A question about Clark. I'm not trying to start a flame war here.

[Crazy Guggenheim]

Jeez.

Why doesn't Clark run for something in next year's mid-terms? Would he? I think it would be a great idea!

Again this is just a question ...... :popcorn:

:scared: :scared:

[Captain Hilts]

1. "Jeez" back at you! nt

[Crazy Guggenheim]

2. LOL.

[uppityperson]

3. Have you written or called him to ask him why he doesn't?

What did he say?

[Crazy Guggenheim]

5. No. I just wondering from his supporters and what they think.

[no name no slogan]

4. Why do you hate America?

[Crazy Guggenheim]

6. ........

:popcorn: :popcorn: :patriot:

[BOSSHOG]

7. If he has plans to run for President in 2008

he doesn't need to run for anything in 2006. He would be free to devote his time and resources to campaign.

[Crazy Guggenheim]

9. Hey BOSSHOG! How have you been?

I think he could do both. Besides it would give him more of a base in the Democratic Party. What about him running as a U.S. Rep?

[BOSSHOG]

15. Doing Great Crazy, thanks for asking

I would counsel against him running for U. S. Rep (if he also intends to run for President in 2008.) He would be committing only two years to a district (in Arkansas I presume) and then would be branded an opportunist by those who brand others. If he has made up his mind not to run for President I would strongly urge him to run for Senate and stay there for about three terms. I would appreciate his voice in Washington, preferably as President. He was my number one candidate in 2004 but I will vote for whomever the Democrats nominate. Any democrat will be much better than any republican and General Clark has got the Gravitas to not only run, but win big and lead with inspiration.

[Crazy Guggenheim]

18. That's true about being labeled an opportunist. But if he doesn't run

for Pres. I'd love to see him run for something.

Edited for grammar.

[BigYawn]

37. If Clark wants to run for prez in 08, he should run for Gov in 06

My biggest problem with Clark is his lack of political
elected positions. He was amateurish in 2004. Kerry,
Edwards, even Joementum ate his lunch. He needs to
demonstate he can actually win an election before dems
can make him the torch bearer in 2008.

[Texas_Kat]

40. Governor of what?

He endorsed Mike Beebee for Democratic candidate for Governor in Arkansas back in May. So you think he should run for Governor just to run for something?

How lame is that?

[BigYawn]

50. As everyone knows most presidents have been governors rather than

senators or house reps in their background. Clark can move to
ANY state where he feels he can win. Look at Hillary, she moved
to NY state and won senatorship. Clark can do the same.

I believe Clark is very smart, has great resume, but he needs
elected position resume added to his otherwise excellent credentials.
He made some bad guffaws in 2004 campaign and some one like McCain
can make Clark look politically amateurish.

[Texas_Kat]

60. I would appreciate it if you didn't imply

that WKC has the morals of a ... a..... carpetbagger. That's just a little over the top and is considered an insult in this part of the country.

I'm sure you didn't mean it that way, though.... right?

[Crazy Guggenheim]

51. Not lame at all. I would like him to "show his stuff".

[Crunchy Frog]

62. He's already endorsed someone else for Arkansas Gov on '06.

Are you suggesting that he should go back on his endorsement, or that he should go carpetbagging in some other state? And you're saying he should do this if he wants to run for Prez in '08? You do realize that almost as soon as he was sworn in as Governor, he would have to start campaigning for President. He has far too much integrity to simply run for something so he could drop it and use it as a leg up for something else.

We've had plenty of torchbearers for our party who have won multiple elections for other offices, only to do disastrously in the Presidential elections.

I myself am confident that, should he win the nomination, that he would be an extremely formidable contender against whatever the Repukes put out. I respect the fact that you disagree, and completely respect your right to support whoever you think would make the best candidate.

But Joementum ate his lunch? That's kind of a stretch. Which state did Joe win? And how many more states than Clark did Edwards win? And which other candidate besides Kerry won a state that was neither his home state nor his birth state? He definitely was a novice in '04, but he did pretty well relative to the entire field, considering that every last one of them got their clocks totally cleaned by Kerry.

[William769]

8. I would hope it's because he plans on running again in 2008.

[snowbear]

10. Rumor from Kaine in VA is that he'll run with Mark Warner..

..as his VP.

And yeah.. I don't know what to think about Governor Warner's comment about "Loonie Left" ?? ...I didn't catch that..

I'm guessing that Warner plans to run as a 'centrist Democrat' and is making that known early? I dunno.. :shrug:

Warner and Clark are hangin' tight together lately.. but who knows if Kaine is right about them running together?

Maybe Big Eddie will ask the General what his plans are in a few minutes! :headbang:

[Crazy Guggenheim]

11. I can't stream the show! BTW, I am big on Clark for V.P.!!

[snowbear]

12. Oh bummer... We'll try to tell you what the General sez..

Too bad you can't get Big Eddie on there..

We'll try and fill you in!

[Crazy Guggenheim]

13. Thanks. In the mean time I'll adjust my settings.

[Texas_Kat]

21. Clark's site is trying to make sure transcripts get posted

So there should be an opportunity to find out exactly what is said.

[Crazy Guggenheim]

22. Thanks. Do you have a link to Clark's site?

[Texas_Kat]

24. Clark's website

http://www.securingamerica.com

transcripts get posted here:

http://securingamerica.com/taxonomy/term/8

[Crazy Guggenheim]

26. Thanks TK!

[Clark2008]

16. Interesting....

While I still have some problems with Warner attending Bilderberg, I can honestly say that I think that the ticket of Clark/Warner would kick the shit out of the Republicans, even McCain and Guiliani.

(Warner needs to be VP, Clark needs to be CinC. Makes CinC. :) )

[Catchawave]

49. Uh, nothing here on the Virginny radar,

:shrug:

[Crunchy Frog]

63. Do you think it's possible that they are hangin' tight right now

because both of them are working hard to try to get Kaine elected? All I know is that Wes has definitely expressed an interest in running again, and has many passionate supporters who want him in the race for number one. I very much doubt that he would put himself through another grueling primary just to get picked as someone else's running mate.

Of course, if he ends up choosing not to run, I will respect that choice of his, and would think he would be a fine choice for running mate. I'm not ready to jump the gun on that now though, when he clearly is expressing interest in a run of his own.

[melody]

14. How many Clark threads are going to be on DU today?

That's what I wanna know.

I *am* a Clark (by marriage), but still and all... yeesh...

[Clark2008]

17. I guess as many as there are Kerry and Edwards threads.

Seriously, it goes in cycles. There are tons of each every so often.

[melody]

31. I know, I posted the same thing yesterday about the Edwards threads lol

No "slamming" intended. We're all on the same side. I post to the Gore threads. It just gets to seem a little like a fan fiction forum arguing over their favorite slash. lol (And I say that to myself as much as anyone)

[Totally Committed]

30. I love it! There are currently 4 Clark threads going, and this

is the question.

On any given day there are about 127,597 Kerry threads :sarcasm: going at the same time, and I brooch the subject and get slammed into a million pieces!

You go, girl! Keep counting these Clark threads! Make sure this doesn't get out of hand. It's a tough job, but I know you're up to it! :hi:

TC

[FrenchieCat]

35. Don't know how many....but it appears that at least Clark made news

by being instrumental in leading the charges of the actions that got the more progressive than Limbaugh "Ed Schultz show" which will NOW be broadcasted on a very important station.......that is listened to by thousands upon thousands of our armed force personnel serving at home and overseas, a year out before the 2006 election and during a time of war.

Do you think that is an accomplishment that we can celebrate, in particular if it helps us retake the congress in 2006?

So how many threads can Clark have today?

I know that Gore had several at once recently...the links of which which I can post here, if you'd like.

[melody]

45. Oy

We're all on the same side. Why do some people insist on being militant about everything? Why do we fight each other? That's what the GOPher like to say against us.

It was a genial observation that I've made before on other threads.

Now this will be my last post to the thread, since this seems more about primate pack dynamics than progressive change. :eyes:

[FrenchieCat]

47. Oye.......and all this time, I thought I came across pretty

level headed....although passionate! :)

[Totally Committed]

52. I was not being militant in my post melody!

You honestly made me laugh out loud. The next time the Kerry peeps get on my case for objecting to their 85,959 posted threads, I am going to think of your question about only 4 and SMILE!

I actually thought you were cute and respectful in your query. You should have seen my post the other night when I went postal and took no prisoners. I am ashamed (not). LOL!

TC

[Crunchy Frog]

64. Well you know, threads about various different Democrats come in waves

here. There will be a ton of Gore threads for awhile, then there will be a tone of Kerry threads, then there will be a ton of Dean threads, and sometimes there will be a bunch of Clark threads. It's just one of those phenomena that occur with a Democratic site where there are many people with a passionate committment to one political figure or another.

At any rate, this one was not started by a Clark supporter, so you can't blame us for it.:)

[geek tragedy]

19. Because he should run as an outsider, not a DC insider.

He's not a career politician.

[Crazy Guggenheim]

20. I agree about the insider/outsider issue. But I think he could do

a lot of good for his state if he did. He could still be on the outside; especially with the backing of his supporters. If he does not run in 2008, he must run for something and I would support him 100%!

[Jai4WKC08]

23. LOL -- don't be a'skeered

We're really not as mean and nasty as we're reported to be.

Setting aside the fact that he really doesn't need to, and that any state office would be a demotion...

Arkansas has two Democratic senators. The district that he lives in has a Democratic rep. All three endorsed him for president--he should shoot them in the back? That would never happen.

Mike Beebe is running for governor of Arkansas next year. So far, he's unchallenged in the primary (there's talk of one other entering the race, but so far hasn't happened), is widely supported, and thought to have the best chance of beating Asa Hutchenson. Clark has endorsed him already, and I'm thinking has supported him for some time.

If Clark is thinking about running for President in '08, and he's certainly said he's has not dismissed the possibility, he would not run for an office with the intent of never finishing one term. It just wouldn't be right. What could he accomplish for the state? What might he be keeping some other good Democrat from accomplishing?

Besides, Clark was courted by both parties in Arkansas when he first retired from the military and no one really knew where he stood as far as partisanship goes. He said then that the governor's job didn't interest him. It's too much like what he's done before, as a regional commander. He's more interested in national issues, and believes he has more of a contribution to be made at that level, whether in office or not.

[Crazy Guggenheim]

25. Oh I'm not scared. Take a look at my avatar. LOL. Good post though.

[Catchawave]

27. I like Clark...

...it's just his DU supporters I have problems with .... :popcorn:

Seriously Clark Supporters, stop HI..freaking..Jacking my Edwards topics.

[Crazy Guggenheim]

28. I guess they wouldn't like my yak either .........

:popcorn: :popcorn:

[FrenchieCat]

32. Where is it?....

Your Edwards' topic, I mean?
Is it in this thread?

Didn't think so!

[AZBlue]

29. I love him but would rather he waited for '08 Presidential run

[FrenchieCat]

33. We need a fucking Warrior to gain the White House and

the power back.

When I try to think of Warriors and Dems in the same thought pattern.... the General comes first to my mind.

[Crazy Guggenheim]

34. During the Primaries I got a glimpse of Clark on Hardball. Tweety

was reading something off a piece of paper and Clark reached over grapped it from Tweety's hands and said 'Stay off that script!' At that moment I said "That's the guy for V.P.!! OMG!" I was sold on him. Note: this was during the primaries concerning V.P. I would have loved to see him debate Cheney!! :applause: :woohoo:

[FrenchieCat]

36. Well, great to hear.....

the Faux Assman smackdown was also very precious......



Point is....give Clark a regular primary instead of a catch up primary....have him in Iowa.....and let's see how he does running for the Presidency.

I know that even as late as he started......it has to be recognized that he did damn well! Wasn't in Iowa, and still managed to come in third after the two New Englanders in NH......won OK, and came in 2nd in NM, AZ, and ND. It is true that Edwards was close in OK...but then, Clark wasn't getting 24/7 positive publicity a la Edwards. In fact, after Iowa....Clark got no publicity.

That won't be the case in 2008.

Here's my hope that I'll hear you saying.... "that's the guy of Prez!! OMG!" at some point during the primaries in '08!

:hi:

[Totally Committed]

53. "I would have loved to see him debate Cheney!!"

He'd burst that asshole's baboon heart (or whatever contraption is keeping him alive...) right on national television! It would be a glorious sight! :patriot:

TC

[johnaries]

38. Crazy, something I keep meaning to ask you,

How's Gertrude and Heathcliff? You know, the 2 seagulls?

[Crazy Guggenheim]

41. It's Mr. Guggenheim to you .......... LOL.

Oh Gertrude and Heacliff. They're right above you! Get your umbrella out!

Actually G & H were from Red Skelton ......

[johnaries]

59. OMG! I am confused, Crazy was on Gleason's show....

"Ummm, that's good booze...."

I confused Crazy with Clem Kadiddlehopper...

My bad! Both of them, Jackie and Red, comic genius. *sigh*

[nickshepDEM]

39. No idear.

[Crazy Guggenheim]

42. ..............

:popcorn:

[nickshepDEM]

44. I didnt want to start a flame war myself, so I just edited the post.

In reality there is nothing he could run for in 2006. Beebe is the strongest statewide Dem in Arkansas and he's running for governor.

[FrenchieCat]

43. Hey, you've got it!

It's like give me a leader to lead us out of the quicksand.......

Not a politician who will barely utter words as to what is happening now in order to "perserve" his/her political capital for a time when he/she will personally need it to further their political career! To heck with those who will later try to claim a leadership role when all they did when their country needed them the most was to wait in the wings for an "opportune" entrance!

Edited to add....shit, Nickshep edited the sarcastic "do you really expect for Clark to run for anything but President?" Post.

Well, I liked my response to the original post....so I ain't changin' it! :)

[FrenchieCat]

46. There is nothing for him to run for.....

he hails from Arkansas.....so check out who's got seats there, and you will answer your own question.

Beyond that.....Arkansas doesn't have a military defense budget to cut, nor do they invade other countries, nor do they control the national policy on terrorism, nor do they need expertise in national disasters as much as the feds do....so some of Clark's most important skills wouldn't be utilized with him representing Arkansas....and instead would go to waste instead of making the difference for America....

What Dem is calling to cut the pork out of the Pentagon and could not be labeled as "weak on Security".

lemme know!

[Crazy Guggenheim]

48. I understand the whole thing about National Security, etc. However,

it would be wonderful to see what he would do as the head of a state. Also, let me take a look at the Arkansas officials.

[Totally Committed]

54. Where's Jai?

She made a great post on another thread about Gen. Clark's experience as a "Governor". She does it best, so I won't even paraphrase.

I'll see if I can find it and link it here or something.

Stay right where you are Crazy... BRB.

TC

[Totally Committed]

55. Okay, here's Jai's post from the other thread, and the follow-up...

Someone asked that very question, and here is how she answered:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2226350&mesg_id=2228217

I seriously was not aware a General/NATO Commander worked with legislatures on a domestic agenda for the United States.

I assume you mean a domestic agenda for a single state?

A NATO Commander works directly with Congress for an agenda to support all of the Americans living within within his region, which in Clark's case was some 160,000 families spread out over 90+ foreign nations. That support includes health care, education and child care, housing, and a whole host of other quality of life issues, none significantly different from what a governor does except the NATO commander hasn't got the private sector taking care of much of those responsibilities. For example, how many governors are responsible for a large chain of what are essentially grocery stores (commissaries) and shopping malls (post and base exchanges)?

He did the same thing as commander of US Southern Command. Consider it comparable to having had two terms as "governor."

A post commander works with a state legislature for many of the same things, plus environmental law and regulation. Clark did that too, at Ft Irwin CA. Somewhat akin to being the mayor of a very large city.


And, it was followed by this post:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2226350&mesg_id=2228312

And he talked about this experience, at length, during the primaries... mostly in his Town Halls, but Jai is right. His experience is equal to having been a governor two or three times. Since he also was one of the main negotiators and signitaries of the Dayton accords, he has also technically, had experience as a State Department diplomat.

So, his record in both foreign and domestic experience is extensive.

TC

[Crazy Guggenheim]

56. Very interesting ........

[Totally Committed]

57. Very Interesting, Good? or...

Very interesting, not? Just wondering. :)

TC

[Crazy Guggenheim]

58. Good.

[FrenchieCat]

65. Here's Clark testifying in Congress back in 2001.....

Clark's testimony before a House subcommittee on education reform, from back in 2001, a little over a year after he retired and well before he was considering any sort of political career.
***************
Impact Aid: Making the Commitment to our Military Family

Hearing before the Subcommittee on Education Reform
Committee on Education and the Workforce
United States House of Representatives
November 8, 2001

General Wesley K. Clark
United States Army, Retired

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee.

Thank you for inviting me to testify today on the critically important subject of impact aid and the education of the young people in the military family. Let me commend you for holding this hearing, and for your willingness to address this issue.

Put simply, the quality of youth education remains a key factor in the retention and recruitment of personnel in the Armed Forces. Beyond mere expedience, our nation must assure that the children of its Armed Forces personnel are provided a top quality education. The United States' military force is highly educated and its members hold the same expectations for their children's education. More of our men and women are basing their decisions to enter or leave the military on perceptions of the quality of education their children will receive. It is significant that as the ranks of our Armed Services have fallen, funding for impact aid has fallen short of the level needed by our children's schools. If we want strong, educated, committed men and women in our Armed Services, then we must provide for their families well being.

Currently, there are approximately a half million military dependants who attend school in districts surrounding military bases. Less than 15% of military children are in DoD schools; the rest attend public and private schools off-post. In my home state of Arkansas, in the vicinity of Little Rock Air Force Base, there are approximately 2500 students who attend school off post. The three school districts are eligible to receive assistance under the federal impact aid program. However, the impact aid program is funded nationally at only around the 60% level. What does this mean for Little Rock? This means that the three school districts in Little Rock bear a great burden in meeting the educational requirements of each child, both military and civilian. Currently, the three districts receive $575,000 in federal impact aid. If the program were fully funded, the school districts would receive somewhere around $3.8 million.

This significant shortfall translates into a decrease in the number and quality of academic and extracurricular programs the schools can provide to its military and civilian children. It also means a decrease in armed forces retention and recruitment, which is cause for great concern. We do not want to see our military children losing out on the quality education they deserve and their parents expect. Impact aid was designed to reimburse public school districts the full cost of educating the military child attending public or private school off post. In 1950, the Congress recognized that the loss of traditional revenue sources like property and personal income taxes negatively impacted the local school districts. Traditionally these types of taxes have accounted for a significant portion of the local school district's annual budget. However, military students can negatively impact the district's financial resources because their parents do not pay such things as income taxes, license fees, and property taxes. While the nominal cost of educating one student varies from district to district across the United States, one thing remains clear, the federal government must do more to fund the education of our military children. The federal government must live up to its promise to care for its military family by fully funding the impact aid program. If we want to retain and recruit the best men and women, we must provide for their families and this means making an extra effort.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, while much has been done in recent years to strengthen accountability and decentralize responsibility and authority in the DoD school system, off-post schools remain beyond the control of the military and DoD leadership. However well-meaning the off post school leadership and staff may be, these schools face particular challenges as I observed in my assignments at Ft. Irwin, Ft. Carson, CO and Ft. Hood, TX. Such schools tend to suffer from restricted funding and higher than average per pupil cost due to the turnover of students associated with military reassignments. In normal communities, the public schools draw on a diverse tax base and enjoy a relatively stable student population. This stability reduces school stress, disciplinary problems, and the general frictions that are inevitable at the beginning of each school year. Civilian schools with substantial population of military families often suffer from reduced tax base as well as extraordinarily high turn over of students even during the school year.

Federal impact aid was created to address these problems. It is a matter of money but it is not a hand out. These additional resources are very much needed. The federal government impacts school districts and our government should do its part. I know that the Committee has worked hard on behalf of our military family to provide the best possible education for our children. This is an important issue to me and I commend the Committee for it.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. I would
be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

[Crazy Guggenheim]

66. Thanks.

[tritsofme]

61. Who would want to elect someone that only plans to stay for 2 years

and will spend both of those years campaigning for another office?

[wisteria]

67. You know that's not a bad idea. Why doesn't he try to run for

Governor or even a US Senator.

[FrenchieCat]

68. From what state?

His?

Let's see.....2 Democratic Senators already there, both who endorsed Clark in his '04 run.

Clark endorsed Beebe and has supported his run for Governor for some time now.

Should he carpetbag?

Have you read this tread, or just the OP. Cause your question is answered within the body of the thread a few times. :hi: