Did Clark announce 18 months too early?

[cestpaspossible]

Poll question: Did Clark announce 18 months too early?

[BringEmOn]

1. I wish he'd announced early in 2004

[Totally Committed]

2. What is the matter with you people?

If he annouces late, he's a "stalking horse" for Hillary. Or, he's seen as an "Anti-(fill in the blank)".

Right now, he's out there calling of Party Unity, talking Red State "Value" issues on behalf of the Democratic Party.

FOr some of you, Wes will never do anything to your liking. So effing what?

TC

[Sparkly]

4. Besides, seems he didn't really "Announce"

He isn't launching a full-scale campaign, or gathering the press to "Announce," etc... But it sounds like he's indicating he'll get there.

[pkspiegel]

27. Agreed!

He's getting there faster rather than slower. That's a good thing. If anyone can fight the perception that to support the troops and the flag means you are a conservative Republican, it's Wesley Clark.
Go Wes!

[JI7]

3. i'm not sure i care either way

so far i don't really have a problem with it.

[ICantBelieve]

5. ???

He hasn't officially announced anything. But I'm still walking on sunshine!

[FrenchieCat]

6. Well it's true

that it doesn't help Kerry any. But then, so what?

If him announcing anything helps frame the issues that need framing, I say, "It's all good".

[Totally Committed]

7. You betcha! (n/t)

TC

[Mark E. Smith]

8. Absolutely Not!

It gives Clark a highly visible national platform from which he will deliver his strong and principled message.

Real leaders do things like this. This is no timid centrist pol dithering while Bush burns our country down, but a principled Democratic leader willing to take a big chance so that the truth stands a chance of being heard. We have nobody else willing to put his neck on the line like this in our party right now.

[ArkySue]

13. Well said!

:kick:

[Pilgrim4Progress]

16. Exactly right!

Leaders lead!

[trillian]

17. Right on! n/t

[Nay]

56. Yes, well said. I always liked Clark and voted for him, and I also

think it's refreshing to see someone not give a damn about whether he is getting out there too early, or too late, or will people hate him for it or like him for it, etc., etc. Just go do it, Wes, and we will be right behind you!

[PatrioticOhioLiberal]

9. Announcements usually don't include "ifs"

Don't see this as "an announcement".

Rather a harbinger of things to come.

And boy am I happy. :)

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[Adelante]

10. I can't vote

I don't believe he did "announce" early or otherwise.

He spoke to his supporters at a fundraiser. That's it.

[kerrygoddess]

21. Tell that to ...

everyone who started Clark announced threads. :eyes:

[Adelante]

22. I've seen excitement expressed

It's human nature, not a force for evil. Chill your rolling eyes.

[kerrygoddess]

25. Excitement is great

We've got real problems in CA and CA needs to focus on those problems and the '06 elections, not on who's running for Prez.

[Clark2008]

29. And those California Dems who Clark espoused his call to action to

were most appreciative and happy.
The message of unity, Dem values and grassroots was not lost on them, as it seems to be lost on people of this board.

[kerrygoddess]

35. Did he make any endorsements while in L.A.?

I'm sure he made his supporters happy, but we're in a fight for the Governor's office. Did he get behind Phil Angelides, as Boxer and pelosi already have. Did he offer to help here in CA or did he talk in general terms about the '06 elections?

In terms of unity did he speak up and say anything when Kerry's Military Family Bill of Rights passed the Senate the other day? Kerry's Senate bill was very similar to the Pelosi bill that Clark worked on, did he acknowledge that, showing unity?

[Totally Committed]

53. If Wes had made an endorsement of anyone in LA...

you and all his detractors would be saying "How dare he?" or "Who does he think he is?"

He supported Kerry to the hilt, and I resent with every fiber of my being that you, or any Kerry supporter has one damned thing bad to say about him, frankly. Wes treated John Kerry with so much respect and loyalty, you should be ashamed of every negative thing you post, imo.

TC

[kerrygoddess]

65. Hold on!

I said I felt it was wrong for him to announce here, I did not attack Clark. I like Clark a lot. I was very impressed by the support he gave Kerry and the fact that stressed his supporters should do the same. He showed a lot of class when he did that.

[Clarkie1]

87. He did not announce.

When asked if he was going to run he said (from the best I can gather since I was not there):

"I am going to have to take your advice on that."

This was not a formal announcement, he was merely clarifying to supporters that he will run if we support him in that effort. He spent a lot of time talking about how we have to focus on 06', and defending democrats who are attacked for being weak on national security, among other things.

[MADem]

90. Actually, that is only half true

When the false Andrea Poler (sp) Kerry-Intern story came out, Wes was the one gleefully quoted as saying to a number of reporters "He's going to implode with an intern problem" or words to that effect. However, to be fair to Clark, once the handwriting was on the wall, he did throw his support to JFK. That's how you get a cabinet position.

I find the inside baseball and bitter carping over individual favorites here interesting. Why get mad? Suppport your guy, if that makes you feel good, but why fight?? I don't get it. I liked Dean and Kerry, when Dean deflated, I moved on. Oh well.

As I have said before, if Bozo the Clown gets the Dem nom, Bozo gets my vote. A dead raccoon could do a better job than the current ditz making the decisions in the WH.

[Sparkly]

96. Let's just get the facts straight

ONE person quoted Clark as saying that, and it hit Drudge, blaming Clark for even starting that rumor, not responding to it as your story goes. Other reporters said that was NOT what Clark said at all. The story is FALSE.

[Crunchy Frog]

102. We don't usually treat Drudge

as a reliable source of information on this board. This seems to have been something that he pulled out of his ass, as the story was debunked by people who were actually there.

If you've got any more reliable sources to back this claim, I'd like to see them.

[kerrygoddess]

104. As I remember it ...

Chris Lehane, former Kerry aide who worked for Clark tried to make it appear there was something to the story. Clark inadvertantly said something to the press sometime after it had been debunked and it stirred up enough of an issue that with in 48 hours Clark had dropped out of the race.

[Crunchy Frog]

111. Well, that's not the way I remember it

but I guess that's probably how it was framed by the corporate media. The corporate media also tried to insinuate that Kerry didn't deserve his Vietnam medals and even that his wounds in Vietnam were self inflicted. I don't buy that any more than I buy the Drudge story about Clark and the Kerry intern.

[Sparkly]

113. Newsweek's debunking

The original article is gone, but a copy is here:
http://castle22.forclark.com/story/2004/3/7/4627/85548

It cites a New Republic reporter, Ryan Lizza, who was there and confirms Clark never said "Kerry will implode over an intern issue."

[Clarkie1]

62. They were not similar.

The Pelosi/Clark G.I. Bill of Rights was primarily for veterans' health care and far more encompassing.

The two Kerry ammendments were for $500,000 for the death of a loved one in the line of duty, and extending military housing for 18 months.

I commend Kerry for getting these through, but the fact is we need to do much more. These were cheap, easy ammendments for the Republicans to vote for because they require little in funding or extra commitment to veterans who are still living.

In contrast, a 1.98 billion ammendement to fund veterans health care failed in the senate the same day along straight party lines, except for Spectre (R) voting for it.

Again, I commend the good work Kerry is doing in the Senate. Every little bit helps!

[kerrygoddess]

71. I posted this last week about the two bills...

"The Boston Globe article also mentions the Pelosi ''GI Bill of Rights for the 21st century” introduced yesterday in the House. Pelosi received some support for creating this bill from former Democratic candidate Wesley Clark.

The Pelosi “GI Bill of Rights” is similar to Kerry’s initiative in the Senate. Pelosi’s bill would also seek to “increase death benefits for military families, while providing better healthcare for soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.”"


"Last year Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran, first proposed increasing death payments from the current $12,420 to $500,000 through insurance benefits and a ''death gratuity." President Bush has embraced the proposal, but would restrict the $100,000 death gratuity to those who die in a designated combat zone. Kerry's amendment would provide the increased death gratuity for any service member who loses his or her life. (See “The President’s Proposal?)"

http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp?view=plink&id=711

[Clarkie1]

79. I posted as well regarding these bills and ammendments.

And they are not at all similar in their scope.

What Kerry helped get though is limited to increasing death benefits and housing allowances in the the event of death in the line of duty. I commend Kerry for taking a leadership role on these ammendments. They were important, and so inexpensive the Republicans could easily vote for them even though veterans are not high on the Republican agenda.

The Pelosi/Clark G.I. Bill of Rights focuses on all veterans, not only families of those killed in the line of duty.

Among many other benefits, the new GI Bill of Rights will:

Increase funding for VA health care, including an additional $3.2 billion over President Bush's budget for FY 2006 and an additional $10 billion over the next 10 years

Improve mental health services, including expanding post-traumatic stress disorder services to all VA medical facilities

Block increases in prescription drug co-payments and enrollment fees that would raise the health care costs for 2.2 million veterans

Fully repeal the Disabled Veterans Tax, which currently forces disabled military retirees to give up one dollar of their pension for every dollar of disability pay they receive

End the Military Families' Tax which penalizes survivors, including widows and children of those killed in combat

Ensure an adequate number of troops and make sure they have adequate equipment, so that our troops are well protected and not stretched too thin

Provide a $1,000 bonus to the nearly 1 million brave men and women who have served in imminent danger in Iraq and Afghanistan as a thanks for a job well done

Modernize and enhance the GI Bill and Job Training Programs

Assist homeless veterans with employment, and protect bonuses and special pay for those who are permanently and severely injured or wounded or killed in service

Protect the income of our National Guard and Reservists to help the more than 40 percent of those called up who have suffered a pay cut to serve our country

Expand military health care to provide full access to TRICARE -- the military health program -- to all members of the Guard and Reserve and their families

Urge your Members of Congress to support the new GI Bill of Rights for the 21st Century!

http://ga4.org/campaign/gi_tax

[kerrygoddess]

80. I understand the scope is larger, there are similarities...

Kerry has also sponsored and had passed a bill in the Senate in recent weeks that helps protect the income of National Guard and Reservists and Small Business owners who suffer when they are deployed.

I think the Pelosi Bill is awesome. She's pushing stuff through the House that Kerry is pushing in the Senate. It's great. Team work.

[Adelante]

31. His focus is there

This is by one of his staff:

easy on the announcement stuff... (4.00 / 2)

All options are on the table, but General Clark is by no means guaranteed to run. He's focused on making the party stronger.

And to the poster talking about 2005 and 2006 races, General Clark agrees. General Clark will be out there trying to help Dems win governors' mansions, Senate seats, House seats, etc. Those are the short term milestones.

by lhuynh on Sat Apr 16th, 2005 at 21:21:45 PDT

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/4/16/23109/8313

[kerrygoddess]

36. Glad to see his staff clarified. N/T

[Clark2008]

38. And here's something from one of his web guys

I meant more along the lines of supporting WesPAC. Making sure it has the resources ($$$ and base of supporters) to show General Clark he has a foundation from which to run. I do not support starting a new organization.

In 2002, General Clark had no political organization, so we created one. He has one now. I encourage everyone to support WesPAC.-/i]

http://chat.forclark.com/comments/2005/4/17/83420/3219/106#106

[kerrygoddess]

105. I saw the stuff from his staff...

I'm glad they are clarifying this more. I also spoke with a friend who was there a while ago.

[Totally Committed]

34. As I remember,

Kerry started running a long time before 2004... years and years and years. I know, because he is my Senator, and I can tell you that his voting reflected a presidential run years ahead. I didn't see the outcry then. And, Dean was running years ahead, too. Ditto, Edwards.

GMAFB!

Go attend to the things that interest you, and we will tend to getting the White House back! You cannot govern if you do not win...

TC

On edit: Besides, we wouldn't have had all this outstanding business and issues needing attendance by Kerry or anyone, if Kerry had won. Think about it.

[chicagiana]

46. Edwards made a HUGE mistake ...

Edwards only did ONE term. He didn't have a long enough voting record. Than he ran in a Senate re-election year.

Edwards' natural time was '08. He messed up.

Now I guess he needs to run for governor. Because his national political career is more than likely OVER.

[MADem]

92. Over?

He's a KID, fachrissake. He could do eight years as a governor and still have juice to go for a big brass ring. I think he's just getting started. Look at the candidates in old primaries from way back when...they didn't all curl up and die.

And governors seem to do well in the Presidential races of late, it is the new paradigm.

[sybil]

43. I'm focused .

And I'm thrilled that WKC has rallied the base here in CA. No one else seems able to do that these days.

CA will be fine as long as Kerry stays out of the mix. He had his chance as DNC-annointed-candidate '04. He gave it his best shot and he muffed it.

Time to move on.

[Totally Committed]

51. You said it, Sybil!

I agree 1000%.

TC

[sharonking21]

70. Please stop this petty sniping

I would like to contrast the behavior of some here on DU to something that just happened here in Austin.

I am first and foremost a Wes Clark supporter. That does not mean that I dislike, try to snipe at, or say bad things about some of my favorite other top Democrats.

John Kerry was here in Austin yesterday to hold a town hall meeting concerning his bill on children's health care "Kids Come First." I sent notices of it to everyone I could in grassroots Austin. Furthermore, they turned out for John Kerry--among those I could identify there were Clark people, Dean people, Kerry people, Edwards people and Kucinich people. We all realize that this is, in part, a campaign trip. WE DON'T CARE!

My suggestion to all the grassroots organizations here in Austin is that they try to book any and all top Democrats to come here and that we all turn out for each of them. This will help keep the grassroots alive and keep Democratic issues in the forefront.

Our local paper is Republican (endorsed Bush)and they gave short shrift to Kerry's appearance (after the fact--didn't ever even mention beforehand that he was coming). Here is link to their story:


http://www.statesman.com/metrostate/content/metro/stories/04/17kerry.html

Here is the response to that story that I sent to all the grassroots people I know here--of all stripes.

I can’t believe they said only 500 people were there yesterday. If you were there, how many would you have estimated? I know it was way more than 500.

Note also the use of negatives characterizing the event.

“Vanquished presidential candidate John Kerry”

“than one who recently suffered the biggest defeat of his political career.”

“he touched on topics ranging from immigration to the environment to his own failed bid for the presidency.”

“Some attendees were skeptical that the health care plan would work." The devil is in the details," said . . “

“Some Democrats simply seemed star-struck by the guest of honor.”

Clarkie that I am, John Kerry is not my number one :>) favorite for the nomination in 2008, but I hold him in high esteem and he is right up there.

I think they need to show more respect for Democrats.

They need to show more respect for our standard-bearer.

They didn’t even mention that he carried Travis County handily.

And, having been there, this story is pretty much a travesty of what actually occurred.

Yes, he is campaigning. More power to him and to anyone else who wants to do so. We need to keep campaigning on a permanentbasis.

I suggest that we try to lure any top Democrats here to Travis County in order to keep the grassroots nourished.

I will show up for each one of them and I urge that each of you do so too.

But they hardly touched upon the real substance of what went on there regarding Health Care for Kids. That infuriates me.

And the numbers are a real crock! My guess would have been 2000-2500.

..........................................................

See why we need to stop this kind of petty bullshit and pull together?

[kerrygoddess]

74. Well I couldn't agree more.

Kerry was in Austin talking about the Issues. Pushing an issue he has sponsored legislation on. That's what we need to focusing on, the issues, not who's running in '08 and Kerry has said that over and over again in the recent months. Sure there is speculation he might run again and people can view his events as the begining of a campagin or they can view them as an event on an issue, but he won't detract from the issues right now. No one should.

