The interesting thing about Clark is that

[ConsAreLiars]

he is seen as an honest man who will serve the greater good by people across a wide range of ideologies. I'm on the far left, relatively speaking, and think he is a bit naive in the sense of buying into the Corporate Myth, but I am convinced he would be more like Roosevelt than Clinton. Yet I also see support for Clark by DUers who are to the right of me on many issues, and listening to C-Span, I hear praise from callers who sound very much further right.

I'm interested in hearing how others hear view him as a candidate, and more importantly, as a president. Would/could he undo the damage that Chimpy and the PNAC gang have done? Would he have the broad support needed to bring us together as as a nation to combat the the most egregious evils of Corporatism, as Roosevelt did? Would he be able to stave off disaster?

[Lex]

1. I think he would be a great and effective President.

I dread that any of the Dem candidates who get the nomination will be swift-boated, lied about, have their words twisted, their clothes choices ridiculed, and every word dissected in the most negative light possible by the right-wing media/corporate media.

[Erika]

5. The right wing has pretty much committed suicide

And they know it.

[Lex]

18. It would be foolhardy to write them off, esp. their corporate media

manipulation. They'll be charged up for the 2008 races because of the trouncing they just took.

The Dems took the House and Senate DESPITE the smear tactics generated by the rightwing echo chamber and corporate media barrage. Thank goodness just enough people were able to see through that during the mid-terms.

2008 will be disgusting, I predict, in the way the corporate media will treat the Dem candidate (CNN, MSNBC, ABC News, etc.)

[ConsAreLiars]

14. My impression, when hearing him speak,

is that he is completely candid. In contrast to those who seem to be trying to mouth the right words. And he hits back, rather than going defensive. Both traits are extremely potent counters to 'swiftboating" attacks. i just hope, and like to believe, he has the integrity to tell the PR experts and handlers to go F themselves and get a job with Big Pharma where they belong.

[Erika]

19. His working for Faux News shows his colors

Many of us were very suspicious when he "came out" as a democrat. There is no trust there. I would never vote for Clark.

[CarbonDate]

32. Um....

...have you seen him on FOX News? He's out there in enemy territory delivering the Democratic POV. He's hardly a shill for Bush, and he's regularly harder on Bush than a lot of other Dems.

Other than the fact that he's on FOX News delivering the Democratic point of view more effectively than anybody else on that station, what are your other reasons for distrusting him?

[FrenchieCat]

66. The only reason Clark works on Faux shows is because he's got confidence while kicking Puke ass!

Personally, I am very happy that Wes Clark cares more about this country than he does about how the base will judge him for going into the Lion's Den! He’s thinking with his head, and not with his heart or his interest on this one.

So you now have a real excuse not to vote for him.
Why? Cause he gave you one.
Why? Cause he understands that personal pandering to potential primary voters is not how this country will be saved.

For those who would have believed that Wes Clark should have sat on the sidelines and not do what he does best (smack some Pub ass) are not thinking about the good of this country. We did not have the luxury, nor the time NOT to speak to the folks that ended up helping us take the house and the senate back. How were we supposed to regain the majority in congress if we wouldn't have gotten folks, many who watch Fox, to switch from whomever they voted for in their district the last time?

Clark knows that the Left hates Faux. He knows his gig did not not win him any popularity contest with those who vote in Democratic primaries. But he also knew that based on his skills, that this was something that he could do to affect some change. It may not be a lot, to some....But it's really one of the few ways that he could do what he could to help save this country....and so, he did it....cause he's one that sometime goes against the grain if it's the right thing to do, and it was.

Clark is not the DNC Chair. Clark is not a Senator. Clark is not a millionaire with a poverty center. Clark is a retired NATO Commander and General who has spoken, written and done commentating on the various aspects of this War, National Security and Foreign relations....and the ramifications of those issues. Clark did and is doing what Clark can do help and bring some sanity back to this country.

It's very sad and disheartening to see those critics that would be so petty as to only become indignant in principle but forget what our real goal were and ought to be. Clark has informed Fox viewers as to what a real Kickass Democrat looks, sounds and thinks like.

Like Howard Dean said....we have to talk to those folks in their pick up trucks. I think those folks watch Fox, don’t you?

Do a search on Newshounds site and see what there is on what Wes Clark has accomplished for Democrats on that channel!

News Hounds: Wesley Clark Delivers Another Wow PerformanceBut General Wesley Clark did it again Tuesday (August 1, 2006) in another appearance on "Dayside." Clark, a former supreme allied commander for NATO and ...
www.newshounds.us/2006/08/01/wesley_clark_delivers_another_wow_performance.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Plain Talk From Wesley Clark About North Korea On FOXReported by Deborah - July 5, 2006 -. Wesley Clarke spoke very clearly to John Kasich, subbing for O'Reilly tonight, about the situation we're facing in ...
www.newshounds.us/2006/07/05/plain_talk_from_wesley_clark_about_north_korea_on_fox.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Neil Cavuto Pulls Another Chris Wallace and Ambushes ...One of the segments on Your World w/Neil Cavuto today (October 19, 2006) featured General Wesley Clark. Fox News hired Clark, generating a fair amount of ...
www.newshounds.us/2006/10/19/neil_cavuto_pulls_another_chris_wallace_and_ambushes_wesley_clark.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Fox Undercuts Wesley Clark's Sane WordsWesley Clark provided a few minutes of sanity on Fox News Monday (July 24, 2006), but the hosts of "Dayside" did their best to undermine him while he spoke ...
www.newshounds.us/2006/07/24/fox_undercuts_wesley_clarks_sane_words.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: General Wesley Clark Flattens Culture Warrior O'ReillyGeneral Wesley Clark Flattens Culture Warrior O'Reilly. Reported by Deborah - October 24, 2006 -. Bill O'Reilly didn't know what hit him tonight when he ...
www.newshounds.us/2006/10/24/general_wesley_clark_flattens_culture_warrior_oreilly.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Backstabber Neil Cavuto's Double StandardsHere are the letters about Clark's Thursday appearance that Cavuto read on Friday (June 2, 2006):. -Neil, thank you so much for standing up to Gen. Wesley ...
www.newshounds.us/2006/06/03/backstabber_neil_cavutos_double_standards.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: IranGeneral Wesley Clark Flattens Culture Warrior O'Reilly ... July 24, 2006 · Fox Undercuts Wesley Clark's Sane Words, reported by Judy,. July 22, 2006 ...
www.newshounds.us/iran/ - Similar pages

News Hounds: FOX News AlertsAt 4:15 p.m. ET today (October 18, 2006) during Your World w/Neil Cavuto, Fox aired a FOX NEWS ... Plain Talk From Wesley Clark About North Korea On FOX ...
www.newshounds.us/fox_news_alerts/ - Similar pages

News Hounds: How Did we get to the Point Where This Can ...Michael Reagan was a guest today (September 5, 2006) on Your World ... Wesley Clark in which Clark was asked to define "success" in the "War on Terror. ...
www.newshounds.us/2006/09/05/how_did_we_get_to_the_point_where_this_can_legitimately_be_called_news.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: General Wesley Clark Flattens Culture Warrior O'ReillyBill O'Reilly didn't know what hit him tonight when he pushed General Wesley Clark a bit too far. During a discussion about Iraq, O'Reilly challenged Clark ...
www.newshounds.us/2006/10/24/general_wesley_clark_flattens_culture_warrior_oreilly.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Wesley Clark Stands His Ground - Defends Cindy SheehanWesley Clark because the General met with anti-war Gold Star Mom Cindy Sheehan, whom O'Reilly called an "outright radical." Kudos to Clark who stood his ...
www.newshounds.us/2005/09/24/wesley_clark_stands_his_ground_defends_cindy_sheehan.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Neil Cavuto Pulls Another Chris Wallace and Ambushes ...One of the segments on Your World w/Neil Cavuto today (October 19, 2006) featured General Wesley Clark. Fox News hired Clark, generating a fair amount of ...
www.newshounds.us/2006/10/19/neil_cavuto_pulls_another_chris_wallace_and_ambushes_wesley_clark.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Wesley Clark Delivers Another Wow PerformanceBut General Wesley Clark did it again Tuesday (August 1, 2006) in another appearance on "Dayside." Clark, a former supreme allied commander for NATO and ...
www.newshounds.us/2006/08/01/wesley_clark_delivers_another_wow_performance.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Plain Talk From Wesley Clark About North Korea On FOXWesley Clark told Kasich , " The world's a dangerous place". He assured Kasich that North Korea is a definite threat and " war could occur through an ...
www.newshounds.us/2006/07/05/plain_talk_from_wesley_clark_about_north_korea_on_fox.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Wesley Clark Surprises HannityWesley Clark, new Fox News contributor, had a chance to test his debate ... Of course, Hannity called for Wesley Clark to condemn Durbin calling it "over ...
www.newshounds.us/2005/06/17/wesley_clark_surprises_hannity.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Fox Undercuts Wesley Clark's Sane WordsWesley Clark provided a few minutes of sanity on Fox News Monday (July 24, 2006), but the hosts of "Dayside" did their best to undermine him while he spoke ...
www.newshounds.us/2006/07/24/fox_undercuts_wesley_clarks_sane_words.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Wesley Clark Joins Fox News ChannelComment: I have a few immediate thoughts: (l) Wesley Clark is actually quite conservative so this is no surprise; (2) this is a shrewd move on Fox's part ...
www.newshounds.us/2005/06/15/wesley_clark_joins_fox_news_channel.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Way to Go, Wesley Clark!General Wesley Clark proved that a Democrat CAN hold a FOX host at bay. During an interview that aired June 25, 2004 (5:03 PM) Gibson consistently tried to ...
www.newshounds.us/2004/06/27/way_to_go_wesley_clark.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Who Says the Democrats Don't Have Solutions?O'REILLY: And joining us now from Little Rock, Arkansas, is FOX News military analyst General Wesley Clark, who has been thinking about Iraq policy. ...
www.newshounds.us/2005/10/04/who_says_the_democrats_dont_have_solutions.php - Similar pages


News Hounds: "Chicken Little" and Big Bad Oliver NorthIn June of this year, Fox News hired General Wesley Clark as a "Fox News military ... First you have Wesley Clark dumping all over George Bush and his ...
www.newshounds.us/2005/11/22/chicken_little_and_big_bad_oliver_north.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: IranGeneral Wesley Clark Flattens Culture Warrior O'Reilly. Bill O'Reilly didn't know what hit him tonight when he pushed General Wesley Clark a bit too far. ...
www.newshounds.us/iran/ - Similar pages

News Hounds: Backstabber Neil Cavuto's Double StandardsWesley Clark as a "Foreign Affairs Analyst." At the time there were some applause and rumblings about how Fox might be trying to actually become more "fair ...
www.newshounds.us/2006/06/03/backstabber_neil_cavutos_double_standards.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Campaign to Blame Louisiana Continues as O'Reilly ...Wesley Clark on the topic of hurricane readiness. General Clark offered a slightly new take on what transpired in Louisiana after Hurricane Katrina. ...
www.newshounds.us/2005/09/24/campaign_to_blame_louisiana_continues_as_oreilly_plays_race_card_once_again.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Wes Clark: Intelligence Was HypedWesley Clark, obviously an efficient time manager, wasted none softening his statements to Kiran Chetry on Fox & Friends this morning. ...
www.newshounds.us/2005/11/12/wes_clark_intelligence_was_hyped.php - Similar pages

News Hounds:Anderson Cooper (CNN) interviewed Wesley Clark & Howard Dean. On Fox, Shephard Smith did his usual shtick, with reports from the DNC by Martha MacCallum ...
www.newshounds.us/2004/07/30/.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Hannity Calls For Durbin's ResignationIt seemed like Hannity was trying to make up for Wesley Clark's support of Dick Durbin on last night's H&C by joining forces with Bob Livingston to ...
www.newshounds.us/2005/06/17/hannity_calls_for_durbins_resignation.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: How Did we get to the Point Where This Can ...Wesley Clark in which Clark was asked to define "success" in the "War on Terror." Reagan was the follow-up Clark/Democrat-basher, on to trash everything ...
www.newshounds.us/2006/09/05/how_did_we_get_to_the_point_where_this_can_legitimately_be_called_news.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Chickenhawk Sean Hannity Smears War Veteran John ...Guest Wesley Clark said Colmes was exactly right, that the war was billed as being paid for by Iraqi oil, billed as a cakewalk, a search for weapons of mass ...
www.newshounds.us/2006/06/14/chickenhawk_sean_hannity_smears_war_veteran_john_murtha_again.php - Similar pages

News Hounds: Muslim Viewpoints on Middle East Crisis – Kasich Isn ...... and balanced” discussion about the Middle East crisis with retired General Wesley Clark, ... Clark stated that Israel’s focus needs to be on Hezbollah, ...
www.newshounds.us/2006/07/16/muslim_viewpoints_on_middle_east_crisis_kasich_isnt_interested.php - Similar pages

[Quixote1818]

70. Wow! Great Post!!! Thanks nt

[FrenchieCat]

75. I'm adding more posts on this thread as I read the triffling tripe

Thank goodness for my archives!.....cause if one doesn't watch it, folks will just say any ol' thing.....unfortunately.

I'm currently buiding a website that will hold of the debunks that I have for all supporting Clark to use.

It's gonna be a war, this next election--and Wes Clark will be ready!

I'll be walking points for the General, for sure! :)

[Quixote1818]

76. See my post #72 below. nt

PS. Erika dosen't seem to want to tangle with you. :P

[Erika]

175. Talk is cheap

Money speaks.

[Nicole]

81. Fantastic post

as are all the others you made on this thread.

I hope you post the link to that website when it's ready. In the meantime, I'm adding your journal to my track list.

[FrenchieCat]

83. I certainly will, Thank You!

It's called "Rapid Fire--Silver Bullets" and should be ready by next weekend! :patriot:
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/

The site will be for the expressed purpose of providing information for Rapid Responses to fight media/distrator smears on General Clark, and will provide a place for those to go who want to become educated on the type of man Wesley Clark truly is . It will debunk the lies that have been told about him and his distinguished career.....and encourage those interested in writing letters to combat media presstitutes hit jobs...like Drudge and them!.

The "about us" on the site puts it this way...
"We watch the media. We watch what they print or broadcast about Wesley Clark. Some journalists don't do their research and we have to do it for them. If they don't get it right, we send them a silver bullet. We're good shots."

Kinda of a "Media Matters" just for General Clark...cause the beauty about him is everything has been debunked. period.

:hi:

[Nicole]

84. Thank you!

I've got it bookmarked and look forward to reading it. And using it. :hi:

[FrenchieCat]

86. I'm having to clean up some of the links...cause some are no longer

active or have been moved.

I'll see you there, then!

[Clark2008]

115. Great post!

But - I need to tell Howard Dean that both my husband and step-father live in the South and drive pick-up trucks - BUT they both vote Democratic. :7

[Hamlette]

85. why does it matter WHERE he says it, as long as he says the right things?

I'm always so disappointed with DU when people say things like this.

My huge disappointement with Clark working for Fox is that I never see/hear him anymore. I watch a lot of TV. Before 2004 mostly news programs...at least 5 hours a day. But I can't stand Fox and reckon I've never watched more than 5 minutes of it without screaming and turning the channel. Clark used to be on CNN. I watch TV while I'm doing something else (blowing glass) but when Clark would come on, I'd hear this voice of reason, turn off my torch and give the TV my full attention. I was a early supporter of his bid in 2004 and while I think he's more conservative than I am on military matters, he makes so damned much sense I'm willing to listen and accept that he knows more than I do.

[FrenchieCat]

89. Because some only appreciate those who preach to the choir.....

which appears to be much easier and less effective than going into a Lion's Den!

Clark's no chickenhawk in more ways than one! He's fought the good fight, and as someone else said in this thread; he's a true frontline soldier!

[lyonn]

149. Look at it this way, Fox has a record of everything he has stated

and yet Clark is willing to Speak Out. That is more than I can say for many Dems that are Playing it Safe with their comments to preserve their spot in the next Pres. election. Hillary is an example of someone running for pres. that will not put her ideas on the line for fear of being swiftboated. That is not someone I'd rush to for president. Since she has money and clout and a good possibility of winning the nomination, it frustrates me that she is playing it coy. We don't need coy, we need to know where a person stands. Hillary may be someone I could get excited about If I knew more about her thinking. Flag burning is not high on my list. Why would you put someone in jail for burning the flag? Silliness-----

At the moment, someone like Clark that has military savvy seems like a really good option for president! Iraq is the No. 1 problem in Our Country at this time and we need a president that understands that using diplomacy for solving this problem is critical, we can not do it alone like bush baby thinks. (Sorry, "thinks" is not the right word, "Decides" is more accurate).

For other Critical matters that concern this country our New Leaders in Congress should be able to handle that!!!

[CJCRANE]

93. Anyone who has ever seen him

on Fox News knows that he delights in knocking down RW talking points.

He's a great Democratic attack dog (but a polite one) who knows what he's talking about.

[Clark2008]

103. I guess you only preach to the choir.

Wonderful way to win new converts to the Democratic Party. NOT!

:eyes:

[Schema Thing]

110. Only someone who's never given politics a serious, introspective thought

would ever say something so fatuous.












:crazy:

[Dinger]

142. Yeah, Why Would We Want To Win Over Any republicans ?

It's not like we need the votes.

[windbreeze]

195. OH, you have got to be kidding me....right???

could this statement be made and attributed to naivette??? (shaking my head).....now just out of curiousity...did we just win an election???...is it, possible, just possible...that Gen.Clark...by going on Faux, (bearding the lion in their own den, in other words) might have gotten to some people who only WATCH Faux news...that wouldn't have been reached any other way??? I mean, what a concept...sheesh...you certainly don't give that man much credit....I dare say, apparently he has more brains and a lot more savvy than many of us...
windbreeze

[xultar]

198. So you don't think Dems should be on Faux! How stoopid. Buhwawawa!

How else would they get our message?

[lvx35]

2. yes, yes, and yes.

I'm editing this because I want to say more about Clark.

Basically, what America needs right now is a sense of social cohesiveness that will lead us through the current challenges and upcoming resources shortages. This social cohesiveness was evident in WWII, and was marked by a sense of social protocol and ethics that superceded money-making, it was patriotic and in some ways almost socialist in nature. This cohesiveness values the state, the rule of law, the union (in the broad sense) and the collective will as opposed to individual ambition.

Basically I see Clark as being well positioned and qualified to steer America in this direction, that's why I support him.

[Erika]

3. Clark is seen as a fence sitter

He has shown no passion for the democratic agenda. On fact, he is extremely weak on what he believes.

[lvx35]

4. Clark has been on TV all the time

representing my values quite well. The only person I've seen on his level is Dean himself.

[Erika]

8. Clark appears on Faux News

as a regular, but he claims to be a democrat. OK.

[kiahzero]

11. Heh.

I'm not surprised that's your argument.

[lvx35]

13. A soldier on the front lines... nt :)

[SaveOurDemocracy]

144. Is it necessarily mutually exclusive to be...

a Dem and appear regularly on Faux?? I agree it's not the norm, but I fail to see it as reason to dismiss Clark as one of the more courageous, outspoken, honest, effective presenters and supporters of Democratic ideals and principles. He's a soldier and knows the value of confronting and interacting with the opposition in resolving conflicts ... unlike our current Admin.

[lyonn]

153. Can't watch Fox, so, what has Clark said that is Republican speak?

Not trying to be testy but the times I have heard him speak on other shows he talks my language. Can't even think of something to disagree with. That is why my question to you about him speaking on Fox.

Actually, won't watch Fox, try to but they piss me off so bad. If Clark had a regular time to be on the show then I would watch.

[FrenchieCat]

170. No, but all of his videos are posted at his WesPAC site....

Just hit the link on my sig....and you will see "videos" as one of the links.

[cool user name]

7. How do you come to that conclusion?

There was a time that I wasn't too keen on Clark but recently his passion is what has endeared him to me again.

Is the guy flawless? No. Would he make a good candidate? Absolutely. This coming from someone to the very very left.

[Erika]

15. His passion?

If he had true passion would he be a regular on Faux News?

[ConsAreLiars]

20. What has he said that you find objectionable?

I don't watch that channel, but I've seen a few clips of his commentary there, and found no reason to diss him. Indeed, going into the lion's den to destroy the monster is generally regarded as a heroic act. As it seems to be in this case.

[Erika]

21. He is vanilla n/t

[FrenchieCat]

79. Wrong again......

Clark is HARDLY Vanilla! He's more like "kicking Puke ass and taking numbers" RED WHITE & BLUE flavored! :)

SEE! :patriot:

[wellstone dem]

102. You are kidding right, or else you've never heard him speak.

My daughter who hates politics (but is very liberal) was in the other room while Clark was on CSPAN, eventually she came in and said, "Why doesn't he run for President?" Clark has worked hard for Democratic candidates and is a passionate advocate for Democratic values.

[CarbonDate]

35. Yawn.

Is that your only argument? What a bore.

[Erika]

41. Clark has never stood up for the Democrat platform

So yawn again.

[FrenchieCat]

69. Clark has stood up for the Democratic platform regardless of what you say!

These editorials and articles shows what he stands for....and it all looks Democratic to me.

Taxes- http://www.pahrumpvalleytimes.com/2004/02/18/opinion/myers.html
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2004/01/07/003/58645
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2006/11/17/192456/21

Health Care - http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/01/31/wes_clark_raised_the_bar.php
http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/1/30/17455/5250
http://www.muhajabah.com/clarkblog/2006/01/clark_supports_singlepayer_hea.php

War - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/general-wesley-clark-take_b_22672.html

Education -
http://www.house.gov/ed_workforce/hearings/107th/edr/impaid110801/clark.htm
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/clark.interview.pdf

Environment -
http://securingamerica.com/taxonomy/term/74
http://www.stopglobalwarming.org/sgw_marcher.asp?2724
http://energybulletin.net/15587.html
http://www.clark04.com/press/release/167 /

Science
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/sun/2006/jun/10/566627991.html
http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/May05/Commencement/Clark_speech.html
http://www.greenspeed.us/wesley_clark.htm

Affirmative Action & Human Rights-
http://www.texasforclark.com/affirmative.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/2004-01-05-clark-women_x.htm
http://www.clark04.com/articles/010/
http://news.uns.purdue.edu/html3month/2006/060105.Ingrao.Sears.html
http://www.loc.gov/today/pr/2005/05-007.html

Mark Kleiman – http://www.samefacts.com/archives/cat_wesley_clark.html

Endorsement by the Washington Blade (largest Gay Newspaper) - http://www.aegis.com/news/wb/2004/WB040109.html

Endorsement by the Native American Times (largest American Indian Publication) http://www.nativetimes.com/index.asp?action=displayarticle&article_id=3440

http://usliberals.about.com/od/peopleinthenews/p/Wesley...

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040202/lawton

Endorse Wesley Clark by Samantha Powers to Armenian American Community RE-Genocide
http://www.anca.org/press_releases/press_releases.php?prid=503

Opinions of Clark
Col. Hackworth’s change of heart on the Perfumed Prince - http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34738
Esquire/The General
http://www.esquire.com/features/articles/2003/030801_mfe_clark_1.html

Waiting for the General -
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/16795

The Unappreciated General/written in 2000 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A51403-2000May1

Boy from Little Rock chooses military path
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/clark/articles/2003/11/16/boy_from_little_rock_chooses_military_path/

Debating http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/clark/articles/2003/12/10/clark_makes_the_most_of_the_moment/

The Deserter comment from MM and Clark’s bad press on it - http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2004/01/waldman-p-01-26.html

Attacks on Wesley Clark are laughable at best - http://aggressive-voice.com/zz585.html

Clark’s call to Rove debunked - http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20031016c.html

[Skidmore]

92. Erika, as a note, I consider myself progressive on most issues, and

the general is right at the top of existing candidates for my vote. I do think that he is a very solid and practical person, and frankly, this nation needs that right now. We've had too many fly by the seat of their pants ideologues call in the shots for the better part of a decade now and as a result the work of governance has been turned into an unending PR campaign. Instead, we need someone who knows how to do the work and is well grounded. And, after * and Rummy got done with destroying the military, we need somone who can go about repairing this mess. Like it or not, Clark is a leader, and I think he's a darned good one. Whoever gets the job next time around really needs have some confidence and a firm grasp on reality and to be not stand in fear of the next opinion poll. Much work needs to be done.

[lyonn]

156. "after * and Rummy got done with destroying the military, ...."

Yup, we will need someone to fix our military that is doing without the Basics: equipment, supplies (not river water in bottles), parts for aircraft and vehicles, etc. Our poor troops are working night and day for years (!) and they get treated like shit. They come home incapacitated and are dumped on society - how about checking those troops for brain trauma after having been blown by those explosive devices that destroy heavily armored vehicles. Saw a special (or read?) about this brain trauma issue that the govt. chooses to ignore. Yeah, Clark won't consider issues like this?

Sorry, got carried away

So Erika,
what does Obama & Hillary, Kerry, Gore, et al. say? What shows are they on?

Thanks Skidmore for bringing up the troops conditions and positions!

[CarbonDate]

177. You're simply not telling the truth.

As FrenchieCat has demonstrated. So yawn again.

[windbreeze]

197. OK, that does it....

DEMOCRAT platform....?????? how about DEMOCRATIC platform??? please explain exactly what you mean by that, and what he doesn't support...but then, I guess you are right...this is a boring subject....which makes me wonder why it was brought up at all?
wb

[Dinger]

155. Yup. SSDD

If ya know what I mean.

[windbreeze]

196. YES.....in fact, that's exactly where he'd be....

why is that so hard for you to understand?
wb

[kiahzero]

9. Oh please.

It's like 2003 all over again.

[FrenchieCat]

74. Clark is hardly a fence sitter......and if he is, he built the fucking fence first.....

WES CLARK EXPOSED PNAC TO THE PUBLIC......

General Wesley Clark, the late entry into the race for the Democratic nomination for president, is making what critics called a “bizarre,” “crackpot” attack on a small Washington policy organization and on a citizens group that helped America win the Cold War.

In a Tuesday interview with Joshua Micah Marshall posted yesterday on the Web site talkingpointsmemo.com, General Clark gave his evaluation of the Clinton presidency. He said that the Clinton administration,“in an odd replay of the Carter administration, found itself chained to the Iraqi policy — promoted by the Project for a New American Century— much the same way that in the Carter administration some of the same people formed the Committee on the Present Danger which cut out from the Carter administration the ability to move forward on SALT II.”
http://daily.nysun.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:ArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=NYS/2003/10/02&ID=Ar00100

Wesley Clark's Conspiracy Theory
The general tells Wolf Blitzer about the neoconservative master plan.
by Matthew Continetti
12/01/2003 2:00:00 PM

Yesterday on CNN's "Late Edition," for example, Clark said--not for the first time--that the Bush administration's war plans extend far beyond Iraq.

"I do know this," Clark told Wolf Blitzer. "In the gossip circles in Washington, among the neoconservative press, and in some of the statements that Secretary Rumsfeld and Secretary Wolfowitz have made, there is an inclination to extend this into Syria and maybe Lebanon." What's more, Clark added, "the administration's never disavowed this intent."

Clark has made his charge a central plank of his presidential campaign. Clark writes in his book, "Winning Modern Wars," that in November 2001, during a visit to the Pentagon, he spoke with "a man with three stars who used to work for me," who told him a "five-year plan" existed for military action against not only Afghanistan and Iraq, but also "Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia, and Sudan." Clark has embellished this story on the campaign trail, going so far as to say, "There's a list of countries."

Clark's proof? None. He never saw the list. But, the general recently told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, "You only have to listen to the gossip around Washington and to hear what the neoconservatives are saying, and you will get the flavor of this."

You probably get the flavor of what Wesley Clark is saying, too. It tastes, as THE SCRAPBOOK pointed out three weeks ago, like baloney. And sometimes, as in the case of yesterday's interview with Blitzer, it tastes like three-week-old baloney.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/445cqeal.asp

Bush used 9/11 as a pretext to implement Iraq invasion plan
Clark told me how he learned of a secret war scheme within the Bush Administration, of which Iraq was just one piece. Shortly after 9/11, Clark visited the Pentagon, where a 3-star general confided that Rumsfeld's team planned to use the 9/11 attacks as a pretext for going to war against Iraq. Clark said, "Rather than searching for a solution to a problem, they had the solution, and their difficulty was to make it appear as though it were in response to the problem." Clark was told that the Bush team, unable or unwilling to fight the actual terrorists responsible for 9/11, had devised a 5-year plan to topple the regimes in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Iran, and Sudan.

Clark's central contention-that Bush used 9/11 as a pretext to attack Saddam-has been part of the public debate since well before the Iraq war. It is rooted in the advocacy of the Project for the New American Century, a neo-conservative think tank that had been openly arguing for regime change in Iraq since 1998.
Source: The New Yorker magazine, "Gen. Clark's Battles" Nov 17, 2003

Gen. Wes Clark layed out the PNAC mentality in a long article.

Here's some excerpts from Clark's article, "Broken Engagement"

During 2002 and early 2003, Bush administration officials put forth a shifting series of arguments for why we needed to invade Iraq. Nearly every one of these has been belied by subsequent events.
snip
Advocates of the invasion are now down to their last argument: that transforming Iraq from brutal tyranny to stable democracy will spark a wave of democratic reform throughout the Middle East, thereby alleviating the conditions that give rise to terrorism. This argument is still standing because not enough time has elapsed to test it definitively--though events in the year since Baghdad's fall do not inspire confidence.
snip
Just as they counseled President Bush to take on the tyrannies of the Middle East, so the neoconservatives in the 1980s and early 1990s advised Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush to confront the Soviet Union and more aggressively deploy America's military might to challenge the enemy.....
snip
As has been well documented, even before September 11, going after Saddam had become a central issue for them. Their "Project for a New American Century" seemed intent on doing to President Clinton what the Committee on the Present Danger had done to President Carter: push the president to take a more aggressive stand against an enemy, while at the same time painting him as weak.
snip
September 11 gave the neoconservatives the opportunity to mobilize against Iraq, and to wrap the mobilization up in the same moral imperatives which they believed had achieved success against the Soviet Union. Many of them made the comparison direct, in speeches and essays explicitly and approvingly compared the Bush administration's stance towards terrorists and rogue regimes to the Reagan administration's posture towards the Soviet Union.

And the neoconservative goal was more ambitious than merely toppling dictators: By creating a democracy in Iraq, our success would, in the president's words, "send forth the news from Damascus to Tehran--that freedom can be the future of every nation," and Iraq's democracy would serve as a beacon that would ignite liberation movements and a "forward strategy of freedom" around the Middle East.

This rhetoric is undeniably inspiring. We should have pride in our history, confidence in our principles, and take security in the knowledge that we are at the epicenter of a 228-year revolution in the transformation of political systems. But recognizing the power of our values also means understanding their meaning. Freedom and dignity spring from within the human heart. They are not imposed. And inside the human heart is where the impetus for political change must be generated.

The neoconservative rhetoric glosses over this truth and much else. Even aside from the administration's obvious preference for confronting terrorism's alleged host states rather than the terrorists themselves, it was a huge leap to believe that establishing democracies by force of Western arms in old Soviet surrogate states like Syria and Iraq would really affect a terrorist movement drawing support from anti-Western sentiment in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and elsewhere.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0405.clark.html

Apparently for the neoconservative civilians who are running the Iraq campaign, 9-11 was that catalyzing event—for they are now operating at full speed toward multiple, simultaneous wars. The PNAC documents can be found online at newamericancentury.org.

his new book, Winning Modern Wars, retired general Wesley Clarkcandidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, offered a window into the Bush serial-war planning. He writes that serious planning for the Iraq war had already begun only two months after the 9-11 attack, and adds:

I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan. . . . I left the Pentagon that afternoon deeply concerned."

A five-year military campaign. Seven countries. How far has the White House taken this plan? And how long can the president keep the nation in the dark, emerging from his White House cocoon only to speak to us in slogans and the sterile language of pep rallies?
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0342,schanberg,47830,1.html

Was David Brooks “careful not to say that Bush or neocon critics are anti-Semitic?” David Brooks was careful, all right. You can see how “careful” he was in the passage which slimed Wesley Clark:

BROOKS: The full-mooners fixated on a think tank called the Project for the New American Century, which has a staff of five and issues memos on foreign policy. To hear these people describe it, PNAC is sort of a Yiddish Trilateral Commission, the nexus of the sprawling neocon tentacles.
We’d sit around the magazine guffawing at the ludicrous stories that kept sprouting, but belief in shadowy neocon influence has now hardened into common knowledge. Wesley Clark, among others, cannot go a week without bringing it up.
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh010904.shtml

There are many legitimate reasons to criticize the foreign and defense policies of the Bush administration, but Winning Modern Wars would have us believe that the president dangerously derailed the nation’s security policy and diverted resources from the war on terrorism to the dead-end enterprise in Iraq. He blames Bush for everything he believes has gone wrong, and gives him no credit for anything that has gone right, including major steps toward transforming the US military from a Cold War force to one more suited to the current and likely future security environment.

In Clark’s world, vulnerability to terrorism is all George Bush’s fault. Of course, Bush had only been in office for eight months when Al Qaida struck on 9/11. The threat had been incubating during the Clinton years, but that administration had done little or nothing to address it. The most Clark can say about the Clinton administration’s inattention to the emerging terrorist threat is that "in retrospect, it clear that he could have done more."

Clark is a member in good standing of the "Bush lied" school - an outlook based on the claim that the president and his advisers had intended to invade Iraq from the very beginning, and knowingly deceived Congress and the American people in order to drag them into this unnecessary war. As evidence for this, he cites a 1998 letter from an organization called the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) calling on president Clinton to remove Saddam from power. Those who signed the letter included Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz.
http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/oped/owens/04/clark.html

EXCERPTS FROM HARDBALL INTERVIEW 12/17/04

CLARK: ...I think, you know, a guy like Bill Kristol, what he sees is that Secretary Rumsfeld‘s plan is not unfolding the way that the neocons thought it should unfold in the Middle East. This was supposed to be like a scaffold. You know, you just go in there and carve out Saddam Hussein, boom, the people are liberated. And they‘re all democratic. And then the Syrians jump on board and say, hey, by golly, come and save us too. And then the Iranians and the Lebanese.

It hasn‘t worked that way, because what the neocons didn‘t understand is, that you don‘t get the kind of Democratic reform you want in the Middle East at the barrel of a gun. And they‘re holding Rumsfeld responsible for that. But really, it‘s a flawed conception.

MATTHEWS: That‘s interesting. You‘re the first person I‘ve heard say that, general. Because a lot of people look at it much more narrowly and they say the reason we‘re getting criticism of the general is there aren‘t enough troops there. He said he had enough troops, when really in reality, it was the conception that justified the low troop level. Is that your point? That you did not need a lot of troops, because you weren‘t going to face much of an insurgency.

CLARK: .....One is the point of the neocons, which is not military at all. It is the point of the operation and the fact that you could sort of go in there and lance the boil of Saddam Hussein, get him out of there and everything would turn out OK. And it hasn‘t.
http://securingamerica.com/node/60

More Wesley Clark speaking up about the PNAC plan being reported here...
http://www.cpa.org.au/garchve03/1160usplans.html

CLARK IRAQ AND 9/11 VIEWS AND THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION, FOR SOME TIME PUT HIM IN A CLUB OF JUST A FEW:

Here's what Wes Clark has felt and has publicly said about this corrupt government:

Gene Lyons on Wes Clark: "I do think his concerns are honest. I think his criticisms of Bush are exactly what he believes. One reason that I think that is I have had an opportunity to talk to him in a sort of a semi-private way.

Going all the way back to the summer of 2002, I got a sense of how strong his feelings about Iraq were. Long before it was clear that the administration was really going to sell a war on Iraq, when it was just a kind of a Republican talking point, early in the summer of 2002, Wesley Clark was very strongly opposed to it. He thought it was definitely the wrong move. He conveyed that we'd be opening a Pandora's box that we might never get closed again. And he expressed that feeling to me, in a sort of quasi-public way.
snip
It was a Fourth of July party and a lot of journalists were there, and there were people listening to a small group of us talk. There wasn't an audience, there were just several people around. There was no criticism I could make that he didn't sort of see me and raise me in poker terms. Probably because he knew a lot more about it than I did. And his experience is vast, and his concerns were deep.

He was right, too. How long ago was it that you were hearing all this sweeping rhetoric from the Project for a New American Century"
1. http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/03/10/int03221.html



“My views on Iraq were very clear. You've heard them expressed on this show many times, Judy. And you yourself know very well how I felt about Iraq.

That's the reason I was attacked all through the war by guys like Dick Cheney for being an armchair general, because they knew I was against what they were doing. And they were right. And now we see why everybody should have been against it.
1. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0402/12/ip.00.html

Media Silent on Clark's 9/11 Comments
Gen. says White House pushed Saddam link without evidence
6/20/03
But the June 15 edition of NBC's Meet the Press was unusual for the buzz that it didn't generate. Former General Wesley Clark told anchor Tim Russert that Bush administration officials had engaged in a campaign to implicate Saddam Hussein in the September 11 attacks-- starting that very day. Clark said that he'd been called on September 11 and urged to link Baghdad to the terror attacks, but declined to do so because of a lack of evidence.

Clark's assertion corroborates a little-noted CBS Evening News story that aired on September 4, 2002. As correspondent David Martin reported: "Barely five hours after American Airlines Flight 77 plowed into the Pentagon, the secretary of defense was telling his aides to start thinking about striking Iraq, even though there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the attacks." According to CBS, a Pentagon aide's notes from that day quote Rumsfeld asking for the "best info fast" to "judge whether good enough to hit SH at the same time, not only UBL."
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1842

AND JULY OF '03
"There was a hunger in some quarters to go after this fight. It was as though using force was a reward in itself, that, by putting our forces in there and showing our power, we would somehow solve our problems in the international environment. And I think the opposite is the truth. I think you should use force only as a last resort." Wes Clark
http://www.studioglyphic.com/mt/archives/2003/07/general_wesley_1.html

AND
IN AUGUST OF '03

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/08/17/sprj.irq.clark.comments/
Ex-NATO commander: Iraq shouldn't be center of war on terror
Sunday, August 17, 2003
attacked the Bush administration Sunday for launching a war with Iraq on "false pretenses" and spreading the military too thin amid the global war on terrorism.

snip
"We've made America more engaged, more vulnerable, more committed less able to respond," he said. "We've lost a tremendous amount of goodwill around the world by our actions and our continuing refusal to bring in international institutions."

He said that if Iraq "is the centerpiece of the war on terror, it shouldn't be."

snip
Clark has called on Congress to investigate allegations that the Bush administration overstated intelligence about Iraq's weapons programs.

Clark also lashed out at House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, a Texas Republican.

snip
"The issue is the issues," he said. "What does America stand for? How do we want to behave in the world? What does it take to fulfill America's dreams at home?"

IN SEPTEMBER OF '03
http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/000070.html
And now, the moment all you Valerie Plame fans have been waiting for: the CIA has made a formal referral to the Justice Department.

And I think we can count on Howard Dean, who has already broached the issue, and Wesley Clark and Bob Graham to keep this issue boiling.
--------
Inquiry call over US agent leak
BBC Washington correspondent Justin Webb says the president's opponents believe this affair could do real damage to the reputation of the Bush White House.

Democratic presidential hopefuls Howard Dean and Wesley Clark said a special investigator should be appointed.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3151066.stm

AND IN OCT 2003....

Democrat Clark Blames President Bush
for Sept. 11 Intelligence Failures

Clark, a retired Army general who led NATO forces in Europe, delivered his sharpest critique yet of Bush's foreign policy. As the newest entry in the Democratic presidential race, he echoed many of his rivals arguments for removing Bush from office.

Clark argued that Bush has manipulated facts, stifled dissent, retaliated against detractors, shown disdain for allies and started a war without just cause. He said Bush put Americans at risk by pursuing war in Iraq instead of hunting for Osama bin Laden and other terrorists, pulling a "bait-and-switch" by going after Iraqi President Saddam Hussein instead of al Qaida terrorists.

He called Bush's labeling of Iraq, Iran and North Korea as an axis of evil in his January 2002 State of the Union address -- "the single worst formulation in the last half century of American foreign policy."
http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/103003A.shtml

Saturday, October 04, 2003
Wesley Clark Calls for Criminal Investigation of Bush Iraq policy

beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia, and Sudan. So, I thought, this is what they mean when they talk about 'draining the swamp."

"Nothing could be a more serious violation of public trust than consciously to make a case for war based on false claims. We need to know if we were intentionally deceived. This administration is trying to do something that ought to be politically impossible to do in a democracy, and that is to govern against the will of the majority. That requires twisted facts, silence, secrecy and very poor lighting." Wes Clark
http://www.juancole.com/2003/10/wesley-clark-calls-for-criminal.html

AND IN JANUARY OF '04

http://www.atsnn.com/story/29514.html
Clark Calls for Congressional Investigation on Iraq War
Wesley Clark, saying the "President is more concerned with political security than national security." Clark further contends that Bush has been obsessed with Saddam Hussein since first gaining office, and did not do enough to protect the nation against impending terror attacks.

Full Story

Clark commented on the slow speed of the inquiry begun last summer over who divulged a CIA official's name, with the rapid speed of the O'Neill investigation. "They didn't wait 24 hours in initiating an investigation on Paul O'Neill," Clark said. "They're not concerned about national security. But they're really concerned about political security. I think they've got their priorities upside down."

This is a broadly covered story. You can also look here for additional coverage;
http://www.politicsnh.com/archives/pindell/2004/january/1_13Clark.shtml
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,108236,00.html
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040113_240.html
http://money.cnn.com/2004/01/13/news/oneill/

Clark Says Congress Should Determine Whether Bush's War Decisions Criminal
17-Jan-04
Wesley Clark
AP: "Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark said Thursday it was up to Congress to determine whether President Bush's march to war in Iraq amounted to a criminal offense. Asked if misleading the nation in going to war would be criminal, Clark told reporters, 'I think that's a question Congress needs to ask. I think this Congress needs to investigate precisely' how the United States wound up in a war 'that wasn't connected to the threat of al-Qaida.'"
http://archive.democrats.com/preview.cfm?term=Wesley%20Clark

http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/16916/
Let the General Lead the Charge
By Robert Scheer
Last week, in calling for an "independent, comprehensive investigation into the administration's handling of the intelligence leading to war in Iraq," Clark raised the key issue facing this president. "Nothing could be a more serious violation of public trust than to consciously make a case for war based on false claims," he said.

And there you have it -- the basic issue that the Democrats must raise in the next election, or it isn't worth having one.

----
And to this day.....

CLASH OF TITANS DEBATE 2005-
Clark said that joint staff officers told him 10 days after 9/11 that the Bush administration was planning to invade Iraq.

“I said, ‘But why?’ They said, ‘Well, um, we don’t know, but if the only tool you’ve got is a hammer, then every problem has to look like a nail,’” said Clark. “And they proceeded to explain that the administration really didn’t know what to do about the War on Terror, but did want to take apart a regime to show that we were powerful …”

When several audience members cried out, Clark also generated some applause after yelling “Stand up and say it! Let’s hear it! And lets hear you explain it and justify it to the families of those who have suffered the loss!”

On Prisoner Abuse.....Clark jumped in, and the issue escalated. Clark took issue with what he said were memos that came from the White House that basically said that the Geneva Convention didn’t apply.

Clark told his fellow officer that the military that he served in for 34 years “didn’t torture people. It didn’t abuse them. It didn’t punch out prisoners when it captured them.” Clark blamed the guidance from the top for undercutting the armed forces’ training.

“We never had the investigation, but I’ll tell you what, if you believe everything that has happened at Abu Ghraib, and at Guantanamo, and the rest of it, is the responsibility of a colonel or a corporal or a couple of sergeant’s somewhere,” said Clark, “then I’ve got a bridge or two I’d like you to buy!”
http://www.regent.edu/news/clash_titans_debate05.html

Also see....his call on investigation of prisoner abuse!
http://www.securingamerica.com/?q=node/184

:hi:




Wes Clark really is the man for the job to clean up the shitstorm we are now facing. He knows where all of the bodies are buried. Only Nixon could go to China....and so, it goes!

[Hamlette]

87. "seen as a fence sitter"? Why don't you just say "I see him as a fence sitter?"

I suppose I could then say "he is seen as a great, leftie, leader" and then where are we?

Cripes. Give us some examples of fence sitting. He was the ONLY candidate in 2004 to support gay marriage and they crucified him over it. He was further from the fence than anyone else!

[FrenchieCat]

90. He didn't "support" gay Marriage per se, but he certainly wasn't shy

about supporting Gay civil unions, and felt that the marriage part was best left up to the various church denominations to decide...which really is how it should go.

The reason why more the largest Gay publications endorsed him was because he wasn't shy about stating his views; was able to articulate them in a cogent and persuasive manner that even the most RW haters would have to understand; and really blew the whole "Military is homophobic" perception.

That's the beauty of Wes Clark; he is perceived as a moderate, but his beliefs are much more progressive than other " real Democrats" who don't make appearances on Fox.

Wes Clark is one that, should he become President, would be well aware that he is a Democrat(cause he ain't taking that for granted) and therefore should present Democratic Ideals to our nation. In addition, he won't be shy in getting the Pentagon budget straightened out; cutting all that pork out and providing us with working funds for social programs needed. Most other Democrats will be trying to prove just how tough they are on defense by appeasing the Republicans (who think they own the issue--even Clinton had a Repunblican Sec. of Defense and Joint Chief of Staff)....but not the General! He won't have to prove a damn thing other than that he is a "real" Democrat!

[Lurking Dem]

112. I have never understood

why Clark, who is a lefty on most issues, is seen as "moderate" and Dean, who is moderate on most issues, is seen as "left".

[FrenchieCat]

121. Most likely because when "General" is your first name,

It's hard to break the CW perception that one could be anything but. Since the indoctrination of the ideal that the military is ultra conservative shortly after Vietnam, it's just been a "goes without saying" mantra.

Wes Clark breaks that mold, and in so doing, helps the Democratic not just a little bit, but for years to come!

[Lurking Dem]

123. I like to think

that people are more individualistic in their thinking (including military folk) but it IS hard to get past that military = right wing conjecture.

Of course I have my own bias. Ever since he whispered "We'll get it done" in my ear after I asked him about fetal tissue research I have been more than half in love with the man.

[girl gone mad]

167. I think it's more than that.

He is very sharp and speaks calmly and frankly. This is why I think he would be a good leader. I think he is a very passionate and fairly liberal person, but his message is usually refined and logical. At the same time, he is an intellectual who can deliver ideas in plain language.

He was one of the few war critics who was taken seriously because he was thoughtful in the way that he framed his message. I don't mean that as a dis at other war critics, because I was someone on the streets screaming like a crazy person. I just think that his style can be more effective. He went to congress with facts and a stern warning. He forced Pearl to defend the indefenisble and he has earned credibility by being proven right. It's a shame that congress did not take his advice, though at least he got his criticisms on the record. No one can look over his testimony and still claim that "everybody" thought invading Iraq was a good idea at the time.

[Sputnik]

128. It's the haircut

Heh.

I agree with you that's how Clark and Dean are viewed.

It only works to Clark's advantage, so let the masses consider him a "moderate."

[Lurking Dem]

130. True, that!

>>It only works to Clark's advantage, so let the masses consider him a "moderate."<<

[lyonn]

159. Hey FrenchieCat, Clark needs to hire you girl!!!!!

You have convinced me!

[WyLoochka]

95. No passion?

I'm not supporting anyone in particular yet, but the "passion" for real democracy with which Wes Clark speaks is THE top factor that puts him high on my list. You must not have ever actually listened to the guy - sheesh.

[Dinger]

143. Do You Have Any Idea How He Helped Dems In 2006?

Any fucking idea???? You make a statement like "He's extremely weak on what he believes"?
Just out of curiosity, who is your candidate?

[Dinger]

145. Quit Swiftboating Clark

It makes you look bad. I've seen other posts in this thread where you smeared him too. Knock it off. The last thing we need now is Dems tearing other Dems down.

[lyonn]

161. Look at it this way Dinger, Erika has got this Post rolling

We all have gotten excited about the pros and cons on Clark and the cons are not impressive! Erika has an opinion but, it would be helpful if she would site something that Clark said that was anti-democratic? I have looked for the negative side of a General being president and it has been difficult. Some Generals yes, but....

Until Clark says anything that I don't find impressive then he is high on my presidential list. Surely there are some issues we may not agree on but on the major ones, Iraq, civil rights, he's got the excitment going for me.

[Avalux]

202. I have a couple of questions for you.

Have you ever heard Clark speak? Do you realize how actively he campaigned and raised funds for our Democratic candidates this past election? Clark has stated outright he is a liberal and is very passionate about the Democratic platform; I heard him speak at the Texas Democratic Convention and to say has "no passion" is offensive. Do some research before making suck statements.

[Coyote_Bandit]

6. Clark

would make a great VP candidate. He seems to be very detail oriented. And his military background would be an advantage given the mess in Iraq. I heard him on the stump during the 2004 primaries and was impressed with the wide range of people he seemed to attract. To me, a Gore/Clark ticket would be almost unbeatable.

[cool user name]

10. That would be a great ticket.

Clark/Gore or Gore/Clark.

Either way, it's a fantastic ticket.

[lvx35]

16. I would go crazy for Gore/Clark.

The base here would explode...You have global warming, alternative energy, and progressive disciplined leadership on the foreign policy front...All we need to throw in is some healthcare.

[rocktivity]

12. I think Clark is our strongest candidate at the moment

precisely because he DOESN'T take crap from either the Rethugs or the MSM. Yes, they'll fight and smear him, but unlike Kerry and Hillary, Clark won't hesitate to fight back. And I think Barack Obama would do the best job of balancing the ticket by bringing in minorities, the young, women, and most important, religious moderates (who vastly outnumber the religious fascists).

:headbang:
rocknation

[Erika]

17. I wouldn't trust Clark futher than I could throw him

He's a Faux News whore. He has no history with the democrats.

[ConsAreLiars]

22. So who do you support?

Any Democrat?

[Erika]

26. Yes, democrats with a history of being a democrat

Gore, Clinton, Kerry, etc.

[ConsAreLiars]

29. Bull!

You are spouting BS and you know it. Pick one and say why you think he/she would be a better candidate or president. Otherwise, just admit what you are doing.

[Erika]

34. I admit that I am saying Clark is not qualified to hold office

under the democratic party. He has never stood up for the platform.

[ConsAreLiars]

48. That is either ignorant or worse.

Read his positions on any subject and tell me what position he has taken that is in opposition to "the democratic platform/" whatever you might mean by that. Otherwise, I'll just assume that like everything else you've said, you're just operating off some blather based agenda. A little content, rather than smears, would be nice for a change.

[Erika]

61. Clark did not decide to become a democrat until 2003

and then went to work for Faux News.

I have made no smears.

[in_cog_ni_to]

125. Clark voted for Clinton...TWICE and Gore.

He was in the Military and never had a "declared" political party. He was an Independent throughout his military career.

[Dinger]

157. The Hell You Haven't

As long as the mods leave them here, they are ALL here (*proof) for Dems to see, but that's what you want, isn't it?

[Quixote1818]

49. How is this for standing up for the platform?

Formed by General Wesley K. Clark, WesPAC - Securing America’s Future is founded on the belief that a truly secure America demands sound, wise leadership and a renewed commitment to the values that have made our nation great: service, integrity, and accountability.


Anchored in these ideals, and committed to addressing the threats facing America both at home and abroad, WesPAC has two central objectives:

* Elect Democrats to the White House, Congress, state offices, and local offices in order to implement new policies that will restore our nation’s security and prosperity, comprehensively address the threats facing America and our allies while respecting civil liberties, and replace the current unwise policies established by this Republican Administration and Congress.


http://securingamerica.com/mission

[Dinger]

154. Good Question. Yet Erika's Posts Remain

Interesting.

[FrenchieCat]

183. It doesn't really matter about Erika's posts, except to Erika.....

her posts are her honest opinion regardless if they are not backed up with anything. She's allowed to have these opinions even if she's unable to articulate any cogent paragraph that responds to any of the posts made countering her opinion.

It's like having a poster announcing that the world is flat, and a numerous string of folks offer a new map and photos of the Earth showing that it isn't at all. However if poster, rather than to look at the evidence and admit that it may be possible that the Earth isn't as flat as they thought, just repeat "the world is flat".....then

The problem becomes that poster's because,
It is not that the world will still looks flat to others reading the exchange...

it's that the person with the flat world opinion loses credibility, and without credibility on a message board, what is there left? :shrug:

(Edited to correct Ericka to correct sp.)

[WyLoochka]

96. Lieberman has a "history" of being

a Democrat. Webb doesn't. So I'll surmise from your superficial, canardish standards that you will be supporting Lieberman's proposals in the Senate over Webb's?

[Ilsa]

109. People in the military have to remain virtually silent about

their political preferences. It is part of the culture and rules. After he retired, he took stock of his beliefs and came out as a democrat.

Clark would make a wonderful president and leader; one who is open to ideas for the good of the nation, not just one plank of a political party. His education and work in diplomacy definitely qualify him to be president.

Don't like him? Don't vote for him. But don't spread lies or innuendo about him.

[Sputnik]

129. Unless you mean Bill Clinton

who, of course, is ineligible to run, then don't forget that Hillary was once a Goldwater Girl.

She can't be trusted!!!

;)

[kiahzero]

23. That's absurd.

Don't you think the test of whether someone is a Democrat or not should be something more substantive than their number of appearances on cable news?

[Strelnikov_]

24. So, Clark Is A Faux News Whore

Ever think he is simply carrying the message into the 'enemy' camp?

No. Didn't think so.

[Erika]

30. He's never proven he was even a democrat

He talks without saying anything.

[Strelnikov_]

38. A Blood Test? Genetic Mapping? Loyalty Oath?

Following him since the '04 primaries, I'm convinced he will be more of 'Democrat' than at least half of the current crop of Senate Democrats, and a significant number of Congressmen.

[wtmusic]

47. You've wandered into the lion's den

Sorry? :P

I met Clark last summer working on a campaign--I wouldn't be quite so harsh, IMO he's very smart and very engaging in person. He also has no political experience, is an alumnus of the mil/industrial complex, and tends to wilt under pressure (Iowa caucus debate).

One day he could make a fine president, but it won't be in 2009.

[Erika]

52. He's still never shown he was a true democrat

and until he does he won't be considered a serious candidate.

[wtmusic]

57. The only way to judge a "true" Democrat

is by their voting record, and he has none. So it's impossible to say. My concern is his ties to the military will put him under powerful pressure to take un-Democratic stances, regardless of all that purty talking he can do.

He told me he had been doing some consulting on Wall St., so he also has ties to big business.

[Quixote1818]

68. He just recently made millions after he retired from the Military

He lived in a trailer during much of his time in the Military. The guy is smart and could have made a lot of money years ago if he wanted to. He seems more interested in serving his country than getting caught up in special interest crap associated with big business. I think he really cares about his country and serving others. Is is in this for the right reasons.

[FrenchieCat]

71. Yes, Clark is an investment banker.....so he has ties to wall street...

and so does most of our Democrats have ties to business, and.....are you saying they shouldn't? Doing business doesn't make you a bad guy automatically, does it. George Soros is a Big Business type on Wall Street, and Clark is associated with him as well!

Billionaire Soros Gives Financial Boost to General Clark
http://www.nysun.com/article/41564

And Wes Clark is not the only one!

John Edwards Hits the Street
The 2004 Democratic candidate for Vice-President joins Fortress Investment Group, where he will serve as a part-time global dealmaker

Wall Street has long provided a soft landing for out-of-work pols. But increasingly, the revolving door leads to private investment firms. The Street's latest recruit: John Edwards, the ex-North Carolina senator and Vice-Presidential standard bearer for the Democratic Party in the 2004 elections.

BusinessWeek has learned that Edwards has signed up to work for the New York-based private investment concern Fortress Investment Group as a part-time senior advisor. As such, he will be "providing support in developing investment opportunities worldwide and strategic advice on global economic issues," says Edwards spokesperson Kim Rubey. Fortress declined to comment about hiring Edwards, who teamed up with Massachusetts Senator John Kerry in a losing bid against President George Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney last year.

USEFUL EXPERIENCE. Edwards joins a growing line of policymakers turned dealmakers. Former Veep Dan Quayle has been sealing deals around the world for hedge fund group Cerberus Capital Management ever since he dropped out of the 2000 Presidential race.

Ex-New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani has set up his own investment banking advisory firm -- Giuliani Capital Advisors. He also chairs the board of advisors to Leeds Weld & Co., where former Massachusetts Governor William Weld was a principal until recently. Weld has reduced his role to a senior advisor while considering a run for New York governor.

Edwards was a highly successful trial lawyer in the Tarheel State before going into politics. But his experience in Washington should serve him well as a global financial adviser. He was on the Senate Intelligence Committee in Congress and boned up on global economics during the 2004 Presidential campaign for several nationally televised debates with Cheney. Edwards now serves as a co-chair of a Council on Foreign Relations task force on U.S.-Russia relations.
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/oct2005/nf20051013_3314_db016.htm

[Quixote1818]

72. Man, I am sure glad we are on the same side on this

I would hate to argue with you about Clark! You have a billion facts at your fingertips! You would be a fantastic campaign manager!

[wtmusic]

107. You sure you want to link General Clark to Dan Quayle?

How unfair. I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts Wes can spell "potato".

:rofl:

My point was that although it can be beneficial, having ties to big business is often in direct conflict with the welfare of your constituents. Soros is a unique example among the thousands of other money-grubbers who would sell their own mother for stock options, but Soros' endorsement of Wes certainly weighs in in Wes' favor.

The business dealings of all of the people you list should be examined under a microscope, and just the fact that Wes once lived in a trailer hardly makes him salt o' the earth, or shows he is incorruptible.

[Donna Zen]

200. Money on Wall Street?

True, he is putting together investment packages for emerging energy and medical technology.

Do you think that any other Democrat has ever made any money on Wall Street. The Senate is a millionaires club, so what do you think?

As for the Pentagon...Clark has said that he would take on the "make-want" budget. Okay fine! Who of the named candidates can take on the Pentagon? Who will spend their political capital to curb the Pentagon budget? Hillary? (lol) It took Nixon to go to China, it will take a general to go to the Pentagon.

And the military budget contains the greatest amount of waste, and the greatest amount of money.

Clark did not lose the Iowa debate.

So who are these great seasoned campaigners whose speeches make our hearts rise up? Hillary? Gephart, Lieberman...

Yes there are the rare orators in the party...Obama and Bill. But honestly, I don't believe for a minute that the regulars on the rubber-chicken circuit are better speakers to Clark.

And then there's this: Wes Clark tells the truth. Think about that concept.

[Joe Chi Minh]

124. He's a chameleon, Erika. Even Cheney apprently predicted invasion of

Iraq would morph into a post-war disaster. Yet, when you read the following direct quotations from Clark's reservoir of wisdom, you have to marvel how someone could make Bush's "Mission Accomplished!" and "Bring It On!" sound wimpy - particularly the last paragraph:

"Clark made bold predictions about the effect the war would have on the region: "Many Gulf states will hustle to praise their liberation from a sense of insecurity they were previously loath even to express. Egypt and Saudi Arabia will move slightly but perceptibly towards Western standards of human rights." George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair "should be proud of their resolve in the face of so much doubt," Clark explained. "Their opponents, those who questioned the necessity or wisdom of the operation, are temporarily silent, but probably unconvinced." The way Clark speaks of the "opponents" having been silenced is instructive, since he presumably does not include himself-- obviously not "temporarily silent"-- in that category. Clark closed the piece with visions of victory celebrations here at home: "Let's have those parades on the Mall and down Constitution Avenue."

In another column the next day, Clark summed up the lessons of the war this way: "The campaign in Iraq illustrates the continuing progress of military technology and tactics, but if there is a single overriding lesson it must be this: American military power, especially when buttressed by Britain's, is virtually unchallengeable today. Take us on? Don't try! And that's not hubris, it's just plain fact."

Yeee Haaaa! as someone once commented, is not a foreign policy. I suspect there are few more plausible candidates for the title of the Carlyle Group's favourite son, than Clark. It's difficult to avoid the conclusion that Halliburton shares would rocket sky high, if he were ever to grace the Oval Office.

You Clark supporters need to look into your hearts, and ask yourselves what makes you so regressive, why you want the US to revert to being the playground bully. Why you have such little taste for a REAL spread of democracy, WORLD-WIDE. And that means not at the point of a gun or by destabilising democratic regimes in other countries.

Whe politicians talk about spreading democracy in such terms, they are lying through their teeth. And I think you Clarkistas know that; that countries only have interests, not friends, still less, ideals. And the ones who really take heart from the spread of democracy in the world are politicians/statesmen who respect democratic foreign regimes, and don't feel they have the right to invade countries with other age-old cultures, to "set them straight".

There are politicians who suddenly spring up seemingly from nowhere, yet who have a message that is both passionate and consistent. The only consistency Clark, however, has shown is a truly awe-inspiring yet passionate inconsistency. Rudyard Kipling once said that there was no more awe-inspiring sight than a Scotsman on the make. He had something learn. And Clark would have taught him. Kipling would have thought him the Stupor Mundi, the Wonder of the World.

What's more, as Erika said, he has no political experience at all. To vote for him would be to buy a extraordinary pig in a poke; a life-time Republican, moreover.

[Clark2008]

162. BUT, if you read the ENTIRE columns and not just the parts

this poster chooses to highlight, Erika, you'll also find that he smacked down the Bush Administration for not having an exit strategy and said what the poster chose to highlight in a very sarcastic tone.

This poster doesn't understand irony.

[Joe Chi Minh]

163. Sure. And you don't recognise gung-ho idiocy, never mind irony.

"In another column the next day, Clark summed up the lessons of the war this way: "The campaign in Iraq illustrates the continuing progress of military technology and tactics, but if there is a single overriding lesson it must be this: American military power, especially when buttressed by Britain's, is virtually unchallengeable today. Take us on? Don't try! And that's not hubris, it's just plain fact."

Have you learnt the single over-riding lesson, clarkista?

Heck, you're gullible. The world and his wife did that, after the event! Gee whizz! Did Clark have reason to believe that his adulation for Bush was based on sound leadership and administrative skills? If so, it was a unique insight, still not vouchsafed to many of us.

[FrenchieCat]

171. Would you post the "Next" day 4/11 London Times Article you are quoting....

Please.......Thanks!

I can't find the article, just a Reference from FAIR...and then other entries quoting FAIR.

[Joe Chi Minh]

205. At the moment, I can give you its attribution by Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting,

but will see if I can find the article, itself, or a longer quotation from it. This link cites it (the whole article is well worth reading):

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1839

More copious material quoting chapter and verse of Clark's own utterances, as well as those of other very distinguished people who served with him in the military, politics, etc, can be found in the article under this link to Dissident voice:

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

Clark's scary vacillations are copiously chronicled, with wholly contradictory yet direct quotations of his utterances on pages to be found on Google. And the organs of the media concerned are mainly very mainstream, and not ordinarly averse to a right-wing imperialist stance by the US.

However, I find myself again and again asking myself how it is that Clark's devotees here could pay so little heed to these opinions that he was unfit for high office, expressed by two generals, who had been his superiors and who clearly would have known his personal and professional qualities far better than virtually any political devotee of his from afar:

"Soon after Clark entered the race, though, another Clinton-era general, Tommy Franks, who retired this summer after directing the capture of Baghdad, was asked in a private setting whether he believed that Clark would make a good President. “Absolutely not,” Franks replied. Retired General Hugh Shelton was asked the same question after giving a talk at a college in California. Shelton, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was Clark’s boss in 1999 when Clark was unceremoniously told that he was being removed from his position as Supreme Allied Commander, Europe. “I’ve known Wes for a long time,” Shelton said. “I will tell you the reason he came out of Europe early had to do with integrity and character issues, things that are very near and dear to my heart. . . . Wes won’t get my vote.” Shelton has refused to explain how he came to his conclusion."

I mean they are damning comments in this context, and General Shelton's comment, if unprovable or unfounded, would presumably be actionable.

[Joe Chi Minh]

206. Here is a link to an article in the New Yorker by Peter J Boyer, which

tends to run counter to the previous articles I cited, yet still he seems to emerge as a very flawed figure. Still, you might take heart from some of the explanations put forward by friends of his.

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/031117fa_fact?031117fa_fact

However for me, his own words speak louder than anyone else's, friend or foe, and compellingly so.

PS: Those disapproving comments by his superiors were made in a private setting.

[FrenchieCat]

207. Peter J. Boyers? You must mean.......

Please you take heart, and ears, and mind and be very careful with your sources......because you wouldn't want to further tarnish your credibility here at DU.....which it appears is even more shaky as of today......

because it is perfectly clear to all insightful observers that Boyers had an agenda.......
read two "respectable" sources on Peter Boyers' general agenda and in particular in reference to this specific article you cite....

Defending the General
The New Yorker's unfair slam on Wes Clark and his role in the Kosovo war.
By Fred Kaplan
http://slate.msn.com/id/2091194/#ContinueArticle

Boyer's plate
Who is New Yorker staff writer Peter Boyer -- and why is he after Wesley Clark?
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=1383

And Here.....for your reading pleasure....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=321522

[Joe Chi Minh]

208. Here is a link to an article by Wayne Madsen in Counterpunch, which

tends to confirm my strongest suspicions concerning Clark, as a Neocon Trojan horse in the Democratic camp:

http://www.counterpunch.org/madsen09182003.html

After the entry of Baghdad by the US troops, "Let's have those parades on the Mall and down Constitution Avenue"...

... and worse, if anything, the quote from Clark's 1997 testimony before the Senate Armed Services on the School of the Americas:

"This school is the best means available to ensure that the armed forces in Latin America and the armies in Latin America understand U.S. values and adopt those values as their own.":...

are pure Neocon at its most imperialistic and demonic.

[Lurking Dem]

210. ROFLOL!

Wayne Madsen??

You really aren't helping your "case".

[FrenchieCat]

211. More of the same.....Madsen also is part of the

Dissident voices/Counterpunch/Fair group --

Your suspicions about Wes Clark are incorrect, and using extremist left wing sources to document your suspicion are laughable, at best......

[FrenchieCat]

209. Both Fair and Dissident Voices are biased sources on all Democrats

as well bringing in Gen. Shelton's comments does not help your case.....and in fact makes you suspect on your relying on unreliable sources to smear Wes Clark!

Frag Officer
Hugh Shelton smears Wes Clark.
By William Saletan
Posted Monday, Sept. 29, 2003, at 6:20 PM ET

I have a problem with Wesley Clark's former boss and current bad-mouther, Gen. Hugh Shelton. The problem has to do with Shelton's integrity and character. Let's just say that if Shelton runs for office, he won't get my vote.

A couple of weeks ago, Shelton, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was asked at a forum in California, "What do you think of Gen. Wesley Clark, and would you support him as a presidential candidate?" Shelton replied, "I've known Wes for a long time. I will tell you the reason he came out of Europe early had to do with integrity and character issues, things that are very near and dear to my heart. I'm not going to say whether I'm a Republican or a Democrat. I'll just say Wes won't get my vote."

Shelton's remarks appeared in the Los Altos Town Crier on Sept. 23. On Sept. 24, the Republican National Committee disseminated them in an e-mail alert. The New York Times sought clarification from Shelton but reported that he "could not be reached for comment." Since then, the remarks have reappeared in numerous wire stories, TV broadcasts, and newspaper articles. The New York Post trumpeted "the revelation that says Clark lacks the character to be president" and suggested it was one of several "hints that maybe Clark isn't all that." A Post op-ed added, "It makes you suspect that knows whereof he speaks when he says Clark's forced early retirement as head of NATO 'had to do with integrity and character issues.' " On CNBC, former Rep. Susan Molinari, R-N.Y., asked, "What do we know about ? He supported Bush. He said nice things about Condi Rice. Gen. Shelton says that there's issues of character and integrity that need to be discussed." On Fox News, Tony Snow said Clark "didn't run the military. He was run out of the military. … says Clark was, in effect, fired as the supreme allied commander for reasons of integrity and character."

I've searched news databases and found only one person who's pointed out that Shelton has a duty to clarify his accusation. Last Friday, my colleague, Chris Suellentrop, appeared on the Fox News show The Big Story With John Gibson. Gibson recited Shelton's quotes, posited that Shelton "had to have a good reason" to fire Clark, and concluded, "Integrity—that means, does the guy lie? Does he tell the truth to his bosses?" Suellentrop argued that Shelton "should say more of what he means by that. What character issues? What integrity issues?" But Gibson persisted:

Why do you think it is that none of the other nine candidates in this debate yesterday didn't turn around and say, Gen. Clark, what integrity issues, what character issues, why were you fired? No one said a word about this. Is somebody covering something up or are they just … Is there a khaki wall that is going to close around Clark and we are not going to find out what it was that Hugh Shelton and evidently more people at that level felt about him? … Could it be because these issues, the words "integrity and character," are so large that if fried Clark now they may not have somebody that they want to run with ? The Democrats cannot attack this guy or find out what these issues were because it's too bad, they may need him?

Whoa. We don't know that Clark lied. We don't know that the grounds on which Shelton got rid of him were valid. We don't know that when Shelton challenges Clark's integrity, Shelton knows whereof he speaks. We don't know that "more people" at Shelton's level doubted Clark's integrity. All we know is that some military honchos have criticized Clark's style anonymously and that Shelton has challenged Clark's integrity. We don't know whether these two sets of allegations are related, or whether other military leaders who have issues with Clark would characterize them as issues of integrity.

What we do know from widespread reporting is that Shelton resented Clark for going over his head to the Clinton White House, the State Department, and the media. That's the closest thing to a Clark-Shelton "integrity" issue I can find in the public record. If that's Shelton's beef, he ought to say so and let others judge whether it calls into question Clark's integrity.
While he's at it, Shelton ought to explain why, if sneaking around your boss to go to the media is a grave character issue, sneaking around your former subordinate to go to the media with an unfalsifiable insinuation about him isn't. Clark says Shelton never came to him directly: "I have never heard anything about these integrity and character issues." Clark also says he has "no idea" what they are. Until Shelton clarifies the charge, Clark can't rebut it. He's presumed guilty of something serious. That's why Gibson's complaint is upside-down. If somebody is covering up what Shelton is talking about, that somebody is Shelton. And the cover-up isn't helping Clark; it's hurting him.

A wise friend once told me you can learn more about somebody from what he says about others than from what others say about him. Given what I've heard so far from Clark and Shelton, if I had to vote for one of them based on integrity and character, I'd go with Clark.
http://www.slate.com/id/2089014/

Other sources for this..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Shelton

http://www.latc.com/2003/10/01/news/news03.html

side note to correct the Gen. Clark was fired by Pres. Clinton meme. Clark was "retired" early behind Pres. Clinton's back by GOP Sec. of Defense Cohen and Gen. Sheldon (via a hasty call to Clark and a press leak) because they disagreed with Clark's threats to Milosevic of utilizing low flying Apaches and Boots on the Ground, as the 79 days of high altitude bombing was not as persuasive as according to plan. It is Clark's threats that persuaded Milosevic to retreat as was documented in much of the 1999 press reports. Cohen and Sheldon harbored more rancors for Clark due to the preset chain of command. They did not want to accept that as head of NATO, Wes Clark was to report to Head of States which in the U.S. was Pres. Clinton. Because on the military side, Clark was their subordinate, they insisted that he report directly to them. It was a typical game of Pentagon Knives attempting to exert power where they had none due to Clinton's CIC Draft-dodging image. Clinton later awarded Clark with the Presidential Freedom Award in order to communicate his gratitude to Wes Clark for his success, and his feeling of betrayal by Cohen and Sheldon.

http://wesleyclark.h1.ru/presidence4.htm#LA%20Meetup%20with%20Wes%20II
LA Meetup with Wes II
By ccobb
Posted to ccobb's weblog on Tue Jan 6th, 2004 at 01:10:59 AM EST
Wes III couldn't make it, so he sent his father instead.

During the General's testimony in The Hague, Milosevic used Shelton's quote smearing Clark's character and integrity to impugn the General's testimony. The prosecutor Carla de la Ponte called Shelton to confirm and to evaluate whether he should come to testify on Milosevic's behalf. Shelton backpedaled, saying it was 'just politics.'

excerpt from "The Unappreciated General" -- 5/2/00
Not so for the general who won Kosovo, although he too ousted a murderous tyrant who burned and occupied a neighboring land. This general also led a cumbersome multinational coalition to victory in a short war--this time with zero combat deaths. But Gen. Wesley Clark, supreme allied commander Europe, will come home to no special welcome, no TV or book deals and no talk of the presidency. Clark's reward for victory is early retirement. Tomorrow, several months before his tour of duty would normally end, Clark will turn over the European command to an officer more to the liking of the ever-cautious White House and defense secretary.

Clark's problem was that he was a great general but not always a perfect soldier--at least when it came to saluting and saying, "Yes, sir." In fact, when he got orders he didn't like, he said so and pushed to change them.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A51403-2000May1¬Found=true

Why Wesley Clark Got the Ax at NATO - 8/6/99
Defeated generals are sent home in disgrace, but it is most unusual to dismiss victorious ones. Whatever the future may hold for Kosovo--and it looks rather grim at present--there is no doubt that NATO's war against Serbia ended in victory. Nor is it in doubt that its military commander, Gen. Wesley K. Clark, was very much the victorious general of that war.
snip
Yet the implication that Clark was fired because of normal disagreements between the center and the periphery, between the Pentagon and a regional commander, is utterly misleading. Something much bigger was at work: Clark was caught in the middle of an extremely muddled and controverted transition between two forms of warfare.
snip
Clark, of course, knew better. He himself prepared for a much longer air campaign than many others expected by ordering minimum-risk air operations. Nevertheless, the pressures of the war forced Clark to call the Pentagon's bluff, in the case of Apaches, publicly exposing the gap between pretended "combat readiness" and the refusal to accept its real-life risks. He could hardly be forgiven for that.
http://www.texasforclark.com/departure4.htm

"Washington's Long Knives" 8/03/99
The Clinton administration's decision not to reappoint Gen. Wesley Clark for a second term as Supreme Allied Commander (SACEUR) of NATO forces following his victory over Serbia in the Kosovo war reveals the state of high-level Washington confusion over fundamental Balkan policy aims.

More than any senior U.S. civilian or military official, Gen. Clark epitomized a tough, no-nonsense approach to Serbian dictator Slobodan Milosevic. Belgrade no doubt views the decision and its timing as a reflection of Washington's unwillingness to stay the course in the region that can be exploited in the months ahead.
snip
So much for the People magazine view of Washington personnel decision-making. The real story, of course, is that Gen. Clark was not reappointed because he had ruffled too much senior Washington plumage in achieving NATO's victory. The administration expected that a brief and light NATO bombing campaign would bring Mr. Milosevic to heel, put a lid on the violence in Kosovo, and enable the United States to restore the frayed credibility of its European leadership role and the viability of the alliance itself. All at little price and minimal risk.
snip
Gen. Wesley Clark has earned the nation's gratitude. He learned well the lesson of using force to prevail in the Balkan snake pit and emerged as a genuine allied commander of stature. In so doing, however, even a leader of his talents and professionalism was unable to survive the more harsh and unforgiving Washington snake pit. He will depart NATO next April as the shortest-tenured SACEUR since Dwight Eisenhower. That's not bad company to be in.
http://www.texasforclark.com/departure.htm

Warrior's Rewards -- Newsweek 8/06/99
Gen. Wesley Clark, supreme Allied Commander in Europe, waged and won NATO's campaign for Kosovo without losing a single soldier in action. For the U.S. military, the victory was uniquely—historically—bloodless. Last week Clark learned it was also thankless.

In a midnight call from Washington, Clark was told he'd be relieved of his command at NATO next April, a few months earlier than he'd anticipated.

