Westley Clark is the one

[DianeG5385]

Who can defeat Bush. I just hope he's a Democrat. He has the credibility and the foreign policy experience and the smarts(unlike the current occupier)to be President. He is clearly a capable man and most importantly, it appears he is beholden to no one!

[RichM]

1. Doesn't it occur to anyone how silly it is to be making worshipful noises

about Clark, before even knowing if he's a Democrat or not? (Not to mention that no one really knows where he stands on a wide range of issues, even if it turns out he IS a Democrat) :eyes:

Beyond that, do we really want to be putting generals in office? I thought it was understood that US militarism is a dangerous sickness. You don't usually cure militarism & insane addiction to military spending by putting generals in office. :eyes::eyes:

PS - his first name is "Wesley."

[Kahuna]

4. Why would you of all people care if he's ...

a democrat or not. I thought you were a Green.

[RichM]

7. No, not a Green.

But I hate Republicans as much as anyone alive.

FWIW, I'm a socialist (though registered as a Democrat).

[Kahuna]

14. Please cite for us an example, without going back to the Civil War..

of how electing a general has been a bad thing for the country. Please cite for us how presidents who were generals have abused their military connections.

The only two experiences that come to my memory was Eisenhower who cautioned against the military industrial complex. And, Colin Powell was a dove until he was taken out to the woodshed. So, instead of ad hominem attacks maybe you can cite some specific reasons.

Please also be reminded. Clark was against the war with Iraq. So, how are you justified to brand him as some kind of war mongerer?

[Tinoire]

31. My Lai Powell?! Aw C'mon!

Surely you don't believe he was a Dove!

The writing about Powell was on the wall for all to see. Unfortunately all that tacky brass on his shoulders and war hero garbage blinded people so much they refused to read it.

Only a snake can lie with snakes and Powell was a snake from the beginning.

Colin Powell, at a press briefing shortly after the conclusion of the 1991 Gulf War when asked his assessment of the number of Iraqi soldiers and civilians killed: "It's really not a number I'm terribly interested in." You call that a Dove?

[wellstone_democrat]

54. I don't but I'm confused by

the constant (including this a.m.) insistance by some on DU that Powell is secretly "with us" and only waiting for his moment or something. The idea I saw on some thread this a.m. that the leak about October discrediting of the Niger document is a case in point: many thought it must be Condi Rice or Colin Powell!

Where does that come from? He's in this up to his neck and always has been, he's raised a child who believes in neo con economic principles that look like it was inculcated in the cradle. Rice is the last of the cold warriors to the ends of her fingers and rabidly loyal to Bush. Her own past gives no clues that should lead anyone to think she's "leaking" anything negative on this gang of thugs.

Face it folks: As my wife says (whose the primary user of this account and away at the moment): Powell and Rice are NOT being held hostage and just waiting for their "moment." Look at their careers, they have waited all their lives for this

Mr. W_D

[Kahuna]

61. I never believed that Powell was an honorable person..

and that's not what I said. I said that Powell was the dove of this administration. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe Powell was just "acting" again. We'll probably never know.

The point is, Powell is not the president. The examples I asked for was presidents who were former generals. I should have never cited Powell since he has never been a president.

To get back on point, let's discuss presidents who were former generals. Any examples?

[Tinoire]

74. Thank you for that clarification

I was simply surprised to see your statement that "Colin Powell was a dove until he was taken out to the woodshed". As a military vet, I assure you that he was a hawk even back in the woodshed but you couldn't convince people of that because they were convinced that simply because the man had no declared positions on anything, no political track record to check, and spoke well- that he was a Dove.

You can find hundreds of examples of this in the DU archives. If you recall, there was a time when Dems wanted Powell to run on the Democratic ticket!

I fear Clark would be the same. Well spoken, bright but a hawk willing to say whatever we want to hear to get the nomination.

You'll have to forgive me for my reluctance to jump on the Clark bandwagon. I'm more interested in seeing the establishment of Kucinich's "Department of Peace" and backing a candidate whose record I can check. These times are too dangerous for unknowns.

[wellstone_democrat]

93. I was keying off what Tinoire is also seeing below

the general statement was not simply that you saw him as a "dove" until he was reined in by the WH (o0r taken to the woodshed) but that this is a general sort of attitude toward Powell (in particular) and Rice (very secondarily) on DU. Some belief in their moderate or even vaguely liberal impulses. A belief held by some in recent threads that somehow they are in this administration to constrain the nuttier neo con impulses.

If they are, I've yet to see one iota of evidence in 3 years. And, my complaint was not directed at you specifically, but at this insistance on seeing Powell as less committed to the WH agenda than the rest of them.

As for generals as president? Look at George Washington. He heartily believed in a civilian president, turned down the chance after the Rev to be dictator (as some of his officers tried to offer), turned down a third term and, when he faced the Whiskey Rebels in Penna, he struck just the right symbolic note: he led the militia troops out of the capital so the surrounding countryside would see the will of the government not to suffer counter-revolutions but pealed off from the column long before they arrived so that the President would not lead troops against Americans. Others can defend Eisenhower or Grant or Jackson if they wish but Washington, long ignored in these debates, does provide an admirable example of transition from military general to civilian president.
Oh, BTW, he didn't jackass around calling himself the C-in-C either. Guess when you earn something you don't have to keep announcing it, eh?

Mr. W_D with vast imput from the expert on the road at the moment, Dr. W_D (my vastly better half)

[DianeG5385]

5. Thank you for the correction.

It certainly changes the impact of my comments. I want someone in-the-know on the inside with credibility to help bring the current admin. down. Knowing how to spell his name will make all the difference! It's silly, but a little thing such as this can make the difference as to whether your candidate makes the grade!

[Tinoire]

11. It's boggled my mind from the beginning

Reminds me of the lovefest a bunch of Democrats. to include DUers, had with Powell.

What ever happened to voting on issues?! I can tell you, after 20 years in the military, that the chances of making General without being a die-hard ball-playing Republican are slim to none.

This sounds more like an insidious coup from the military industrial complex than anything else- with both Democrats and Republicans on board.

Sorry to piss on the Clark (D/R) parade!

Edited to remove false information. Thank you Rog.

[Kahuna]

15. If you don't like Clark, don't vote for him...

You're entitled to your opinion. We want someone who can win, who we know is very liberal and progressive, and who may be the person with the courage to hold the bushies accountable

[Tinoire]

18. Where are you getting that he is liberal and progressive?

Saying it's so don't make it so. Please provide some documentation.

Edited to remove false reference.

[Kahuna]

26. I'm not going to provide you with anything...

I don't care who you vote for. Don't vote for Clark if he runs. There will be many others who will be delighted to vote for him.

[rasputin1952]

45. Let's be realistic for a moment...

an individual can be liberal and progressive without taking every point that libs/progress' have, to heart.

I consider myself liberal and progressive, but I am not in favor of any group getting 'special' or 'enhanced' rights. I feel that everyone is born equal, therefore, everyone is is equal under the law.

I am not a racist, but I do not believe that reparations for slavery are a viable option at this point. Perhaps, when there were former slaves alive, I would consider this, but the point is moot at this time. Rather than being a decisive issue, it is a divisive one, and I would vote against it.

I hate war; but if my country were attacked, I would be among the first to defend it. I served my time in the Army, under several MOS's,
and am capable of fending of a determined enemy for some time. For me, war must be justified, not a junket in a foreign country to gain wealth or advance a sense of power.

My point is, not every liberal/prog issue is relevant to each individual. Gay rights might be to some, for me it is not; gays have as much right to privacy as I do, I see no problem.

Clark may well feel the same way, it is his right. Just because he does not carry the flag for certain issues, surely does no mean he is against them, he just has other priorities.

edited for poor spelling.

[Tinoire]

52. Look Rasputin

I served my time in military also. 20 years in one MOS and having seen more shit than I care to talk about or even remember.

Your point is valid. All I'm asking for his a little more than a statement about Clark's liberal and progressive beliefs. This is a discussion board and people making such statements should be prepared to back them up.

[Kahuna]

57. Some folks are so "progressive," they..

don't eveb believe we should have an army at all. :eyes:

[Tinoire]

75. How do you know what "some folks" believe?

As a retired vet I REALLY resent that statement. You have no idea what people believe! That was really a presumptuous statement.

[Kahuna]

82. Well, it's like this...

When people tell me what they think, then I KNOW what they think. Does that sound far out to you? Really? I find that hard to believe that you don't believe that anybody ever tells me what they think and that I don't have a *right* to know what people think. :crazy:

Further, do you think that because you're a retired vet that entitles you to rights that I should not have???? :crazy: Otherwise, why did you mention it?

[Tinoire]

87. This is too funny!

Fist you come here saying Clark is a "liberal and a progressive" on a discussion board but refuse to provide any proof, rudely addressing enquiring posters as you go.

Then you presume to know what "some people" think without having the courtesy of asking them what they think and making a fool of yourself pretending that they told you what they think (please show your proof that "Some folks are so "progressive," they.. don't eveb believe we should have an army at all" - this could be amusing).

Then you make a nonesensical post about the whole thing.

I hope Clark has better guns than this in his Division!

Then you

[Kahuna]

91. Too sad..

You didn't even get it. :crazy:

[Tinoire]

92. Too funny

I've got 2 other DUers who just called me about this thread on the phone and they're both laughing their heads off. Must be our warped progressive sense of humor!

[Forkboy]

94. If I knew your number

I'd be calling and laughing about it to :D

[Tinoire]

96. Just got a third call a few minutes ago!

We'll just pretend you have my number and make you the 'honorary' fourth caller ;)

Peace :hi:

[DianeG5385]

103. I'm wondering why I don't have your number

and why the thought of Clark as a candidate has created an issue. Based on what I have heard from all of the other candidates the guy just struck a chord with me. I realize he's undeclared, but i hope he runs.

[Tinoire]

104. lol DianeG5385

On edit: Just realized something and want to clarify. The calls were not about you nor was anyone laughing at you or your posts! Yours were sincere and made sense!

-----

One of these days! You sound like an intelligent, thinking person and in no way would I fault you because Clark struck a chord with you. Just keep looking at them all because this next election is going to be critical for America.

Maybe Clark would be a good choice- I have no idea because he hasn't been debating with the other candidates and hasn't declared his position on the issues.

I have reservations because you don't make it to his rank being a liberal or progressive.

Just now, as I was typing this, I found this article which brought back horrible military memories of that OPFOR exercise they bring up.

http://www.counterpunch.org/clark.html

and also this in the British Papers:

No sooner are we told by Britain's top generals that the Russians played a crucial role in ending the west's war against Yugoslavia than we learn that if Nato's supreme commander, the American General Wesley Clark, had had his way, British paratroopers would have stormed Pristina airport threatening to unleash the most frightening crisis with Moscow since the end of the cold war.

"I'm not going to start the third world war for you," General Sir Mike Jackson, commander of the international K-For peacekeeping force, is reported to have told Gen Clark when he refused to accept an order to send assault troops to prevent Russian troops from taking over the airfield of Kosovo's provincial capital.

<snip>
The Russians had made a political point, not a military one. It was apparently too much for Clark. According to the US magazine, Newsweek, General Clark ordered an airborne assault on the airfield by British and French paratroopers. General Jackson refused. Clark then asked Admiral James Ellis, the American commander of Nato's southern command, to order helicopters to occupy the airport to prevent Russian Ilyushin troop carriers from sending in reinforcements. Ellis replied that the British General Jackson would oppose such a move. In the end the Ilyushins were stopped when Washington persuaded Hungary, a new Nato member, to refuse to allow the Russian aircraft to fly over its territory.

Jackson got full support from the British government for his refusal to carry out the American general's orders. When Clark appealed to Washington, he was allegedly given the brush-off. The American is said to have complained to Jackson about the British general's refusal to accept the order to take over Pristina airfield, and Jackson's subsequent appeal to his political masters when Clark visited Kosovo on June 24.

<snip>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Kosovo/Story/0,2763,208123,00.html

I don't mean to dampen your enthusiasm and you made some valid points in your posts. It's just that having worked with these people for so long, my antennae go up and these next elections are critical for world peace, world stability and for our country. So keep your eyes open and keep looking at them all because who knows what's going to happen after these interesting primaries!

So peace and may the best man win.

[Aaron]

110. Re: 'Gay Rights'

"...not every liberal/prog issue is relevant to each individual. Gay rights might be to some, for me it is not; gays have as much right to privacy as I do, I see no problem."


I'm no expert on 'gay rights' but I'm pretty sure they involve some equal treatment regarding adoption and some manner of marriage/civil-unions so that gay people don't get turned away from visiting partners at the hospital, left out of partners' estates, and so they can have families and help kids through adoption/foster care like everyone else. Maybe something about employment, housing, and other discrimination protections as well, but like I say I'm not an expert on them by any means.

[rasputin1952]

116. Please understand...

I am no expert on a whole lot of things, but I know what I believe in, we should all be treated equally under the law, and as humans.
I am not in favor of any kind of discrimination; nor am I automatically going to support something, just because it holds the lib/prog mantle. All things need to be researched, and intelligent choices made, to merely go lockstep creates unthinking people.

I try not to judge people, but I always do. But I have learned to judge people by their character, (or lack thereof), than by other means. That may make me a better person, but I don't know. Would I let my son stay overnight at a known child molesters house, no, and neither would anyone else. Would I be ticked off, if someone did something to one of my children, you bet. But just because someone might try, from a "group", I cannot condemn all who belong to that group. If an Asian man steals my wallet, does that make all Asians thieves? If a Black man does not like me, does that mean all Black men are bad? Of course not.

I feel that I would miss out on a lot of really good people if I thought like that. Anyway....different things attract different people; if we all grew to understand that, and treated people as individuals, we would all be better off.

[Tinoire]

37. I see. No proof that he's "liberal & progressive"

other than your word? On a discussion board? :shrug:

That'll convince people!

[rog]

51. Wesley v. Robert

Forgive me, but I'm not sure what the Winchell tragedy has to do with General Wesley Clark. I'm pretty sure that Robert Clark (above) and Wesley Clark are two different guys.

Meanwhile, I'm going to be watching Clark closely. It's hard to form an opinion based on a couple of television interviews ... I've only seen his hour w/ Russert and the few minutes he was on this morning ... and I certainly have many questions about his background. Still, the recent interviews I've seen have been interesting.

I'm keeping my eyes open.

.rog.

[Tinoire]

58. Whew! Thanks

That slipped right past me! Thanks Rog.

[Pastiche423]

13. Apparently some here

don't mind appearing silly and down right gullible.

Aside from "National Security" (damn, I hate those f'ing words now) just what does Clark have to offer?

He has not declared that he is a DEMOCRAT
He has no experience in governing
He has no experience in diplomacy
He has no experience in balancing a budget
He has no experience in healthcare
He has no experience in the environment
He has no experience in the economy
He has no experience in education
He has no experience in civil rights

AND

HE HAS NOT SAID HE IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT!

[wildmanj]

29. no experience

are you sure your not talking about bush ii

[Pastiche423]

42. I am talking about Clark

Can you refute my statements w/proof?

[pa28]

34. Draft Clark!

Why is a prerequesite that a President must be "promoted" from another office? Yes, he is a retired general but he has made his own way through personal achievement and has earned everything he has. He has not compiled a record because he has been busy serving his country with distinction. That's a good thing . . . right?

[Kahuna]

72. It's good enough for me.

nt

[hlthe2b]

2. I think so too, DianeG

While I really like several of the other candidates, I really think Clark would be one formidable candidate. At the least, Kerry, Dean or Graham should try to pair up with him as their pre-announced VP choice. Yeah, I know that I don't know all of his views yet, but I've certainly heard enough to know that I agree with him on many key issues and he is a progressive.

[Tinoire]

12. What have you heard that so impressed you?

Is it the same thing that is so impressing the Republicans who are trying to draft Clark as their candidate? Or is it different things?

Frankly I'm puzzled and would appreciate any insight.

Thanks

[barbaraann]

3. Well, ummm.

if you have to say "I just hope he's a Democrat" that isn't good.

Wouldn't you like someone who is willing to fight with everything he or she had for he ideals of the Democratic Party? So many good people have died for these ideals. I want someone to carry the torch of FDR, JFK, MLK and all the other great leaders of our party high and with great pride!



:dem:

[Kahuna]

6. Questions...

What exactly does this mean??
So many good people have died for these ideals.

And are you questioning whether General Clark has been fighting for Democratic principles? He's a general, remember? He's been shot 4 times fighting for democracy. He put his life and time on the line like none of the other candidates can claim, save Kerry.

MLK was a democrat? Are you sure? The civil rights fight was a non partisan issue. Please don't do like the repukes and use a great man like MLK to make a specious argument.

I take it that you don't have a problem with Clark running as VP with YOUR candidate of choice as a Democrat. But on the top of the ticket bothers you somehow.

I think your anti-Clark spin needs a little work. :eyes:

[barbaraann]

24. Answers...

I believe that many people have died because they were a threat to the ruling elite of this country. I am NOT questioning General Clark's patriotism or bravery.

And regarding MLK, it was Lyndon Johnson who fought for the passage of the Civil Rights Bill and led the battle for the realization of King's dream. The Republican Party during my adult life has been the party of racism and division and the Democratic Party has been the party of equality and inclusion. MLK died fighting for the ideals that are carried on to this day by the Dems and today in most elections over 90% of blacks vote Democratic because of what our party has done and tried to do.

Regarding Clark as VP, I'd really like to see to a pro-peace ticket. However, what I have mainly been trying to get across is that the Republican Party might be so desperate for a good candidate that they could turn to Wesley Clark, because almost every elected Republican is going to be tainted by their association with the Bush administration. I think's it's going to get ugly and Clark seems to be a very decent, capable, sane man. The GOP is in very, very short supply of this type of candidate. Don't you think?

[Kahuna]

36. Wow! I don't know how to respond...

I'll only add that Clark is pro peace. Clark was against bush's Iraq adventure. Clark has been shot four times and knows the wages of war better than most men alive.

I'm touched at your concern for Clark. Really. I'm not being sarcastic. I too think he is a fine man. But you will never have to worry about the current GOPers in charge turning to Clark. There are some who would like to see him run as a republican. But not enough that would in any way threaten bushie boy.

Clark is a very smart man. While I am a loyal dem, my party has been floundering so badly, that we need someone new and different that will totally take the country and voters by surprise. We have been demoralized for years now. We have been beaten down. We need a hero right now. Many of us believe that that hero is Wesley K. Clark.

[greatauntoftriplets]

41. And his positions on...

...the economy, the war on terra-ism, the environment, trade issues, education, the social safety net, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, national healthcare, programs to help the underprivileged. Uh, what ARE Clark's positions?

And what skeletons does he have in his closet that Rove will go after?

[Pastiche423]

55. Skeletons?

Such as why he is reffered to some as a vain, pompous, brown-noser?

"...The reaction from former army subordinates is very different.
"The poster child for everything that is wrong with the GO (general officer) corps," exclaims one colonel, who has had occasion to observe Clark in action, citing, among other examples, his command of the 1st Cavalry Division at Fort Hood from 1992 to 1994.

While Clark's official Pentagon biography proclaims his triumph in "transitioning the Division into a rapidly deployable force" this officer describes the "1st Horse Division" as "easily the worst division I have ever seen in 25 years of doing this stuff."

Such strong reactions are common. A major in the 3rd Brigade of the 4th Infantry Division at Fort Carson, Colorado when Clark was in command there in the early 1980s described him as a man who "regards each and every one of his subordinates as a potential threat to his career".

While he regards his junior officers with watchful suspicion, he customarily accords the lower ranks little more than arrogant contempt. A veteran of Clark's tenure at Fort Hood recalls the general's "massive tantrum because the privates and sergeants and wives in the crowded (canteen) checkout lines didn't jump out of the way fast enough to let him through'."

More...

http://www.counterpunch.org/clark.html

Not to mention his role in Waco...

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/clark.htm

[greatauntoftriplets]

62. So what is his position on the VA?

In as few words as possible. Please and thank you.

[Pastiche423]

70. Don't know why you are asking me

but I'll research it.

[Kahuna]

64. They have been posted here at least twice a week...

a search will yield you results of earlier discussions. I have no intention on being ran ragged, retrieving information that is easily available everytime somebody comes along and claims that they haven't seen earlier discussions.

[greatauntoftriplets]

66. I have limited time to spend on DU.

Please post them again.

[Kahuna]

73. I'm not your personal researcher...

I don't know what makes you think I am... :crazy:

[greatauntoftriplets]

76. Excuse me please!

n/t

[Nashyra]

95. Why don't you go to some of his websites

or google some of his speeches and then you will have a better understanding of what a fine candidate he is. We MUST have a candidate who can appeal to the moderates, Clark has a liberal agenda and his military record appeals to the moderates because they see him as strong on national security. Get it through your heads, whether we accept the fear factor that * has crammed down the throats of the voting public enough people have that we have to have a candidate that will alleviate those fears. Clark does that. And he has said he won't run as a Repug, and he has not said that he won't run so a draft Clark movement is appropriate.

[DemExpat]

8. I think so too, Diane.

With perhaps Dean as VP.....

A team with a chance of beating out Bush!

His international experience is vitally important in my view, and his other democratic views mirror most of mine as well, from what I've read and seen on interviews and discussion shows.

Clark is my first choice for Pres!

DemEx

[DianeG5385]

9. When I say I hope he's a Dem

it's because he has not made his party affiliation apparent. All of his comments and so far, all of his positions i can agree with. that's why i hope he's a dem.

[DemExpat]

19. Diane, if its within an hour you can still edit your subject line now!

A great new aspect of DU2....
DemEx

[Sava]

10. you don't even know who he is!!!!

I don't know where this guy stands on domestic issues. While I applaud his criticism of the president, I don't know if I want him in the White House. He could turn out to be another closet republican like Clinton.

And before you praise Mr. Clark for his military career... the man was considered to be an egotist... and BTW, he bombed Serbian bridges on Easter Sunday... unforgivable...

[DemExpat]

16. I'll take another 'Clinton', thank you very much.

:kick:

DemEx

[Sava]

22. Clinton: economic policy perhaps... everything else sucked

his handling of conflicts.... BAD
we still don't have a universal health care plan after 8 years of Clinton...
he relaxed media ownership laws...
he relaxed pollution controls...

as Michael Moore said, "Clinton was the best Republican president we ever had"

PLEASE NO MORE!!!!

[DianeG5385]

35. You are so funny!

Clinton did amazing work under the RW onslaught..Handling of Haiti...no more boatloads landing on our shores...A semblance of stability. Somalia...welcome gift from George bush #1..Kosovo..In the heart of Europe..Site of WW1..Learn your history...Now stabilized..Serbia..again heart of Europe, ethnic cleansing...immediate threat to the stability of Europe, hence US security. Contained Saddam, kept him from GAINING WMDS giving the BIG LIE to Bush's reason for war...WARNED the Bushites that their biggest challemge would be Osama...they ignored hime because they were lusting after that Taliban pipeline through Afghanistan...Why is it we know it happened this way but the Press tries to warp our reality?

[Sava]

39. Kosovo... "learn my history?"

oh please... while you sit and sponge up everything you hear on the Western media, I lived in Kosovo for 6 months (2 during the bombing of my homeland)... what happened there and what was reported were two completely different things. Clinton killed innocents to take away attention from Monicagate. There was no genocide in Kosovo or Serbia. get a clue!

Talk about warped realities...

[Tinoire]

68. Well unfortunately what really happened in Kosovo

was not reported here and in this I agree with the Republicans- the Dmeocrats smack of hypocrisy.

Some HORRIBLE things happened under Clinton's watch that should have raised the same cries of outrage in the US that they raised in Europe. I adored Clinton but recognize that the name "Slick Willy" was well-coined and that he could have sold ice to an eskimo.

I'd rate him as a great President for the US but a dove of peace, Clinton was not- nor was he a Liberal or a progressive.

That said, I'd vote for him again but howl in outrage over Kosovo.

The more I read and find out, the more I'm convinced that both the Republicans and the Democrats are working off the same script to at all costs protect rampant materialism and consumerism in the interests of Corporate Capitalism. The Democrats just throw the people a few more crumbs but both rape and pillage the third world.

[Sava]

107. you are totally correct!

I have family in Serbia and they see these events with their own eyes. And the history they tell there is much different than the propaganda I see in the US.

[Tinoire]

48. Handling of Haiti?!

Do you know what you're talking about? Did you follow what we did down there and WHY?! The OPPRESSED people of Haiti are not grateful to him at all!

----------------------

Today General Clark displays the same sort of Kennedy Administration New Frontier arrogance, a belief that American power and values should guide the world. This kind of thinking dates back at least to the administration of Woodrow Wilson, a liberal icon of the last century along with FDR and Kennedy. Wilson was another American president who pursued a policy of "missionary diplomacy," which meant the frequent use of force to bring to heel the "heathens" who happened to resist the imposition of American values.

General Clark is arguing in favor of these Wilsonian/New Frontier ideas. He believes that the United States’ prestige in the world is huge so our nation can and must provide direction, institutions and anything else for struggling nations. The problem is, General Clark says, our nation hasn’t been doing nearly enough up until this point. Like Wilson arguing for an America establishing, "a just democracy throughout the world," which meant that Wilson reversed our traditions of no entangling alliances, General Clark now insists that America must live up to its responsibilities. Soon we will likely hear General Clark, or one of his friends, say that they have to, "get the country moving again."

<snip>

"People abroad love the United States in a way you never see over here," General Clark said. "Over there they like us. They love us. They love what we stand for. And they want to be like us. Sometimes they want us to help them and sometimes they want us to tell them what to do."

Apparently, General Clark hasn’t been in Europe lately. Or the Middle East, where the US has taken on the responsibility of accomplishing something that is well nigh unachievable.

<snip>

http://www.lewrockwell.com/bresiger/bresiger11.html

[greatauntoftriplets]

63. Go Tinoire!

:hi:

[Tinoire]

85. :) As soon as I can find the information re the VA

You can BET I'll post that here!

:hi:

[Darranar]

86. What about Virginia?

And what does Virginia have to do with Wesley Clark? Or have I missed something?

[greatauntoftriplets]

88. The Veterans Administration = VA

And thanks (above) Tinoire!

[Darranar]

89. Thanks!

n/t

[Tinoire]

90. VA - Veterans Administration n/t

[DianeG5385]

25. ah yuhhh

I'll take another Clinton anytime! Nothing like having a brilliant man who can extemporize his own speeches and actually knows what he's talking about, one who doesn't have to have the CIA "vet" his speech for "correctness". Think about it..doesn't this imply that Bush has no clue about the statements he makes in his speeches? I think that's a major indictment of this administration...The guy ( you know...Bush...the President?...) doesn't have a clue what he is talking about so the CIA director has to take the fall for not spell checking the State of the Union Speech?????

[Sava]

27. Clinton was a corporate wh0re... sorry I want a progressive

no thanks... he did good for the economy... that's about it.

[DemExpat]

30. Well..."it's the economy, stupid".

Without that there's not much chance for anything.

He did good.
:kick:
DemEx

[Sava]

33. How about, "More than just the economy..."?

Sorry, I just have high standards. No more liars in the White House, for a change.

[DemExpat]

38. Best of luck in getting your high standards VOTED

into the Whitehouse.
I also would love a perfect world with perfect leaders, but we still live in a semblance of democracy....if the votes are counted, that is.

:kick:
DemEx

[Sava]

40. in the absence of perfection... I'll settle for honest...

Right now I'm leaning towards Dean. I don't ever want to see Hillary CLinton or Gore on the Dem's ticket. I won't vote for a liar, or some dead guy in a suit.

[DemExpat]

44. I like Dean too....

but I think that Clark is much more electable, and getting a (decent)non-Repub elected is the only thing I care about at this time>

:hi:
DemEx

[Sava]

46. I'd support a Dean/Clark ticket

sorry but Clark is too much of an unknown for me... I want to know where the man stands on domestic issues. Is he qualified to be making domestic policy? Sure he has military experience, but what about the economy? Too many question marks...

[DemExpat]

49. If Clark runs, we will soon find out the details......

DemEx

[Kahuna]

67. Of course you will. You find him too unsavory to be pres..

but not too unsavory to prop up a weak candidates.

[Sava]

108. agreed!

yes, I don't want him deciding things... just used as a figurehead selling point as VP to get Dean in the White House.

[Kahuna]

111. Sorry, Sava but, Clark is too superior to be used...

by any of the current lightweights running to lend them gravitas. If they don't have it on their own they don't deserve the nomination. On the other hand, Clark DOES have it on his own.

[Nashyra]

98. You might wabt a progressive

but a progressive will not beat *. I'd rather have another Clinton any day and start having the federal gov't shift back toward the left.

[Kahuna]

17. How do you know that she doesn't know who he is?

Did you ask her? Just because you don't know who he is, you shouldn't assume that no one else does.

[Sava]

20. zzzZZZZzzzzZZZZZzzz

My assumption is based upon what the national media and what websites have reported about Clark. Sure, she could be his fricking biographer... if so, she should enlighten us on WHY we should vote for Clark.

[Kahuna]

28. When did she ask you to vote for him???

Did I miss something? Seems to me she expressed a personal preference. That shouldn't bother anyone.

[Sava]

32. the first post, duh

sorry, it says quite clearly, "Clark is the one"

[Kahuna]

69. The one for *HER*..

Don't play games with me.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

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

[DianeG5385]

43. Yikes!!!

Who'd a thunk a little thought on my part would lead to deleted posts???
Is the fix in? Is there a preference MATRIX of which I am unaware? Is preferring intelligent articulate potential candidates whose articulated views you agree with indictable? A little OTT,I agree, but I happen to think Clark has the leadership qualities that Dubya lacks.

[Sava]

47. elaborate please

The only stance I've heard Clark take is on the Iraq war, and the whole 9-11 osama-saddam connection that Fox News wanted him to make. That's it. Can you give us more info on Clark?

[Kahuna]

71. The onus is on you to do your homework..

before you start slamming people whom you know nothing about.

[JVS]

105. If that is the attitude for supporters of Clark's non-candidacy

Then he cannot beat Bush. A race cannot be won by someone who will not participate and whose supporters will not spread information. And while at DU it might be possible to tell others to go research someone you support, in the general public that is not the case. The onus is on his supporters to prove that he is the proper choice for president, and this is not made any easier by the fact that Clark himself is not willing to cooperate.

[Sava]

109. No, when you make a BS assertion, the onus is on you...

to prove it is true. If we lived in a world where truths were never proven true, our entire lives would be lies. So before you encourage other people to believe your propaganda, you must give them fact, not fiction. good night...

[Nashyra]

99. Do a google on wesley Clark and also go to Draft Clark

website. You will find many answers if you are willing to look.

[Tinoire]

50. A monkey has the leadership qualities that Dubya lacks!

But that is no reason to vote for the monkey. Got anything better than that? I am still interested in knowing what liberal and progressive issues Clark has. Can you elaborate?

[DianeG5385]

53. He has not elaborated his views on progressive issues

I am judging him as former NATO commander and knowledgable critic of the BUSH foreign policy mess. This is what you get when you vote in an inexperienced moron. So far, other than Kerry and Dean and Graham, I don't see that any other candidate has the foreign policy bona fides and in my mind, right now that is a major crisis to be fixed. If that is corrected, the future Dem prez can re-negotiate trade and environmental deals that our current occupier is incapable of.

[DemExpat]

56. From a Draft Clark site.....

http://www.draftwesleyclark.com/aboutclarkdomestic.htm#The%20Environment

Wesley Clark on Domestic Issues
(Note: These are positions we believe to be those of General Clark, based on public statements and writing, but these have not been approved or screened by General Clark himself. This page will continue to evolve, as we learn more, and as General Clark continues to speak out on the issues that are important to America.)

Biography | In the News | Clark on Domestic Issues | Leadership for America (official Clark site)

“It’s very hard not to think in terms of the welfare of the country, and when you see the country in trouble, in challenge, yes, you’d like to pitch in and help.” -- General Wesley Clark, Meet The Press 6/14/03

General Wesley Clark has a long and distinguished record of service in the armed forces as both a leader and a force for justice in the military. His innovative social vision led him to tackle, as a base commander in the early 1980s, such complex and then-taboo problems as teenage suicide and spousal abuse in military families. Clark’s innate sense of fairness has led him to embrace Democratic positions on domestic issues.
See where he stands on:

Affirmative Action | The Environment | Guns | Health Care and Education | National Security, 9/11, and The Patriot Act | Taxes and the Economy | Women’s Issues


Affirmative Action: Clark is a strong proponent and supporter of affirmative action, diversity, and multiculturalism:

“I’m in favor of the principle of affirmative action… what you can’t have is you can’t have a society in which we’re not acknowledging that there is a problem in this society with racial discrimination.” Meet The Press
"I saw first hand the racial prejudice, the civil disobedience, the intolerance… I've often gone back to that experience. It's something I've related to." Waging Modern War by Wesley Clark
Clark was recently one of several former military men to file a pro-affirmative action "friend of the court" brief on behalf of the University of Michigan in their battle against the Bush Administration efforts to dismantle Michigan's admissions policy. Clark said he was "surprised and dismayed" by the president's decision. (Read the consolidated brief (PDF) of retired military leaders (including Wesley Clark) in support of University of Michigan's affirmative action program.)
---------------snip---------------
see more at site above.

[Darranar]

81. I feel...

that the people on that website are exxagerating his opinions, and creating whole stances on issues based on comments he's made. They know very little and infer very much, and I feel taht they are taking a few comments too far.

[Nashyra]

100. Kucinich

does not have widespread appeal. I like him and some of his ideas but I prefer a candidate that can beat *

[Tinoire]

60. Thank you for a refreshingly honest answer!

Interesting election this is going to be.

You see foreign policy as the number one issue so go for Clark.

My best friend at DU sees the budget and economy as no 1 but goes for Dean with Kucinich in second.

I see social justice and go for Kucinich.

May the best man, speaking to the concerns of the most Americans,win.

[chaska]

59. Warmonger?

I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity. General Dwight D. Eisenhower

None knows better than the military leaders themselves the dangers of war; consequently, they are usually the last to advocate it. Wesley Clark, Waging Modern War (p. 17, paperback edition)

Real Generals start wars only as a last resort; armchair Generals like Bush as a first. A little knowledge/experience is a dangerous thing.

General Clark doesn't need to stuff the crotch of his flight suit.

[doubleplusgood]

65. "Sooner or later, you'll get Generals"

(from 1960's General Tire jingle)

[DianeG5385]

77. As many have stated...At least generals know the cost of war

Unlike Bush and Rumsfeld who revel in the "unknowable" and suck the lifeblood of our economy for their personal vendetta against Saddam, a man who is/was LESS a threat to us in 2003 than he was in 1991 when his DAD chose not to hunt him down. Our greatest generals who came to political power, Washington, Eisenhower (who else someone?)warned us about the abuse of military power. Is Clark in this lineage? Schwartzkopf spoke up but was soon silenced.

[DianeG5385]

78. OT

How do you guys get those cute sigs for your posts, especially the neat dream-catcher...You techies...clue me in! i'm sure It's some simple little thing I missed but I must have a sig!

[Pastiche423]

79. Is Clark in this lineage?

IMHO, yes.

[Kahuna]

80. Right. Generals don't start wars, They just execute them..

But they do know first hand the human costs if war,

[DianeG5385]

102. Let's Check out Clark and hope he measures up

We want a man of stature with the credentials to take out Bush as a certainty. I don't want a Lieberman or a Gephardt. I want a man of convictions from outside of party politics!

[Kahuna]

112. A person outside of party politics should be extremely

appealing after the last ten years of partisan bickering.

The Democrats need new leadership. If we can draft General Clark to provide that leadership, I'd be more than delighted if he answered our call.

[chaska]

83. This is a great post from Donna Zen

The last paragraph is especially good.

"When I heard a very, very liberal friend was supporting Clark, I wrote and asked him why? Here's an interesting part of his reply:

We are too timid in our vision. We seek a new President, but we don't seek a radically different governing coalition to achieve Democratic ends, one that will bring us not only the Presidency but also both houses of Congress. Only then will constitutional legitimacy be reestablished, as only then can we attack the systematic rot and undermining of the rule of law we've seen at the top over the past twenty five years.

That's exactly what we've been saying - we have to win the White House, the Congress and turn the corner on the courts. The American people can't afford another 49% Presidency.

That was written by someone with a PHD in Economics.

One of the key visions that Clark has is "constitutional legitimacy" which refers to our having strayed from the underpinnings of government with checks and balances. The imperial presidency, and a weak congress that does not accept responsibility for its actions are destroying our democratic ideals. Clark talks about a return to a dialogue and believes people must voice their opinions and they must receive the best information. No one else is talking about this and to be honest, I never expected to hear it. The man knows and is very concerned about Black Box Voting. How do I know this? Because I got in contact with the draftclark people and asked.

For me, and I'll vote Democratic, so in a way I'm just watching this thing unfold, learning how progressive he is on every issue, every one...is amazing. Another candidate would be branded a "liberal crazy" for putting forth such beliefs, and yet no one refers to him as a liberal. It is such a hoot! A stealth liberal in uniform. I don't think the Dems I know and love are going to pick up on how unbelievable this opportunity really is. If things worked out, I am convinced that we could wipe the floor with bushco and send all the rats like DeLay packin'. I loved it...on CrossFire, Tucker started spouting about something DeLay had recently spewed. Clark just glanced at Tucker and very calmly said, "Tom Delay is a fool." Game. Set. Match.

[phegger]

106. actually...

on CrossFire, Tucker started spouting about something DeLay had recently spewed. Clark just glanced at Tucker and very calmly said, "Tom Delay is a fool." Game. Set. Match.

Actually I don't believe he said this. DeLay didn't come up during the Crossfire interview, as far as I know. It was brought up by Russert on MTP, and Clark's response was not "he's a fool", though he may have meant to imply that.

I'm interested in Clark myself, but I think that misquoting the guy isn't helpful, whether from an excess of enthusiasm or sketchy memory. I would have loved for him to have said that to Tucker Carlson, of course. Because, as we all know, Tom Delay IS a fool.

Peace.

:smoke:

[Darranar]

84. About...

Clark being a general: we've never had a progressive liberal president who's been a general. Eisenhower was distinctly Libertarian, though he proved that many generals know the cost of war and hate it. The only other general who was president that I can think of is Ulysses S. Grant, who had a series of scandals during his term and, in short, was a horrible president, however good a general.

However, this does not mean that all generals cannot be progresive and liberal. That is simply an overgeneralization and will get no one anywhere.

[DianeG5385]

97. I must restate Clark may be the One

He may be able to give voice to our liberal concerns and wisdom in our foreign policy ventures.

[Nashyra]

101. I whole heartedly agree

[Kurovski]

113. Yeah, "Clark is the one"

in the same way Teresa La Pore was the one to help the voters in Palm Beach County.

(Insert rolling-eye icon here.)

[chiburb]

114. From TAP:

WES CLARK IN '04? To be honest, Jack Beatty is really hard to argue with. There's no question that the former NATO commander is the candidate George W. Bush would least like to run against. But it doesn't look like Clark is going to take the plunge.
Posted at 11:09 AM

[chiburb]

115. Link added:

To the Atlantic Monthly:

http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/polipro/pp2003-07-09.htm