[sharonking21]

81. Sorry but that is a weak defense

(Edited to insert word left out in error)

All of us knew very well that Kerry's appearance here also had a lot to do with campaigning. AND WE DIDN'T CARE. I feel that you are seeking subtle and not-so-clear-cut distinctions that are mere justifications for an opportunity to chastise Clark needlessly. Be ashamed and stop doing it.

[kerrygoddess]

84. Not a defense...

Facts. But thanks for sharing. Nothing to be ashamed of. I like Clark a lot and always have. I think the timing was wrong on this not his aspirations.

[Clarkie1]

89. If you "couldn't agree more" then your criticism of Clark is not valid.

Firing up the grassroots and building support for important issues is how democracy works, and the Clark grassroots certainly seems fired up today and growing.

Clark has stated unequivocally we need to focus on the present and getting Democrats elected in 06', and he is going to help defend them from right-wing attacks.

Yes, we need to focus on issues. Clark, as you well know, is sponsoring several at the moment.

Or are only senators supposed to do that?

[kerrygoddess]

94. Not actually criticizing Clark

I stated I felt it was wrong that he would announce and have not said anything about him personally.

If he didn't formally announce I don't see that it is an issue other than Clark supporters are making it look as if he did for their own gain.

I don't see the gain in pushing who will run in '08.

[Clarkie1]

99. Here is a thread that will clarify this, if you haven't seen it already.

It's a misunderstanding and much ado about nothing.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1729481

[kerrygoddess]

106. Good Deal! Thanks!

I do like the General a lot, actually.

[Totally Committed]

40. Not enough room for all the

here's what Kerry just did threads?

It's about bandwidth, there's room for everyone's threads. Or are you just afraid it's Wes's turn to suck up all the oxygen in the room for a change?

Do your own thing and we'll do ours. No one is forgetting who Kerry is. Every time I see GWB screwing with everyone's freedom, or running the economy into the ground, or messing with the lives of my family and friends, Kerry's name is never far from my mind. Trust me.

TC

[kerrygoddess]

50. Not about that...

I live in CA, L.A. actually and we've got serious problems here. I think Clark should have come here with helping in mind, not promoting his agenda. Just my opinion. I'm actually glad JK had the foresight not to show up and take the focus off the CA Dems and their business.

[Totally Committed]

57. He doesn't need to...

with the 11,532 Kerry threads started every day just to prove to everyone he's still viable.

If he runs for *anything* in the future, I will oppose him. I will demonstrate against him. And, I am a resident of MA. I will never ever forget his campaign or his concession. I will never forget HIS decisions that doomed US ALL to his failure.

Stick a fork in him, he's done -- as far as I'm concerned, HE'S DONE.

TC

[kerrygoddess]

73. Nice attitude...

You accused me above of attacking Clark personally which I did not do and then you have the audacity to post this about Kerry.

Enough said! Who's bashing who.

FYI, I'm from MA and you should be grateful for all Kerry has done for MA. Instead you post a rant about demonstrating against him if he runs again for anything in MA.

This kind of attitude sucks. Especially over this.

[politicasista]

75. Go Kerrygoddess!

:yourock:

[Clarkie1]

59. Clark's only agenda is making the Democratic Party stronger

Your agenda, however, is clear. And your appreciation for other Democratic leaders besides your personal fave noticeably lacking.

Kerry's work is in the senate, and I appreciate the work he is doing for he Democratic Party.

[politicasista]

78. Amen.

:thumbsup:

[tishaLA]

86. I also live in LA

and I think it's great that Clark came here and offered a positive vision of what he wants to do to help the party and the country. He talked about American foreign policy, about veterans, about making election day a national holiday, about "the Christian wrong" and how Democrats can contend with that, among other things. Those are important things in California and across the nation as we try to make the party stronger.

[high density]

108. Yeah...

That's why I voted "no" because he hasn't announced yet. :)

[Zensea]

11. If anyone else announced this early they'd be laughed at or scorned

That's the way I see it anyway.
Think about it.
If Hillary announced now, she'd be scorned by lots of people.
Look at the criticism of Dean for allegedly starting to run for 2008 (and who knows, perhaps he is) by running for DNC chair.

It's only a little over 4 months after the last election.
Feels premature to me.

That is if he has officially announced. There seems to be some diagreement on that in terms of the parsing of language.

[trillian]

15. Of course he didn't officially announce

He told his supporters, that's all.

Sheesh!

Edwards ran for two years before he officially announced.

:patriot:

[Zensea]

23. read the last line in my post

IF he announced it will be premature at this stage.
Some folk are saying he has announced, some say not.

I would say it is not an official announcement in the de jure sense, but it looks pretty cloes to a de facto announcement.

& there's no denying the excitement of some Clark supporters.

Regarding the Sheesh comment, better to address that to the original poster than to me.

[ClarkUSA]

18. He has not officially announced at all.

But it's still a happy day for Clark supporters.

[chicagiana]

49. When Hillary announces ...

When and if Hillary announces, she will be scourned. It doesn't matter WHEN she does it. Besides, WHY exactly would she announce early when every right wing talk show host is constantly blabbing about Hillary in 08'.


If the right wing is giving Hillary free publicity, THAT is a bad sign. They aren't giving CLARK publicity. They're scared of Clark. They're scarred of Clark in the same way they're scarred of Al Franken.

[cestpaspossible]

66. 'scared of Clark in the same way they're scared of Al Franken'

in the same way?



"Because he's good enough..he's smart enough.. and, doggonit, people like him?"

[trillian]

12. No!

And you had better believe he knows exactly what he's doing!

:patriot:

[alpaca]

14. He didn't announce

He made a statement to supporters to energize them. Anything we can do to frame the issues will help with 2006.

[The Traveler]

19. I see it more

like he drove a stake into the ground and issued his challenge to the neo-fascists and theocrats. Look out, wankers ... here he comes. And he is not coming alone.

[Clark2008]

76. Ooooo! I like this wording...

...he drove a stake into the ground and issued his challenge to the neo-fascists and theocrats. Look out, wankers ... here he comes. And he is not coming alone.

Expressive, accurate and ballsy.

Love it!

[CJCRANE]

20. It wasn't an announcement,

it was a hint to keep his supporters in the picture.

[Clarkie1]

24. He is doing everything he can to support the Democratic Party.

His energy now is on the present and 06'.

In regards to a future presidential run, he has not yet announced anything formally, but will "take your advice on that."

Unlike working behind the scenes and keeping everyone guessing as is the tradition with career politicians (and as several senators are doing now), Clark has made his intentions and willingness to run again if he has our support clear and unambiguous. He is preparing for that contingency, but making it a reality is contingent upon us.

For that, I say THANK YOU GENERAL CLARK!

CLARK O8'!!!!

[democrank]

26. Clark can "announce" anytime he wants

as far as I`m concerned. Whether it`s today or a year from now, he has my vote. What a breath of fresh air this man would be, plus I admire his penchant for populism.

A Rhodes Scholar combat veteran. Try that on for size, Bill Frist.

[onehandle]

28. He Didn't Announce. nt

[tishaLA]

30. I don't think he "announced"

I think many who love (and many who hate) Clark wish he did though. Those who hate Clark look for any utterance to demonstrate his "bad faith" to the party.

Happily, he has spent months and months on the raod promoting democrats and democratic party ideals so the haters haven't had much red meat thrown their way for a while.

[ClarkUSA]

33. Clarkhaters can kiss my Democratic ass

He didn't make an official political announcement but he sure sounds open to "all the options.";)

[Clarkie1]

41. Re: 08' he said "I am going to...

have to take your advice on that."

It's a clarification from "rule nothing out."

What he is saying to his supporters is that if "drafted" again then yes, he will run.

As he said in 04': "It's not about me, it's about all of you."

THANK YOU GENERAL CLARK! :-)

[Lena inRI]

32. The only people regretting Clark's candidacy at any time. . .

are those copy-cats (especially the Repubneo-cons and the 2 Johns)who have been taking his ideas and passing them off as their own.

I'm so happy he will have 18 months to get credit for his creative, cogent solutions to various problems.

Now when the people hear his ideas, they can go from saying "he ought to be President" to saying "hey, this guy can be our next President!"

Also, now Clark can take his time introducing all his domestic-social plans that never got enough exposure in 2004 because of a skewed media.

Good General Clark, I'm a-ready. . .regrouping for the "March to the White House 2008"!

Keep your powder dry, Clarkies.

:kick: :kick: :kick:

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

[x_y_no]

37. He didn't announce ...

So he can hardly have announced too early.

But I'm delighted to read that he'll take our advice. I know what mine is. :-)

[jen4clark]

39. From what I've read

in all the different accounts of people who were at the event, he did not formally "announce", but gave his supporters a more definitive answer than "rule nothing out."

[Pithy Cherub]

42. Clark could announce it to his vegetable garden and I would be in!

When and if he chooses to formally announce, I'm in. Meanwhile onto the goals for 2006! :)

[chicagiana]

44. AIR TIME!!!

All General Clark needs is AIR TIME!!!! If he gets his air time, America will be convinced with this man. He is positively hypnotic. He has a powerful presence that is calm, confident and overwhelming.

He is not the hyper-active rambler that Dean is. He is that grandfatherly figure that everybody respected as a kid, being just "cool enough" and "in charge" enough.

Wesley Clark in 2008.

I will PROTEST John Kerry if he runs again. Kerry dropped the ball. Kerry BAILED OUT, when we needed him to fight.

[sybil]

45. BAILED INDEED!

[cosmokramer]

48. Kerry couldn't beat the WORST PRESIDENT EVER....

...he doesn't deserve another chance.

[x_y_no]

52. Amen. n/t

[Totally Committed]

54. Super Amen! (n/t)

TC

[tishaLA]

60. I wouldn't say he doesn't deserve another chance

I'd say he has to make a compelling case about why he deserves to be the candidate again after he lost to the worst president ever and ran a not particularly inspired campaign.

[politicasista]

82. Nice of you guys to lift up your own while attacking another

Love the Democratic unity. :rofl: :sarcasm:

[x_y_no]

95. I sweated blood for Kerry ...

I have earned the right to my opinion of him after his pathetic campaign.

I may feel differently by the time the next election year rolls around, but right now I wouldn't lift a finger for either him or Edwards. Maybe, just maybe I could stir up enough passion to cast my vote for him if he's the nominee, but even that's questionable. It'd be a wasted vote anyway, so why not vote third party?

[MoonRiver]

55. Absolutely! Clark YES! Kerry, a resounding NOOOOOOOO

:dem: Here's to The General! :yourock::toast::patriot:

[politicasista]

69. How thoughtful of you to use the General to trash Kerry

Like you have in all of your other posts. :rofl:

[MoonRiver]

Whose using anybody? I'm expressing my opinion.

I am a passionate supporter of General Clark and have been for at least 2 years. Of course, for Kerry promoters, it's NOT OK to speak positively of anybody except Kerry. :thumbsdown: to totalitarian mentalities.

[JHBowden]

77. Hey, I supported Dean throughout 2003.

Some of the more zealous Clarkies will bash *any* Democrat from Gore to Kerry to score points, and all it does is turn liberals who haven't made up their mind yet off from Democratic Underground.

[MoonRiver]

85. My favorite candidate is Wes Clark. Kerry is on the lower end

of my potential candidate preferences. There are some I dislike even more than him. Am I not allowed to express opinions about personal preferences for the 2008 race?

[JHBowden]

91. Do you guys really believe that Kerry must be protested?

Kerry isn't at the top of my list either. I'm looking for a candidate that will take down the Bush-Tom Delay machine, protect the judicial branch from the radical clerics, and clean out the special interests.

What do I see from the Clark supporters? Violent attacks on loyal Democrats. It ain't right.

[LandOLincoln]

93. "Violent attacks on loyal Democrats????"

You might be more effective if you didn't overstate the case so much. It isn't THE Clark supporters, it's one or two, and they are hardly making "violent" attacks on anyone.

That said, I'm bound to point out that one of the General's main points last night was that DEMOCRATS NEED TO STOP ATTACKING OTHER DEMOCRATS, and that goes for Clark supporters disparaging Kerry as well as the regular 3-4 who jump into every Clark thread for the express purpose of pissing all over it, and us.

[JHBowden]

112. Yes, the attacks are vicious.

Some say Kerry needs to be protested, others are saying that they will vote 3rd party if Clark, well, loses *again* to the "pathetic loser" who defeated him last time for the nomination. Clarkies have savaged Gore, Dean, Clinton, and now they are going after Kerry.

The General is correct in that this stuff needs to stop (or at least redirected against adversaries like Tom Delay). As 2004 illustrated, you guys are going to win very little with only a handful of dedicated fanatics. You gotta reach out, and trashing everyone who isn't Clark or a Clark supporter is not a way to do it.

[x_y_no]

97. See my post #95

I bear no malice towards Kerry - only profound disappointment.

[MoonRiver]

101. Explain how not wanting your guy to get the nomination is violent?????

:shrug:

[JHBowden]

115. That's not what bothers people.

The stuff I identified in post #112 does. Clark wouldn't approve of the crap that goes on here, so do not be a sinner.

[JHBowden]

68. Why be vicious?

Bashing loyal Democrats isn't a way to convince me and others why we should support Clark. Next time it could be your candidate that gets swiftboated.

[Crunchy Frog]

109. I apologize for saying this but

I don't think it's ever a good idea to promote one person by putting others down.

I think we should be exercising a little graciousness while celebrating this apparent signal from Wes. You don't win others to your point of view by putting down people who they admire and respect.

I think Wes also said something about the importance of Democrats defending other Democrats.

[cosmokramer]

47. Never too early to start energizing your core supporters...

...not an 'official' announcement, but a most definite 'stick with me, it is likely to happen and I'll need you'.

He's running, make no mistake about it. But the 'official announcement' of this intent won't be for a little while yet.

Expect boots on the ground in Iowa in January 2006.

[Eloriel]

58. Oh, God. You people are going to drive me away from DU.

Again.

[FrenchieCat]

61. Really?

Too much positivity?

Personally, I'm glad that Clark is being a leader, and not waiting till a signal is being given by whomever!

[Adelante]

67. Oh, good!

Um, oh, God. ;)

[Clarkie1]

72. No one can "drive you away" except yourself. n/t

[Crunchy Frog]

110. Well, you could always just make use of the ignore

and hide threads features. I also dispute that anyone "drove you away" You made a decision to leave for awhile. There's no real point in making other people responsible for your own choices, rather than taking ownership of them yourself.

[JHBowden]

63. I'm glad somebody is getting a jump on it.

If Clark wants to work now to become a force in 2008, it is better for all of us.

[sundancekid]

64. Never too early or too often to announce AND to denouce ... 4-star props!

[Zhade]

83. IMHO, *anyone* announcing a bid for prez now is way too early.

Takes some of the focus off '06, and more importantly the voting reform needed to make any announcments worth anything.

[Name removed]

88. Deleted message

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

[wisteria]

98. I agree with the Kerry supporters, My choice remains Kerry in 2008,

but support whom you will. I just can't figure out why it is necessary to go negative on other peoples choices for president? If you really feel your candidate is the better choice than you should feel no need to attack others choices.

[Adelante]

100. I agree with you

But it goes the other way often enough, as well.

[Clarkie1]

103. MODERATOR: PLEASE CONSIDER LOCKING THREAD.

Reason: Poll is based on a false premise.

Please see this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1729481&mesg_id=1729481

[kerrygoddess]

107. Good idea! N/T

[incapsulated]

114. HE DID NOT ANNOUNCE!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1729481&mesg_id=1729481&page=

[Moderator]

116. Locking

for borderline and some inflammatory rhetoric.

Take a breath everyone.

The Mods