I'm becoming very suspicious about Clark

[BonjourUSA]

With a look from abroad (France), when I listen commentaries, read press or watch TV, I'm becoming very suspicious. Isn't Clark a Torjan Horse of Repukes ?

This guy never had a clear political option, he seems to follow the wind. Why not to be Democrat today ? With Repukes feelings, why not too ?

Why not to have a good Democrate speech ? With no-shocking terms for Repukes' ears, why not too ?

It's your affair, not ours, but it is not completely reassuring.

[mhr]

1. Some of us in the US have concerns as well

eom

[QC]

2. Stick around and you will see plenty of discussion of these very questions

In fact, there have been literally thousands of posts about the question of whether Clark is an authentic Democrat.

Do a search and you will surely find at least a few hundred of them. It's been an active discussion, to say the least, so I think you will find enough information on boh sides of the issue to draw your own conclusions.

[BonjourUSA]

7. Yes, I read many posts here and..

I just wanted to transcribe our feelings.

Because we are sure of nothing now with America. We know that if the worst isn't absolutely sure it can be likely.

[WesWing2004]

15. under the microscope at home and abroad

because of Bu$hCo's fucked up administration!! Whomever is elected next year will be put under an electron microscope before we cast our votes.

The world is SICK of being lied to by the Cabal!

[chookie]

52. Isn't that a little extreme?

Sorry -- I disagree.

The house is on fire. Time to put it out, rather than engaging in exchanges about personal preferences for wallpaper patterns.

Hon -- you may have the time and interest to run every candidate under a scanning electron miscroscope, but let me warn you that everyone you put under such intense scrutiny will look pretty ugly.

I personally did not need such powers of magnification to know from Day One that Candidate Smirk was running a deceptive campaign, and if allowed to occupy the office of the Presidency, would lead our nation and the world to the brink of disaster.

Christ! -- after these last 3 years, you are still playing the same old song, "Won't Get Fooled Again"? It's one of my favorite Who songs, and is *usually* spot on when it comes to politics universally, but I don't think a vote for any of the current Dem candidates is going to be a Meet the New Boss Same as The Old Boss scenario. I think it is more appropriate to be singing the Who's "We're Not Gonna Take It" at this current time.

Dear -- you wouldn't like George Washington ("Tobacco Whore!" or Thomas Jefferson ("Slave Fucker!")or Benjamin Franklin ("Womanizer!!") either, using your present method of examination of your fellow Americans.

Squint your eyes if you have to, but look for the guy who looks like he can defeat Bush.

[placton]

3. Thw GOP must be happy

to have this type of "debate." Yes, this is another conspiracy = the GOP wants to elext "stealth candidate" Clark to replace Bush, because . . .

C'mon gang - disagree on history and issues, but this is tin foil hat stuff.

[QC]

5. Of course they're happy--

Every talking point they send out on the blastfax seems to turn up at DU moments later as the subject of an animated and divisive discussion.

Why wouldn't they be happy?

[annagull]

4. Bonjour-France (sp?)

I am here in the U.S. and I am not sure. I have a hope that a General could get us out of Iraq, Yet he seems to be a Republican. I know that I have never voted for Reagan, and he (Reagan) ruined our economy, did horrible things in South America, so I don't understand, either, I think I am sticking with Dean. They all hate him, so he must be good.

[bearfartinthewoods]

6. i just watched Clak's townhall on c-span

and heard him say we had to stay in iraq to finish the job.

[Karenina]

9. "...stay in iraq to finish the job."

The JOB? Would that be the "job" of pulverizing a population 50% of whom are under 16, or of destroying their heritage, or of poisoning their land, or of terrorizing them and creating an abiding hatred and lust for revenge or of installing *corporate "councils to steal their resources and enslave them? You mean THAT job? Just asking.

[bearfartinthewoods]

10. yeah riiiight...that's what we are doing

pulverizing the population.

[jumptheshadow]

13. Aren't all the major candidates saying that?

Aren't all the folks who are polling over 8 percent in the polls saying that we must stay in Iraq for some time to come?

I wept when we went to war. But I think it would be immoral if we simply pulled out after having destroyed much of that country's infrastructure. The Bush administration plunged Iraq into chaos. We must create an intelligent long-term exit strategy to rectify the horrible situation our country has created.

[0007]

16. You mean the US can and the UN can't"

It will be immoral if we stay.

[JVS]

23. By staying we will only prolong the suffering of the Iraqis and Americans

we need to leave.

[0007]

14. "We" meaning the US not the UN?

I believe a complete pull out is in order with the UN taking full control is in order.

Nothing less! Clark is failing to satisfy my expectations and wishes of something better than junior and his thugs.

[LTR]

19. The sad reality is...

...we're stuck in Iraq. We realy have no choice but to stay and clean up the mess.

Invading Iraq is one of the stupidest things a president has ever done in the history of this country. Defying the UN has screwed us even more. Now, with Hussein out of office, anarchy is abound, our troops are exhausted and pissed off, and money is being drained from our economy. And the UN is rightly hesitant and pissed off as well. I don't blame them!

Here's my solution (and remember, I'm just looking at things realistically):

1. Elect a candidate (whoever it is, but I like Clark myself) willing to clean up the mess in Iraq, not one who will pull out immediately. If we just bail on them, then Iraq goes back to the way it was before, and our soldiers would have died in vain. Main point here: Get Bush out of office. Period.

2. Go to the UN, apologize for the actions of the previous administration, make a strong effort to work with other nations in a more diplomatic way than before. Ask for their help. Give them the main role in setting up a government.

3. Start cycling troops in and out of Iraq. The ones that have been there since the early part of the year are tired, hot, hungry and probably pissed off. Bring them home for awhile, and shuffle fresher trrops in and out, just like a hockey game.

4. Get the job done quickly and get the hell out of there.

5. Support our troops: Bring 'em home ASAP, give them tax breaks, scholarships, and decent health care. The neocons certainly aren't 'supporting' them now.

6. Never, EVER let a president pull this shit agian! Period.

I hope I'm being somewhat realistic. Remember, pulling out right away is an impossibility, no matter how much we despise this Bush ego trip know as "Iraqi Freedom". If we pulled out immediately, then this will do very bad things to our country, and our soldiers have died for nothing.

Main point: Finish what we started, clean up our mess, and learn from our mistakes in the future.

I cartainly can't fault a candidate who thinks we should do this.

[JVS]

20. You can't have it both ways.

Staying to clean up is not getting the troops out ASAP. Since your plan involves both, it is impossible.

[LTR]

26. True

but just how many troops do we have over there now? Do we need them all?

And how many do we have at home now on active or reserve duty? I'd really hate to send even more soldiers there, but what if we sent fresh peacekeeping (is there such a thing, or am I too optimistic?)troops there for a 2-3 month tour, just to give the other soldiers a breather? That, and supplement with UN troops (see "kiss the UN's ass" above). This will definitely lighten the load.

And offer the UN a big role in building a new Iraq.

On second thought: Why not bring home ALL the troops, and replace them with hawkish neocons and Haliburton employees? Just being funny, but it kinda makes sense, right?

[Romberry]

8. I'm a Dean guy but what....

...is this up to now, "I'm becoming suspicious about Clark" thread number 12,203?


I really, really wish people would spend more time finding a candidate to get behind and less time tearing apart other candidates.

Everyone knows about Clark and some people's suspicions. After all, all Dudge did yesterday was run all the RNC FUD he could lay his hands on.

The same tactics have been used against Dean ("the angry waffler"), Kerry ("what is he anyway, French?"), Edwards ("Nasty old trial lawyer!") and just about anyone that stands a reasonable chance of beating GW Bush. And yes, I left Joe Lieberman off that short list intentionally.


Far be it from me to tell people what they can talk about on these threads but I get painfully tired of seeing the forums go around and around and around in the same dizzying circles over and over again. All it does is start flame wars (a lot of times I think that's the intent) and encourage the kind of hard feelings that ultimately make it hard to unify later. Just my opinion...

[BonjourUSA]

11. I agreed and read my post #7

;-)

[QC]

17. It's just your opinion, perhaps, but it's right.

All this endless conflict can do is make it hard for us to unite later, and that's why I also believe that a lot of it is intentional.

We all know that the Goopers always do everything in their power to depress Democratic turnout. Why would their efforts in that regard *not* include sowing disunity in Democratic forums?

[Padraig18]

24. I agree

A flame war by another other name is still a flame war.

[liberalnurse]

12. I just want to share with the French

that there are a lot of us in America who do not support *bush.... Actually, I despise him intensely! Just don't let your President rescue him out of this Iraq quagmire. *bush made his bed, let him sleep in it PLEASE!

Just hang in there, our new democratic President will be in office by Nove. 04. That should be Howard Dean:)

[RichM]

18. Yes, he is a sort of "Trojan Horse" of Repukes.

C'est dommage que la plupart des gens ici qui s'appellent "Democrates" ne s'en rendent compte.

[Rebellious Republican]

21. When Jim Jeffords came over from the Dark Side, every Dem in

the freeworld was ecstatic! Why are so many posters here so judgemental of Clark. I used to be a republican, and to be frank about it, I found that I am met with suspicion here at DU (not by all DUers to be sure). Is it not possible for people to change their political views and beliefs. How do you guys expect to grow the Dem party if you you do not accept people from other parties comming over. Are you going to wait for other dems to give birth to offspring, that in turn will grow up to be Dems. Folks you might be more a little more tolerant, you know kinda like what the Dem party espouses. Is it possible for the Repubs doing anything sneaky and underhanded to keep this man from running against AWOL :think:. Think about it, do they have good reason to fear this man :scared:? Of coarse they do, so maybe there might just be some sabotage going on here. Just so that it is understood, I have not decided on a candidate yet, so no, I am not pro anyone yet. I just feel that this candidate is being trashed way to soon by so called Dems. Should we give him a chance to get his veiws out, after all he has only just entered the race. OK I am finished ranting, but I am glad that there are places like DU for us to exchange free ideas!

:kick:
ANYONE BUT BUSH IN "04"

[JVS]

25. Jim Jeffords didn't join the party and didn't seek any nominations.

so your analogy is poor.

Leaving the Republicans is not the same as joining the Democrats.

[Rebellious Republican]

28. Not wishing to get into a flame war with you, JVS you miss the...

point entirely. Was the Democratic party cheering him on when he was making his decision? Was Jim Jeffords a hero for delivering power to the Dems by becoming an Indie. You are absolutely correct, he did become an Indie, that was a smart move in his case. He still needed to retain some his base (Moderates, Independents,many that would not continue to support him if he had become a Dem). He also had campaign contributions to be concerned with, remember he paid back those that had contributed strictly along party lines. He would have had to pay a hell of alot more back, for the reason as mentioned above. Which brings us to the question. Now what if Jim Jeffords decides to run as a Dem. Will YOU cheer him on, or based on the fact that he was once a Repub, use the same arguments against him that are being used against Clark? Next question, I have always openly admitted that I was once a Repuke, now I am a card carrying DEM, and DAMN proud of it. If I decided to run for public office, would these same biased arguments be used against me? Even though I was intensly involved in the McBride Campaign here in Florida. Most of the Dems here that knew me and my history, welcomed me over to their side. Why, because many people wanted Jeb to be beaten so bad they welcomed anyone that was against that fat bastard! The point is that maybe it is possible for him to be genuine! Sorry if I sound defensive, but I have had to deal with skeptisim, suspicion, and bias myself.

:kick:

[Rebellious Republican]

29. Freepers may be sabotaging Dem campaigns ...

Just in case anyone has missed this, and it does back up what I have been saying. The repubs will do anything to sabotage all Dem campaigns. You would be wise to make sure of your sources before bashing other candidates, no matter which candidate. That is if you insist on bashing another candidate.Divide and conquer!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=411751&mesg_id=411751

[Padraig18]

30. Exactly!

If he says he's a Democrat NOW, I will take his word for it!

[JVS]

43. I'm not missing any point at all.

What Jeffords did was good, but nobody was considering giving him any power within our party.

Apples and oranges.

[Rebellious Republican]

48. So, you still have not answered the questions, or did you miss

those as well?

[Paschall]

39. Quite right

Besides when Jeffords jumped off the GOP ship, he wiped out the GOP majority in the Senate. THAT WAS reason for every Dem in Creation to be ecstatic.

[rman]

31. Clark out of the Dark? I hear him being called "Democrat"..

that's pretty much it. Seems to me there's a shadow casted over him.

[rogerashton]

22. Bonjour!

Marx remarked that, in a capitalist society, the government are the executive committee of the ruling class. Gore Vidal noted that in America we really have only one party, the property party, and the Democrats and Republicans are its two branches. The real competition between them is to get the backing of the billionaire class, to become its executive committee. The differences between the two are that the Democrats propose to try to solve the problems of class domination (problems from the viewpoint of the billionaire class) while the Republicans doubt that they can be solved without reducing the class dominance of our society (they are correct) and that they are better ignored in the hope that they will go away (they are mistaken). Not that my support matters much, but I support the Democrats on the theory that it is better to solve problems than to ignore them.

(I suppose some of the loyalists on this board will flame me for this cynical view of our party, but, hey, flame on).

What seems to be happening is that a major segment of the ruling class are beginning to figure out that the Republican elite are just not competent to protect their interests. Thus the recent shift in the media toward more negative press on Bush* (although I would not call this coverage serious criticism). The orchestrated emergence of a "New Democrat" who is a credible opponent to Bush* is hardly surprising. That he is a military man is worrying, though. Could it be that the ruling class are so disappointed in the Republicans that they do not anticipate a future Republican government in their interest -- in other words, an end to the "two party system?"

Clark = American Bonaparte?

Both the billionaire class and the Republican elite seem to be a bit panicky, and panicky rulers are very dangerous. When they are panicky enough to call in a general, ugly things can happen. Four years ago, if one had told you about the events of 2000-2001, you would have dismissed it all as paramoia, wouldn't you have? Be honest, now!

All that said, if he is nominated, I will vote for him. The worst probably won't happen, and the alternative is worse still.

[MrPrax]

46. Good points...

Yeah I always assume their is one class and an A team and a B team...

or this interesting comment
"What does it say about an American electorate, or to be more precise, about the white male electorate, that Arnold and Wesley can become such instant political heroes? The infusion of celebrity and superficial images into politics owes much to a televisual society where surfaces are everything. In addition, white men, in particular, as social critics such as James William Gibson and Susan Faludi contend, are attracted by the warrior psyche and ornamental style that dominate American popular culture. Finally, in an era when Viagra promises a quick-fix to impotence and the desire for intimacy, is it any wonder that quick-fix candidates with nothing more to commend them than their image should garner attention and even adulation?"

http://www.counterpunch.org/shor09252003.html

[noiretextatique]

47. thanks for posting the article, MrPrax

and i do believe the ms. shor made some excellent points. i was struck by her conclusion:

Neither Arnold nor Wesley nor a host of other wannabee pop cult icons is capable of addressing these persistent problems. Their only function is to convince an already compromised electorate that they can be winners in this fixed and failed political game.

sadly, i tend to agree.

[Skwmom]

27. No. The 2004 Dean Debacle

is their game plan.

[onecitizen]

32. I have worries as well..........

I'm not totally ready to jump on the bandwagon yet. I need to learn more about him. At this point, I'm still a Dean supporter.

[starscape]

33. glad we got our daily thread about this started early.. (n/t)

[BonjourUSA]

35. Ealy for you !! It was 12:32 AM in France

:)

[starscape]

38. Tell you what...

Wait three hours and then post the "Clark supported Bush" thread..

Then later, the "Clark is really a republican" thread...

Then "Clark is making me nervous" thread (you can take that in any direction you want)

And then the gratuitous "Clark supporters are (thin-skinned, bullies, military fanatics, sheep)" thread.

Just so we're covered for the day.

Unbelievable.

[carpetbagger]

34. Clark himself is the best source.

Take out what Matt Drudge selectively picks out from his past, and look at what he's said over the last several months. Or, look at the entire speeches that allegedly paint him as a republican. It becomes very clear that Wes Clark is a man who thinks the GOP is the party of past international laurels and wasted potential. He has cast his lot not with opportunism, but with where his heart is for the future. He thinks the best of people, but his disappointment with the administration's foreign and domestic direction has become quite manifest since he complimented them in 2001, an act analogous to a teacher giving everyone an A at the start of a course, until the students prove themselves less able.

[Trek234]

36. Even people in France can see what Clark is

It's amazing that ordinarily intelegent people on DU who can get through constant Bush propaganda have fallen so easily to Clark.

I guess there are sheep on both sides... Hopefully there aren't enough to cost us 04.

[starscape]

37. Don't people in France know what Bush is?

If they are so worried about Clark, or if we over here are "sheep" (as you so delicately put it) maybe there is no concern over putting a winner up in '04 and just getting more of the same.

We need to realize, one little world event could suddenly push Bush's poll numbers close to where they were, for no good reason. Another terrorist attack between now and the election might render all of this Democratic infighting completely moot.

I think, under all the worry about the economy, etc.. people are still somehwat scared about their security. I think the idea of a General as prez would allay those fears somewhat. That, coupled with everything he's said on the issues being very democratic and even liberal, makes him appeal to me.

Does that still make us sheep??

[Paschall]

40. If you had said a "non-AWOL veteran" I would have agreed

I think the idea of a General as prez would allay those fears somewhat.

What the country needs is someone who talks straight about those fears: that most of them are unwarranted and have been pumped up by the Administration for its own geopolitical and business ends; that Europe has been hit by terrorist attacks far more frequently than the US and its citizens do not live in perpetual fear; that by giving in to fear we hand the terrorists the victory they seek.

I'm very concerned about promoting a candidate just because the scrambled eggs on his cap "reassure" the great unwashed masses. Similar thinking gave us Franco, Pinochet, and Pétain. Clinging to an "authority" figure or looking to such a figure to restore national order is precisely what skyrocketed Shrub's ratings in the wake of 9/11. And as with Franco, Pinochet, and Pétain, Shrub has proven once again that loyalty offered in fear is often betrayed.

(Please note: I am not comparing Clark to Franco, Pinochet, or Pétain. I am discussing the mindset that drives people to seek "refuge" in such men.)

[poskonig]

41. Clark cannot be both a GOP plant and a Clinton puppet.

The Republicans need to get their smearing straight.

[seventhson]

49. Sure he can, postkonig -- and here's why

He most recently worked for the Stephens Group.

The Stephens Group helped Shrubya finance his Harken Oil deal with Saudi (and Bon Laden) money.

Stephens then went on to get intro bed with Clinton.

This is the Arkansas mafia connection.

Those on the left (and even some on the right) have followed the Bush ties to Clinton via the CIA/Contra/Cocaine connections at the Mena airport in Arkansas when Clinton was governor.

The dark ties between top dems and top repubs is not much of a secret which is why some people like Clark can slip both ways.

But google "Stephens Group" and Clark, then Clinton and/or then Bush for details

[JohnOneillsMemory]

42. Question for you: what will Europe think of a General as US President?

Now that the rest of the world sees the US as the biggest threat to world peace, what would the reaction be to having General Clark in the White House? Horror at his past or relief that he's declared himself a multi-lateralist?

[DoveTurnedHawk]

44. The Int'l News Reports I've Read Have Been Almost Uniformly Laudatory

And I've read quite a few of them.

DTH

[Cleve Steamer]

51. Western Europe seemed happy

...with the outcome of the Kosovo campaign.

Clark received more than 20 major military awards from foreign governments, including honorary knighthoods from the United Kingdom and the Netherlands as well as the title of Commander of the Legion of Honor from France.

http://www.medaloffreedom.com/WesleyClark.htm

[BonjourUSA]

54. If he was so good politician than he is good officer,

he could be an excellent president

[BonjourUSA]

50. What do you think about Ike ?

Seriouly, I don't know. If he doesn't wear his uniform… Why not, he will be better than your current asshole. (Can someone be worse ?... But perhaps you could find this one ;) )

[59millionmorons]

45. Another Clark basher

YAWN

[Blue_Chill]

53. I'm becoming very suspicious of those that have become Rove's attack dogs

He fears Clark, then drudge and the RW media attack Clark, all the sudden lefties everywhere trust these sources grab the news and run with it.

Good job guys Rove would be proud!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

55. Now this is REALLY getting old

Anyone who doesn't embrace the Church of Clark is doing Karl Rove's work?

Can you not even consider the possibility that some of us sincerely think that this country needs less military influence, not more? (That proves that we're Rove's disciples, right?)

My doubts come from the nature and tone of the "grassroots" campaign to draft and promote someone that even political junkies like me were barely aware of. I haven't even read the Drudge or Andrew Sullivan reports, and I'm tired of the Clark cultists' tag team that uses ridicule (as in "yawn") and misdirection to answer every objection.

BonjourUSA, vous avez posé des bonnes questions.

[Blue_Chill]

56. Then why do the attacks on clark

almost without fail include either links to drudge or other RWers? If they don't include a link the post says almost exactly what the RW has been saying about Clark.

You don't find it odd at all that the very same people that bitch and moan about anyone using right wing links don't even bother to verify the info from those same sources when they attack Clark?

Please, if you don't like what I'm saying stop doing it. Think for yourself and verify what your attacks.

BTW - the united states doesn't need LESS MILITARY influence. They need someone who has a lot of it so they know that war is more then what you see in the movies. I'd like a leader that has SERVED his country instead of used it to gain power.

[BelgianMadCow]

57. I have to reply to this message, because I'm not sure either

that a centrist General without political track record, who is nicely rooted in the establishment, is the man that will bring change to America. I don't necessarily agree that he is a repug shill or goes with the wind though.

So I think I would be a Dean or Kucinich man, really. On the issues, that is.

Some people, let's call them pragmatical, insist this election is the last one before the Reich is here, and it cannot be lost. They believe a left candidate would not take enough center votes.

Personally, I believe that depends on the type of left candidate.

My main reason for replying is to voice my concerns. Critical open-minded thinking has been hit here lately.

[BonjourUSA]

58. I'm gonna stop speaking about Clark.

Because I'm French, I don't know about him enough and I just wanted to transcribe a feeling in my post. I did not think of starting as much polemics. I apologize.

A last word, perhaps a cliché, that the best Dem candidate wins. You and us need a good president of United States for repairing four years of disastrous american policy. But we can nothing for you so I'll never talk about your candidates any more... Of course I'll continue to say how much we hate Bush... if you allow it to me ;-)