was so concerned with his precious bodily fluids. And that's what I think they will try to do. They might go all the way to the edge of suggesting some kind of mental illness. I don't think he's very vulnerable to that sort of smear.

Clark gave a very interesting quote that I used in a column in a profile in Esquire. He said the whole question about running against George W. Bush boils down to how much pain can you take. So I think he has some idea of what's coming. I think he has some idea that it will be shrill, it will come from that side of the spectrum, and it will be harsh. I think they're going to try to portray him as a crackpot and as wildly ambitious, and therefore dangerous. The right-wing will definitely label him an opportunist and say he's switching parties simply to become President and he's power-mad.
...
Let's just look at the situation like this: How much of a partisan do you have to be to look at George W. Bush and Wesley Clark standing side by side and say to yourself, "I'd pick George W. Bush to lead this country." How partisan do you have to be to decide that Bush is more qualified in a national emergency -- a guy who can scarcely speak in complete sentences -- to handle a crisis over a decorated war hero, a Rhodes Scholar, a retired four star general, and the former Supreme Commander of NATO?"

http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/03/10/int03221.html

So it's not surprising that the attacks are orchestrated, shrill, and harsh.

[Jerseycoa]

7. Here's one from the other end

Just to be fair and balanced ;)

http://www.rnc.org/Newsroom/RNCResearch/Clark.htm

Both sites share many of the same concerns.

[PsN2Wind]

8. You're stepping on my handle there

[Moderator]

9. Locking.....

3. The subject line of a discussion thread may not include profanity or swear words, even if words or letters are replaced by asterisks, dashes, or abbreviations.



DU Moderator