Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

An argument for Edwards over Clark for VP.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
PeaceProgProsp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 08:43 PM
Original message
An argument for Edwards over Clark for VP.
I like both of these guys and I go back on forth on arguments for both of them. I think Edwards noses out Clark, but I still need arguments to convince myself.

I thought of one today.

I'm thinking about 2012, and I'm hoping that Kerry creates an America which makes a candidate like Clark obsolete. I realize that Clark has a lot going for himself, but I still think his greatest value is that he's an antidote to the world that Bush is trying to create. Bush is trying to run on fear, and Clark says, "if you're afraid, you need a guy like me and not like Bush."

Well, I hope that after 8 years of Kerry, we no longer have an America in which fear is part of the mix.

I hope we have an optimistic America which is ready for a ticket like Edwards-Landrieu, or something sunny like that.

I think of Kerry-Edwards as sort of a bridge to the future. We're starting with Kerry, becaue that's what America needs now, and going towards Edwards, because that's what America deserves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jjmalonejr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 08:45 PM
Response to Original message
1. Well said!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bok_Tukalo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 08:48 PM
Response to Original message
2. I hate to be cynical
but I think it comes down to polling: Will the Edwards "two Americas" rhetoric play better than 4 stars.

Is it the war or the economy, stupid?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 08:52 PM
Response to Original message
3. But the election is this year, not 2012
And we need to win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PeaceProgProsp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. The VP will only add inrementally to 04, but picking the right VP
makes the biggest difference if it's the between 8 years and 16 years of having the white house.

So long as you trust that Kerry is the right nominee for president -- which I trust -- it seems like it's important to think about 2012.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Awsi Dooger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 05:54 AM
Response to Reply #5
45. Exactly, it might have been Clinton's biggest gaffe
Throughout the second term I really wasn't as concerned with the Monica crap as how Gore would fare in 2000, solo. I don't need to be reminded he really won, yadda yadda. I saved 12 VCR tapes from 2000 and have been reviewing them. Gore was pathetic in that campaign, even more than I remembered. Sometimes it's so painful I have to fast forward.

In the late '90s there were newsmagazine headlines like, "Does Gore have what it takes?" for a reason. A more charismatic and "normal" VP would have sailed to election.

Also, keep in mind this seemingly irrelevant fact: Wes Clark is not as tall as John Edwards, up to two inches. When CNN did that piece on the Dean campaign a few months ago, "True Believers," one scene showed a Dean aid expressing disbelief at how short Clark is, "at least a half inch shorter than the governor," in her estimation.

If either Clark or Edwards face the electorate atop our ticket, we'll be far less handicapped with the taller, 5 foot 10 Edwards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
4. i like Edwards for vp because
Edited on Mon May-24-04 08:55 PM by JI7
during the primary he did well among conservative leaning voters , especially in swing states like wisconsin. this is the only group of voters that edwards did far better than kerry did with. so in terms of helping kerry win which i think is most important, i think edwards can do it. he brings in ADDITIONAL support. and it's all based on actual results and other studies done.

i like edwards for many other reasons also but as far as reasons for why he would be a good vp pick goes, my reason above is the best one i got.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KC21304 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. Clark did very well with conservative voters in Oklahoma.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PeaceProgProsp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. It was the only state in which he did well.
So I'm not sure how much that says.

Edwards did well with moderates in every state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KC21304 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #13
25. I beg to differ. Before Clark bowed out
he beat Edwards in New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Arizona, New Mexico and North Dakota. Not very liberal states, wouldn't you agree ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. Of those 5 states, only in AZ did Clark beat Edwards by >1000 votes.
(Or roughtly 1000.)

And nationally, Clark has about 500,000 fewer votes so far.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KC21304 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. Ahm... Clark hasn't been in the race since Feb 11th.
He still beat Edwards in those 5 conservative states, which means the statement that Clark would not do as well as Edwards with conservative voters and that he only did well in Oklahoma is not true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. He didn't beat him by much. Aren't SC and Missouri conservative?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 11:22 PM
Response to Reply #30
38. yes, but the point is not that they are conservative states as much as
the type of voters who voted for edwards called themselves conservative leaning. kerry won many of those conservative states like tennessee and virginia and georgia. kerry won wisconsin and many other states. but the people who voted for edwards in many of those states were different from the ones who voted for kerry. they were republicans and independents and conservative leaning. edwards did far better than kerry with people who described themselves this way. this is why i say edwards can bring additional support.and i believe many of these people are probably part of the 35 percent of union members that voted for bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KC21304 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #27
37. Hey, I didn't say Edwards didn't do well with conservatives.
Edited on Mon May-24-04 11:24 PM by Kerryfan
PeaceProgProsp said that Clark did not do well with conservatives and Edwards did. I pointed out that Clark won conservative OK. and when Peace said that was the only one, I pointed out that he beat Edwards in 5 conservative states.

I do not have vote totals, only percentages, but I doubt that 3 percentage points in TN was 80,000 votes. Anyway I guess we all have made our points. Goodnight.

On edit I see you said 80,000 in TN and VA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PeaceProgProsp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #37
39. I didn't say Clark didn't do well with conservatives.
I've said that Edwards did really well, and I think JI7 has really made the clearest statement of this fact.

Your argument is based on the idea that OK is conservative. JI7 points out that the exit polls showed that actual moderate voters really voted for Edwards in big numbers. (Not bad for the fourth most liberal Senator in 2003 who talked about poverty and race at every stop on the trail.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #27
49. Excuse me?
Here's almost 9000 votes more!

New Mexico
updated: 11:53 a.m.,
February 19
Kerry 40,964 42% 14 98% reporting results by county not available
Clark 19,838 21% 8
Dean 15,854 16% 4
Edwards 10,953 11% 0
Kucinich 5,365 6% 0
Lieberman 2,520 3% 0
Uncommitted 460 0% 0

Here's almost 1500 votes more!

North Dakota
updated: 3:06 p.m.,
February 12
Kerry 5,316 50% 9 100% reporting not available not available
Clark 2,502 24% 5
Dean 1,231 12% 0
Edwards 1,025 10% 0
Kucinich 308 3% 0
Lieberman 98 1% 0
Sharpton 28 0% 0


Here's almost 9000 votes more!

New Mexico
updated: 11:53 a.m.,
February 19
Kerry 40,964 42% 14 98% reporting results by county not available
Clark 19,838 21% 8
Dean 15,854 16% 4
Edwards 10,953 11% 0
Kucinich 5,365 6% 0
Lieberman 2,520 3% 0
Uncommitted 460 0% 0

I'm sure you didn't mean to exaggerate, right? :eyes:







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #49
53. You counted NM twice.
So, Clark beat edwards by 50K or 80k in AZ, 9K in NM and almost nothing in the other three states.

In Missouri and SC combined -- just two states -- Edwards got 200,000 more votes than Clark, and has today around 500k more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. For perspective, Edwards beat Clark by about 200K in only SC and Missouri
on Feb 3.

Then he beat Clark by 10k on Feb 7, and then 80K total in TN and VA on Feb 10.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rowdyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 08:57 PM
Response to Original message
6. Lets get in the door in 2004 first
National security is issue 1. Wes Clark will only be in his mid-60's in 2012-a mature, experienced leader.

Not knocking Edwards by any means, he's my second choice. But I really think Clark is the stronger choice for 2004.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leilani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
7. Someone just called in to Larry King & asked Bob Woodward
who Kerry should pick for Veep.

Woodward said someone ready to step into the Presidency immediately.
Said that is the real requirement. Said someone should have weight; must be able to debate Cheney.

I agree...this is #1 requirement; no on the job training.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PeaceProgProsp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. A lot of Democrats seemed ready to put Edwards on the top in 04
So I think they feel he's ready. And he certainly campaigned like he knew how to lead and persuade.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #7
54. It was me who called!!!
I actually got through! damn, I sounded dumb. i called in, just to see if I could, and I probably should have ripped both of those guys. Not quick enough I guess. I posted something on this last night- in Gen. Discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #54
65. I heard you Dinger!
You didn't sound dumb at all! You were great! After he answered, my first thought was...."He's right, Wes Clark would be perfect!" :7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
faithfulcitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #7
63. Exactly! Bob's right...
The VP should be a person who could step in immediately, and Kerry needs to *highlight* his security credentials. Kerry also needs some passion on the ticket, and Clark fits that bill as well. And no one seems to talk about Clark possibly giving AR to Kerry... With him, it's very much in play.

What would Edwards highlight...uh they're both Senators?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KC21304 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
8. Then Clark can pick Edwards for his VP in 2012.
I do not see Clark as just a security candidate. He has a degree in Economics and taught it at West Point. If things are on an even keel by 2012 I'm sure this man who has been Vice President for 8 years will be able to handle that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PeaceProgProsp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. terror
Without the fear of terror, I think lots of people would have scratched their head about why Clark was running.

I hope that within 2 years of Kerry's campaign people stop thinking that terror means we should expect less of our democracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KC21304 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. Even if we get Osama and Iraq turns out fine
what about the rest of the world ? Clark has great relationships with so many leaders around the world. He is a national treasure of military, diplomatic and humanitarian experiences that we cannot afford not to use.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PeaceProgProsp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Being VP bulids relationships.
The title is your letter of introduction.

I think the rest of the world would be happy to see that Kerry doesn't think militarism is an important part of his future plans.

They'd probably like to get to know John Edwards because he stands for principles with which they agree: working together for a better tomorrow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KC21304 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. Clark is already widely known and respected around the world
and not just for his military credentials. He needs no letter of introduction.

Edwards is a fine person and if Kerry chooses him I will support him, but Clark is the person we need NOW, to help win the election and to regain respect around the world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PeaceProgProsp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. You see, I have this feeling that Kerry is the person we need
today (and for some reasons that made Clark and interesting candidate) and Edwards is the guy were going to need in about two years provided Kerry does his job right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KC21304 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #23
26. Of course Kerry is the person we need for President
and Clark is the person we need for Vice President. We know to what lengths Bush and his goons are willing to go to at election time so we need all the help we can get. I believe Wes Clark can bring in votes where John Kerry needs them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dae Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. Now I'm a Kerryfan fan...Wes for VP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KC21304 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #14
20. Thanks, dae. I have been pushing a Kerry/Clark ticket
since before Clark announced. I had the good fortune to see Clark endorse Kerry in Madison on Feb 13. They were magic together.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. I want Clark to be Veep!
He's pro-Human-Rights (he's for same-sex marriage). Edwards is very lukewarm when it comes to defending Choice and promoting equal protection for all (e.g. same-sex marriage). Clark seems to be able to project the image of strength that the middle-of-the-roaders want, and yet he can promote human rights the way I like to see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PeaceProgProsp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. I think Edwards was sensible.
He didn't want to give christian conservatives a reason to show up at the polls to vote agains the Democrats.

But, if you noticed, Kerry adopted Edwards's language on same sex marriage.

Edwards said that he thought that every single federal right conferred upon married people should be conferred upon same sex couples.

A couple weeks later Kerry issues a press release saying (IIRC) that he believed that all 145 federal rights confered on married couples should be conferred on same sex couples. The only difference: someone on his staff counted up all the federal rights conferred on married people.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. kerry has been supporting that for years
it was something he always believed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PeaceProgProsp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #18
40. I don't doubt it.
However, while the other candidates were trying to figure out a way to say they didn't believe in gay marriage without saying too much at all (so as not to scare the far left) Edwards was the first to make a fairly eloquent statement about federal rights and the limits of federal jurisdiction and doing the right thing in a way that would stir up the right wingers.

Two weeks later, Kerry was issuing the same exact statement, with only the number of federal rights added.

He hadn't been articulating his longstanding beliefs quite that way until after Edwards stated his position.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ezee Donating Member (615 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:00 PM
Response to Original message
9. I agree, especially with your last sentance
we do deserve better and I think that Edwards really does believe that and can deliver that to America and to the world...It will just take a while to get there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leyton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:32 PM
Response to Original message
22. I think it comes down to where the country is headed come decision time.
Let's say Kerry announces at the convention. Presumably, that leaves his decision for mid-July, to allow for materials to be printed that say Kerry-Lieberman or Kerry-Gephardt (okay, kidding). So where will the country be in mid-July?

If Iraq is still dominating headlines and it looks like it will continue to through the fall, Clark is the best choice. He bolsters Kerry's credibility on national security and would assuage some concerns about Kerry's ability to lead in that arena.

If Iraq is subsiding and the economy continues to grow, Edwards is the better choice. He has credibility on jobs (although Kerry trounces Bush in polls on that issue anyway) and is more suited to domestic policy anyway, I think. This is not to say that Clark can't handle domestic, just that Edwards is probably at his best with that sort of issue.

What's a shame is that Kerry can't just have them both. Goodness knows they both bring incredible assets and few weaknesses to the ticket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 09:44 PM
Response to Original message
24. Do you beleive the terrorists will go away when Bush does?
I don't think so. They were around before Bush and will be here after Bush. We need to restore our relationships with our allies. Clark led a force made up of troops from 19 nations, each of which had veto power over his command. He was endorsed in the Primaries by 55 ambassadors. He holds the highest honors from most of the NATO countries. Beside the terrorists there are still countries like North Korea, China, and Russia that will still have to be dealt with. The rest of the world still depends on the US for leadership. That is something that Clark offers that Edwards has no experience with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenPartyVoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 10:31 PM
Response to Original message
31. I think Edwards would debate against Cheney better
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 10:34 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. How can they debate when they agree?
They both believe 9-11 and the Iraq War are connected. How could Cheney defend the Bush policy when Clark has been 100% correct so far?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #32
50. And they BOTH are STILL cheerleading for the war. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Darkamber Donating Member (507 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 10:45 PM
Response to Original message
33. Simply answer..Edwards VP Clark Sec. of State
This combination gives the best of both worlds at the top.

If Clark wants to run in 2012, he can from the Sec. of State position. And it allows Clark to really do what he's good at. I just can't see Clark doing fundraisers and going to funerals for Kerry.

Edwards ads a fresh and positive and hopeful vision for the future.

I have a feeling we will be shortly sick of war and sick of hearing what General said what and how high up the command different orders went.

Kerry needs both of these men and we should put them where they can be of the most use. Edwards working at the Senate/fund raising and Clark working the UN and other international leaders.

And Clark would have a learning curb as well if he stepped into the President spot. There's a reason why a lot of the lawmakers have law backgrounds. The bills passed through you need a law degree to read them and figure the loopholes in them. But then I guess Clark could hire Edwards to explain them to him before he signed anything into law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. Better answer..Clark Leader Edwards Lawyer
Edited on Mon May-24-04 11:05 PM by dogman
I'm sure Clark would be way ahead of Edwards on the learning curve towards Presidency. I would also think that any President would have a Constitutional lawyer at hand before he signs a bill, even a President who is a lawyer. Most people I know don't trust lawyers to begin with and this is one of the most common criticisms I hear about politicians.I think Holbrooke or Rubins would be more likely candidates for SOS. I just hope Kerry picks the one who helps him beat Bush now, 2012 is a long way off. Edwards is probably the least qualified candidate under consideration, but he would be better than Lieberman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Justice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. LOL Clark Needs Edwards to Explain "Legal" Things?

I like Edwards, and think he is part of our party's future - so VP seems right. I also think Clark should be SOS or NSA. But I can't help imagining Clark debating Cheney - I'd pay real money for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-04 11:03 PM
Response to Original message
36. I'm there. Also, Nader likes Edwards... I realize that's not a selling
Edited on Mon May-24-04 11:08 PM by mzmolly
point for many but....

1. Kucinich and Edwards are friends ... that and the Nader thang have gotta help with the so called "left" vote?

2. My far right - Republican Mother in law likes Edwards, and he helps in NC :shrug:

So... we've got Nader and my mother in law liking Edwards, that's quite a broad appeal! ;)

I like Clark's position on the war, and I would support his spot on the ticket, but Edwards is probably gonna be the guy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slenderfungus Donating Member (26 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 01:40 AM
Response to Original message
41. Edwards would be a redundacy of votes Kerry already owns...
Clark, however, would bring votes to Kerry which Kerry might not be able to bring on his own. Clark might bring a large number of votes from independent voters and moderate, disillusioned Republicans who might otherwise consider Nader, not voting at all or even voting for Bush again. Edwards brings redundancy to the overall ticket by simply adding enthusiasm to an already Democratic voter base rather than reaching out to bring over outsiders to supporting Kerry's campaign that might otherwise be lost.

Considering the amount of fear expressed by various posters to this board that this election will be a repeat of the 2000 election, I would think that it would be far more strategic to bring outsider votes to Kerry than just reinforce a voter base that has already committed to Kerry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 02:23 AM
Response to Reply #41
42. edwards did the best among moderate independents and republicans
but it was edwards who did best among republicans and independents and conservative type voters. this is the one area where edwards did far better than kerry on. and this is the one area where kerry does need help with. he won the south by forming a strong coalition of traditional democratic voters such as women and minorities and liberals. but when it comes to moderate or conservative leaning voters who are independents and republicans edwards beat kerry. so edwards has proven he could attract a group of voters that kerry did not do well with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 02:31 AM
Response to Original message
43. The way I see it
Edited on Tue May-25-04 02:32 AM by fujiyama
is that Clark has much more experience dealing with foreign leaders and foreign affairs.

Edwards has a better message relating to domestic issues. He's also a better campaigner.

In this election I believe the former trumps the latter, atleast in that the economy probably will improve (may or may not be by much)...but Iraq will almost certainly continue to be a mess.

That's the reason I give the edge to Clark. I also think he is able to explain why Iraq was not part of the war on terror, and in reality was a distraction and a diversion from it...People are only now starting to question the wisdom in what seems to be Bush's biggest fuckup (and there sure were a lot of them. That's for sure) -- which is Iraq.

Clark (along with Graham) has the ability to debate Cheney on this very important point.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ngGale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 03:16 AM
Response to Reply #43
44. I'm ready for sunshine and I'm sure the rest of the world is...n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #44
56. Who wouldn't like sunshine? (Edwards)
But first we have to get rid of the storm clouds (Terrorists) and how does Edwards do that? I think Clark is the best one for that job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bushwakker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 07:00 AM
Response to Original message
46. Gephardt, Edwards and Clark are all good choices
they each bring a particular strength to the ticket. Question about Edwards would be his experience and foreign policy credentials.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasSissy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
47. Your post says almost nothing about Edwards.
I don't get the point. What are Edwards advantages?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #47
48. Text Of Senator John Edwards' Address At Broughton High School
It's good to be home!

Thank you all so much for being here. I have never loved my country more than I do today. You know, the truth is, all my life, America has smiled at me and today I am smiling right back!

More than anything, I love the American people. The people I have listened to; the people I have embraced, the people who made me laugh, inspired me, inspired you. People who made me think. People who have made me reach.

And today, I see their faces. I see the faces of the men and women who worked in the mill in Robbins, North Carolinathe mill my father worked in, the mill I worked in. I can picture their faces as clear as they are in front of me right now, lint in their hair an grease on their faces, men and women who represent the best of what America is.

They went to work day after day, decade after decade in the mill because they believed that if they worked hard and did what was right, they could build a better life for themselves and their families.

I see the faces of the workers at Tower Automotive in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. They are wondering where do they go after the doors to their factory close? What do they do? Have they not done the right things in America? Have they not worked hard, been responsible, raised their kids? Where do they go now and will they have a president and an administration who understands their lives and who will stand up for them?

I see the faces of the young men and women that I met in Afghanistan, at night. They are proud of their country, proud of serving their country, but worried about their families back home. They are worried about what would happen when they went back.

I see the men and women at Page Belting in Concord, New Hampshire who wonder if anyone understands the struggles that they face and most Americans face every day in their lives.

And I also see the earnest, young, wise faces from central high school in Des Moines to Pomona College in California. Young people, looking desperately for inspirationlooking for someone who will lift them up, make them believe again that in our America, with their help, with their energy, and their enthusiasm, everything is possible.

Most of all I see all these faces, turning from skepticism and despair to inspiration and hope, because they believe in this country. They believe in themselves and they know that you and I together are going to change this country, and build one America that works for all of us.

It has been my greatest honor to have walked with you. From the beginning, this has never been my campaign. This has been your campaign. And I am blessed to have been a part of it. And I'm also blessed to be back here at Broughton High School with so many friends and family, members of my community.

Today I've decided to suspend my campaign for the presidency of the United States.

But I want to say a word about a man who is a friend of mine, somebody who I believe has great strength and great courage, my friend Senator John Kerry. He has fought for and will continue to fight for the things that all of us believe in: more jobs, better health care, cleaner air, cleaner water, a safer world. The truth is these are the causes of our party, the Democratic Party. They are the causes of America. And they are the reasons we will prevail, come November, and take back this country.

You know, it wasn't very long ago that all the pundits and pollsters said, by the time we get to Super Tuesday, there won't be a John even competing much less fighting for the nomination. And we proved those pundits and pollsters wrong and we are going to prove them all wrong come November when we take back this country.

And I want to say a personal word about my friend John Kerry, who I know very well. This is a man who from the time he served this country courageously in Vietnam, and all the way through this campaign, is a man who is a fighter. I know him. I saw what we went through in November, December, and back in the summer when everyone said he didn't have a chance. But he showed the strength, resilience, and courage that he has shown his entire life when he fought for us and for our country in Vietnam. He has fought just as hard throughout this campaign.

The truth of the matter is that John Kerry has what it takes, right here in his heart, to be president of the United States. And I for one, intend to do everything in my power to make him the next president of the United States, and I ask you to join me in this cause. For our country, for our America!

Somewhere in America a little boy or little girl plays on a sandy lot. It might be in a mill village like where I played. It might be in a barrio, or on a farm, or it might be a vacant lot on a city. We want that child to have big dreams about what he or she can do, where he or she can go.

In this great country, all things should be possible for that child-- as they have been for me.

As I leave this stage today, I leave it to you to make certain that in our American, our children can prosper and dream. This cause, this challenge to change America, belongs to you. You should not step back. You should step up.

It is up to you to make certain that in our American, our children can prosper and reach and dream.

It is up to you to choose a president who will end our two Americas so that every child can have the same chance I had.

It is up to you to make sure that the 35 million Americans living in poverty are never ignored again.

It is up to you to make this generation the generation that grows up in an America that is no longer divided by race.

It is up to you to demand a campaign that is about attacking peoples problems, not politicians attacking one another.

Those of you who cast your votes for me cast your votes for a new kind of politics. You wanted a positive campaign and you got one for a change.

I couldnt ask for better company today. With the love of my life by my side. To have your life blessed with four beautiful children, and family and friends, you couldnt ask for anything more.

To my staff and my supporters, thank you from the bottom of my heart. I will never forget all of your hard work and all that you did to help change your country. To everyone who gave their time, their heart, and their soul to this campaign, thank you. You deserve nothing short of a huge round of applause!

Like most Americans, in my life, I have learned two great lessons: one that there will always be heartache and struggle, and two, that people of strong will can make a difference. One lesson is sad, and the other is inspiring. And what makes us Americans is that we choose to be inspired

We can change America so that the America I love, the America you love can be again that bright, shining star, that beacon that stirs our hearts when we hear our anthem or see our flag. We can make it so. We are greater and stronger than anything that stands between us and that destiny.


We should never settle for less than our highest aspirations in our leaders and for our country. Because we are America - where all things are possible.

And our message today is this: we want to change America and we will!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
51. It will take GENERATIONS, not just 2 terms
to fix the mess the chimp has created. I mean GENERATIONS. No, Wes Clark would only continue repairing the damage done. He knows the world leaders the chimp has shit on. They RESPECT Wes Clark, they TRUST him. This country will only benefit with Wes Clark as VP and then President for 8 years. By 2020.....we may be in the world's good graces again, if Wes is Prez. Remember...he knows foreign policy..inside out. Edwards doesn't. Remember...the entire WORLD now hates us....Wes can use diplomacy to change that, given the chance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #51
52. That's kind of depressing.
I don't think America can make it if in two years we've aren't thinking more about working together to make American a better place and less about giving up things because we're afraid of terror.

The rest of the world is going to be happier when they see us all working together.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #52
55. When they see who working together? The rest of the world
doesn't TRUST us as far as they can throw us! We HAVE to have a president who has experience in diplomacy and TRY to repair the ill feelings the chimp has caused. He basically told the world to "go to hell, we will do as we please whether you like it or not." That will not be forgotten anytime soon. The rest of the world doesn't give a shit if Dems and repubs "work together"...they just don't want to be attacked by the "world power" and that is exactly what the chimp has told them we will do by his actions toward Iraq. We HAVE to change our foreign policy. Plain and simple. Wes Clark can help to do that. He knows what he's talking about. He can get the rest of the world to work together with US and our NEW foreign policies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 12:10 PM
Response to Original message
57. With the GREAT job Bush is doing
creating more terrorists...we'll need people with Clark's expertise for many years to come. Do you actually think the threat of terrorism will be gone in eight years?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 12:12 PM
Response to Original message
58. I found an argument for Edwards over Clark
"In the 2004 election, media attention on John Edwards (with 1,420 hits from March 1, 2004 to May 20, 2004) makes him the frontrunner on Kerry's ticket, according to the LexisNexis data. Trailing far behind are Wesley Clark and Hillary Clinton with 338 and 291 hits, respectively.

"It's anyone's bet when the announcement will come and who will be named to join Kerry on the ticket, but based on the LexisNexis data, unless a sleeper emerges, it could well be John Edwards who is selected on July 21 -- five days before the start of the convention."

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040525/cltu024_1.html






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xkenx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
59. WHY WES CLARK
Why General Clark is the best choice for VP:

Polls show Kerry ahead of W on domestic issues, behind on national security. Overall a dead heat. W may creep up domestically as economy improves, so Kerry needs to siphon away some of W's support on security. way, and This election WILL be about national security and terrorism because W will make it that. Look at the headlines from Iraq dominating the news. Bush has already put Kerry on the defensive questioning Senate votes and the "ribbon-throwing" incident. All Bush has to do is neutralize Kerry on war/terror, and he keeps his lead. Kerry can co-opt the national security theme on Bush.
Enter Wes Clark: Clark can stand up and say, "Vietnam was a disaster, but I stayed in the military afterwards to build the great all-volunteer Army we have today. Sen. Kerry said "Send me to Vietnam" and served with great courage and honor in that war. Sen Kerry criticized that war afterwards, and I consider that dissent an act of patriotism, for he had the nation's best interests at heart. Sen. Kerry backed up that service by serving his country for these many years in the Senate, including not forgetting Vietnam as he worked with Sen.McCain for years to retrieve our POW's & MIAs. I am proud to stand with Sen. Kerry, a man I consider to be one of the great patriots of our time". (As he wraps himself in the flag and talks about winning the only war NATO ever fought, this man who is one of the most decorated military heroes in U.S. history). This man can bring in military and ex-military votes which NO other VP candidate can do,and he is "squeaky-clean."

There are many other areas where Clark complements Kerry:

1.Ability to step into the Presidency if necessary. Clark has a career of military and diplomatic leadership unparalled. He has earned the respect of European leaders (he has knighthoods or the equivalent from 18 european nations) and understands the Arab world. NO ONE has Clark's credentials to help repair our alliances around the world and gracefully resolve the Iraq problem. Plus, something that many people do not realize, as one of our major military commanders, Clark had "domestic affairs" responsibilities similar to those of mayors and governors. He was responsible for the everyday lives (schools, healthcare, safety, career advancement, etc.) of those under his command, numbering hundreds of thousands at times.

2.Clark brings a "common man" background, someone who grew up poor, earned an appointment to West Point where he finished 1st in his class,
became a decorated war hero--someone with the brains, talent, and drive to go into the business world and make lots of money--who instead chose to serve his country for another 30 years or so. If this man isn't a true American hero, I don't know who is.

3. Agreement on issues: Kerry and Clark are very closely in agreementon Foreign Affairs / Homeland Security issues as well as on Free
Trade, and most domestic issues.

4. Campaigning against Bush: Clark has demonstrated, both during his campaign and since endorsing Kerry, that he is both loyal to Kerry and is a tireless campaigner against Bush. Clark has "fire in his belly" on defeating Bush. Clark can take on Bush/Cheney on all issues, especially those
where Bush would like to think he is strongest.

5. Helping to win Electoral Votes - Clark should help to win all the Swing States that Al Gore just missed winning and retain the Blue States that Bush would like to have. Most candidates are mentioned because they might win one state for Kerry, Clark could help in ALL of the above swing states. This is because he is an Arkansas Southerner who also proved to be popular in the Southwest and among Hispanics and American Indians. In fact, with General Clark's military background and "All American" image he has more popularity than most democrats such as John Kerry in all parts of the country where Republicans tend to be popular. With his Military Supreme Commander status, if he could get just 10% of military families to vote Democratic (who would otherwise vote Republican) this could change the outcome in a number of states. Although Wes is now a very progressive Democrat, his past background makes people feel secure. His comfort with Religion also helps. Both Kerry and Clark have a long history of using guns (despite being pro gun control.)

6. Taking on Dick Cheney: There will be a VP debate. Only Clark can face Cheney and cite Pentagon "inside information" about how Cheney decided from the beginning to go to war with Iraq. On all military related issues, Clark will be more believable than Cheney to millions of swing voters. 4 star hero vs. the
"chickenhawk."

7. Raising funds for Kerry: This is very important to Kerry since Bush has raised so much money. It was Wes Clark who raised almost $9 million in January alone, pre-matching funds. This was about 2 million more than his closest rival. In the 5 months of his campaign, he raised about as much as Dean. While Dean started the Internet dominance, Clark continued it with equal success and still has the best web site and Blog Community around. Since Dean isn't suitable as Kerry's VP, Clark is the best choice to attract the "outsider" type people who support Dean. Clark was often the 2nd choice among Dean supporters and their 1st choice for VP under Dean. In summary, with Clark as VP choice, there would be BY FAR the largest fundraising boost to the Kerry campaign as well as a likely union with Howard Dean and his supporters. Lets also remember that Clark was the most popular with the wealthy and powerful Hollywood crowd.

8. Mutual respect: Since Kerry and his VP choice will probably be together for months, getting along with mutual respect is very important. They have to be able to share each other's secrets. As has been demonstrated repeatedly, their mutual respect for each other's careers is apparent.

9. Kerry and Clark already have a name for their ticket that no one else can claim, "TWO PATRIOTS, ONE MISSION." This alone will be worth millions in free advertising. Undecided voters are easily swayed by these powerful slogans.

10. Appeal to the Church going Americans and Patriotism-Wes Clark has a background that includes several faiths. He is the "most comfortable" of all the major VP contenders with "God" and "American Patriotism". The Flag really means something to him. This is why he is a danger to Republicans in all parts of the country. He still is Karl Rove's worst Nightmare.

11. Is VP the best position for Clark? Some would say that Clark should be saved for Secretary of State. However, if we waited, it is very possible that Kerry would lose a close election. Additionally, as VP he could be used as a 2nd Secretary of State, Defense and Homeland Security. As shown by Cheney, a VP can be very powerful when they are strong and respected by the President in National Security issues.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #59
60. I love this, Ken.
Thank you. :loveya:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GOPBasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #59
67. Excellent post!
Welcome to DU! :hi:
That was a great post. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
61. Kerry needs a few important things in a VP
He needs someone who can electrify a room! Not because Kerry isn't a nice guy, but he's viewed as too serious, too stiff, and too somber.

He needs someone who people can accept as Presideent if Kerry can't, for whatever reason, fulfill the job.

I think Edwards would fill both of those requirements. He's exhuberant, has a very likeable smile and surely wow the room! As far as personality, he is complimentary to Kerry in almost all respects.

The most repeated complaint I've heard about Edwards during the primarys was he didn't have enough experience to be President. He's a very smart guy and seems to be a quick learner. He'd be us to speed very quickly.

I like Clark, but his personality is too similar to Kerry's and simply wouldn't fill the voids.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xkenx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #61
62. CLARK ELECTRIFYING!!
Many of us who followed Wes Clark beyond the artificiality of the debates found ourselves to be inspired by him like no one since Bobby
Kennedy. View the town hall meeting video on C-SPAN from Heniker, N.H. one week after Clark entered the race (3rd or 4th wk. in Sept.)
Also read below the inspirational leadership this man provides.

By cris
Posted to cris's weblog (Firsthand Accounts) on Tue Nov 18th, 2003 at 03:51:17 PM PST
The Man for all Reasons
If you are lucky, once in your lifetime a truly exceptional person will cross your path. I met and know such a person: General Wesley Clark. For three years, I had the privilege of working for General Clark when he served as Supreme Allied Commander-Europe. I can attest to the fact that he is a general's general and a soldier's general.

I first met General Clark in June 1998 on a special assignment in Maastricht, Belgium, in support of General Hugh Shelton. I was immediately struck by two things. First, although General Clark wore the uniform of a four star General, he spoke as though he were a polished diplomat. He seemed comfortable in both worlds - as a General and as a spokesman for NATO.

The second thing I noticed was the way he treated his subordinates. He treated everyone equally, regardless of their rank, and he listened - really listened - to what people had to say. And the General's security detail clearly loved working for him. This is not common; most security guys don't get to know their principals on a personal basis.

A year later, I got a call from my assignment officer. He told me I could either work at the Pentagon for the Secretary of Defense, or I could work for General Clark. After my memorable first encounter with him, there was no question what I would do. I said that I wanted to work for General Clark.

In the weeks before I arrived at SHAPE (Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe), I thought that I would be the "token Hispanic." When I arrived, I quickly found out that I was mistaken. I had never seen so many minorities working in any high-powered setting. I learned that it was because General Clark values diversity and wants to give everyone a chance.

And from the moment I arrived, General Clark and his wife did everything they could to make me feel welcome. My first assignment was to take the General to his quarters and then to a dinner engagement with NATO officials. After the event, the first thing General Clark asked me was whether I had gotten anything to eat. To most four-star generals, security is an instrument. With General Clark, it was a different story. He always treated his staff like family.

During the war in Kosovo, I saw how deeply compassionate General Clark is. He worried about the pilots who were out on night missions, and he would not go to sleep until he knew the last pilot had bedded down. Instead, he would work in his study, going over the latest intelligence reports and providing updates to the alliance and officials back in Washington. When he finally went to bed, it was only for two hours, and more often than not, he would be awakened by calls. His instruction to me before going to bed was: "Cris, push every call through." No rest for the General.

In fact, I don't think anyone in the U.S. armed forces worked harder than the General. His superiors in Washington, DC knew this. They would often preface their calls by saying, "Don't wake General Clark." All of us who worked for him were amazed by his constant upbeat tempo and energy. We wanted to do everything possible to take care of him because he was doing so much for America and NATO.

And no matter how pressing a situation became, General Clark always stayed calm. I recall when an F-117 went down - the only plane to go down during the entire campaign. In contrast to other officers I knew who would explode in tense moments, General Clark remained calm and efficiently took the necessary steps.

I don't think anyone else could have done what the General did at NATO. For anyone who thinks that was a small accomplishment, just get nineteen friends together for dinner and try to pick a restaurant as a group. General Clark took nineteen countries and built consensus through dialogue. He gave Milosevic a chance, and then took action only as a last resort.

General Clark is an extraordinary leader. People trusted him because they knew that he was honest and a straight shooter. And there was no mincing words with him. He always wanted to hear the truth. You didn't put things off. He wanted to know what had gone wrong so that he could make corrections and get back on the right track.

But most of all, General Clark is loyal -- loyal to his country and to the United States Army, the organization that brought him up from West Point cadet to Supreme Allied Commander. I have worked around a lot of generals, and I can say that the Boss is one of the best I've ever worked with. He cared deeply about the soldiers he led, treated all of us who worked for him with the highest respect, and served his country with dedication, courage and honor.
From the right front seat

Cris Hernandez Jr, Chief Warrant Officer (Ret)
Former Personal Security Officer to the Supreme Allied Commander, Europe
Casa Grande, AZ
---------------------------------------------------------------------
This one from interviews


As a junior Navy officer, Eric Massa had no choice the first time he went to work for Gen. Wesley Clark in 1996, as Clark's assistant in Panama. The Navy set up the interview, and Massa hoped to mangle it with blunt honesty.

"I didn't want the job, and I told him so," said Massa. "I was afraid of working for a pompous moron, of which there are several wearing stars. I had worked for senior officers who didn't care about people, and I didn't want to do that again."

It turned out Massa and Clark had something in common there, and Massa spent the next four years attached to Clark, first in Panama and then in Europe, during Clark's stint as supreme allied commander in Europe.

When Massa left Clark in 1999 it was under protest and only because Massa had been diagnosed with advanced cancer. Now, years later, Massa - recovered and retired from the Navy - is working for Clark's army again, this time as a campaign staffer trying to get Clark elected to the White House.

Massa wasn't looking for the job this time, either. Clark asked

him to come on board after learning a month ago that Massa had "involuntarily resigned" from his government job at the urging of Republican bosses. They were upset that Massa had visited Clark at a Democratic campaign event.

"They said I was a political liability and that if I liked Wes Clark so much I should go work for him," Massa said. A lifelong Republican, Massa just re-registered as a Democrat. Massa is the son of a Navy man, and as such grew up outside America and with a respect for the military. The family came to the United States when Massa was 16, and after graduating from high school in Louisiana, Massa attended the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md.

In all, Massa spent 25 years in the Navy, 16 of them on sea duty. In the mid-1990s, Massa's commanding officer told him it was time to decide how he wanted to fulfill his joint duty, a requirement for officers to spend part of their service with another branch of the military.

When Massa said he wanted to do something out of the ordinary, he was told an Army general by the name of Wes Clark was looking for a Navy aide. All he knew about Clark was that he had stars on his Army uniform, and that didn't carry much weight with Massa.

Their 50-minute interview, however, convinced Massa to withhold judgment.

"He had questions I didn't expect from a military man," Massa said. "He asked me if I was familiar with Greek literature, if I read Homer, what I thought about the Illiad.

"And the last 20 minutes were devoted to people questions," Massa said. "He asked me what I would do if a young soldier came to me and told me his wife had died. Or a homosexual soldier told me he was being harassed. His whole thing was treating people with dignity and respect."

Three hours later, Massa was on a plane with Clark to Panama, where Clark was commander in chief of the U.S. Southern Command. Massa described his job as Clark's executive assistant and deputy chief of staff.

Once there, Massa asked Clark what the Homer question was about. Massa remembers the answer: "He said he was looking for someone who was well-rounded enough to talk about issues beyond military terms."

For about 13 months, Massa shadowed Clark, keeping notes of his meetings and drafting follow-up letters to the people Clark had met. Massa said Clark forbade his staff to begin any of his correspondence with "I" because Clark wanted the emphasis on the recipient, not himself.

A show of support
When Clark was promoted to supreme allied commander in Europe in 1997, he asked Massa to stay on and be his advance man. Massa agreed and moved his wife and kids, who had been waiting for him back in San Diego, to Brussels, Belgium. After Clark arrived, Massa was again a close assistant and became one of Clark's main liaisons to Washington, D.C.

Massa had every intention of staying in Europe as Clark's assistant until he got sick in late 1999. He hadn't recovered from running a half-marathon but chalked it up to the flu. He blew off a doctor's appointment his wife had made for him, thinking he'd work it off.

On Nov. 9, 1999, Massa looked up from his desk to find Clark standing there. Clark told Massa that his wife had called worried about his health.

Clark had arranged another doctor's appointment for Massa, and when Massa protested, Clark gave him the only direct order Massa recalls receiving in four years. "I think we have lost the fundamental relationship between a four-star general and a Navy commander," Clark told him. "You will go to the doctor."

The doctor diagnosed Massa, who had never smoked, with advanced lung cancer and gave him four months to live. Clark cut through red tape to get Massa and his family back to the United States for treatment.

Just before Massa left, Clark convened the staff and tearfully awarded Massa the Legion of Merit medal for his work. Clark had received the same medal in the 1970s when he was a speech writer for the then-supreme allied commander.

It's one of the few times Massa saw Clark cry.

"Everyone thought that was goodbye, that I was dying," Massa said.

Back home in San Diego, doctors were more optimistic and diagnosed Massa with non-Hodgkins lymphoma, not lung cancer, and began aggressive treatment.

Unknown to Massa, Clark had a soldier tracking Massa's surgery. As soon as Massa came to in recovery, staff told him he had a call. It was Clark. At the time, he was overseeing the bombing of Kosovo.

A different kind of service
Massa retired about three years ago; he waited so that the last thing he did in uniform was attend Clark's retirement. Now he's living in a hotel in Manchester, trying to avoid a fast-food diet and bringing his family in from New York when he can.

He talks wistfully about the job he lost to get here. Massa was in Washington overseeing part of the Navy budget as a member of the House Armed Services Committee. His departure was reported by the press and has since become fodder for online political sites.

But he doesn't regret where it got him. On the trail, Massa is helping get Clark the veteran vote - and whatever else needs doing.

"If Wes Clark asked me to jump off the Brooklyn Bridge, I'd ask him if he wanted it done in the summer or the winter," Massa said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Mario Cuomo said,

"Wes Clark is a man of whom you can ask a question, and he will look you directly in the eye, and give you the most truthful and complete answer you can imagine. You will know the absolute truth of the statement as well as the thought process behind the answer. You will have no doubt as to the intellect of the speaker and meaning of the answer to this question....So you can see, as a politician, he has a lot to learn."



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #61
64. Hmmmm.....
Edited on Tue May-25-04 03:46 PM by in_cog_ni_to
A VP should be chosen because he can electrify a room with his likeable smile and personality? What about Iraq? What about Osama Bin Laden? What about foreign policy experience? What about Homeland Security? What about "righting" the U.S. with the rest of the world? What about the largest deficit in U.S. history? I know someone who is adept at ALL of those things, has a Masters degree in Economics, has a Mach 5 learning curve, AND, AND, AND he has a likeable smile (absolutely melts the heart) and a kindhearted personality and electrifies a room....Wes Clark! He has so much more to offer a Prez.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grannyfran Donating Member (67 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #61
66. Oh, come on ---
We're talking about Vice President of the United States here -- not Prom King. If it's a Kerry/Edwards ticket I'll work my tail off, but I know we won't have as good a chance for success as a Kerry/Clark ticket could give us. Let's save the republic first -- then we'll work on 2012. We have to have two serious, experienced statesmen in office to rebuild our nation and our reputation in the world. A good portion of the rest of the earth fear and hate us. I want my grandkids to grow up in a democratic country, free from fear of being blown up by a terrorist or thrown in prison for disagreeing with government policy. I would like to see them have a chance at a decent education, find meaningful work that pays a living wage and get medical care if they need it. The ability to "wow" a room with your smile just doesn't cut the mustard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scoopie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 08:25 PM
Response to Original message
68. You know...
the point is lost on many Edwards fans.
You go on and on about how he's a good campaigner. How he has a nice smile or whatever.
The thing you're not considering is that he wouldn't be able to step in if something happens to Kerry.
He's not "learned," so to speak. Heck, I've never served in the Senate and I know more about the Middle East (the obvious hot spot in FP these days) than Edwards and Bush combined. What's amazing is that, when I hear Wes, I LEARN something about the Middle East - and believe me, that's HARD to accomplish. If I were paid, I'd be an expert.
Edwards should have stayed put. He shouldn't have given up his seat. He's got potential, but four years in Congress after a lifetime of tort does not a president make.
Sorry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
surfermaw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-04 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
69. My Thought on Starting with Kerry and moving to Edwards
An an up beat personality I like also, however we need the General and all the others to get us to the White House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Aug 18th 2018, 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC