Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Wolfie now interviewing Former Supreme Allied Commander of Nato but it is

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 (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Nashyra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-04 11:50 AM
Original message
Wolfie now interviewing Former Supreme Allied Commander of Nato but it is
General Joolvan or something like that. What a blatant slap to Clark. I think it is a direct attempt to minimize Clark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MSgt213 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-04 11:52 AM
Response to Original message
1. Maybe not Clark. Clark is a busy man these days he might not have been
able to get him or Wolfe could have wanted a different presepective. No way of knowing, but I don't think it's a slap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-04 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
2. Would interviewing Clinton be a slap to Carter?
Let's worry about something more important, ok?
 Add to my Journal Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nashyra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-04 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I think it is important
because of the fact that the media did in fact try to minimize Clark in the primaries and I so happen to think that Clark would make an excellent vice President and would have made an excellent nominee. Considering that the war and the middle east, Iraq and Afghanistan are virtual hell holes, the fact that CNN could come up with a "General" with the identical credentials of Clark is troubling to me and important. I still think they are trying to minimize Clark. Your post was extremely rude considering I was only bringing something up that might have not been noticed by others. If you didn't think the post was important why not just leave it alone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-04 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. It's not meant to be rude, just a statement of fact
Edited on Thu May-06-04 12:16 PM by 56kid
I just think that it's not a big deal. They don't have to interview Clark every time they interview a former commander of NATO.

I should have realized that you were sensitive about this issue since you brought it up in the first place & I probably should have left off my editorial comment.

The problem is, that's what I really think. -- it's not a slap to interview a different commander, just as it wouldn't be a slap to Carter to interview Clinton & there really are more important things to think about.

& the reason I didn't leave the post alone is because I think it's important to not overreact about insignificant things such as who CNN decided to interview today & I thought you were overreacting.

 Add to my Journal Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nashyra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-04 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. I brought it up because of the fact that
it was not only "a different" general, but the fact that he was also a retired "Nato" Supreme Allied Commander. I should have put the emphasis on the fact that CNN was being what I thought was blantantly partisan and thought that it was an attempt to minimize a potential vp selection. I should have worded it differently. I don't think I over reacted by posting an observation and I still think it is an attempt to minimize Clark's resume as a potential veep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-04 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. point taken
guess we just have a difference of opinion.
Now if CNN continues to do this over the next week or so and never consults with Clark, then I will agree with you.
 Add to my Journal Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nashyra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-04 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Thanks for the debate
and I try to make my post's more subjective so that they do not appear to be overly sensitive about a particular candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Oct 30th 2014, 06:40 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) 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