Clark still has his fans at NATO headquarters. It was Clark who balanced the demands and misgivings of 19 nations and armies through 78 long days. That showed a great political touch; indeed, Wesley Clark may be too much of a politician for some soldiers—even if he is too much of a soldier for the politicians. During the Kosovo war, that made him "the perfect man for the job," said a top NATO official. When the war was over, it also made him the perfect man to dump.

In reference to other officers and their thoughts on Clark,

MAJ. GEN. ROBERT SCALES: SCALES: I've known Wes for 40 years; he's also a passionate, committed, empathetic individual. So, soldiers in wartime have to lead soldiers into battle and the lives of men and women are at stake. And sometimes that requires a degree of flintiness that you don't need in other professions.

HUME: What about those who suggest that his character reflects a kind of unbridled ambition that puts his career above all things, fair?

SCALES: No. No. Unfair. Again, like I say I've known him all my adult life. He is an individual who is committed to a higher calling. I mean he's got three holes in him and a Silver Star from Vietnam. He has a…the word patriot only partially describes his commitment to public service. And for as long as I've known him, he's always looked, you know, beyond himself and he's been committed to serving the nation. And I think what you are seeing happen here recently is an example of that.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,97689,00.html


Lt. Gen. James Hollingsworth, one of our Army's most distinguished war heroes, says: "Clark took a burst of AK fire, but didn't stop fighting. He stayed on the field 'til his mission was accomplished and his boys were safe. He was awarded the Silver Star and Purple Heart. And he earned 'em."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34738


General Barry McCaffrey :"(He) is probably the most intelligent officer I ever served with," McCaffrey said. "(He has) great integrity, sound judgment and great kindness in dealing with people. He is a public servant of exceptional character and skill."

McCaffrey told the Washington Post: "This is no insult to army culture ... but he was way too bright, way too articulate, way too good looking and perceived to be way too wired to fit in with our culture."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1047429,00.html
"I have watched him at close range for 35 years, in which I have looked at the allegation, and I found it totally unsupported," said retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, who taught with Clark at West Point in the 1970s. "That's not to say he isn't ambitious and quick. He is probably among the top five most talented I've met in my life. I think he is a national treasure who has a lot to offer the country."
McCaffrey acknowledges that Clark was not the most popular four-star general among the Army leadership. "This is no insult to Army culture, a culture I love and admire," McCaffrey said, "but he was way too bright, way too articulate, way too good-looking and perceived to be way too wired to fit in with our culture. He was not one of the good old boys."
http://www.projo.com/extra/2003/candidates/content/projo_20030921_wpclark.6873b.html


Defense Secretary William Perry: who as deputy defense secretary first encountered Clark in 1994 when he was a three-star on the Joint Staff. "I was enormously impressed by him," said Perry, a legendary Pentagon technologist who served as defense secretary under Clinton.

Perry was so impressed, in fact, that with Clark facing retirement unless a four-star job could be found for him, Perry overrode the Army and insisted that Clark be appointed commander of the U.S. Southern Command, one of the military's powerful regional commanders in chief, or CINCs. "I was never sorry for that appointment," Perry said.
http://www.projo.com/extra/2003/candidates/content/projo_20030921_wpclark.6873b.html

Gen. John Shalikashvili, chairman of the Joint Chiefs overrode the Army once again and made sure Clark became Supreme Allied Commander Europe, traditionally the most powerful CINC, with command of all U.S. and NATO forces on the continent.
http://www.projo.com/extra/2003/candidates/content/projo_20030921_wpclark.6873b.html

Col. Douglas Macgregor: There is this aspect of his character: He is loyal to people he knows are capable and competent," Macgregor said. "As for his peers, it's a function of jealousy and envy, and it's a case of misunderstanding. Gen. Clark is an intense person, he's passionate, and certainly the military is suspicious of people who are intense and passionate. He is a complex man who does not lend himself to simplistic formulations. But he is very competent, and devoted to the country."
http://www.projo.com/extra/2003/candidates/content/projo_20030921_wpclark.6873b.html

Col. David Hackworth: I'm impressed. He is insightful, he has his act together, he understands what makes national security tick – and he thinks on his feet somewhere around Mach 3. No big surprise, since he graduated first in his class from West Point, which puts him in the supersmart set with Robert E. Lee, Douglas MacArthur and Maxwell Taylor.
Clark was so brilliant, he was whisked off to Oxford as a Rhodes scholar and didn't get his boots into the Vietnam mud until well after his 1966 West Point class came close to achieving the academy record for the most Purple Hearts in any one war. When he finally got there, he took over a 1st Infantry Division rifle company and was badly wounded.
He doesn't suffer fools easily and wouldn't have allowed the dilettantes who convinced Dubya to do Iraq to even cut the White House lawn. So he should prepare for a fair amount of dart-throwing from detractors he's ripped into during the past three decades.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34738

Andrew Young: "I asked a whole lot of my friends who were generals and colonels and majors, who served over General Clark and under General Clark and every last one of them said to me that this is a good man, and if he were leading our nation they would be proud. son of the South capable of making a dangerous world a safer place for everybody. A man we are going to make the next president of the United States."
http://socialize.morningstar.com/NewSocialize/asp/FullConv.asp?forumId=F100000035&lastConvSeq=9789

Retired General Walter Kross, a former four-star Air Force general under whom Clark served on the staff of the Joint Chiefs in the mid-1990s. For two years Kross worked with Clark from 6:00 in the morning until 9:00 at night six days a week, and sometimes on Sundays. He disagrees strongly with Shelton and Cohen about Clark's abilities and character. When I asked him why Clark was disliked by some military officers, Kross replied,

"He's not the army general officer from central casting. He's the extra-ordinary senior officer who can do extra-ordinary work on the entire range of challenges senior officers have to face—including Kosovo and the Dayton Accords, on which he worked himself into exhaustion. No army officer from central casting can do that work, but Wes did. "
He added, "Some senior officers misinterpret drive, energy, and enthusiasm for overambition...he is outside the mold and that makes some other officers uncomfortable."
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/16795

[FrenchieCat]

212. So let me see if I can get this right......

1. You are quoting a smear about Clark based on a short excerpt from an article by Clark that you cannot "conveniently" locate and is not linked by original smear writer....and by the way neither can I locate it, and I'm usually pretty good at that sort of thing.

2. You quote extreme left wing sources about Clark as they quote each other as sources? Brilliant!

3. In reference to this one, ""Soon after Clark entered the race, though, another Clinton-era general, Tommy Franks, who retired this summer after directing the capture of Baghdad, was asked in a private setting whether he believed that Clark would make a good President. “Absolutely not,” Franks replied. Please cite the reliable source documenting that this was said. Thank you.
Slight correction, Tommy Franks was a Bush I General....certainly not Clintons.

[FrenchieCat]

62. Iowa Caucus Debates? Clark didn't Contest Iowa, and wasn't in those debates.

and he is NOT an alumni of the MIC.


http://www.nhpr.org/node/5339
Clark speaking on radio....

http://www.nhpr.org/node/5339
"I think General Eisenhower was exactly right. I think we should be concerned about the military industrial complex. I think if you look at where the country is today, you've consolidated all these defense firms into a few large firms, like Halliburton, with contacts and contracts at the highest level of government. You've got most of the retired Generals, are one way or another, associated with the defense firms. That's the reason that you'll find very few of them speaking out in any public way. I'm not. When I got out I determined I wasn't going to sell arms, I was going to do as little as possible with the Defense Department, because I just figured it was time to make a new start.

But I think that the military industrial complex does wield a lot of influence. I'd like to see us create a different complex, and I'm going to be talking about foreign policy in a major speech tomorrow, but we need to create an agency that is not about waging war, but about creating the conditions for Peace around the world. We need some people who will be advocates for Peace, advocates for economic development not just advocates for better weapons systems. So we need to create countervailing power to the military industrial complex."

Clark: Don't spare Pentagon
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/25/elec04.prez.debate/
"We're faced with a very serious deficit problem. We need to keep the--we need to go back to the top 2 percent and repeal those tax cuts. We need to put all the government spending programs on the table, including the military programs."

[FrenchieCat]

77. Clark is a real Democrat......

and anyone who doesn't think so, is not, in my book.

read about some of that here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1922835

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2924958

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2856313

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2861053

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2862562

and here's Clark's schedule that I posted back in MAY...before the elections really had gotten off the ground!
January 3rd: Email fundraiser for Jim Pederson, running for the US Senate in Arizona

January 5th: Fundraiser for Eric Massa, candidate for US Congress NY-29, Honorary Chair, Barroom NYC, New York

January 10th: DNC Statement on Bush failure to provide body armor for troops

January 10th: Liberal Supper Club, Washington DC

January 11th: Letter-writing campaign to demand body armor for troops

January 17th: 7:30PM, Sears Lecture Series, "Do We Really Care about Human Rights?" - Purdue University, Loeb Playhouse, West Lafayette, Indiana - "The Balkans: A Strategic Vision"

January 19th: Securing America: "Where is the leadership and the rule of law?"

January 24th: Press conference with Senator Schumer introducing "Consumer Telephone Records Protection Act of 2006"

January 25th: Release of "The US Military: Under Strain and at Risk" for US Senate National Security Advisory Group; aka Albright/Perry Report

January 26th: Paul Begala's Radio Show, WOR-AM NY

January 26th: 1PM, Fundraising Reception for Bob Gammage for Governor, Hotel Derek, Houston TX

January 26th: Rally with Representative Hubert Vo in TX House District 149, Houston TX

January 26th: 6PM, Kickoff of Juan Garcia's race for Texas House District 32, Selena Auditorium, Corpus Christi TX

January 27th: "Take Back Your Privacy" E-Mail Campaign in support of S. 2178, "The Consumer Telephone Records Act of 2006"

January 27th: Mississippi Delta Grassroots Caucus Third Annual Conference, Little Rock AR

January 30th: "Real State of the Union" speech before New America Foundation, Washington DC


February 1st: WesPac Reception and Fundraiser, Biltmore Hotel, Coral Gables FL

February 2nd: WesPac Reception and Fundraiser, "Evening in San Francisco with General Wesley K. Clark" at Hotel Monaco, San Francisco CA

February 4th: Bloggers' Roundtable, Los Angeles CA

February 4th: "Take Back the House with General Wesley Clark" in support of Democrat Francine Busby for CA-50, Hollywood CA

February 4th: WesPac fundraiser sponsored by 4-Star Democratic Club, Los Angeles CA

February 6th: ABC World News Tonight

February 7th: Email fundraiser for Tammy Duckworth, Democratic candidate in IL-06

February 8th: Veterans for a Secure America fundraiser, Washington DC

February 9th: Stephanie Miller radio show on AAR

February 10th: "Iraq: The Way Forward—A Conversation with General Wesley Clark," Council on Foreign Relations, Washington DC

February 11th & 12th: Hosting C-Span Book-TV program "After Words"; Guest David Rieff, author of "At the Point of a Gun: Democratic Dreams and Armed Intervention"

February 11th: Speech at National Student Leadership Conference, Washington DC

February 23rd: Book signing with Alan Axelrod, author of "Patton: A Biography" at Barnes and Noble, Broadway and 82nd Street, New York NY


March 5th: "This Week" interview by George Stephanopoulos

March 10th: Ed Schultz Radio Show

March 10th: WesPac fundraising luncheon, Cambridge MA

March 11th: Congressman Marty Meehan's St. Patrick's Day Breakfast, Dracut, MA

March 11th: Vietnam and the Presidency Conference, JFK Library, Boston MA

March 12th: Washington Post Book Review, "The Commando Option"; To Dare and to Conquer: Special Operations and the Destiny of Nations, from Achilles to Al Qaeda By Derek Leebaert

March 13th: Wall Street Journal Op-Ed, Slobodan Milosevic "A Petty Hitler"

March 13th: PBS News Hour with Jim Lehrer, discussing the life of former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic

March 14th: Diane Rehm Show, WAMU

March 14th: Fundraiser for Eric Massa NY-29, Washington DC

March 15th: Chicago Public Radio

March 16th: IAVA PAC Founding Members Reception, Washington DC

March 18th-20th: New Hampshire House Democratic Caucus

March 18th: Town Hall Meeting, New England College, Henniker NH

March 18th: New Hampshire Veterans Home visit, Tilton NH

March 18th: Salem/Windham Democrats host General Clark, Windham NH

March 19th: Upper Valley Democrats and Young Democrats of Dartmouth College host General Clark, Hanover, NH

March 21st: Ed Schultz Show, AAR

March 21st: Project H.E.R.O. pilot, home of disabled veteran Shelby Bowling, Hamilton OH

March 21st: Meeting with Democratic activists, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati OH

March 21st: Fundraiser for John Cranley, Democratic candidate for OH-01, Hyde Park OH

March 21st: Ohio Democratic Party fundraiser, Hotel Westin, Cincinnati OH

March 23rd: "Evening with General Wesley Clark" Reception and Dinner, The Houstonian, Houston TX

March 25th: C-Span "Booknotes" with Alan Axelrod, author of "Patton: A Biography"

March 26th: ClarkCast: Conversation with Nick Lampson, candidate for the House of Representatives from the 22nd Congressional District of Texas

March 29th: Press Conference, House and Senate Democrats "Real Security Plan," Washington DC

March 29th: Congressional Radio-Television Gallery Dinner, Washington DC

March 29th: Endorsement event, James Webb running for Senator of Virginia, Arlington VA


April 1st: North Dakota Democratic-NPL Convention, Fargo Civic Center, Keynote Speaker, Fargo ND

April 1st: Democratic Radio Address on Democratic national security plan

April 2nd: C-Span "Road to the White House" General Clark's recent visit to New Hampshire

April 4th: Campaigning for Mike Weaver, Democratic candidate for KY-02, Elizabethtown and Owensboro KY

April 5th: Press Conference Call with Chairman Dean for DNC announcement of new "Fighting Democrats" website and formation of Democratic National Veterans and Military Families Council

April 9th: ClarkCast: "Leadership and Global Warming"

April 10th: Boston Globe Op-Ed, "A US Plan for Darfur"

April 10th: Emory University Presidential Distinguished Lecture Series, "Strategic Leadership in the 21st Century" Atlanta GA

April 13th: Doha Forum on Democracy, Development and Free Trade, Panelist: “The Age of Great Immigrations” Doha, Qatar

April 15th: Email fundraiser for Andrew Horne running in KY-03

April 16th: ClarkCast: "Common Voices, Global Warming"

April 20th: News & Notes with Ed Gordon, "Why the U.S. Should Care About Darfur" NPR

April 22nd: Address to Arkansas Young Democrats State Convention; tribute at Arkansas Vietnam Veterans Memorial, with former Senator Max Cleland, Little Rock AR

April 22nd: Arkansas Democratic Party Jefferson-Jackson Dinner, Master of Ceremonies, Little Rock AR

April 23rd: ClarkCast: Conversation With Senator Barbara Boxer

April 24th: 8AM, breakfast fundraiser for Steve Filson, Candidate for California's 11th Congressional District, Zazoo's, Oakland CA

April 24th: 10:30AM, Veterans forum: “Defending America, Defending Veterans”; Karl Ross Post No. 16, Stockton CA

April 24th-26th: Milken Institute Global Conference; Panelist: "Global Risk: What Should Be Keeping You Up at Night" Los Angeles CA

April 25th: 9AM, fundraising breakfast for Russ Warner, Democrat running for Congress in CA-26, private residence, Pasadena CA

April 25th: 6PM reception and 8PM dinner; fundraiser for Mike Beebe, Democratic candidate for Governor of Arkansas, at the home of Ron Burkle, Beverly Hills CA

April 26th: Albuquerque veterans meeting, Bataan Memorial Park, with Democratic candidate Patricia Madrid, Albuquerque NM

April 26th: Fundraiser for Democratic candidate for NM-01, Attorney General Patricia Madrid, at the home of Mikey Weinstein, Albuquerque NM

April 26th: 7PM, "Take a Meeting With the World" Public Lecture Series, Interview by George Stephanopoulos, University of Judaism Gibson Amphitheatre, Bel-Air CA

April 27th: 6:30PM, WesPac fundraiser at the home of George Soros in New York City; 8:30PM dinner at the Hotel Carlyle.

April 29th-30th: Senate Democrats Weekend Policy Retreat, Philadelphia PA

April 30th: ClarkCast: "Final Thoughts on Global Warming"


May 1st: Al Franken Show, Air America Radio

May 3rd: Arab American Institute Foundation Kahlil Gibran ‘Spirit of Humanity’ Awards Gala, General Clark will present to former President of Poland Lech Walesa

May 5th: Boys and Girls Club of America Centennial Celebration, Guest Speaker, Boston MA

May 5th: Real Time with Bill Maher, HBO

May 7th: ClarkCast: "The State of the Middle East"

May 10th: Professional Fire Fighters of New Hampshire 9th Biennial Convention, Nashua NH

May 11th: Project H.E.R.O. launch, Washington Court Hotel, Washington D.C.

May 12th: Press Conference with Rep. Leonard Boswell, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) services for troops, Capitol Rotunda, DesMoines IA

May 13th: Hawkeye Labor Council fundraiser for Workers for a Better Iowa, Cedar Rapids IA

May 14th: Meeting with Polk County Democrats, Iowa

May 14th: Meeting with Draft Clark 2004 supporters, Cedar Rapids IA

May 14th: ClarkCast: "Common Voices From Iowa"

May 19th: Wagner College Commencement Address, Staten Island NY

May20th: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Commencement Speech and Honorary Degree, Troy NY


June 8th: Texas Democratic State Convention, Opening Speaker, Ft. Worth TX

June 8th-9th: YearlyKos Convention, Panelist: "Championing Science," Las Vegas NV

June 15th: Association of Alternative Newsweeklies Convention, Little Rock AR, Opening Remarks; An Evening at the Clinton Presidential Library, Little Rock AR

June 24th: Tennessee Democratic Party Jackson Day, Featured Speaker, Ryman Auditorium, Nashville TN


Democratic events in 2006:

-Arkansas Democratic Party Jefferson-Jackson Dinner, Master of Ceremonies, Little Rock AR
-Arkansas Young Democrats State Convention, Arkansas Vietnam Veterans Memorial, with former Senator Max Cleland, Little Rock AR
-ClarkCast: Conversation With Senator Barbara Boxer
-ClarkCast: Conversation with Nick Lampson, candidate for TX-22
-C-Span "Road to the White House" - General Clark's visit to New Hampshire in March
-DNC Statement on Bush failure to provide body armor for troops
-Democratic Radio Address on Democratic national security plan
-Email fundraiser for Jim Pederson, running for the US Senate in Arizona
-Email fundraiser for California Lt. Governor candidate Jackie Speier
-Email fundraiser for Tammy Duckworth running in IL-06
-Email fundraiser for Andrew Horne running in KY-03
-Fundraiser for James Webb running for Senator of Virginia, Arlington VA
-Fundraiser for Mike Beebe, Democratic candidate for Governor of Arkansas, Beverly Hills CA
-Fundraiser for Steve Filson, candidate in CA-11, Oakland CA
-Fundraiser for Russ Warner running in CA-26, Pasadena CA
-Fundraiser/rally for Francine Busby running in CA-50
-Fundraiser for Mike Weaver running in KY-02, Elizabethtown KY
-Fundraiser for Mike Weaver running in KY-02, Owensboro KY
-Fundraiser for Patricia Madrid running in NM-01, Albuquerque NM
-Fundraiser for Eric Massa running in NY-29, New York NY
-Fundraiser for John Cranley, Democratic candidate for OH-01, Hyde Park OH
-Fundraising Reception for Bob Gammage for Governor, Houston TX
-Honorary Chair, Fundraiser for Eric Massa, candidate for US Congress NY-29, Washington DC
-IAVA PAC, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America PAC to support veterans for Congress
-Kickoff of Juan Garcia's race for Texas House District 32, Corpus Christi TX
-Letter-writing campaign to demand body armor for troops
-Liberal Supper Club, Washington DC
-Meeting with Democratic activists, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati OH
-Meeting with Polk County Democrats, Cedar Rapids, Iowa
-North Dakota Democratic-NPL Convention, Fargo Civic Center, Keynote Speaker, Fargo ND
-Ohio Democratic Party fundraiser, Hotel Westin, Cincinnati OH
-Press Conference Call with Chairman Dean for DNC announcement of new "Fighting Democrats" website and formation of Democratic National Veterans and Military Families Council
-Rally with Representative Hubert Vo in TX House District 149, Houston TX
-Salem/Windham Democrats, Windham NH
-"Take Back the House with General Wesley Clark" in support of Democrat Francine Busby for CA-50
-Tennessee Democratic Party Jackson Day, Featured Speaker, Nashville TN
-Texas Democratic State Convention, Opening Speaker, Ft. Worth TX
-Town Hall Meeting, New England College, Henniker NH
-Upper Valley Democrats and Young Democrats of Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
-Veterans for a Secure America fundraiser, Washington DC
-Vietnam and the Presidency Conference, JFK Library, Boston MA



Congressional Events in 2006:

-Congressional Radio-Television Gallery Dinner, Washington DC
-Press Conference, House and Senate Democrats "Real Security" plan, Washington DC
-Press conference with Senator Schumer introducing "Consumer Telephone Records Protection Act of 2006"
-Senate Democrats Weekend Policy Retreat, Philadelphia PA
-"Take Back Your Privacy" E-Mail Campaign in support of S. 2178, "The Consumer Telephone Records Act of 2006"
-"The US Military: Under Strain and at Risk" for US Senate National Security Advisory Group; aka Albright/Perry Report


Civil Liberties events in 2006:

-Press conference with Senator Schumer introducing "Consumer Telephone Records Protection Act of 2006"
-"Take Back Your Privacy" E-Mail Campaign in support of S. 2178, "The Consumer Telephone Records Act of 2006"
-Securing America: "Where is the leadership and the rule of law?"


Educational events in 2006:

-Emory University Presidential Distinguished Lecture Series, "Strategic Leadership in the 21st Century" Atlanta GA
-National Student Leadership Conference, Washington DC
-Purdue University Sears Lecture Series, West Lafayette, Indiana
-Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Commencement Speech and Honorary Degree, Troy NY
-"Take a Meeting With the World" Public Lecture Series, Interview by George Stephanopoulos, Bel-Air CA
-Vietnam and the Presidency Conference, JFK Library, Boston MA
-Wagner College Commencement Address, Staten Island NY


Environmental events in 2006:

-ClarkCast: "Final Thoughts on Global Warming"
-ClarkCast: "Common Voices, Global Warming"
-ClarkCast: Leadership and Global Warming
-Clark Community Network: "Real Science Blog"
-YearlyKos Convention, Panelist: "Championing Science," Las Vegas NV


Foreign Affairs events in 2006:

-ClarkCast: "The State of the Middle East"
-Doha Forum on Democracy, Development and Free Trade, Panelist: “The Age of Great Immigrations” Doha, Qatar
-"Iraq: The Way Forward—A Conversation with General Wesley Clark," Council on Foreign Relations, Washington DC


Grassroots events in 2006:

-Bloggers' Roundtable, Los Angeles CA
-ClarkCast: "Common Voices From Iowa"
-Meeting with Draft Clark 2004 supporters, Cedar Rapids IA
-Meeting with Democratic activists, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati OH
-Mississippi Delta Grassroots Caucus Third Annual Conference, Little Rock AR
-YearlyKos Convention, Las Vegas NV


Human Rights events in 2006:

-Arab American Institute Foundation Kahlil Gibran ‘Spirit of Humanity’ Awards Gala; Clark presented to former President of Poland Lech Walesa
-Boston Globe Op-Ed, "A US Plan for Darfur"
-C-Span Book-TV program "After Words"; Guest David Rieff, author of "At the Point of a Gun: Democratic Dreams and Armed Intervention"
-News & Notes with Ed Gordon, "Why the U.S. Should Care About Darfur" NPR
-PBS News Hour with Jim Lehrer, discussing the life of former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic
-Sears Lecture Series, "Do We Really Care about Human Rights?" Purdue University, Indiana
-Wall Street Journal Op-Ed, Slobodan Milosevic "A Petty Hitler"


Labor events in 2006:

-Hawkeye Labor Council fundraiser for Workers for a Better Iowa, Cedar Rapids IA
-Professional Fire Fighters of New Hampshire 9th Biennial Convention, Nashua NH


Publishing/Media events in 2006:

-Association of Alternative Newsweeklies Convention, Little Rock AR, Opening Remarks; An Evening at the Clinton Presidential Library, Little Rock AR
-Book signing with Alan Axelrod, author of "Patton: A Biography" at Barnes and Noble, Broadway and 82nd Street, New York NY
-Congressional Radio-Television Gallery Dinner, Washington DC
-C-Span "Booknotes" with Alan Axelrod, author of "Patton: A Biography"
-C-Span Book-TV hosted "After Words"; Guest David Rieff, author of "At the Point of a Gun: Democratic Dreams and Armed Intervention"
-Editor, "Great Generals" biography series, Palgrave Macmillan
-Washington Post Book Review, "The Commando Option"; To Dare and to Conquer: Special Operations and the Destiny of Nations, from Achilles to Al Qaeda By Derek Leebaert


Security events in 2006:

-Democratic Radio Address on Democratic national security plan
-Press Conference, House and Senate Democrats "Real Security" plan, Washington DC
-Milken Institute Global Conference; Panelist: "Global Risk: What Should Be Keeping You Up at Night" Los Angeles CA
-"Real State of the Union" speech before New America Foundation, Washington DC
-"The US Military: Under Strain and at Risk" for US Senate National Security Advisory Group; aka Albright/Perry Report


Technology events in 2006:

-Digital Universe web browser


Veterans/Military Events in 2006:

-Albuquerque veterans meeting, Bataan Memorial Park, with Democratic candidate Patricia Madrid, Albuquerque NM
-Clark Community Series Blog: Troops & Vets
-DNC Statement on Bush failure to provide body armor for troops
-IAVA PAC, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America
-IAVA PAC Founding Members Reception, Washington DC
-Letter-writing campaign to demand body armor for troops
-Letter-writing campaign to "End the Widow's Tax"
-New Hampshire Veterans Home visit, Tilton NH
-Press Conference with Rep. Leonard Boswell, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) services for troops, Capitol Rotunda, DesMoines IA
-Press Conference Call with Chairman Dean for DNC announcement of new "Fighting Democrats" website and formation of Democratic National Veterans and Military Families Council
-Project H.E.R.O. pilot, home of disabled veteran Shelby Bowling, Hamilton OH
-Project H.E.R.O. launch, Washington Court Hotel, Washington D.C.
-"The US Military: Under Strain and at Risk" for US Senate National Security Advisory Group; aka Albright/Perry Report
-Veterans Forum: “Defending America, Defending Veterans”; Karl Ross Post No. 16, Stockton CA
-Vietnam and the Presidency Conference, JFK Library, Boston MA


Youth Events in 2006:

-Boys and Girls Club of America Centennial Celebration, Guest Speaker, Boston MA
-National Student Leadership Conference, Washington DC
==========

Advisor, US Congress Government Accountability Office (GAO)

Advisor, Global Green USA "Healthy Homes, Smart Neighborhoods" Task Force on sustainable housing in post-Katrina Gulf Coast areas

Advisor, IAVA PAC, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America

Advisor, ManyOne Network, Digital Universe web browser

Advisor, US Senate Democratic National Security Advisory Group

Chairman, City Year Little Rock

Congressional Task Force on United Nations Reform

Editor, "Great Generals" biography series, Palgrave Macmillan

Foreign Affairs commentator, FOX News

National Chairman, International Code Council Foundation Project H.E.R.O

Stop Global Warming Virtual March

Vice Chairman, International Crisis Group

[Cameron27]

82. Wowza!

This thread's a keeper!

Bookmarked, archived, printed out...I'm in heaven!
:woohoo:

[Clark2008]

117. Apparently, you listen without hearing anything.

You're saying all this, well, ridiculous hyperbole without providing even a shred of proof.

This may be your opinion, but Erika, it's not based on any facts. Have you read any of the links provided to you above?

If not, then I would suggest one of two things: either get started reading or shut up because you're making a fool of yourself.

[xkenx]

126. Erika, whatever the roots of your antagonism to Clark are,

I thank you for being foolish enough to insult Clark with your simplistic one liners and untruths, so that the Clark supporters here become riled up enough to display all of Clark's attributes for Duers to digest. This thread has probably resulted in MORE Clark supporters. At times it is actually helpful to us for people to see moronic hate-filled attacks on Clark; they'll look more closely at the rational responses.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

146. Those were exactly my thoughts...

:toast:

I have no firm candidate in mind for 2008, and have viewed Clark as more of an potential great VP choice ... but Erica's unsupported generalized statements have made this a very enlightening, well-supported discussion of just how actively and effectively Wesley Clark has been in helping to define and project Democratic ideals and positions on many issues.

[Erika]

178. You're welcome

Why you would trust someone who became a dem in 2003 and went to work for Faux News is interesting.

[Name removed]

189. Deleted message

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

[Quixote1818]

27. Obama or Richardson would be a good choice for VP

nt

[ConsAreLiars]

40. I'd like Gore

A lot of practical experience and excellent on all the most important issues. I don't think there is any real difference between Clark and Gore on the issues, but Gore has a lot more years "in the belly of the beast" than does Clark. That goes to Clark's strength as an outsider, and Gore's value as an adjunct.

[Quixote1818]

25. Any Democrat who does well in Oklahoma would do best in a National Election

I think Clark has by far the broadest appeal. I have Republican friends who really respect him because he is able to go on FOX news and debate with Bill O'Reilly and everyone still respect everyone no matter how far apart they are.

I really like Gore but I think Clark would have the best shot at the presidency.

[Erika]

28. I couldn't vote for Clark

He has no democratic credentials or takes any democratic stands.

[kiahzero]

33. Really?

We didn't get that impression from your "Clark goes on Fox so he's not a Democrat" posts.

Maybe you should read what his positions on the issues were in 04: http://clark04.com/issues/

[Quixote1818]

36. He only helped one shit load of Democrats get elected this year

with his PAC. I don't know ONE thing he stands for that isn't far left liberal. This is the guy who stuck up for Michael Moore when he won the academy award and ripped on Bush. Michael Moore was all alone and Clark stuck his neck out and defended Moore when no one else would. Clark also posed on the cover of a magazine for gay's and lesbians and was against the war from the beginning. I could go on all night if you like. Please name one non-democratic stand Clark has taken???

[Dinger]

151. Prove It

Or stop your bullshit flaming, smearing posts.

[EST]

31. Clark is an excellent choice.

He has the proper chops to represent the progressive reality and his status as commander would make a lot of quivering, "authoritarian addict" republicans happy, so he has lots of that indefinable quality called "electability."

I have looked at all of the current crop of possible candidates and, given that I am for more interested in a candidate's ability to handle the job than I am in merely winning, I think he's the best of the bunch.

[Erika]

37. How you can say yes to him when he has never upheld

the Democratic platform is beyond rational thinking.

[kiahzero]

42. Because most of us realize that what you're claiming isn't true. (n/t)

[Erika]

46. Get real

Clark didn't even show up as a democrat prior to recent elections. Most of us don't want a guy who all of a sudden claims to be a democrat and goes to work for Faux News.

[kiahzero]

56. You've ignored all evidence to the contrary of your claims.

But, by all means, continue to argue that appearing on Fox News disqualifies you as a Democrat.

[Quixote1818]

60. I guess Ron Williams is no longer a Democrat

and neither is Colmes. So what if Daily KOS and every other liberal blogger and politician on the planet was fine with Clark working for FOX news.

Erika knows more than they do apparently!:eyes:

[Dinger]

160. Let's Start Will BIll Clinton's Smackdown of chris wallass

And John Kerry, and Howard Dean, etc., etc.

[Clark2008]

120. "Most" who?

Looks like you're the only "most" in this thread - and the facts aren't on your side.

[lukasahero]

193. Your "most" seems to be vastly outnumbered here...

I see one person on this thread making these ridiculous and proven untrue claims and that's you. Perhaps you live in the kind of world where "most" means "me"?

[windbreeze]

199. Thanks for the thread on Clark, Erika

how about we do this every day??? ...wonderful idea you have here...see you tomorrow..(jealous I didn't think of it)
Thanks again..
windbreeze

[alfredo]

203. He was in the millitary, he couldn't take a public position.

[Quixote1818]

43. If Clark is so far right, how is it that he has won so many DU presidential polls?

DU is not exactly a moderate website filled with politically naive people. Have you ever watched Clark tear Bill O'Reilly apart on FOX? Would you rather he not be their to actually create some balance on that network????? Just check out Crooksandliars.com once in a while. They constantly have video's of Clark tearing up a FOX news nut.

I truly don't think you know a thing about Wes Clark. Clark was a Clinton guy.

[Erika]

50. Clark was a Clinton guy?

Please show any proof of that.

[Quixote1818]

54. It's well know Clark and the Clinton's were close. Here are a couple of sites

Here is one site I found that discusses the relationship. It only took me 10 seconds to Google this:

http://www.etalkinghead.com/archives/clark-uses-clinton-support-against-dean-2003-12-29.html

Here is another:

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2003/09/17/16463311.php

[Erika]

58. Thanks for the links

"Clark didn't decide to become a democrat until 2003" per the articles. Then, he went to work for Faux.

Draw your own conclusions.

[kiahzero]

63. Military members are non-partisan.

I guess he should be punished for that, though.

Also, I guess it makes sense to attack him for taking Murdoch's money for attacking conservative thought, and using that money to help Democrats win elections.

I guess that aforementioned help getting Democrats elected is indicative of how little he cares for the party: http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/9330 .

[Quixote1818]

64. Why don't you watch Clark rip apart O'Reilly in this video

then tell me his is still with the other side: http://movies.crooksandliars.com/The-OReilly-Factor-Wesley-Clark-torturepics-10-03.mov


More video's of Clark taking on FOX news nuts here:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/index.php?s=Wes+Clark

[Clark2008]

122. I'm drawing conclusions about you from your lack

of profile - I mean, if I use your school of thought, I don't have to provide any links. I just have to state: "operative" (NOT TROLL, MODS) and be done with it.

[CrispyQ]

98. Well there's the pot calling the kettle black -

Asking for proof of something while you've posted several times in this thread without providing one source or link. :eyes:

[Dinger]

152. You Said It CrispyGirl! (nt)

[Lurking Dem]

113. The far right hates him

His nickname was "Clinton's General" for G-d's sake.

[madfloridian]

118. Here is some....

From You Have the Power by Howard Dean, published fall 2004...

"It remains to be seen, too, just how much my support for the civil unions bill will hurt my chances to reshape Democratic politics. Some pretty important Democrats have shown they think it might. When former president Clinton was trying to drum up support for Wes Clark, just prior to Clark's entry into the presidential race a year ago, he called a friend in a large city and said "I need you to be for Wes Clark." The friend demurred. Clinton said, "Look, I'm from Arkansas, and Wes is from Arkansas, we need to be for Wes. "

The friend told Clinton he was Dean supporter. "Howard Dean", Clinton said "forfeited his right to run for president when he signed the civil unions bill. He can't win."

It was a rare mistake for the president. The supporter was gay and called us to tip us off."

Page 113 You Have the Power

[xkenx]

190. Bill Clinton publically said, "There are two shining stars in the Democratic Party,

my wife and Wes Clark." Sounds like pretty good Dem. support for another Dem. This was in the summer of '03

[Strelnikov_]

44. What The Hell Does 'Upheld The Democratic Platform' Mean? n/t

[kiahzero]

45. "Didn't appear on Fox News," apparently.

At least that's the only thing that's been mentioned so far. :eyes:

[Erika]

51. Talking about social and fiscal issues

of the GOP platform.

[Strelnikov_]

53. "Talking About Social And Fiscal Issues Of The GOP Platform" Supports The

Democratic platform?

I really don't know what to say.

I do know what to do, though

[ConsAreLiars]

59. Well you are apparently looking for the

award for non sequitors. "Talking about social and fiscal issues of the GOP platform" is BAAD!

Obviously, you are serving some other goal than enlightened discourse. Care to confess?

[FrenchieCat]

80. Clark has Democratic social and fiscal stances.....not GOP!

Wes Clark Endorses Transition to Single-Payer
by Scott Shields, Mon Jan 30, 2006 at 05:34:10 PM EST
http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/1/30/17455/5250

http://www.muhajabah.com/clarkblog/2006/01/clark_supports_singlepayer_hea.php

Endorsement by the Washington Blade (largest Gay Newspaper) - http://www.aegis.com/news/wb/2004/WB040109.html

--------------
STANCE ON AFFIRMATIVE ACTION.....HE WROTE THIS
Amicus Brief To the United States Supreme Court,
February 19, 2003
Based on decades of experience, amici have concluded that a highly qualified, racially diverse officer corps educated and trained to command our nation’s racially diverse enlisted ranks is essential to the military’s ability to fulfill its principal mission to provide national security.

The primary sources for the nation’s officer corps are the service academies and the ROTC, the latter comprised of students already admitted to participating colleges and universities. At present, the military cannot achieve an officer corps that is both highly qualified and racially diverse unless the service academies and the ROTC use limited race-conscious recruiting and admissions policies.
http://www.texasforclark.com/affirmative.htm

And just what did you do in the class war, Senator?
http://www.pahrumpvalleytimes.com/2004/02/18/opinion/myers.html

There were those who, concerned more with party credentials than the public interest, challenged Clark's right to run as a Democrat. At candidate debates he was asked to justify his recent decision to be a party member. But what defined Clark as a Democrat was not longevity of membership but fidelity of principle. There was a time when tax fairness virtually defined the Democratic Party. It no longer does. The party is so wired into corporate corruption that it is a betrayal of everything for which it once stood. If a Democrat steps out of line long enough to support the poor and middle class, she or he is likely to be attacked by "leaders" like Joe Lieberman, who last year attacked Al Gore for Gore's halfhearted economic populism.

Clark tried to reverse that. Where other candidates tinkered with tax "reform" (every screwing of the public in the last 40 years has been done in the name of tax reform) he proposed a bold stroke to "restore progressivity to the tax system." A family of four with an income of up to $50,000 a year would have been exempted from the income tax altogether. A single parent with one child making up to $28,000 a year would also have been exempted (with a sliding scale to cover other circumstances).

The revenue lost would have been recovered by reversing the trend of cutting taxes paid by the rich. Clark would have increased taxes on the one percent of taxpayers at the top.

This was, indeed, a restoration. When the income tax was created in 1913 under grass roots pressure for a fairer form of taxation, it was assumed the income tax would be progressive - taxing the rich more heavily than the poor. And that's the way it started. In 1913 single people making $3,000 a year and married couples making $4,000 (a figure equivalent to $58,000 in 1994 dollars) a year were exempt from income taxes - they didn't even have to file a return.

Then the wealthy, their lobbyists, and their accountants went to work. Congress started chipping away at the progressivism of income taxes through loopholes, deductions, indexing, exemptions, and all the other parlor tricks that have changed "income tax" from a popular mechanism for fairness to a despised expletive. And the Democrats have been chief conspirators. In the past 40 years, during which Democrats were usually calling the shots in Congress, the top tax rate has been lowered repeatedly and special interest tax breaks handed out to Democratic sugar daddies.
snip
But even that isn't the real story. The tax rate is irrelevant. The top tax rate can be a confiscatory 100 percent and the rich would end up paying little because of all those parlor tricks. And because of the Democrats' leadership against the poor (and their collaboration with Republicans in years of GOP congressional majorities), the debate on tax measures is always unbalanced and lopsided because today's counterfeit Democrats have lost their predecessors' skill and deftness in taking on the big boys. They inevitably cower before Republican claims that by asking for fairness, the Democrats are engaging in class warfare.

----------------------------------------------
EDIT: COPYRIGHT. PLEASE POST ONLY 4 OR 5
PARAGRAPHS FROM THE COPYRIGHTED NEWS SOURCE
PER DU RULES.

[EST]

78. I don't care to be called beyond rational.

My rational thinking, or the lack thereof, is not subject to attack on DU.

Have you any proof for your conjectures? How 'bout a couple of links supporting your claims. Real information, now, not some ignorant reporter with an axe to grind, barfing onto a keyboard.

I did not support Clark in the last contest because I was suspicious of him-a relative newcomer-and fell victim to the plethora of bad press attempting to demonize him.
I am a bit smarter, now, and a helluva lot better informed.

[CarbonDate]

39. More than one Bush voter....

...has told me they would have voted for Clark. Why the Democrats insisted on nominating Kerry (other than that it was "his turn") is still a mystery to me.

[ConsAreLiars]

55. I heard the same thing during his 2004 campaign.

talk show callers and such. Somehow he is able to get through to people who are not inherently evil but just misled by the Cons.

[Quixote1818]

73. Everyone I know respects Clark, Democrat or Republican nt

[Lurking Dem]

114. The Republicans where I live hate him.

Not too many moderates here. The far right can't stand him and start bringing up the very same talking points (Kosovo et al) that some Clark haters here bring up.

Hmmmmmmm.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

111. Clark simply started way too late. He didn't play the "game" part of election primaries right, and

was too far behind by the time he got his one win in Oklahoma. He was utterly ignored in news coverage.

Clark was my number one guy for campaign 04 and I'd support him again.

[wiley]

65. Great question. I believe so, but it's a great question to discuss.

As a professor of economics, he has some very interesting ideas regarding the topic. I'm resigned to the fact that it will take many years to undo the damage done to this country in every area, but anyone with a 100% rating from the League of Conservation Voters can't really be called a corporate schill. I don't believe that he wants to destroy corporations or capitalism, but he has made some very strong statements regarding the responsibilities of corporations that do business in the US and worldwide.

I can only hope that DUers and the country will actually listen to what he has to say. He's a self declared liberal. It will be interesting to see his positions if he decides to run for President. I'm very willing to give him a chance, since I've seen him speak several times and besides being honest to a fault, he does have the ability to get people who are not already set in a specific political agenda to listen to him. My very right leaning Dad and my very left leaning sister in law both believe he would be a great unifying competent President, and they hope as well that he will run.

If not, I still think he's one of the most important, thinking leaders in the country.

He was also one of the fiercest PNAC critics, and all but single-handedly tried to stop the PNAC agenda in Iraq in both Senate and House hearings in 1998. Anyone who can turn Wolfowitz into a whining catty ahole is my kind of guy. Obviously Cheney and the shrub despise him, which is another huge plus in my book.

[TacticalPeek]

67. He is by far the most progressive potential presidential candidate.

By way far, on issues domestic and foreign.

A favorite quote, calling for a criminal investigation of the Bush administration:

October 3, 2003

Going further than his nine rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination, most of whom have called for a special counsel to probe the leak of an undercover CIA officer's name, Clark also demanded an independent commission investigate the "possible manipulation" of intelligence leading to the war in Iraq.

"Nothing could be a more serious violation of public trust than to consciously make a war based on false claims," he told a conference of military reporters and editors. "Its handling of intelligence and its retaliation against its critics may have been criminal."

http://www.politicalstrategy.org/2003_10_04_weblog_archive.php

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=235&topic_id=3434&mesg_id=3434

:patriot:

[democrank]

88. Wes Clark has my full support.

because of:

his position against the invasion of Iraq from the beginning
his deep, detailed understanding of international affairs
his position that fighting poverty is a "moral value"
his ability to connect with Democrats, Republicans and Independents
his commitment to his family
his ability to communicate effectively
his understanding of economics
his decades-long service to his country
his compassion born of his own rags-to-riches story
his intelligence
his commitment to veteran`s and their families
his tireless dedication to advancing basic Democratic Party principles
his straightforwardness
his hands-on approach to problem solving

I was sold on Wes Clark the day I heard him speak on C-Span back a few years ago, when he spoke about our moral obligation to lend a hand to those less fortunate. Everything he said exemplified a very clear understanding of how life`s variables can effect good, decent people. I was struck by Clark`s humanity and compassion. As far as I`m concerned, he`s one of the best we have.

[FrenchieCat]

91. Well, folks sometimes don't want to remember that whatever is said about

the military culture, it is probably the most socialistic institution in the United States. Folks, no matter their rank, eat the same, dress more or less the same, have the same health care, very similar living conditions and the pay for the most part is not dramatically higher.....even for officers.

Clark didn't make his first million till he got out of the military in the year 2000 as a 34 year 4 star general and NATO COmmander...and he did so by writing a best selling book and giving speeches. He did not choose to work for any defense contractors who I am sure wooed him. The point is that he could have made millions way before than. As a Rhodes Scholar holding a masters in Economics, Politics and philosophy and a war hero (in Vietnam), I'm positive he could have had the best job offers and just went on to make beaucoup dollars. In fact, he was offered scholarships to both Yale and Harvard. He chose West Point because he understood that the scholarships wouldn't cover the additional money he would need known as a stipend; West Point did.

Here's his earning scale (note, before becoming a general in the '90, Clark never earned over $50,000 per year).

[eridani]

94. He seems to me to be solidly committed to American imperialism

--but then, so have most Dem holders of high office since we gave up on our platform of 1900 in which we roundly rejected an imperial state. Maybe the best we can hope for is someone with a decent approach to domestic policy who won't be a STUPID imperialist, and Clark surely qualifies there. The thing I like best about him is his stance on the Fairnss Doctrine. He also gets a lot of extra points in my book for taking on election integrity in Florids.

All announced candidates so far seem to favor making health care more accessible, but I haven't yet heard anybody just come out and state the obvious--that we are already paying for universal health care; we just aren't getting it, and that there is no reason why anybody should be denied care for any reason.

[1932]

97. FDR and Truman were anti-imperialists and Kennedy wrote private letters to

Galbraith criticizing the Dulles borthers and the CIA for their pro-empire attitudes, and Senator Kenedy gave a spech in the senate criticizing colonialism in Africa that sent pro-imperialism Adlai Stevenson (who, at that time, was a corporate lawyer representing many multi-nationals who were making a killing off the exploitation of Africa) into a tirade.

I wouldn't give up on the possiblity of reviving anti-imperialism within the Democratic Party.

In fact, since it is Imperialism which helps concentrate the power and wealth at the top that is undermining America democracy, I think we need to revive the FDR-Truman-JFK attitude about impreialism because, if we don't, democracy is in jeopardy.

[eridani]

169. FDR talked a good game--

--with his Good Neighbor Policy, but he was also the guy that said "Somoza may be a sonofabitch, but he's our sonofabitch." Truman founded, and Kennedy supported, the School of the Americas, the purpose of which was to empower local elites to kick in the teeth of their poor people in the service of US corporations. http://www.thomasmertoncenter.org/soa/

George Kennan's containment policy (fine by itself, but also a nasty cover for dominating 3rd world economies, by force if necessary) was the basis of our national security state that began under Truman.

http://www.harpers.org/TheOilWeEat.html

“We have about 50 percent of the world's wealth but only 6.3 percent of its population,” Kennan wrote. “In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction.”“The day is not far off,” Kennan concluded, “when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts.”

Our guys have often talked a good game about human rights, but have generally come down in favor of making the world safe for dollar a day labor when push comes to shove.

[nealmhughes]

99. I really like General Clark, too -- from a perspective on the Left.

I view him more as a statesman than a partisan politician.

While center-left, he truly has the people at his core -- and our republic.

Rather like Eisenhower with more brains, looks and charisma, I'd say.

I view him as the perfect candidate from a pragmatic viewpoint. From an ideological, Dennis, of course...

[OneBlueSky]

100. I like Clark, too . . . but the country (and the planet) needs a committed environmentalist . . .

in the White House . . . Al Gore is my choice, by far . . . he's the only potential candidate who recognizes (and has extensively studied) just how bad global warming is becoming, and will therefore be the one most likely to take dramatic action to address it . . .

wouldn't mind Clark as his veep, though . . .

[wellstone dem]

106. I think a gore/clark or clark/gore ticket would be amazing.

The strengths of these two men balance each other in a positive way.

[jgraz]

166. never happen -- bad electoral math

The Dems won't put an Arkansan and a Tennesseean on the same ticket.

[Clark2008]

192. LOL!!

Surely that was sarcasm... or you don't remember Clinton/Gore?

Arkansas and Tennessee together on the ticket... :rofl:

[Lurking Dem]

119. Clark IS a committed environmetalist.

I don't think Gore is willing to subject himself and his family to another run. I would LOVE to see him named as head of EPA or Interior, though. It would be a fitting finale to a brilliant career in public service.

[OneBlueSky]

172. Clark may well be a committed environmentalist, but . . .

Gore is the one who is recognized as such by the general public . . . and who has made the environment and global warming his primary concern for the past however many years . . . because he knows that if we continue to foul our nest to the point of global destruction, nothing else will matter much . . .

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

101. Well, I know that the Democratic Committee in Newton County

would vote for him. In 2004, they refused to support Kerry, Dean, or any other candidate (and they wonder why the repukes have got all the county offices)-they hadn't heard of Clark, but when told who he was said they would vote for him.

[NastyDiaper]

104. If my 1st pick does not run, Clark is next.

I think that you said it quite well in "he is seen as an honest man who will serve the greater good by people across a wide range of ideologies."

Many good candidates we tend to chose in how they align to our own ideals. Somehow, and it's hard to finger, listening to Clark I get the feeling that he seeks his ideals from the people not himself, but with the strength and awareness that not all issues can be put to vote.

[wellstone dem]

105. Thank you Erica.

I've bookmarked this thread because the lame arguments you've made have inspired the most throrough explanation of why Wes Clark would be a great candidate. And now, on to the ignore button.

[Pithy Cherub]

108. Another Lefty who fully supports Clark.

A family full of Marines and my political beliefs make for some hilarious juxtapositions, but we all agree on Clark being a unifying force for Change and Good. He firmly stated on TDS that he was a Liberal. A liberal with 4 stars that was on the cover of The Advocate who stood up for Michael Moore's free speech rights during a time of war and claimed that he bled for the flag for all people to support it, not just republicans. He has a progressive tax plan and he taught Economics at one of America's premier educational institutions, West Point.

This Liberal has found a kindred spirit who has Great Leadership skills and always the Courage to speak up even when its not politically correct. WES has starch in his spine! :patriot:

[jonnyblitz]

116. i know plenty of mainstream liberals that like him but NOT ONE

far lefty. Of course the far lefties i know are non DUers. They all know about "School of the America's". I think he is a wolf in sheep's clothing and won't do anything to get us out of Iraq with his "rearranging deck chairs on the titanic" ideas.

[FrenchieCat]

127. And what is it that you and they "know" about the School of America?

Do they know that Clark did not institute it? Do they know that it is congress that funds it? Do they know that it was while Wes Clark was CIC that reforms were done there? Do they know that what the worse abuse in Latin America by those who may have graduated from the SOA occurred in the 70 and 80s way before Clark's time? Do they know that Wes Clark is not responsible for the SOA and has stated that if anyone can point to abuses there, if he were President, he would shut it down? Do you and all of your "left" extremist peeps know that maybe what y'all should concentrate on is the human abuses going on is China, as opposed to this old Red Herring always pulled out by the Far left and slammed into Wes Clark's face as though he really is more responsible for its existence than all those folks in the senate, the house and the executive branch....while Wes Clark never had a vote?

And let us not forget one very important fact; Latin America has transformed itself since the 1990s and is much more to the left and Democratic since.

So if you want to saddle Wes Clark with the total ridiculous credit for being the sole supporter (that you would accuse) and abater of the SOA based on his one year stint in 1996-97, then it would be fair and appropos that you also give him all of the credit for all of the positive changes in Latin America in them being more to the left than America currently. I mean, if you're gonna go way out there, might as well be all emcompassing in everyway imaginable! :shrug:

"We are teaching police and military people from Latin America human rights," Clark said "And if we didn't bring them in and teach them human rights, they wouldn't be able to learn human rights anywhere."
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/18/elec04.prez.clark.mcgovern/index.html

George Bruno will be happy to take you down there," Clark told the woman who questioned him in Concord. "If you find anything in that curriculum material or anything that's taught there that looks in any way remotely connected with human rights abuse or torture, you let me know, and I promise you, we'll close the School of the Americas when I'm president," he said.
But if "you find nothing wrong and you see these officers and noncommissioned officers in there learning about human rights, I'd like you to change your position."
link is to a smear page, do not use.... haah
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0117-01.htm
* * *
Clark said the school is the primary vehicle for teaching proper human rights to police in South America, and likened closing the school to proposing to close the Harvard Business School, which he said has turned out several people now under fire for corporate corruption.

* * *
Statement of General Wesley Clark on the School of the Americas
(now known as the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation)
"I strongly condemn human rights abuses of any kind. Throughout my career, I have fought to protect the fundamental rights of all people and to promote democratic values that empower people to prevent abuses of power and combat them when they occur.

It is unacceptable that some who passed through the School of the Americas (now known as the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation) committed human rights abuses. Those that did should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law - as should all who commit war crimes or crimes against humanity. In order to prevent such abuses from happening in the future, we must promote a policy of engagement and education with friends and allies in the region.

I strongly support the reforms that have been implemented at WHISC and encourage careful vetting of students. I strongly support oversight measures that ensure that antidemocratic principles are not taught at the school. Thanks to the work of human rights campaigners and others, WHISC is constantly improving the way it teaches the Army's values of respect for human rights, for civil institutions, and for dissent."
http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:EUsQZkGpITsJ:www.clark04.com/issues/soa/+wesley+clark+school+of+the+americas&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=3

Let's tar Max Cleland with the same brush...another evil man! :sarcasm:
KEEPING OUR PRIORITIES WHILE KEEPING THE PEACE - Senator Max Cleland
http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itps/1299/ijpe/cleland.htm
Having said that, in my opinion we should and must continue such efforts as military education for our allies through the Marshall Center in Europe, the School of the Americas, and similar programs. It has always been my belief that those who understand war, including the true costs of war, understand peace and all of its blessings. Today, we train our military in the strategy of war and the art of peace. U.S. military personnel are well schooled as students of (Karl von) Clausewitz, Sun Tzu, (Alfred Thayer) Mahan, and the best known writers of conflict and engagement. At the same time, they also receive thorough and effective training in such fundamental American principles as subordination of the military to civilian control and respect for human rights. While our foreign military education efforts have not always succeeded in instilling such values, I believe that recent reforms will eliminate any such shortcomings in the future.
--------------------
Clark's main "support" for the School came in 1996, when he was the CinC of Southern Command for 1 year and at that time the school fell under his leadership.

Second, by the middle of the Clinton Administration, the U.S. had started to clean up its act significantly, with even State Department officials admitting that "they had done a lot of bad stuff in South America" in the '50s-'70s. The School now has a mandatory democratic education and civil rights component. It is a military training center that helps train officers from South American countries: newsflash--by the 1990s, most of the countries in South America had become developing democracies, as opposed to the authoritarian regimes the U.S. had supported in the '50s-'70s. The SoA also went through further reform, with an external independent oversight board. It's supported by countries like Canada--OK, not ALWAYS the paragon of virtue, but hardly an enthusiastic supporter of imperialism in the contemporary era.

Here are the facts on the School (conveniently dating back to around the time Clark was CinC of Southern Command), now renamed the Western Hemispheric Institute for Security Cooperation, from a non-partisan and progressive research institute's project on South America.

People who protest that institution have a right to demand restitution for past injustices, but as far as having real impact, they should turn their attention to the secret detentions and support for anti-terrorism in Asia and so on.The skills that these people were taught at the SOA were not torture, murder and mayhem but strategy and martial expertise. How these folks become twisted is not happening at SOA but in their own countries.

As Clark said, the corporate executives pillaging our economy went to Yale, Harvard, etc. Should we shut down those institutions? Now I agree, it's not the same thing, but, think of a more likely parallel and ask yourself should the institution be closed due to the actions of a small minority of students/attendees? You've listed 18 people out of 63,000 graduates. That's .03%. As General Clark said, a small minority.
----------------------------
There are terrible problems in South and Central America, with the links to the drug trade, human rights abuses by rebel, government, right-wing paramilitary, and plain old criminal groups, corruption, and poverty. Any program that could be used in a positive way, should be. Human rights are certainly not going to served by leaving the worst of these militaries to their own devices.

Link to PBS article with debate-style format on SOA
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/july-dec99/sota ...

Posted by Du's Tom Rinaldo a while ago on this subject....

The School of the Americas (now known by the touchy feely name of Western Hemisphere Institute for Cooperation and Security) is a terror training camp run by the Us government, whos graduates go on to organize death squads in Central America, rightwing paramilitary units to overthrow democratic regimes, and commit other terroristic atrocities."

I don't think it would still exist, and it wouldn't have operated openly for at least the last 15 to 20 years after some of those major abuses started coming to light, if that was the sole or even major mission of that institution. Many tens of thousands have received training of all sorts there. In one instance or another, to varying degrees, everything you said though is absolutely true. And I will go further and say that under the likes of Kissenger, and Reagan's Poindexter and Ollie North crowd, covert efforts to do exactly what you said were hatched by some within its confines.

However I am just not enough of a conspiritalist, or a radical I suppose, to buy that that school existed during the Carter and Clinton years with that as it's main intent, and that both of those Democratic Presidents fully supported everything you note went on there and maintained that school for those expressed purpose. I am more likely to accept that Presidents like Nixon, who set up his own "plumbers squad", and Reagan, who gave a green light to Ollie North's covert operations, allowed those shady operatives to use the cover of working inside those institution to further their covert ends, the same way that illegal and immoral operations are conducted through every established Government institution whenever honor and decency is suspended, including the FBI, the IRS, the INS and so forth.

