DraftWesleyClark.com

“Stratman - For some reason, I feel a little put off by your "liberalism is a mental disorder" comment.

Care to share your sources and research?”

“What Tom said just reminded me of something current. It seems the Republicans' new revision of the Fair Labor Standards Act will give overtime to some of the working poor while taking it away from many middle class workers.

Divide and Conquer (with a heavy dose of sleight of hand).”

“Yesterday Ge. Wesley Clark revealed that he is a Democrat. Looks like he's getting ready to announce!”

“"social problems do play an integral, important role in the economy - it is an industry, in a sense. Sociology 101."
Mutt
09:19:38 AM

Shouldn't that be that economic distress plays a significant part in causing social problems?”

“very true, Tom. look at the 80's compared to the 90's. lots of crime and discontent in 80's, declines in those areas in 90's for example...”

“I don’t know if he’s featured in Franken’s “Lying Liars” book, but George Will sure should be. He is trying to tar Clark with the same ‘liar brush’ the right so successfully used on Gore. It ain’t gonna work this time.

In his column, he calls Wesley Clark a “a deranged moderate” after quoting him out of context and placing the quotes out of order. From Will’s column:

“As Clark crisscrosses the country … he compounds the confusion that began when he said on June 15 that on 9/11 "I got a call at my home" saying that when he was to appear on CNN, "You've got to say this is connected" to Iraq. "It came from the White House, it came from people around the White House. It came from all over." But who exactly called Clark?
[snip]
July 18: "No one from the White House asked me to link Saddam Hussein to Sept. 11."


What he actually said and the order in which he spoke it is found in the Russert transcript:

“GEN. CLARK: I think it was an effort to convince the American people to do something, and I think there was an immediate determination right after 9/11 that Saddam Hussein was one of the keys to winning the war on terror. Whether it was the need just to strike out or whether he was a linchpin in this, there was a concerted effort during the fall of 2001 starting immediately after 9/11 to pin 9/11 and the terrorism problem on Saddam Hussein.

MR. RUSSERT: By who? Who did that?

GEN. CLARK: Well, it came from the White House, it came from people around the White House. It came from all over. I got a call on 9/11. I was on CNN, and I got a call at my home saying, “You got to say this is connected. This is state-sponsored terrorism. This has to be connected to Saddam Hussein.” I said, “But—I’m willing to say it but what’s your evidence?” And I never got any evidence. And these were people who had—Middle East think tanks and people like this and it was a lot of pressure to connect this and there were a lot of assumptions made. But I never personally saw the evidence and didn’t talk to anybody who had the evidence to make that connection.”



Anyone who can read can see that Clark didn’t say the call to his home came from the White House. By reordering his words and omitting the prelude, Will is accusing him of contradicting himself (lying). Will should print a retraction or face a lawsuit.”

“The GOP has ample reason to fear a Clark candidacy. He would take away Bush's "tough on defense" and foreign policy planks.”

“Eggs-actly!”

“I polished it up and sent my above post to the Washington Post. It would be cool if they print it.”

“Might could be! So if we read the Post for the next week or so, we'll learn your identity. Or did you sign it Violin?”

“Oh #&%!$!”

“Bus-Ted.”

“Washington Post editorial page editor to executive editor:

"We got a really thoughtful piece about Wesley Clark from some guy in New Jersey, but when I clicked on the internet link he provided I downloaded a virus into the newspaper's computers. We're dead!"”

“No, Geobeet, I foresee the Homeland defense confiscating Violin's computer for actions "detrimental to the country" by using pseudo virus tactics.”

“I guess I'll be posting from Guantanamo Bay for the foreseeable future.”

“Can you post a link to an abacus?”

“Think positive. You can introduce Rutgers tomatoes to Cuba.”

“Nope, no letter to the editor from Fiddleman today!”

“Patience, geobeet. The investigation will take time.”

“Fortunately, there are at least 25 other people in the NJ phone book with my name.

I'm thinking of suing them for copyright infringement.”

“Or just change your name to fiddlerbackpacksandcreatesscaryweblinks.com”

“It seems that Bush supporters are afraid that General Wesley Clark will do to Bush what he did to Milosevic and liberal Democrats are afraid that he will unite warring factions within the party like he did in Bosnia.


Spinsanity deconstructs the 'call from the White House' lie being pushed by parties as diverse as the Weekly Standard and Paul Krugman.

This one's getting more traction than the manufactured claim that Al Gore took credit for inventing the internet.”

“You mean Al didn't invent the internet?”

“D@MN! All this time......”

“I feel so used!”

“The "liberal press" really did a number on Gore”

“Gen. Clark Reportedly Is Asked to Join Dean


By Jim VandeHei and Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, September 11, 2003; Page A01


Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean has asked retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark to join his campaign, if the former NATO commander does not jump into the race himself next week, and the two men discussed the vice presidency at a weekend meeting in California, sources familiar with the discussions said.

Clark, in a telephone interview yesterday, said he did not want to comment about the private meeting. Asked about reports that the two men had discussed a wide range of issues, including endorsing Dean, joining the campaign, possible roles in a Dean administration and the vice presidency, he said only, "It was a complete tour of the horizon."

Later, an adviser quoted Clark as saying, "I have only one decision to make: Will I seek the presidency?"

It was the fourth time Dean and Clark have met face-to-face to discuss the campaign. No decisions were made at the California meeting because Clark is still considering a run for president. Clark is scheduled to make a speech Sept.19 at the University of Iowa, when many political insiders expect him to announce his intentions.

"Most of our conversations have been around my getting advice on defense, and sometime he asks me about domestic issues," Dean said in an interview yesterday. "This is a guy I like a lot. I think he's certainly going to be on everybody's list if he's not the presidential nominee himself." Dean declined to discuss their private conversations.

While it would represent a gamble for both men to team up so early in the campaign, such a move would rattle an already unpredictable nomination campaign. Dean and Clark have two things in common that if combined could prove formidable among Democratic voters: They both opposed the war in Iraq, and both are generating excitement on the Internet and with grass-roots activists.

But a Dean-Clark alliance would also underscore the relative inexperience that both men have in national campaigns. Clark has never run for political office, and Dean has created controversy for his off-the-cuff remarks last week on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Last week, Dean said the United States should not "take sides" in the Middle East conflict and said that an "enormous" number of Israeli settlements would have to be dismantled as part of a peace agreement. Yesterday, Dean shifted course, saying the settlements should be left to negotiators.

The governor's original comments angered a number of Jewish leaders and drew rebukes from two rivals, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.) and Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.). Dean came under fire yesterday from a group of House Democrats for his comments on the Middle East. "This is not a time to be sending mixed messages," the Democrats, including Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (Md.), wrote to Dean.

Dean has increasingly talked up Clark as a possible running mate or as a presidential candidate, pointing to the general's 33-year military record, which included a victory in Kosovo as commander of NATO forces in Europe. Dean's laudatory comments have fueled speculation among top Democrats that the two men might join forces soon on a Dean-Clark 2004 campaign.

Dean's campaign played down the significance of the talks. "I am certain along the way we have made it clear we would welcome General Clark's support in the campaign, but I am assuming other Democratic campaigns have done the same," said Joe Trippi, Dean's campaign manager. Trippi refused to discuss the meeting in California.

Other Democratic candidates have reached out to Clark, too, with Kerry talking to him by phone during the last week. But none apparently has courted the general as aggressively as Dean, a Clark adviser said. Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) said he has not talked to Clark in weeks and would welcome him into the race. "I never worry about who's in the race," Gephardt said.

Clark has been making the rounds of Democratic donors and Washington insiders for months as part of his exploration of a presidential campaign. More recently, he has been meeting with Democratic strategists who have expertise in managing presidential campaigns. Among those to whom he has reached out are Mark Fabiani, who ran the communications operation for Al Gore's 2000 campaign and worked in the Clinton White House.

If Clark joins the presidential race, which some prominent Democrats predict he will do, he would become the 10th candidate. Still other Democrats think Clark will not run, partly because he would enter well behind Dean in both fundraising and grass-roots support. Clark has sent mixed signals in recent days, leaving some Democrats he has talked to with the impression that he is in, others with a suspicion that he is out.

Recent polls show nearly two-thirds of voters cannot name even one of the nine candidates, so there is room for a new candidate to move, some strategists think. But recent polls show Clark is not widely known and would enter near the back of the pack.

He would not enter empty-handed. DraftWesleyClark.com officials said they have generated pledges of more than $1 million for a Clark campaign. Dean's campaign has said it will raise at least $10 million this quarter and other campaign strategists expect that number to be significantly higher.

The Draft Clark organization has begun running 60-second commercial spots in Iowa, New Hampshire and Clark's home state of Arkansas, prodding Clark to run. Another Clark organization reports having grass-roots groups in numerous states.



© 2003 The Washington Post Company”

“If I see these two on a ticket, I will start to have hope.”

“I've got to do more reading up on Clark. I like what he has to offer so far. Now when I get to the part about him and the nekkid orgies.....”

“I'm with the hopeful on this one too. this could be the start of something very interesting...”

“I'm all about having a real choice in this election. 2000 was such a drag.”

“You mean the cigar store indian or the smirking chimp?”

“Chalk this up to me being slightly conservative, but I don't think people would get a good deal with Dean. Where Bush is considered too hawkish, I think Dean would be too isolationist. There's something to be said for being cautious about gunning for everyone, it's a totally different matter to not use any force at all. Maybe Clark would balance that out, but traditionally the VP has been simply a luxury item.”

“Now I have a choice.”

“Maybe Clark leading the way and Dean as VP? Interesting. That combo would give the Dems a shot.”

“The bottom line is that Bush is beatable. Very beatable, IMO. It's a matter of taking a party that is in disarray and putting someone on the forefront that is as formidable and charismatic as Clinton was. Say what you want about him, but that guy had both qualities, big time. What happened to the Democratic party was a shame. The 9/11 factor threw the country into a state where bipartisanship was PC. The adminstration in power gained an automatic boost in approval of 50 points between Sept 10 and Sept 11, 2001. What the Dem leaders like Dick Gephart did wrong was to abandon their principles to try and make their photo ops and shows of bipartisanship with a popular president carry them into the midterm elections. They got trounced. The one thing they overlooked was that 'no matter how republican you try to be, the republicans will always be more republican than you are'. So, by doing so, these guys started to look second rate against this popular President. Looking more like brown nosers than anything else. You can't get on top of U.S. politics by acting out of weakness instead of strength. As a result, everytime a Democrat would even sound like he/she was rocking the boat, they were labeled immediately as 'liberal whiners'. That's what happens when you abandon your principles and take a namby-pamby stance and look like a jerk as a result. Back to original point: the dems need some strength in a candidate, but are working at a deficit and it is almost down to one year, which in the scheme of things, is not a lot of time...”

“If I remeber correctly, Clinton was put out there kinda like a sacifical lamb. he Dems really didn't think at first he'd make it. Clinton was the master of BS, or better than the other guys. He had the benifit of a poor ecomony, the Perot vote (my republican friends still don't let me live that on down) and the grumbling of having Republicans in office for three terms, IMHO. Some "Boomers" looked at this guy as "one of ours in office now". All I know if that I hear a big old sucking sond coming from the South, just like uncle Ross said there would!”

“I don't know, Laq. I give him more credit than that. Let's put BJ's aside too...”

“I don't even concider the BJ thing an issue to get him elected in the first place. The issue I do have with the BJ is that it was very dangerous and irresponsible thing for him to do. He was in a closed room, with no protection. Any phuck (read person giving the BJ) coulda taken out the leader of the Free world. My felling sbout that are more National security than cheating on his wife. Hell, I would cheated on that old hand bag myself.”

“True dat, LQ. Evenn though the issue is old and tired, it's good to hear someone put it in an irresponsiblity context concerning the nation rather than some pseudo-moralistic BS that most people exuded at the time...But, back to the point, I think he was the 'style' of candiadte that the dems need right now. He was more centrist than the party had produced in a long time. He had the resiliency to stave off a lot of opposition, too.”

“Who was he running against in the primary, Tsongas, wasn't it? This isn't a slam on Clinton (that would be too easy), but it sure didn't hurt to have Tsongas as an early opponent.”

“it was a field of candidates including Bob Kerry, Tom Harkin, Tsongas...having trouble remembering the rest, but there were a few more...”

“Okay, well then maybe Tsongas was the only one giving him any competition and that's why I remembered his name.



Or maybe I'm totally off base.
(No, not all the time either, smartasses)”

“lol. SMW. no, you are on the right track. But, no one had the presence at the time that Clinton seemed to be able to capture national attention with. The others simply phased out one by one as the primaries got underway..”

“And Bush the Previous was in the fight of his life against Dukakis...

LOL”

“Gennifer Flowers had a "hand" in getting Clintons name out there too. If that wasn't a hint of what was to "come".......

I crack me up !




Alright back on track here. I like the message that Dean has to offer, I like Clarks history. The biggest Dem I know, my wife, doesn't like Dean. She thinks he comes off like a dumb a s s. I like his anti-establishment stance, brings me warm feelings of days long past. I think he could take down Bush in a debate. Speaking of, I loved that last prez election debate between Gore and Bush, where Bush said something real stupid, and Gore walked over like he was going to sock'em one in the chops! The look in Bush's face, priceless!

Anywhoo, Dean is the only one who really went out on a limb about the war early on. That might prove to help him now. Clark, so far, I can't find any dirt on him. I wonder what the Repubs what say about him to put him down? Kinda hard to bring a General down (unless he does it himself, right Westmorland? ).”

“What pissed my off about Dukakis was when Poppa Bush accused him of being a liberal during the debates and Dukakis got a real sheepish look on his face. I don’t remember his response but his face said it all. He should have seized the opportunity and said, “I’m GLAD you brought that up. If by liberal you mean I support - rattle off a list of several positions that the majority of Americans support – then yes, I am a liberal”, he would have done a whole lot better. Instead, he made it look like he was hiding something shameful.

I don’t think Clark (or Dean for that matter) will be such easy targets.”

“......and remember the best Ducockis could do was jump in the nearest tank, which of course was used in the Repubs ad campain against him. What a dip. He wasn'
t even close to being electible. Not when he had to have a foot stool proved at every speaking engagment.”