Mixed Feelings about Dean attacks on Clark

[WillyBrandt]

Noted on TalkingPointsMemo.com was an attack by Dr. Dean on Gen. Clark:

"At the town hall meeting in Rochester, a woman asked Dean why he was complaining about his rivals' attacks, but distributing fliers against Clark. Dean said he wasn't aware of the fliers and the decision was made by local staff. But he said he would be happy to defend them.

"If the fliers said that General Clark was originally for the war and now is against it, that's accurate," Dean said. "If the fliers said that General Clark said it was perfectly fine to let our software jobs to got to India and replace them with other jobs, he did say that. There is a difference in attack ads and just pointing out the facts."

As a Clark supporter, this pisses me off. The Iraq claim is simply false, and requires a willfull suspension of reality to be sincerely believed. The India thing was letting a throwaway comment in a debate eclipse far more words about trade policy.

So, I should hate Dr. Dean. But I don't. If you remember, Roosevelt, Kennedy, and Johnson engaged in hugely unfair and successful attacks both upon Republicans and even fellow Democrats. And the country, frankly, was better off because of it.

It pisses me off that Dr. Dean is doing this against my candidate--a good, honorable man, who I think would be better as our nominee--but it ironically gives me hope that Dean would come through the General Election victorious. (Unlike some Clark supporters, I want Dean to be "electable"--he is still the favorite, though ever less so.)

We need fighters who are willing to be a bit nasty; we're not going to win by playing clean. We're in a knifefight, and need to give some kicks in the groin.

It's an ambivalent feeling I'm trying to express: what Dean is doing (in a small way) against Clark means he's got enough of the rogue in him to be far more nasty and effective against Bush in the general election. So I wish he'd stop doing it, but I'm glad that he's the kind of guy who is both willing and able to.

(I still hope that Clark continues to not engage in false nastiness against Dean. I think it would be bad strategy. But he can say--as he has--every vile thing he wants about Bush.)

[Padraig18]

1. Oddly, I agree with you.

I want a candidate with a spine who's not afraid to fight back, and even get vicious about it, because no one who isn't willing to get vicious and get down in the 'mud, the blood and the beer' will stand a chance against * and the Marvelous Rove Spin Machine.

[WillyBrandt]

2. What makes me not worry is that

I doubt it will be effective against Clark.

It's so clear to me that Clark/Dean is the ticket. Dammit, if only everyone in the world agreed with me!

[Padraig18]

6. You and me both!

Could still happen, denials and all aside. Imagine it--- a populist pit bull and a genuine Rhodes Scholar 4-star general going after the AWOL Chimp and his dreaft-dodging VP.

:evilgrin:

[MoonRiver]

18. I have reached a point where Dean would not be my first choice as VP.

If we're looking for a TRUE populist, nobody would be better than DK. But a very realistic and excellent choice is Graham in Florida. He's made it pretty clear he wants the job too. He knows huge amounts of dirt on Iraqgate and voted against the IWR.

[Marian]

44. I used to want

Clark/Edwards, but someone I greatly respect pointed out to me that Graham would be much better for us because of Floriduh.

I think it is folly to believe there could be a Dean/Clark or Clark/Dean ticket at this point.

[seventhson]

3. Clark IMHO is the MIC/BFEE candidate. Dean MUST point this out

as should all the other Democratic candidates.

The vast majority of Americans are so misinformed and media-led that they will NOT know about these things unless those who are informed try to tell them.

Dean's statements are accurate and on point.

If it hurts Clark it5 is because Clark is essentially guilty of the allegations as charged.

Dean did NOT aithorize these fliers and it is being made WAY too much of.

But nevertheless the truth hurts. It should hurt Clark. It SHOULD hurt this MIC lobbyist from the ultraconservative Stephens group.

Only the blind will refuse to see that.

[WillyBrandt]

5. Clark is also the candidate of little green men

Who is DETERMINED to hold back cold fusion research, holistic healing, and the power of crystals.

Oh, and I forgot to mention--Clark referened the HOMESTEAD ACT! Didn't the Native American Times know this when they endorsed him.

Unbelievable! The specter of Roswell looms.

[Bombtrack]

11. whoa, 2 mock alien responses

jinx

[Bombtrack]

10. Well hopefully there aren't enough crazily paranoid democrats out there

who believe that a thing called the "BFEE" exists

tell me, do they have uniforms? Do they have a base at the bottom of a volcano?

Do they ever team up with their enemies (like the Kennedy family good empire) to fight invading aliens?(or create education bills)

[Eloriel]

24. You know, I don't know of anyone

here at DU who has explored even a little of the vast amount of material out there on the Bush Family who doesn't "get it" about the Bush Family Evil Empire or, as I prefer to call them, the Bush Crime Family.

Frankly, all you REALLY need to do is look at what this Bush has done to this country in 3 years -- and HOW he's done it -- with an analytical approach to "get it" well enough not to try to paint such references with the tinfoil hat brush.

You come dangerously close to looking not only appallingly ill-informed, but also like you're involved in spreading disinformation, perhaps quite purposely.

If you're sincere in your disbelief, however, I would suggest you read up on the subject. It will serve you well and keep you from looking quite so ill-informed.

Eloriel

[Bombtrack]

29. I've heard and read all the theories and non-well known factoids

alot from the hard people. But unlike alot of other people who read those things on a regular basis, I also read respected and respectable and/or mainstream media and journalism, in addition to the alternative.

And I'm skeptical towards all of it. And there is nothing that even comes close to making any sane person believe that the Bush's are some sort of machiavellian right-wing Don's.

There's no more truth to it than the crazy crap the right-wing kooks says about the Clintons.

[John_H]

51. And he was the guy on the grassy knoll, don't forget.

[liberalmuse]

4. I like both Dean and Clark...

and the way they defend themselves. They don't mince words. I'd love to see both of them on the same ticket. Oh, how I would love to see them go against this 'landslide Bush' guy. Can you imagine both of their guns aimed towards W (I meant to add '24-7', instead of having to stop and defend themselves against the likes of Lieberman and the DLC)?

[newsjunkie]

8. Thats how I feel

ever since I first heard of both of them. We need them BOTH! If it comes down to these 2,I just hope they keep it clean!

[Ramsey]

22. Agreed

While it hurts to see any of the candidates target another, the truth is that I consider it "practice" for the real deal. The Bush cabal is going to throw every bit of nastiness they can muster at our nominee no matter who that is. We MUST have a nominee that can stand up to that and defend himself.

I think both Dean and Clark have demonstrated that ability. It makes me think either of them actually has a chance to win. We know this race will be about lies and distortions' we are already seeing those kind of tactics leveled at both Clark and Dean. So far they have fended it off well. And this is a god time to hone those skills, early in the primary before the general public is paying attention.

[mouse7]

7. Gee, I remember, "Dean was skiing in Aspen when..."

Clark said "Dean was skiing in Aspen, while I was getting wounded in Vietnam" before a much wider audience and long before any Dean volunteers handed out a few flyers a couple of Clark events.

[Padraig18]

9. It's politics.

I think the realists in both camps realize this, and also realize that no actual bridges are being burned. :)

[dogman]

32. Simple statement of fact

Remember it was in response to reporter who asked who would win skiing contest. Throw away question-throw away answer. Not distributed to Dean supporters at Dean function.

[mouse7]

37. An answer to a reporter in a broadcast means less than a few fliers?

You can't possibly believe something that silly.

[dogman]

41. Sure

The answer to the reporter was 100% factual even though it was a throw away. The flyers are untruthful and introduced by the campaign at a function that is not theirs. However unlike Bush, Clark tolerates free speech and the dissemination of lies and half-truths will usually back fire anyway.

[mouse7]

45. YOU don't get to define "throwaway"

The media whores DID NOT throw the quote away. The media whores immediately had that quote on every news program for weeks.

Now... what news organization ran copies of the fliers?

So how many people were exposed to Clark's "Aspen" quote?

Now how many people saw the copy of the fliers?

Thats right... 10s of millions saw the Clark Aspen quote, and maybe a few thousand saw the fliers between what was actually handed out and what was posted on message boards and blogs.

Just don't try to go there.

[Jerseycoa]

12. Good question here

"And why doesn't Dean know his campaign workers are distributing these flyers? Everyone else has known for like a week."

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_01_11.html#002400


I have never been enamored of a Clark/Dean or Dean/Clark ticket. Either of them would need a VP with congressional weight and experience, one domestic policy and the other foreign policy. A shared ticket doesn't do what either of them need.

[mouse7]

30. Have you ever managed in the field in a big campaign?

There is no management from a national office over it's own lower level staff. Forget management of local volunteers from national. A local CD office gets stuff shipped to it. Bumper stickers, buttons, posters, issue papers, etc. That's the communication a local CD office gets from national. All volunteers are coordinated from a CD/City campaign office.

A local CD office communicates regularly with it's state HQ... when you can get a minute of the state ops manager's time. One thing your ops guy does not want to hear is the details of your flier crew. For the state ops manager, that goes under the category of...

"Why are you bothering me with these stupid %$@*&%$ details?"

[Jerseycoa]

31. Not the point

It was in the newspapers, on TV, all over blogworld, everybody knew, including Howard Dean unless he's lying or out to lunch completely.

[mouse7]

48. It is the point.

I have spoken from experience what really happens. You have spoken from no experience that you don't know what you are complaining about. You are pointing toward publicity that was generated AFTER the fliers were passed out. There was no publicity prior to the fliers being handed out that day. You are saying that Dean should have gone into the future, read the blogs/message boards, then go back in time and halt the volunteers, then come back to the present day to report on his efforts.

Gee... who's unrealistic?

[dogman]

42. Imagine the Presidency

or conducting an International military campaign. It sucks but unless you are GWB you probably will be held accountable.

[mouse7]

49. An international military campaign is NOT a flier crew.

That's like expecting Dean to be responsible for a Spec4 assigned to the 82nd Airborne dropping a rack of dishes during KP.

[KittyWampus]

13. Yes, But Dean's Nastiness Regularly Bites Him In The Ass

Unfortunately, Dean's attack style is not wearing well and won't work at all should he get the nomination.

Further, Dean makes too many mistakes while he's at the business of "attacking"... his supporters have made a habit of throwing money at him when he screws up ... but that's pretty much like giving a child candy every time they misbehave.

[Padraig18]

14. disagree entirely.

only someone who's willing to attack, and do so relentlessly, even stands a chance against Chimpy and the Rove Spin Machine.

[KittyWampus]

19. There Are Different STYLES Of Attacking. And Dean Is Gaffe Prone Besides

Look, Dean's already recieved backlash for his inept attempts.

What many Dean supporters fail to realise:

most voters don't hate Bush. Dean's style of attacking him is only good for a small number of Americans.
most voters don't give a crap about IWR and Dean's calling out longstanding Democrats and divisiveness in a HUGE TURNOFF>

Why is it that Clark can give back handed compliments, attack Junior and give out barbs to his Dem opponents without it coming back to bite HIM in the ass or turn off voters?

[windansea]

21. i like Clark's style

he attacks without coming off like a jerk

[Padraig18]

27. don't bring a knife to a gun fight.

Make no mistake: the GE will be a gun fight, and Dean understands this better than anyone else.

[Bread and Circus]

15. I don't hate Dean, I am just tired of Politics as Usual and Dean...

has proven he is Politics as Usual...he's better than
Bush in many ways but if he wins, it will be hard to
tell Dems from Repubs in some ways.

I want a clear choice.

Clark is a clear alternative.

[mzmolly]

26. Clark has not run a clean campaign... he claims Dean can't win with

out one poll, one shred of evidence to that effect. He's said it in two major interviews. His supporters are tauting that as a primary reason they support Clark. He has stolen Dean's platform/ideas after they were *tested* in inspirational to many. This is not CLEAN campaigning.

I'm not trying to smear Clark. Shit, I know it's politics as usual, but please spare me the "Clark is running a clean campaign" meme.

Additionally, Clark is in NO position to be critical of any of the Dems, he doesn't know enough about domestic issues to open that can of worms. If he is critical of the particulars, he'll be forced to answer questions, and I don't think he want's to *go there* He hasn't showed up to any recent debates? WHY? Proves my point.

And, he's garnered much support from those that say.

Gosh, I really like Howard Dean, but "he can't win" *hogwash!* I read the testimonials here almost daily. Dean can win, he's in the best position in the polls, he's firing up voters, bringing new people into the process, inspiring young voters... etc.

Not only can Dean win, but he can change politics as usual. And, we've got one chance to do this, Howard Dean.

[SadEagle]

16. BTW, Some posters on DKos claimed that they stopped using them...

... due to complaints from Dean supporters. This is not verified, of course, but I sure hope it's right, since I think being positive about fellow Democrats wins.

[Bread and Circus]

17. We are in a gunfight....don't bring a knife to a gunfight....

Dean (having skipped out on Vietnam, promotes raising
taxes, no Foreign Policy experience) is the knife we
don't want to take a chance on (dirty politics or not).

[Cogito]

20. I agree with you.

I think Clark's strategy has been to let the other candidates go hard against Dean and wear the "professional politician" label. If it comes down to a two man race the Clark campaign will need to show he has become a professional politician at that time.

[mzmolly]

23. Willy, I understand your frustration. But Clark advised a member of

congress to vote for the war. Clark started out supporting it, and now does not. It's ok for him to see the light so to speak, and it's ok for Dean supporters to point that out.

Edited to add: I am thankful for Clarks voice NOW, I don't care if he started out believing George Bush. What matters most is where we go from here.

[exJW]

28. That's simply not true

A vote for the resolution was in no way a vote for "war". Clark has been clear and consistant on his views of when and how America should go to war.

Clear. Consistant. So when anyone says he was "for the war", that person is a liar. That is clear.

Deans support of Biden Luger, while critisizing the rush to war, actually makes him similar to Clark in stance, if not in style. He should promote his own position, which was pretty good, instead of lying about others positions.

His fans should do the same.

[mzmolly]

33. Biden Lugar was not the same resolution no matter how much Kerry/Clark

supporters want it to be. I'm not lying about Clarks position, he said he would have voted for the same resolution Kerry supported.

I refuse to argue about the semantics of B/L here again. I am fully comfortable with my candidates support of Biden Lugar. I know why Clark is not critical of his new peers, he can't be.

[WillyBrandt]

38. What a bunch of bullshit

Clark did NOT initially support the war, ever. He has consistently denounced it. Those who claim otherwise are purposefully misrepresenting reality.

God this pisses me off...

[HFishbine]

25. You make some claims about the veracity of the flyer

What is false?
---------------

(front side)

WESLEY CLARK: REAL DEMOCRAT?

Clark PRAISED Bush and Cheney Until Deciding to Run for President

May 2001: "As you look around the world, there's a lot of work to be done. And rm very glad we have got the great team in office, men like Colin Powell. Don Rumsfeld. Dick Cheney. Condoleezza Rice. Paul O'Neill, people I know very well. our president George W. Bush. We need him there. . ."

January 2002: "I tremendously admire, and I think we all should, the great work done by our commander-in-chief, our president, George Bush," January 22, 2002 speech, Harding University

January 2002: "Af1er Al Qaeda attacked America, retired Gen. Wes Clark thought the Bush administration would invite him to join its team. ... But when GOP friends inquired, they were told: forget it. Word was that Karl Rove, the president's political mastermind, had blocked the idea. Clark was furious. Last January, at a conference in Switzerland, he happened to chat with two prominent Republicans, Colorado Gov. Bill Owens and Marc Holtzman, now president of the University of Denver. 'I would have been a Republican,' Clark told them, 'if Karl Rove had returned my phone calls.' Soon thereafter, in fact, Clark quit his day job and began seriously planning to enter the presidential race -- as a Democrat. Messaging Newsweek by BlackBerry, Clark late last week insisted the remark was a 'humorous tweak.' The two others said it was anything but. 'He went into detail about his grievances,' Holtzman said. 'Clark wasn't joking. We were really shocked.'"

Clark VOTED For Republicans for Decades
"Clark has said he voted for Nixon in 1972, Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984 and George H.W. Bush in 1988."
Clark NOT a Registered Democrat Until October 7, 2003
Clark declared his candidacy for president on September 17,2003. He registered as a Democrat on October 7 - 20 days after he declared. And nearly 38 years after he turned 21. W. 9/17/03 and 10/7/03]

Clark SAYS Democrats Are Soft on National Security
Wesley Clark was on "Hardball" with Chris Matthews 12/8, and spoke on why he's running as a Oem after voting for several GOP WH candidates: "I voted for people who were strong on national security and national defense."

"I'll tell you why General Clark voted for . General Clark spent 30 years in the armed forces. He wasn't that active in politics. And I think his focus was really on military affairs, national security..."
Clark BELIEVED Bush's Compassionate Conservatism
Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark in September offered this explanation for having praised President Bush at a Republican fund-raiser. "It's been an incredible journey for me and for this country since early 2001," he said. "We elected a President we thought was a compassionate conservative. Instead. we got neither conservatism nor compassion." The retired Army general gave a different story here in New Hampshire the other day. In this version. it was only American voters who got suckered by Mr. Bush's 2000 campaign -- not him. "I never believed that George W. Bush was a compassionate conservative." he said.

Clark BRAGS About Having No Strong Party Affiliation
"If this party is going to win in the future," he said, "it's going 10 need a lot of people like me . .. people who don't have strong party affiliation." -Clark, in New Hampshire

(back side)

WESLEY CLARK: PRO-WAR

CLARK PRO-WAR
OCTOBER 2002: SUPPORTED War Resolution "Retired U.S. Army Gen. Wesley Clark said Wednesday he supports a congressional resolution that would give President Bush authority to use military force against Iraq, although he has reservations about the country's move toward war. Clark, who led the allied NATO forces in the Kosovo conflict, endorsed Democrat Katrina Swett in the 2nd District race. He said if she were in Congress this week, he would advise her to vote for the resolution, but only after vigorous debate."
Clark Wanted to "Go Ahead" with the War "The credibility of the United States is on the line and Saddam Hussein has these weapons and so, you know, we're going to go ahead and do this and the rest of the world's got to get with us."
September 2003: SUPPORTED War Resolution AGAIN "Gen. Wesley K. Clark said today that he would have supported the Congressional resolution that authorized the United States to invade Iraq, even as he presented himself as one of the sharpest critics of the war effort in the Democratic presidential race. . . . General Clark said that he would have advised members of Congress to support the authorization of war but that he thought it should have had a provision requiring President Bush to return to Congress before actually invading. . . . 'I've said it both ways because when you get into this, what happens is you have to put yourself in a position - on balance, I probably would have voted for it.'"
When Clark's press advisor, Mary Jacoby, asked: "You said you would have voted for the resolution as leverage for a U.N.-based solution," Clark responded, "Right. Exactly."

4. October 2003: SUPPORTED War Resolution a THIRD TIME When asked whether he favored the resolution, Clark said: "The thing was, I would have voted for it for leverage.

CLARK NOW ANTI-WAR

October 2003: "I've been against this war from the beginning," he declared. "I was against it last summer. I was against it in the fall. I was against it in the winter. I was against it in the spring. And I'm against it now."

November 2003: Explaining away the September 18 interview, Clark said: "At the time I'd made this statement, I was having what I thought was an informal--I wasn't clear whether it was on-the record or off-the-record discussion abut the philosophy of sort of entering the presidency and somehow the Iraq question got thrown in." <60 Minutes II, 11/19/03>

Paid For by Dean For America
Produced In House, Volunteer Labor

(link: http://chat.forclark.com/comments/2004/1/7/23747/58243/230#230)

[Lobo_13]

34. I look at it this way

Everyone is going to have to get down in the mud to some extent or other. Clark has been doing it less obviously, but when push comes to shove, he'll be right down in the muck with everyone else.

We have to be hopeful that we can emerge from this and succeed, but we can't be naive and think that it won't be necessary.

[Larkspur]

35. Boy, am glad Dean is challenging Clark on these 2 issues

"If the fliers said that General Clark was originally for the war and now is against it, that's accurate," Dean said. "If the fliers said that General Clark said it was perfectly fine to let our software jobs to got to India and replace them with other jobs, he did say that. There is a difference in attack ads and just pointing out the facts."

Dean is right about Clark trying to have it both ways on Iraq and IWR. Clark is like Kerry on this issue, except that Clark didn't vote for it but he did cheerlead in CNN the illegal war.

As a software engineer whose job Clark doesn't mind sending to India, I will never donate any money to faux-Dem Clark, should he win the nomination.

[WillyBrandt]

39. As a software engineer who is not a child

I know that what matters are substantive positions on issues, not a throwaway debate comment that can be twisted by those already against a canddiate.

[retyred]

36. I don't have a problem at all

with dean's slam on Clark, most of what I read was the truth and the truth needs to be said, however dean denial of of the flier is a lie otherwise he wouldn't have had a ready reply in defense of it.

The insinuation of Clark not being a Democrat I think was a streach simply because of a 20 year old voting record and a two year old speaking engagement when deans whole tenure as Governor was more in line with being a Republican than a Democrat.

This is smear politics, it's what will happen by Rove and I think Clark showed he was well above that sort of thing by giving his response to the people dean targeted with the smear, IMO it made deans attempted smear appear to be what it was, a desperate attempt to discredit an opponent without merit or relevance, Clark's action was in theme with his campaign, it was a non issue when the issue should be bush.

While Clark did appear somewhat lax in his attack on the attacker, it also shows an attack on dean would have appeared to indicate that dean was somewhat less than relevant. For Clark, the target is bush and without a doubt Clark will "beat the living shit" out of him, dean is just a minor detour to the real issue, bush.

Clark has proved that he is a better man simply by being in a position of nipping at deans heals by not using smear tactics after coming into the game after dean had a two year head start.

So while I don't like what dean did, it's OK, it has cemented my support of Clark even more.


retyred in fla
“Good-Night Paul, Wherever You Are”
So I read this book

[kerry-is-my-prez]

40. I will not vote for someone who is a "rogue" when we have other candidates

who can win and who have standards and integrity.

I believe that both Clark and Kerry have the capability to slaughter Bush in a debate and to stand up to him. They have the ability to do it in an intelligent and credible manner. To me - Dean lacks credibility when he speaks about foreign policy. He just doesn't seem to have that good a grasp on it - he almost seems "sheepish" and hesitant about it.

I feel that Clark, Kerry, Gephardt and Kucinich DO know their stuff when it comes to that topic. Part of this is because they have been in Congress for a long time and the other part is they seem very confident and have no hesitiation when they speak about it. Edwards - I'm not sure about so I won't make a comment about it.

[Marian]

46. But you can count of Dean

to make a mistake or get angry and then 'see the light' several days later.

Isn't that who you want as Commander in Chief?

[stickdog]

43. Clark can't stand the heat. If he got the same treatment Dean's getting

now, his campaign would wilt within a week's time.

[Marian]

47. How do you get that?

Clark has 'stood the heat' in a lot more stressful settings than Dean will ever know.

[Lefta Dissenter]

50. The more I see how Clark handles the attacks against him

the more impressed I am with him, and the less I worry about the attacks, regardless of where they come from.

He handles the attacks from Dean et al in a gracious, courteous way. "Hey, take the fliers, bring them in and ask me about them! I welcome this!"

But have NO DOUBT - when Rove and his band of merry men attack, you'll see the same side of Clark that you saw when the Faux guy went after him. I believe I saw flames come out the top of his head. He stayed dignified, but he would NOT let that 'reporter' put words into his mouth. I think he surprised and earned the respect of more than a few people.

I am proud of the fact that he doesn't throw spitwads at the other candidates. He saves those for bush.

I don't think we need to compromise who we are as human beings in order to win the election. That's one of the things I admire SO much about Clark - he can fight strong without fighting dirty.