Kerry Calls on Clark to Disclose Sources of Special Interest Compensation

[kerryistheanswer]

h one of his rivals for the Democratic nomination telling voters that in a democracy “we have a right to know, and we want to know,” John Kerry today called for total disclosure of the sources of the special interest compensation received for speaking appearances.

“I hope my opponent will tell the voters which special interests were lining his pockets with cash, so that the voters can decide who this candidate really represents,” said John Kerry.

Wesley Clark has become extremely wealthy since leaving the Army, and the public has a right to know what is the source of that income. The Associated Press this week reported that Clark earned more that $1 million in speaking and consulting fees since retiring from the military.

Clark’s financial disclosure reports lists speaking fees of $1,410,580 from “Greater Talent Network, Inc.” of New York. Greater Talent is Clark’s speaker’s bureau. Clark does not disclose the original sources of these speakers’ fees. This lack of full disclosure comes on top of Clark’s problems at the beginning of his campaign when – in addition to failing to register as a Democrat and unregister as a lobbyist—in became clear he was getting paid $30,000 a speech after joining the race, and criticism from experts forced him to end the practice

“Voters should and do expect more from those seeking public office, even those seeking it for the first time,” said Kerry.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0110b.html

[Eloriel]

1. or even

esp. those seeking it for the first time.

Eloriel

[bearfartinthewoods]

11. is this tied into his lobbying?

[pasadenaboy]

2. typical bashing

[kerryistheanswer]

4. cheap shot

it's quite easy to play monday morning quarterback after the fact. both clark and dean have been all over the place on how they would have voted if in congress. unlike lieberman and gephardt, kerry has been particularly critical of the bush plan since the beginning.

[w13rd0]

5. I wish he would have asked for as much info as well...

...but that doesn't lessen the responsibility of Democratic caucus and primary participants of asking "for as much info" from a man who just joined the Democratic party and is running for the Democratic nomination. Failure on the one hand (questioning Bush), does not render the validity of the questions moot on the other hand (questioning Clark). In that sense, can it really be called bashing? It could be called "opportunist". It could be called "playing 'meaner' with Democratic opponents than with Bush", much as many criticize Lieberman of doing. But "bashing"?

[seventhson]

3. seems like Kerry is pulling back and joining

the dems to protect us all from Clark and his MIC repub backers.

I think someone told him he was burning his bridges by dissing Dean

I like Kerry better than Clark, not by a whole lot - but still this is a good development

[ozone_man]

86. Bingo, at least I hope you're right.

No liberal in their right mind would want to see Clark get in, and I think Kerry is a liberal.

On edit: That and also Kerry is looking at NH and probably seeing Clark as an obstacle close to the size of Dean that needs to be taken out. But, one would hope that in the end, if he can't win, he will come down on the side of supporting the liberal cause.

[mouse7]

6. Naaaaw... Kerry doesn't attack people that haven't attacked him

He's just "delineating differences" by saying "special interests were lining his pockets with cash."

Karl Rove wishes Sen. Kerry well and is paying careful attention to everything he says and want us all to know we'll be hearing these words again... and again.... and again.

[kerryistheanswer]

7. um....no

Kerry has NEVER accepted PAC money. WHy are you so against Clark revealing his financial sources? What are you afraid of?

[slinkerwink]

9. I also want Clark to reveal his financial sources---he IS a lobbyist.....

[mouse7]

10. I'm against Kerry handing Rove quotes for Bush commercials

These statements of Kerry's are completely irresponsible. There are ways to word things that can request the same information without damning a Party member.

I also don't wanna hear Kerry never recieved PAC money again. Kerry recieved 700 million dollars of Republican Heinz ketchup PAC money into his LIFE. I have a problem with the influence the 700 million dollars fortune of a former Republican US senator buys.

Kerry has CHANGED since he married into the Heinz family, and it not been good change.

[slinkerwink]

15. but you aren't against Lieberman, et al, handing Rove quotes

for Bush commercials against Dean?

[mouse7]

19. Then you haven't been paying attention

http://www.caglecartoons.com/images/preview/{3D1B5D8B-CAD6-49B5-BFA5-CBF632AF4028}.gif

[isbister]

8. Disclose Sources of Special Interest Compensation

All of the candidates should be honest about their past.

If there's something to hide, get it out in the open and get it out of he way... you can be sure that the republican machine will turn these things up if they get a chance and we don't need to give them any fodder for the general election.

[mouse7]

12. Yes, lets be honest about Kerry marrying GOP HEINZ fortune

Let's talk about the influence that 700 million dollar of money from one of the most anti-union family corporations in America can have. Let's talk about the Kerry connections to the Neo-Con John Heinz fortune.

[isbister]

16. Re: Yes, lets be honest about Kerry

Kerry had a decent amount of money before he got remarried some of it from what his mother left when she died.

Kerry has not kept his wife hidden away. He's been quite open about who his wife is.

Are you trying to suggest he has hidden his wife or who she is? Then by all means talk away.

[mouse7]

18. No, he's been quite open about the potential for corruption

It's a consistant theme in politics that sometimes thing are best hidden in plain view.

Kerry's marriage into a GOP dynasty is the elephant in the room nobody is talking about.

[isbister]

26. Re: nobody is talking about

And nobody is talking about it because John Kerry has continued to stand up for the people. He and his wife could easily go turn republican and retire somewhere but they don't, the spend their time and energy trying to make a better America, a better world.

Only Kucinich has a record that is further left than Kerry's, his actions and his words are not those of a republican. It really is silly to suggest his wife's dead ex-husband is somehow running Kerry's life from the grave. In fact, won't it be nice when they get a chance to use some of that money to trounce bush and his hundreds of millions :-)

[mouse7]

30. Either money IS or IS NOT corrupting

If money has a corrupting influence, then John Kerry has more to explain than any candidate in the field when he married into a GOP dynasty.

If Kerry supposedly cannot be corrupted by by the influence of money, then neither can the other 8 good Democratic men and women who are running for the Presidency, and he needs to shut up about the issue.

If Kerry is to dare to challenge another Dem about the influence of special interests, Kerry has 700 million more potential reasons to be guilty than other candudate in the field.

[isbister]

43. Re: Either money IS or IS NOT corrupting

Was the question the money or hiding where it came from?

[mouse7]

57. If money doesn't corrupt, nobody cares where it comes from

The basis of your argument of wanting to see where the money comes from is that it is a corrupting influence.

[slinkerwink]

63. it's definitely hiding where it came from

and this is how we know whether Clark is driven by special interests.

[JI7]

29. well, lets talk about it then

in fact, i will start a thread on it myself.

[mouse7]

33. No... we can talk about it right here. n/t

[sandnsea]

22. Teresa's hidden away?

I know you know how hard I'm laughing. The thought, Teresa hidden away...rotflmo

[mouse7]

28. Read #18 n/t

[Clark Can WIN]

85. How did this naughty Clark thread turn into a

Naughty Kerry's wife thread? :silly:

[JI7]

20. senator john heinz was a neo-con ?

?

[sandnsea]

23. Tell me tell me

Ignore is wonderful but once in a while... John Heinz a neo-con? I must hear this.

[mouse7]

31. Heinz Foods was ferociously anti-union corporation

Go read the history of the way attempts for unions to organize Heinz Foods was treated.

[eileen from OH]

13. it just looks so bloody OBVIOUS

Go after Dean. Hmmm, can't catch, Dean. Okay, second place is okay. Yeah, yeah, second, that's the ticket.

WAIT A MINUTE, WTF?????

Go after Clark.

Rinse, repeat.

I wish like hell one of these guys would go after Lieberman. Yeah, yeah, I know he's not a threat. (I'd just enjoy it, okay?)

eileen from OH

[quaker bill]

53. You have a point.

And on the other hand they might as well go after Lieberman. Saddam was no threat and they went after him...

[RafterMan]

14. The first part

...is an eminently fair request.

The second part, which tries to make a big stink of his prearranged speech at DePauw (so secret it's still available at C-SPAN) is ridiculous.

[mouse7]

17. But you word the request differently

Kerry knows better than to leave quotes hanging out in the air like "I hope my opponent will tell the voters which special interests were lining his pockets with cash." If Clark were to win the nomination, that quote will be used against Clark.

Kerry should have said something like, "We would like the Clark campaign to provide further detail on the speakers fees received from "Greater Talent Network, Inc." The current disclosure doesn't provide details on the specific events in which Clark received speakers fees."

It's the exact same request. Mine cannot be spiced into a neo-con commercial by Karl Rove. Kerry's will be. Over and over and over and over...

[RafterMan]

21. Yes

The tone is completely over the top.

But I also feel Clark should release the details.

[Dookus]

24. agree

the tone is out of line. The request is fair - Clark should release it, and I believe he will.

The request, though, is phrased as though there's something untoward being hidden. That's unfair.

But at least Clark won't turn it over to a judge to decide. He'll decide himself.

[sandnsea]

25. I'm sure Clark will put all this out

And it is important we get all this out before we decide who is going to go up against Bush. It's kind of too bad Kerry always has to be the one to get things out in the open. Maybe that's what being a real leader means. Everybody knows they have to pay attention when he speaks.

[JI7]

27. the earlier the better

people seem to be more accepting or forgiving of things they don't approve of as time goes by. that's why getting it all out in the open early is good. i

[slinkerwink]

35. I think that Kerry has every right to call Clark on his BS

[Dookus]

37. What BS?

Are you REALLY going to say that Clark's private activities should be MORE accessible than Dean's public records as governor?

[Dookus]

38. I guess you're not

gonna say that. Good for you, because it would be indefensible.

[TLM]

42. Dean made public who gave him speaking fees...

that's part of the majority of his records which are public.

The rest are sealed, however Dean has turned them over to a judge for review.

All the Clark folks hounding this issue of Dean's records, suddenly now are saying that Clark should not have to disclose who gave him over a million bucks prior to his rather sudden conversion to the democratic party and decision to run for president?


I guess there's just another set of rules for Clark.

:wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:

[xultar]

70. I know someone who knows what is in those sealed records in VT

They will fight to have them outted if Dean wins the nomination.

[Clark Can WIN]

84. I would rather they didn't wait n't

[Dookus]

75. No...

but nobody's explained to me why Clark's private business MUST be released NOW, while Dean's PUBLIC business can be hidden until well after the primaries.

Explain that twist of logic and I'll bake you cookies.

[mouse7]

36. And maybe that's was being out of control means

The Kerry quote was OUT OF CONTROL.

Leadership might mean phrasing the request as my sample request did. Kerry practically insinuated Clark took bribes. That's more of a gaffe than what Dean's been doing. However, since Kerry is so vicious, so often, to so many people, I think it possibly demonstrates the real person beneath the rhetoric.

[Mattforclark]

32. Kennedy Library in Boston, Universities = special interests?

He was doing the Uni speaking tour and talked at a bunch of colleges and universities around everywhere.

"Clark’s financial disclosure reports lists speaking fees of $1,410,580 from “Greater Talent Network, Inc.” of New York. Greater Talent is Clark’s speaker’s bureau"

One of those places that Clark spoke at was the University of Iowa. I guess that's a special interest.

http://www.uiowa.edu/~ournews/2003/september/090803clark.html

And here he is talking at the Kennedy Library at the University of Massechusetts, Boston during the war in Afghanistan. He talks about JFK, Afghanistan, renewable energy, and a whole host of other topics. You can listen to his speech at http://www.wbur.org/special/specialcoverage/archive_121301.asp and see for yourself

I am sure the Kerry campaign can use google as well as me though.

Personally I would love to have a President who is beholden to the special interests called Universities. That might mean that the President would be intelligent, and intellectually curious. That sounds great to me.

[KittyWampus]

71. Hopefully Clark'll Release Info With A Gentle Smackdown Included

:)

[tedoll78]

34. Kerry needs something.. and quick..

to stop the bleeding in NH. If Kerry eclipses Gephardt in Iowa (even if it is with some backhanded help from Dean voters), Dean won't be the only one getting a boost going into New Hampshire.

[TLM]

39. Why does Clark get some special treatment from his supporters?

Clark was a f-ing lobbyist with ties to some of the most dispicable neo-con repuke assholes in the country from carlucci to kissinger.

Why shouldn't he have to disclose where his money is coming from?

Why the double standard from Clark supporters?

Kerry annoys me but he's right on this one... Clark seems to be gettign a pass on everything.

Dean disclosed the sources of his speaking fees... and those totals were nowhere near $1,410,580 so why shouldn't clark do the same?

[Dookus]

40. calm down....

Clark hasn't said he won't release this information.

But if you think Clark's private income information should be public, but Dean's public information should be private, then you're being blinded by allegiance to one man.

[TLM]

41. But he has not said he will and has not made it public yet...

funny how all the Clark folks who have been screaming for Dean to make his records public... suddenly change their tune when it is Clark's records being kept secret.

Clearly Clark is hiding something.

Why is Clark hiding the source of his income?

[mouse7]

45. Kerry's quote just hit the news cycle. Clark needs through Monday.

You can't expect Clark to get anything out till the end of the first following business day. The people that need to generate the info aren't in their NY office.

[slinkerwink]

48. Dean's people work through weekends also....

and what if Clark doesn't answer this by Monday? What then?

[mouse7]

50. If I was in charge, we'd all have estates

If Clark can't get his agent's office in NY to produce the figures Monday, then Clark has a problem.

[slinkerwink]

56. I'd say so.

[Clark Can WIN]

83. Of course you would

But where are your cries for Deans PUBLIC records?

When people defend, over and over ad nauseam Deans actions in keeping his PUBLIC records PRIVATE........... and then turn around and whine that Clark's PRIVATE records are not yet PUBLIC, some may see that as hypocritical. Some will perceive hypocrisy from the other side of the fence according to their predispositions. So we are at an impasse.

[LuminousX]

64. First rule of campaigning...

the head office need to be staffed 24/7. Ever see The War Room?

[jumptheshadow]

44. This Clark supporter says he should disclose that information

And for the same reason why Howard Dean should have unsealed his records: We need to know what we're getting if we vote for somebody for the nomination.

[maddezmom]

46. This Clark suppporter thinks he should release the info

for the reason you stated. We should know who we are voting for, warts and all.

[slinkerwink]

47. those are clark's speaking fees----Dean already made public

his speaking fees, and you guys jumped on him for it :shrug:

[maddezmom]

49. didn't jump

just want to know what's in the package?

<<But in a 1993 letter to Dean, Primmer wrote that two insurers were sending a gift to the governor, described only as a "package," after Dean met with them to discuss the bill that would provide new tax breaks. Dean signed that bill into law later that year. >>


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2004/01/09/politics1546EST0686.DTL&type=printable

[slinkerwink]

51. so? it's a package---my congressman gets packages all the time

such as candies, etc.

[maddezmom]

52. box of chocolates

:)

[slinkerwink]

54. I'm saying we shouldn't come to conclusions to a package

but yes, we should call Clark's hiding who paid him in speaking fees out into the open. At least Dean publicly disclosed his speaking fees!

[jumptheshadow]

69. Looking at Vermont nuke reports is far more important

Than looking at who paid whom for speeches.

It is a critical security issue. Dean must find a way to disclose before we vote. He must.

[quaker bill]

55. It seems John has finally figured out

That Clark is the true threat to his winning the race.

Clark is the only candidate who claims the ex-military, 'strong on defense', foriegn relations experience vote.

Kerry came out early adn often for the Censure of Clinton. If the Clinton wing wanted to run an anti-Kerry candidate, they could not have done better than Clark.

Looks like John has finally figured it out.

[slinkerwink]

58. I say it's about damn time.

[Padraig18]

59. Yep, someone handed Sen. Kerry a clue.

Seems as though Sen. Kerry finally figured it out. :think:

[slinkerwink]

60. this should've been done a week ago

[Clark Can WIN]

88. Kerry's been circling the drain for some time now

He just hasn't known it. Just hasn't worked out for him. I can't blame the guy for being a little desperate. I think he's a good guy who honestly only wants the best. I think he would make a fine president and I also notice, we haven't concluded a single (binding) primary yet. He still has the same chance as everyone else in the race.

I also happen to agree with him on this for two reasons.
1. We should know
2. It'll come out anyway

But they are not my private records. Obviously only the General can make this decision.

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

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

[slinkerwink]

62. oh yeah? what if clark doesn't? what will you say?

[SahaleArm]

65. Then you can call Clark supporters hypocrites - like Dean supporters n/t

[LuminousX]

66. Deflection instead of response

not that Clark supporters have a hotline phone to their candidate, it would be nice to see the response: Yes, Clark should make this information available and if he doesn't, it will be dissappointing.

Nope, instead the response is a panicked "Dean is a hypocrit" even though Dean isn't the one who brought this point up.

[slinkerwink]

68. exactly! it was kerry that brought it up, but us Dean supporters are

getting attacked for it as usual......

[SahaleArm]

78. When self-pity becomes a campaign formula...

That's too funny because it's like flies on sh*t with Dean supporters in this forum. And now you're claiming you've been attacked? LOL.

[KittyWampus]

72. Have You Read The Thread... Clark Supporters DO Want Info

but accurately pointing out that the speeches were done by a private citizen and that it doesn't compare with Dean's issues is valid as is pointing out hypocracy.

[Padraig18]

76. When all else fails...

... attack Dean. It will assure a Pavlov-like response every time.

[SahaleArm]

79. Public documents should be given priority and released...

Thanks for agreeing; and if you read the message I expect Clark to release his private information.

[kerryistheanswer]

67. Kerry's 35 years in public service = open record

Kerry's record and funding are open for all to see. Both Clark and Dean have skeletons that the public ought to know about. Isn't it about time that both campaigns reveal them?

[KittyWampus]

73. Skeleton? That's A Bit Of A Stretch. We're Talking About Speeches

to Universities.

[SahaleArm]

80. Kerry's internal memos are sealed ex-officio...

He's still an acting Senator; the only thing that's open book is his voting record.

[Padraig18]

82. You are correct.

The blatant hypocrisy on this 'sealed records' business is enough to make any RATIONAL, LOGICAL person :puke:.

[Jerseycoa]

74. Basically okay with this

A bit disappointed the question wasn't more respectfully asked, but what do you do? It's a fair question. Clark has spoken for transparency so I expect the answer will be forthcoming.

[Fleshdancer]

77. It's only fair

I want Dean's records open so naturally I would want Clark's records open too.

[stickdog]

81. Why is General Clark sealing his records?

Isn't he for openness and tranparency?

[mzmolly]

87. The Clark/Kerry *lovefest* is officially over....

:hi: This is just the beginning folks, just the beginning.

[mike_c]

89. I suspect the majority of those are Republican speaking...

...engagements-- not the sort of thing Clark wants public!

[Lefta Dissenter]

90. Unbelievable!

Shame on Kerry. Unless he has already ASKED Clark to give more information on the speeches that were arranged and paid for through an agent, then he was pretty slimey in insinuating that Clark was trying to hide something.

Who had the McDonald's answer earlier - or was that on a dupe thread? I'm going to revise that a bit by making it a catering service. Say I work for a caterer - Fred's Food. Someone asks me to provide financial information. So I say that I've earned $10,000 from Fred's Food.

But then someone publicly accuses me of HIDING something, because I didn't 'reveal' that in actuality, the money originated from Joe Schmo and Martha Mulberry, who were among the people who hired Fred's Food to provide their party buffets.

Clark listed the speeches that he gave directly, without working through an agency. He arranges the speaking engagement, he receives a check directly from ABC University, where he spoke. However, when the speeches are scheduled through, arranged by, and paid for by an agency, the checks to Clark are cut by the agency, NOT the institution who wanted him to speak there... He's not 'hiding' a frickin' thing!

I have no doubt that now that he realizes that there's a question, he'll be more than happy to provide that information. But for Kerry, and now many other people, including Dean Supporters, to be creating this fantasy that Clark is HIDING something... That's just WRONG.

No, I'm not slamming Dean supporters for raising a question, I'm angry because some people are grasping at straws, trying to create the implication that Clark is being dishonest because he didn't somehow magically know to offer the information preemptively.

THIS is the nastiness that is splitting the party.

[maddezmom]

91. the LINK is broken?

did this get removed or is there a glitch?

[ReynoldsWrap]

92. It definately looks like it was removed...

Theres nothing about it listed anywhere on their site or in their press releases. Maybe they realized such an inflamatory release wasn't in anyones best interest and they'll be looking for another way to bring it up in a more tactful way? Like maybe asking Clark to fill in the details in a way that doesn't make Kerry sound like he's accusing Clark of anything? Lets hope.

I'm a Clark supporter. I'd like to know where he spoke. I don't think it'll change my opinion very much, but I'm curious nonetheless. I'm hearing a lot of silly stuff about Clark trying to "seal" these records, but its nothing like that at all, as others have said. He has been asked to provide more detail, and I imagine in due time he will.

It might take a couple days, and I think some of you (who will remain nameless) are completely jumping over the line and trying to damn him for hiding something. He hasn't even had a chance to respond yet! If he comes out and says "I refuse to make this information public." or ignores it for a fair amount of time, THEN you can get upset. To jump the gun and accuse him of something in the short amount of time since Kerry's release makes you look petty.

If I was Clark, I'd want the information to be compiled by the agency. Otherwise the details will be sketchy or lacking (since I imagine the agency itself keeping better track of this information than Clark himself...since afterall, its their business). I'd have someone at the agency on monday morning start compiling a list of dates, times, locations of the speeches, and how much money I made at each one. Once that information was out, I'd happily release it.

He's a retired 4-Star General that has led an extraordinary military career. A lot of people want to hear what he has to say. This will include a lot of people that you and I might not think fondly of...but hey, if a bunch of rich republicans want to pay you tens of thousands of dollars to stand up and talk for a little bit...who are you to turn them down?

And just because, potentially, Clark spoke before these types of people, doesn't mean he likes them or agrees with their ideology. I do work every day for a LOT of people I don't particularly like. It doesn't make me "one of them".

[oasis]

93. kick