Reply #: My response

[Padraig18]

"Lets do this bit by bit and examine what are "allowable" reasons for opposing a Clark candidacy

"those who are blatantly anti-military" - Well, "blatantly" seems somewhat loaded term. However, it is I believe acceptable to be unimpressed with the MIC and those that willingly participate within it. There are those that grant the military a pass, there are those that do not. Neither position is necessarily unassailable."

I used the term 'blatantly anti-military' deliberately, not accidentally. I agree that his military record is open for objective- civil discusion.

""those who will never forgive him for saying kind words about Republicans he had personal or working relationships with (no matter how long ago that may have been)"

At the risk of falling to Godwins law, there are posters at this site decrying Arnold far more distant past. Having working / personal relationships with Republicans is exactly what some people are concerned about. How deep do they go, how much does Clark owe? Once again this is a valid avenue of investigation."

Again, I used the word 'never' deliberately, not accidentally; I also agree that this is the subject for a fair and civilzed discussion.

""those who cannot accept any 'centrist'" - That is true. The argument needs to be whether "centrists" are in fact Democrats in the accepted sense. "

We agree.

""a 'new Democrat' who does not possess a 25+ year-long political pedigree"

Yes, there are people that are concerned that someone previously unknown appears and wishes to be declared leader of their group. Anyone not asking these questions must be wilfully naive,"

Again, we agree.

My reason for attempting to define/deliniate what I personally perceive as being the characteristics of a hard-core group of "Clark haters" is to simply point out that there are SOME here at DU who will *never* accept any answer from Gen. Clark on these subjects, no matter how reasonable, valid or truthful those answers are.

:hi: