You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #131: I always respect your conclusions, H2O Man [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-19-07 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #123
131. I always respect your conclusions, H2O Man
Because they are well-thought and fair. But I don't see how Clinton-Clark is any more predictable than Edwards-Clark or any number of 2008 candidates and Clark, if he remains out of the race. As in 2004, he has a lot to offer any ticket light on foreign policy and national security experience - this wasn't the case with Kerry, but with other of the primary candidates. I have seen no indication from Clark, however, that he has interest in being anybody's VP. I always sense that when his commitment to national service is called on by any president, he will respond, but I also think he recognizes that VP is not necessarily the best place for his talents. He has always deplored the power Dick Cheney has over Bush's direction in foreign affairs. Clark has said many times, many times, that it is not a proper or even workable situation. If not president, SoS or national security or emergency preparedness, just a few of many examples of where his abilities and experience might better fit than VP.

Further, I don't actually see how a Clark VP helps either Clinton or Edwards on the war, other than the obvious. Both of them disregarded his guidance in 2002 and voted the wrong way. Both would be pounded on that vote in the media and by the oppo. Both of them will have to face serious questions raised by prewar intelligence investigations in Congress, which Clark has been backing to the hilt since 2004. I seriously doubt either would consider Clark an asset when you consider how his own priorities of transparency and accountability on the war would jar the required campaign message.

I also want you to understand, as I am the OP, that I am in no way a Clinton supporter, not today, not tomorrow. I will vote the GE ticket, but I will not vote in the primaries for ANYONE who voted yes to the IWR. That goes double in intensity for Edwards who co-sponsored it while he was on the Intelligence Committee, but it doesn't give Hillary my support or my vote. So your speculations about any motivation for this thread being support of a Clinton-Clark ticket are far off base. Just so you know, friend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC