Clark, btw, was the guest of honor at the NDN's annual meeting in June:
http://www.newdem.org/annualmeeting/clark.php (Speech also available)
Here is how he was drafted by the DLC
July 22, 2003
Draft-Clark enthusiasts grow hopeful. This
article from the Financial Times has been reprinted at Draft Clark 2004.
Chris Kofinis, a Democratic political consultant, suggests Mr Clark's entry would electrify the presidential race. "Democrats want someone who can win," he says, and that may mean the party's liberal wing may have to contemplate someone whose name begins with "General"
http://wesleyclarkweblog.com/archives/000122.html<snip>
But members of the
DLC, meeting in Philadelphia over the weekend and today for the group's annual "conversation," say they're holding their centrist ground. Their "Third Way" or "New Democrat" ideas will reclaim the White House for the Democrats in 2004, they say, as they did for Bill Clinton in his two victories.
<snip>
Despite the political focus, however, the declared Democratic presidential candidates were asked to stay away.
<snip>
The absence of candidates has hardly back-burnered the presidential race. It was still the dominant discussion in the hallways and ballrooms where the group gathered over the weekend. Center-of-the-road names like
Lieberman, Kerry and Edwards were bandied about. As was a name that
many participants said they were surprised to hear often: that of Gen. Wesley Clark, the former NATO commander. Clark has not declared his candidacy but has said he is considering a run. Supporters say he could go toe-to-toe with Bush on military issues.
<snip>
http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/6400042.htmAnother article about this same meeting in Philly:
Centrist Dems weigh Dean dilemma: At Philly meeting, praise and scorn for presidential contender
By Tom Curry
MSNBC
PHILADELPHIA, July 28 - Meeting in Philadelphia to plan strategy for the 2004 elections, members of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council grappled Monday with what one Democratic political consultant here called "their worst nightmare," the possibility that Howard Dean might win their party's presidential nomination. DLC activists said that despite Dean's recent fund-raising successes, his winning the nomination is far from a sure thing.
<snip>
DLC'S ROLE AS COUNTERWEIGHT
The DLC is the business-friendly group that helped write Bill Clinton's platform in 1992. It serves as a counterweight in Democratic politics to labor unions and interest groups such as the NAACP and the National Organization for Women (NOW).
<snip>
“The main theme of the next election is going to be national security,” said Chris Kofinis, a political consultant who attended the DLC gathering and is advising the campaign to draft retired Gen. Wesley Clark as the Democratic candidate. MSNBC article but now archived. You can find it here:
http://blog.forclark.com/story/2004/1/4/144349/2024And just to clarify that the NDN is DLC:
DLC AND NDNTwo acronyms that junkies know and that Democratic candidates hear in their sleep. The Democratic Leadership Council, chaired these days by Sen. Evan Bayh and run for 17 years by its founding director, Al From, is the spawning ground of moderate “Third Way” thinking in the party. Bill Clinton was chairman when he launched his own presidential bid in 1991. The New Democratic Network is the DLC’s overtly political cousin, run by an operative named Simon Rosenberg. It doles out cash to candidates and, increasingly, supports independent spending efforts.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/834591.asp?0bl=-0&cp1=1More about the NDN:
Centrist Democrats launch new agenda
By Hans Nichols
The centrist New Democratic Network (NDN) unveiled a new six-point agenda yesterday that it says can serve as a blueprint for making the Democratic Party the governing force in American politics for the next generation.
<snip>
Several announced and potential Democratic presidential candidates addressed the gathering at a Capitol Hill hotel, including Sens.
Joe Lieberman (Conn.) and
Bob Graham (Fla.), as well as retired Army Gen.
Wesley Clark. Sen.
John Kerry (Mass.) addressed the convention by phone, and former Vermont Gov.
Howard Dean sent a video greeting.
<snip>
Rosenberg explained in the interview that
the network’s revamped agenda and new strategy are the beginning steps of “a 10- to 45-year” plan to elect centrist Democrats to local, state and federal offices. http://www.hillnews.com/news/061803/centrist.aspx----
About the NDN
The New Democrat Network (NDN) is one of the nation’s most influential political organizations.
NDN promotes a new generation of leaders who advocate economic growth and fiscal responsibility, strong American leadership in world affairs and world markets, a smaller, smarter government, and a progressive approach to social issues that respects family, faith, and community.
<snip>
NDN is led by NDN President Simon Rosenberg, with advice from NDN's Advisory Board, a group of leading New Democratic thinkers and strategists. NDN’s Advisory Board includes former Democratic National Committee Chairman Joseph J. Andrew, pollster and Latino electorate expert Sergio Bendixen, former Army Secretary Louis Caldera, former Member of Congress and Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Vic Fazio, former Member of Congress and Chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council Dave McCurdy, former White House Press Secretary Mike McCurry, former White House Chief of Staff Mack McLarty, and former Federal Trade Commissioner and White House Cabinet Secretary Christine A. Varney.
------------------------------
Want to know
who founded the NDN? The NDN was
founded in 1996 by Senator Joe Lieberman, chairman of the DLC. "NDN acts as a political venture capital fund," a special type of political action committee among political action committees. NDN raises PAC money from many sectors, which they then distribute to their top federal candidates -- Lucas received $10,000 from them. NDN also provides a mechanism for fat-cats to donate directly to candidates without worrying about all those pesky Election Commission limits. Clinton campaign aide, Simon Rosenberg, is now NDN's President. Joe Lieberman is chairman.
The DLC does the same thing, actually. But, by forming the NDN, the DLC contribute more than twice as much to favored candidates. The favored candidate is Clark.
Wesley Clark: The DLC Focus Group Candidate<snip>
Still many believe Clark’s late entry will cause him problems in both raising money and establishing a cohesive campaign.
If Clark catches fire quickly, the DLC will make sure neither will be a problem. But the fourth and biggest question, his stance on issues, is a bit tougher. But don't worry, the DLC focus groups will tell feed him talking points soon enough.<snip>
Clark is very unsure on many of his positions, and they can change at any time. There is a clear reason for this. The first wave of the Democratic Leadership Council focus group data is barely in, and needs to be reviewed. Once the data is analyzed, the DLC machine will steer the General towards his newly formed positions.
<snip>
The DLC had nothing going for it until Clark was shoved into the race with zero political experience. Joe Lieberman mirrored their stance on many issues, but lacked charisma. John Kerry looked wimpish and went from frontrunner to bottom feeder in only a few weeks. It was becoming clear that Dick Gephardt stirred no emotions among the primary voters. John Edwards was irrelevant and even joked that no one knew he was running for the Presidency.
<snip>
The only candidate making noise and catching fire for the Democrats on the campaign trail was Howard Dean, who proudly proclaimed that was he was from “the democratic wing of the Democratic Party.” Clearly Dean couldn’t be controlled by the DLC and his successful campaign could set them back years in but one election cycle. And that led the DLC to shove the four-star General into the race. He is the perfect focus group candidate. Smart, looks good, speaks clearly and confidently and he fits the suit. Now the DLC just has to tell him what to say. And that’s where the DLC may run into trouble. Many published reports speak of Clark’s arrogance, and his stubbornness. Many say the General wants things done his way, and only his way. And this may also make Clark difficult to control for the DLC.
<snip>
http://www.washingtondispatch.com/article_6667.shtmlYou can see what gets them so excited about Clark here:
http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=131&subid=192&contentid=252098Here are some excerpts from Clark's speech to the DLC:
<snip>
And, the challenges come from the fact that the United States today doesn’t have a real national security strategy. We lost our strategy. We lost our vision of how to deal with the world around us. We had it, we created it, we paid for it in blood during World War II. We came out of that conflict resolved that America would be engaged in the world. We were engaged. We built the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund, we formed NATO, we stayed involved. We recognized that what we had to do was head off conflict, we had to contain Soviet expansionism, we had to block the spread of Communism, we had to deter the use of nuclear weapons to intimidate our allies or, God forbid, wage nuclear war.<snip>
Wesley Clark: Well, in the first place, I think it’s always dangerous to draw too tight an analogy between one situation and another. And there are many, many differences between the situation in Vietnam and Iraq. Secondly, I want to say that I wasn’t one of those who was anxious to get into Iraq. I always was skeptical of it. I always doubted that there was an imminent danger that required us to do it. Nevertheless, we’re there now and that’s all ancient history. So, what we have to do is I think, number one: establish legitimacy. For some reason, we fought the UN full endorsement of this mission and the full engagement of the United Nations. For the life of me, I don’t know why. The same people who fought the UN were telling me five years ago – all they could talk about was “burden-sharing, burden-sharing, burden-sharing,” “mission creep, mission creep, mission creep,” “exit strategy, exit strategy.” And somehow, all that disappeared and I don’t understand it. So, I’d go first to the United Nations. I’d say, “Look, we know you don’t have a security force. We’ll finish the job, we’ll work for security. We want you to come in and we want you to really help us work the reconstruction and the redevelopment of Iraq.” There’s political redevelopment to be done, there is economic reconstruction to be done. And, there’s a whole new climate in the Middle East to be created. Legitimacy is job number one. The second is the creation of public order over there. As soon as you can turn those responsibilities over to elements that speak Arabic and preferably Iraqis the better you are. The third thing is, stay engaged in the region and work for peace as an effective intermediary between the contending parties in the Middle East so we don’t attract more anger and more hostility in the region. But you know, my fourth point is, we’re there. This is a difficult situation. It’s going on on three levels: the resistance you see today, the ordinary life of the people in Baghdad and down below that something we’re not quite sure of, which is a sort of level three, subterranean forming up of Iranian dissidents coming in and organizations from Syria. We just don’t know where that’s going to go. We can influence it if we’ll work for legitimacy through international institutions, move the problem over to the Arabic-speaking and the Iraqis, and stay engaged as a constructive force in the region.<snip>
http://www.women4clark.com/transcripts/ndnspeech.htmNow only available via
google cacheOn June 17, 2003, when speaking at the New Democratic Network’s annual meeting in Washington, Clark was asked about the “Vietnamization” of Iraq. He responded by saying that what he thinks we need to do is "number one: establish legitimacy." Legitimize what? Our pre-emptive, unilateral strike that started the war, our complete disregard of the U.N., or perhaps he thinks we should legitimize our ongoing occupation in Iraq. Clark unfortunately did not convey any clear insight into his idea about establishing legitimacy. He did however continue to address the NDN on the subject, explaining that he would first go to the United Nations and say, "Look, we know you don’t have a security force. We’ll finish the job, we’ll work for security. We want you to come in and we want you to really help us work the reconstruction and the redevelopment of Iraq." So the General’s proposal to deal with the situation in Iraq and bring peace is to first legitimize. Then we should ask the U.N. to come in and help us clean up our legitimate mess. “Help us” clearly indicates a continued U.S. presence. And, correct me if I’m wrong here, but I didn’t hear anything about ceding authority. Do you think this plan will have a better chance if Clark were to present it to the U.N.? I ask because Bush isn’t having much luck with this particular agenda. Maybe new dog, old trick would work.
quote from Rustie Woods for the
LEFT-WING Dissident Voice.
Hope this is of some help to you.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