In short I would say that Clark backed that School when he did because he felts that there was still an appropriate mission for it to play. Reforms were already underway when he spoke. A number of people who were trained there have done some terrible things. More didn't. Clark believes that positive lessons and models for multinational military cooperation have been developed in South America for fighting Drug Lords that can be applied to our international struggle against terrorists, operating in places like Pakistan and Yeman.

I would certainly ask of Clark both now, and should he become President, that he ensure that strong curbs be placed on either that institution, or any other that replaces it and attempts to pick up whatever legitimate functions it pursued, to absolutely minimize the potential for human rights violations flowing from training done at that School. It is my limited understanding that much of the reform efforts that were undertaken focused on that problem, which was most acute in the 1980's during Reagan's anti Sandanista days.

I would go further and say that all abuses should be completely eliminated, and guarenteed never to occur again, but I am too realistic to ask for that about anything. The U.S. will never have full control over the actions of agents from other countries that train with our military. Having said that, I acknowledge that elements of our military have been directly involved in terrible actions.
----------
That being said.....I don't believe that Clark actually supports the SOA much more than most other Democratic politician. Period.

[xkenx]

131. Ah, finally--welcome Jonnyblitz to yet another thread where you jump in to

gratuitously attack Clark. Dance with the lovely Erika. And thank you for keeping this very pro-Clark thread going.

[Maestro]

132. I saved this from here at DU. I can't remember who posted it.

Whoever it was I thank them for it. Clark by no means deserve the "doesn't support democratic platform" arguement. He is certainly a wealthy man, but let's face it, you almost have to be to make it politics nowadays. That doesn't mean that the person is pro-corp and anti-worker necessarily. I personally think that Clark would represent the vast majority of dems very well. Here is what I saved from a post from a fellow DUer.

Profile of Retired US Army General Wesley Clark

Retired US Army Four-Star General Wesley Clark : General Wesley Clark is a retired four-star US Army general. He commanded the NATO operation in Kosovo from 1997 to 2000 as Supreme Allied Commander. A Vietnam veteran, he served in the Army from 1968 to 2000, retiring after political wrangling with Washington.

Clark was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2000, made a Knight of the British Empire and earned a Purple Heart, Bronze Star, Silver Star and Army Distinguished Service Medal, plus 30 more honors from the US and abroad.

Recent Notoriety: In a June 2005 poll of 14,000 DailyKos readers, Wesley Clark was the surprise top choice for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination with 26% of the votes, followed by 17% for "no frickin' clue," and 10% each for Senators Clinton and Feingold.

Clark was a 2004 candidate for five months but dropped out after winning only one primary. Clark was let go in 2003 from his broadcast stint as CNN military analyst. Critics contend that the White House pushed CNN to fire the popular Clark.

Political Views and Stances:General Wes Clark is a moderate liberal with impeccable national security credentials. He holds strong pro-environmental views, and equally strong pro-civil rights stances. He supports equal opportunity for gays in military service, and believes that reproductive decisions should be between a woman and her doctor.

He's a fiscal moderate who urges return to balancing the federal budget, reduction of the budget and trade deficits, and would repeal all Bush tax cuts for wealthy Americans.

West Point & Oxford University: After a distinguished high school career, Wesley Clark obtained his cherished goal: appointment to West Point. While Clark chafed at the "inspections, polishing shoes, marching in parades," he regarded West Point as "a means to an end...I liked the chance to make a difference." He was drawn to international relations studies.

Clark graduated first in his West Point class. He then won and accepted a two-year Rhodes scholarship to Oxford University before entering the Army.

Early US Army Career: Clark entered the Army in 1968, was called to Vietnam duty in 1969, and shot 4 times in one 1970 combat incident. He returned and served 2 more years in Vietnam. In the 1970s, Clark was a West Point professor of social science, and served in various vital Washington DC Defense Department positions, including White House Fellow from 1975-76, along with Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. Clark next commanded battalions in Germany and Colorado, and earned promotion to general.

Later Career in the US Armed Forces: During the Persian Gulf War, Clark was Commanding General of the Army National Training Center, in charge of arranging 3 deployments to Kuiwait during Operation Desert Storm. A 1994 promotion placed Clark in a key Joint Chiefs of Staff strategy position. In 1997, he was made Supreme Allied Commander, head of US military activites in 89 countries and of all NATO forces in Europe. He oversaw the Kosovo conflict, and played a strong role in negotiating peace in Bosnia.

Personal Data:

Birth - December 23, 1944 in Chicago; moved to Little Rock in 1949

Youth - Mentored by the director of the local Boys Club of America

High School - Class valedictorian, President of the National Honor Society, led swim team to state championship

Family - Married since 1966 to Gert Kingston, who he met at a Navy USO dance; one son, two grandsons. Daughter in Law is of Columbian origins.

Faith - Christian. Raised Southern Baptist. Converted to Roman Catholic when married. Now attends Presbyterian church services.

Interesting Personal Notes: Clark's beloved devout Jewish father died suddenly when Wesley was 4 years old. His widowed mother moved back to her hometown of Little Rock, Arkansas. Cognizant of Southern anti-semitism, she hid his Russian Jewish immigrant roots from him. He learned of his ancestry while, as an Oxford student, he was contacted by his father's family.

Clark's father was a handsome Chicago attorney and Democratic politician and activist. At his funeral, people lined up for blocks to pay their respects.

The Wesley Clark Persona: Wesley Clark is private, ambitious and competitive with great intellectual powers, a blend that inspires jealousy more than friendship. He's telegenic with a star-quality smile, and at ease in front of cameras. Clark can be self-effacing, relaxed and funny at times, intense and tightly wound at other times.

He was described in a 1980 magazine article as someone "who took everything seriously...who would be able to inspire the troops and earn their respect, but probably not...earn their love."

Memorable Quotes: Referring to the present Bush Administration, "I think we're at risk with our democracy. I think we're dealing with the most closed, imperialistic, nastiest administration in living memory. They even put Richard Nixon to shame."

"There are two big legacies we leave to our children: Constitutional government and the environmental itself."

"I'm pro-choice, pro-affirmative action, pro-environment and pro-labor. I was either going to be the loneliest Republican in America, or I was going to be a happy Democrat."

"It was my belief in service that led me to West Point. It was the year after John F. Kennedy admonished us to ask not what our country could do for us, but what we could do for our country....I wanted to be an officer and leader in the Army."

"It is in the best interest of our country to promote stable communities and families. I believe that same-sex couples should not be denied rights to pensions, health insurance, family medical leave. bereavement leave, hospital visitation, survivor benefits and other basic legal protections that all families and chldren need."

"One of the principles that we operate on in this country is that leaders are held accountable. The simple truth is that we went into Iraq on the basis of some intuition, some fear, some exaggerated rhetoric and some very, very scanty evidence."

"There are three terrible things that can happen to you in the United States Army, if you're an officer. You can win the Congressional Medal of Honor. You can be a Heisman Trophy winner. Or you can be a Rhodes scholar."

http://usliberals.about.com/od/peopleinthenews/p/Wesley...

I see nothing exceptionally objectionable.

[Rockstone]

133. Was he involved with those peoples deaths in Waco, TX?

I know he was on hand, but what was his part?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

135. **sigh** Here we go again. He had NO part in Waco. None. Zip.

He was not "on hand." He was merely the commander of an Army division that lent the FBI and ATF some equipment at their request. He had no planning or operational involvement in that incident (and could not have because of the posse comitatus law). This canard keeps turning up, even though it has been debunked repeatedly, even by REPUBLICAN Senator John Danforth.

Good grief...

[Lurking Dem]

137. You know that started on FOX news, right?

Clark's campaign flatly denies any planning role by Clark in Waco. And an investigation by a Justice Department special counsel, former U.S. Sen. John Danforth (search), R-Mo., bears out that assertion. Danforth found no improper actions by anyone in the U.S. military regarding Waco and concluded that the fiery end to the siege resulted from the Davidians setting fires inside the building compound where they were holed up.

Federal law restricts the role of the military in civilian law enforcement operations and "we weren't involved in the planning or execution of the Waco operation in any way, shape, form or fashion," says retired Army Lt. Gen. Horace Grady "Pete" Taylor, who ran the Fort Hood (search) military base 60 miles from the site of the Waco siege.

Waco "was a civilian operation that the military provided some support to" and "any decisions about where the support came from were my decisions, not General Clark's," Taylor said this week.

"Clark's totally innocent in this regardless of what anybody thinks about him," says Taylor, Clark's former commander. "He played no direct role in this activity nor did any of us."

[Rockstone]

138. Thanks for explaining

Not I didn't know it came from Fox. I had read it on DU, but never got a clear picture of Wes's non involvement. But I also don't believe the cover up story.

All I know is that they filled they punctured the walls with tanks (non military ones I assume, based on the info above) and filled it with flammable gas canisters. Not hard to imagine it going up in flames after that.

[Lurking Dem]

140. But that's a seperate issue from

what was supplied by whom and who authorized and/or planned it.

[Rockstone]

147. Agreed

it sounds like the right tried to latch on to this to try to smear clark with.

I am by nature skeptical of military people. I did see Clark on some open panel discussion on CNN, and thought he was very well spoken. He is a gentleman, and has a softer touch than a Dean or Webb.

Suffice it to say I was impressed. I still harbor feelings of mistrust against any military person, Webb included, because I feel the indoctrination is psychologically damaging. So if I am biased against him, I hope I have explained the emotional driver for that.

[Lurking Dem]

148. I hope you can also

overcome that bias as you learn more about him. I think you'll be impressed.

[FrenchieCat]

173. No, Clark had nothing to do with WACO......

and here's some information on that:

http://www.talkleft.com/new_archives/004501.html
Wesley Clark and Waco Rumors are re-surfacing that Ret. General Wesley Clark played a direct or indirect role in the Waco disaster because his army division supplied some military equipment to the siege effort and his deputy attended a high-level meeting five days prior to the fiery end. Response has been swift that the allegations of his playing a role are not true: bq. Federal law restricts the role of the military in civilian law enforcement operations and "we weren't involved in the planning or execution of the Waco operation in any way, shape, form or fashion," says retired Army Lt. Gen. Horace Grady "Pete" Taylor, who ran the Fort Hood military base 60 miles from the site of the Waco siege. Waco "was a civilian operation that the military provided some support to" and "any decisions about where the support came from were my decisions, not General Clark's,"
>snip
Many are calling on Clark now to make a formal statement about the extent of his knowledge of the Government's plan and any authorization he made for equipment being sent from the First Cavalry. We have no problem with that--we'd like to know too. But we're predicting the answers will be a let-down for the far right

Glenn Reynolds on Clark and Waco:
Nothing there
Glenn Reynolds isn't impressed with the attempt of some wing-nuts to implicate Wesley Clark in the Waco affair . I seem to recall having criticized Glenn once or twice in the pastm, and my astrologer predicts I may do so again someday. But even though he and I often don't see things the same way, Glenn always calls 'em as he sees 'em. That's a virtue less common than it ought to be.http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/wesley_clark_/200 ...

For the past couple of months, I have followed several internet discussions about Wesley Clark's "involvement" in the Branch Davidian Standoff at Waco, but I have not seen it mentioned so prominently in a mainstream website until it appeared today in InstaPundit. I have not responded to the various conspiracy theories about General Clark's role because most seem to be generated by people with little or no contact with reality.
snip<
At the direction of the division's Chief of Staff, I later briefed the division's tank crews before they departed for Waco. My guidance to the crews was they could provide the FBI equipment (10 U.S.C. § 372), they could train the FBI on its use (10 U.S.C. § 373), and they could maintain the equipment (10 U.S.C. § 374). I told the crews, however, that under no circumstances could they operate the equipment in support of the FBI's Waco operation (10 U.S.C. § 375).

Incidentally, my office's written legal opinion and the slides used to brief the tank crews were turned over to Congress during its Waco investigations, to the Danforth Commission, and to the United States District Court that heard the Federal Tort Claims Act lawsuits arising out of Waco.

I would be happy to provide additional information, butI believe too much ink has already been spilled over what is truly a "non-issue." Of course, the normal disclaimer applies: nothing in this e-mail should be construed as an endorsement on behalf of or against General Clark.

Richard D. Rosen
Colonel, U.S. Army, Retired
Associate Dean for Administration & External Affairs
Texas Tech University School of Law
http://www.instapundit.com/archives/012794.php

Clark had no role at Waco, ex-commander says
1. http://www.suntimes.com/output/elect/cst-nws-clark29.ht ...
Commanding officer says Clark had no direct role in Waco siege
Washington-AP -- Democratic presidential hopeful Wesley Clark is facing a flurry of questions over his role in the deadly 1993 siege in Waco, Texas.

His former commanding officer says the now-retired general had "no direct role" in the government's standoff with Branch Davidians -- and that the military didn't help plan it.
>snip
Federal law restricts the role of the military in civilian law enforcement operations and "we weren't involved in the planning or execution of the Waco operation in any way, shape, form or fashion," says retired Army Lt. Gen. Horace Grady "Pete" Taylor, who ran the Fort Hood military base 60 miles from the site of the Waco siege.

Waco "was a civilian operation that the military provided some support to" and "any decisions about where the support came from were my decisions, not General Clark's," Taylor said this week.

"Clark's totally innocent in this regardless of what anybody thinks about him," says Taylor, Clark's former commander. "He played no direct role in this activity nor did any of us."
http://www.detnews.com/2003/politics/0312/01/politics-3 ...

[mdmc]

134. Why doesn't he run for something? AK gov. or something

:kick:

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

136. He's been too busy campaigning for other Democrats.

[Tinksrival]

139. Wow!

Feels like Groundhog day all over again, ocelot!

[mdmc]

141. glad he got coattails

:kick:
Him and the big dog on the campaign trail!

[MrSlayer]

150. Yes to all three.

Though it would probably take until his second term to turn all of this around. I really hope he declares early and can get the money flowing. If he can get his message out to a broad audience he'll be tough to beat. The problem is the corporate masters who own the media will be giving all the face time to those who will advance their own cause and shun people that actually will do something about their corrupt influence.

[RagingInMiami]

158. This is a great thread

I've always liked Clark. I voted for him in the 2000 Primary after my first choice, Bob Graham, had dropped out. I always felt that the media never gave him a fair shake back then.

The man is extremely intelligent, outspoken, distinguished and has solid democratic values. I believe he has the capacity to not only restore our credibility abroad, but to reunite our divided country.

I fall smack in the middle of the liberal spectrum, meaning that I am not far left nor moderate left.

[ConsAreLiars]

164. I agree. The discussion has been quite informative.

He's obviously quite capable, and on the issues he's closer to Wellstone or Kucinich than any of the other main 2004 primary candidates, but he doesn't come across as an elitist or a "politician" in the usual sense of someone who says whatever his party hierarchy or PR handler tells him/her to say.

[RagingInMiami]

186. That is what I meant to say

2004 Primary, not 2000.

[ConsAreLiars]

187. Seems more like a hundred years ago than two or six.

I stood (alone) as a candidate for Clark in my precinct caucus. The "utopian lefties" had brought in a bunch of kids for the more moderate Dean (why? don't ask me!) and I tossed my vote to Kerry in the unrealized hope that he would eventually expose Chimpy and the PNAC gang. After all, he had investigated them and knew the facts. Yet another disappointment.

[jgraz]

165. We are incredibly lucky to have so many great potential candidates for 08, including Clark

He's not my first choice, but I'll proudly support him if he gets the nod.

[Pastiche423]

168. The general still loves the SOA

[DoveTurnedHawk]

174. What I Love About This Thread

The anti-Clark smears are just so obviously lame and weak now. People who raised questions about him in 2003, fine, I can at least understand that, even if I disagreed vocally back then. But now, after three solid years of solid, pro-Democratic advocacy and hard work to elect Democrats?

The only things they have left are already-debunked smears and lame "I SAID IT I SAID IT AND I SAID IT AGAIN SO IT MUST BE TRUE, BUT I CAN'T HEAR YOU NYAH NYAH NYAH" repeat one-liner postings.

DTH

[Erika]

176. Clark is absurd to think he can run for a dem presidency

When he declared he wasn't one until 2003. We don't need that shallowness.

[CarbonDate]

179. And you say the same thing....

...over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.

[Erika]

180. Yeah strange how the truth remains the same

regardless of how many times its said.

[FrenchieCat]

181. Actually what remains the same are your opinions--no matter what information

is provided, your mind appears "closed for business".

One of the things that Wes Clark said I will quote...."We live in a liberal democracy. That's what we created in this country. It's in our constitution! We should be very clear on this... this country was founded on the principles of the Enlightenment. It was the idea that people could talk, have reasonable dialogue and discuss the issues. It wasn't founded on the idea that someone would get struck by a divine inspiration and know everything, right from wrong. People who founded this country had religion, they had strong beliefs, but they believed in reason, and dialogue, and civil discourse. We can't lose that in this country. We've got to get it back."
- Gen. Wesley K. Clark, Bill Maher Show, September 4 2003
http://www.awesclarkdemocrat.com/issues_domestic/democracy/

We've got to get it back.....but it seems that you are way far gone...

But in reality, you may have been more helpful to Wes Clark in this thread than you had intended.
But hey, shit happens! :)

beyond that.....if he runs, don't vote for him. It's really that simple!:shrug:

[Erika]

182. My intent was not to harm Clark

but give my honest opinion. The defensive posts says a lot.

[FrenchieCat]

184. Your intent doesn't much matter to me.....

but Facts do.

As you and I both know, Folks will decide not based on your pronouncements....but rather on their own opinions and whatever facts they have been able to gather.

I don't have a problem with you or your opinions whatsover, even if I don't agree with them.

In fact, I should say thank you!

Have a good night! :hi:

[Erika]

185. The originator of this post asked for opinions on Clark

I gave them.

[ConsAreLiars]

188. You've given your opinion (thanks) many times (way too many) but invoked

many lies as support for them. If you believe Clark did not vote for Democrats since Clinton or that his registration as an independent means he was a right winger, then you are entitled to those beliefs, however false. One of your favored alternatives was a Goldwater girl and supported the invasion of Iraq, but for some reason, you don't see that as a problem. Chimpy would be proud of you.

[Lurking Dem]

191. After some thought

it occurs to me I have never read a post of yours that would lead me to believe you were a Democrat or supported the Democratic Party platform.

[Pithy Cherub]

194. Good thing they can be invalidated and smart folks can

conclude that your opinion has no factual basis with the heft of cotton candy at a 5 star restaurant.

It has been amazing to see the vapid unresearched viewpoint repeated in such a child like fashion. At least, when people read your name now it comes with the appropriate warning, opinion ohead, facts be damned!:eyes:

[Donna Zen]

201. A lie does not become the truth

no matter how many times it is told.

[youthere]

204. Oh PLEASE keep posting Erika...it's most entertaining...

Best laugh I've had all day.

[butterfly77]

213. I voted for him last time in the primaries...

and I will do it again,if he runs.