Calling all Clark supporters!

[BeHereNow]

I must admit, I really don't know much about Clark,
however, I have noticed a LARGE number of supporters
here at DU.
Therefore, I am asking you to tell me why YOU think
he is the answer to the mess we are in.
I will tell you straight up though-
My number one reason for doubting him is
the fact that he is a military person and it
is my perception thus far, that the Military
Industrial Complex is the foundation for the
trouble we are in now.
Talk to me....I'm looking for an lesson in
why I should support Clark.

Thanks!

BHN

[DemExpat]

I doubt that my reasons will be enough for you....

He looks like a great moderate Dem to me, he looks very electable in my eyes, and as an ex-pat with international concerns, he is the most internationally oriented candidate of the bunch IMO.

DemEx

[BeHereNow]

6. That's what worries me...

"international concerns' have become synonymous with
transnational corporate concerns, which always lead
back to the MIC.
Granted, he MUST be more versed in international issues,
but from what frame of reference?
Military?
In that case, I would be concerned.
WHAT are his views on foreign policy?

[DemExpat]

10. I don't see his internationalism in that light at all....

Whenever I have heard him discussing global issues he always has respect/understanding for OTHER countries and groups' viewpoints, something totally missing in the present administration - as I'm sure you've noticed. He has lots of experience working with different nations on difficult issues.
This to me is vital to any possible progress in world peace and cooperation.
I want to be 'proud' of my country (as seen from the rest of the world) as I was beginning to feel before this group of criminals took over....
I'd love to see President or Vice-President Clark!

DemEx

[Doctor_J]

1. Because

he is an environmentalist, he's smart, believes in fair taxes (the people who have benefitted the most paying the most), believes that gays should be allowed to serve their country in the military, and is very progressive on a number of issues.

The main point for me though is that he would beat Smirk like a drum in the election, if we have one.

[Pepperbelly]

4. Won't be nearly enough for some ...

The lefties in another thread are having a group bash-love fest trying to see who can get the best insults in as we speak. I am going to stay out of that for the sake of my blood pressure.

Only Nader is pure enough for some.

[Doctor_J]

8. Yeah

It's beyond odd how some people here think that military service DISqualifies someone from being president. No wonder the GOP runs the country.

[alcuno]

2. I'm not just a Clark supporter.

But I think that the interesting thing about Clark is that he has been willing to go against the grain. Many support him because he has called the war a "war of choice" and he has voiced many of the same questions that people here have. He also makes a lot of sense on the issue of the tax cuts for the "fabulously" wealthy.

The neocons can't win with him; he has the ability to shut them down in a debate.

On Edit: I have stated that I believe he is going for VP.

[Julien Sorel]

3. Because his military background gives him

Teflon, and would allow him to pursue a political agenda that is actually quite liberal -- the most liberal, as far as I can tell, of any of the major candidates. He can attack people without sounding shrill or overly combative. He's intelligent. He has the goods to beat Bush like a bass drum, and start moving the country in a different direction, away from this headlong rush into arrogance we've seen, and towards true progress. None of the other candidates offers that; either they are too conservative, or have no realistic chance at the nomination. My next choice would be Kerry who is hurt by his status as an insider.

I think Clark is the best option out there, not just to beat Bush, but to make an impact on the country in the way that I would like.

[Starpass]

18. Oh Billy--I like what you just said, especially the Teflon part

One of those posts that come along now and then that hit the nailon the head. You just said what would have taken me ten paragraphs to say----indeed, the Teflon of being the General and thus, muffling the whole fukcing repuke crowd, gives him the platform to speak about a people/liberal agenda. The media, et al, will tear the ass off of anyone else but what the fuck are they going to say about a military leader?? His stars give him a platform none of the others can even remotely approach---an appeal to people all over the political spectrum.

[DrBB]

5. Military does not = military industrial complex

Dunno if I should weigh in since I'm sending money to several candidates and so far committed to none.

But you evidently suffer a confusion about the military and the MIC. Having a distinguished military career and being a tool of the MIC are not the same thing. Apparently I have to point out that the person who coined the term for the latter was in fact one of the most distinguished examples of the former: Dwight D. Eisenhower.

I'd add to that the fact that Clark is an intellectual--a Rhodes Scholar and top of his class at West Point--and from everything I've read rather more liberal than most of those currently running. Rather to the left of Dean, in fact.

I'm sure many many others will fill in, but there's a start.

[BeHereNow]

11. Agreed- career does not = MIC

HOWEVER- no one can deny the connection
between the elected /selected and the MIC.

So, suddenly we have a candidate who is immune
to the corporate backers necessary to even compete
in elections?
How can that be?
Does "having a distinguished military career"
somehow eclipse his need for corporate backing?
Who is funding his campaign?
Fair questions, I do believe.

BHN

[ewagner]

26. Clark and MIC (IMHO)

It seems to me that Clark is not that KIND of General who never met a weapons program he didn't like.

He has the military in perspective: that is, where does the military fit in Civil Society. I was impressed that he studied the philosophy of just war with the Jesiutes. This tells me he understands that there are foreign policy options other than "bomb them back into the stone age."

These things give me a level of comfort about Clark. But ind addition, I like the teflon comments posted above. i think those are correct.

He can beat Bush.

[Dookus]

7. For all the reasons listed above....

plus he can overcome the BIGGEST obstacle the Democratic party will face in 2004: that Democrats are weak on national security and defense.

A decorated war hero and wounded veteran who led the NATO forces in Europe can beat the snot out of Bush on this issue.

[cally]

9. Well, I haven't completely decided

but Clark appeals to me because he is different. I probably agree with Kucinich the most, but I am concerned about some of his economic policies and his previous promotion against choice. I like Kerry, a lot. His voting record is great but he seems to cave too often on important issues. Dean seems like an unknown to me. His passion sells me, I love his anti-Iraq war but he seems a little politically naive. He is way more conservative than I am. Lieberman sold out to Insurance industries and during the selection, he also seems to promote Israel instead of world interests.

I can build a case for many of our candidates, but Clark seems to be electable. He takes away the mililary issue from Republicans, he is strong on terror, and most important, he can build a coalition with world powers to save us from the idiocy that is Iraq.

Clark adopts the Clinton economic policies. He believes in world cooperation, he believes that domestic policy is the priority.

Then it all comes down to an understanding of the candidate. Clark does not come from the monied class like Dean and Kerry do. Gephardy seems beholden to Unions. Edwards need more of a base.


I think all major candidates are beholden to the military industrial complex. I actually feel reassured that Clark has fought and sees beyond the profit motive. It is much better than those beholden because of economic interests.

I think I'm a cynic, but I am so excited about Clark. (And yes I read the threads and links about Clark and his connections to PNAC. I'm actually reassured about it. He knows about all this and so he can fight it. I don't want a naive newcomer. I want a knowledgeable fighter who can take all these folks on.)

[Democat]

12. He turns Bush's biggest 2004 positive into a big Bush negative

Republicans strongest chance to win in 2004 is the fact that the American people believe Republicans are stronger on defense. This is Bush's big hope for winning in 2004.

If the American people are presented with a General or an idiot protecting them, regardless of the fact that he is a Democrat, there is a very good chance they will choose the General.

Some people here don't want to admit it, but fear may be the number one factor that determines who many Americans vote for in 2004.

If people are looking for someone to protect them from the terrorists that Bush keeps promoting, who better than General Clark?

The timing is right for Clark. Even if you don't think he is the best overall candidate, sometimes you have to choose the best candidate for the time.

[southern democrat]

13. There are many reasons

I support Wesley Clark.He is very intellegent,when you see him speak and answer questions its like he's talking directly to you personally.I could be wrong but I feel he is geniune in his beliefs.He is pro-choice ,he warned of the problems in Iraq before we went in,he knows the value of having allies in the war on terror,he knows the power of diplomacy,there's no doubt he is a patient man.On the domestic front he belives in pulling people up and not keeping them down.There's no doubt in my mind he could have chose to seek office as a Republican not as pres.but as Gov.or Sen.,he would have been a shoo-in running as a republican for Gov.or Sen. in Ark.He chose not to,this tells me Wesley Clark has convictions, he is a Democrat.There are not many Democrats I would not support,probally the only one is Zell Miller so I am definately not going to disrespect the other candidates.But I have no doubt if Wesley Clark gets the nomination he will defeat George Bush.Gen Clark has chrisma,he has the education,he has history,he has a stellar record on national security ,he will raise the minimun wage,he will promote affirmitive action,he will nominate common sense moderate judges,he will protect our enviroment,he will not sell out to corperate America and he will carry some southern states in the election.What more could you ask for?Please run for president Gen.Clark Nuff Said!

[ArkDem]

34. Shoo in as a republican in Arkansas?

Not hardly. He is an unknown here just like he is nationally.

[Renew Deal]

14. Check out this resource.

http://meetclark.com/faq/

It includes many of General Clarks views and other info about him. It is pretty good.

[BeHereNow]

19. Thanks for the link...

I am open to learning ALL I can about all the candidate possibilities.
Still deciding and am in the process of listening to other views
and information.

Unlike some DUers, who remind me of frothing freepers far
more often than I care to observe or admit.

BHN

[Renew Deal]

21. One More

I forgot, check out www.digitalclark.com

It has plenty of audio and video with Wesley Clark.

[BeHereNow]

22. Thank you kindly...

I appreciate your help.
BHN

[WesWesWes]

15. Esquire article

an interesting profile of Clark. http://www.esquire.com/features/articles/2003/030801_mfe_clark_1.html

[newyawker99]

33. Hi WesWesWes!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Starpass]

16. Politics 101---I'm an old Pol. Sci. Graduate

the only thing between us and 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is that goddamn dogged shit that has been there for years on end: poll after poll after poll after poll after poll after poll--for years has said that the Dems rate a bizillion points behind the patriotic repukes on defense. Well geeeees, what do you think '04 is going to be all about---economy, jobs, condoms???? It's going to be what the incumbent (advantage) Bush and his $200 million dollar ads and his whore media says it will be...............duh, guess what that might be?? He's fucked up everything he's touched so my real stupid guess is that it's going to be "defense" and stuff like that...think??? ONLY Clark and Kerry can remove that final barrier to the big white house. With the others, Bush will walk over, kill and bullshit this moron public into giving him four more years. Bottom line: Clark and Kerry are the only ones who will give us a shot. Remember a whole fucking bunch of Dems supported our great warrior chief in Iraq or he wouldn't have had 75% approval ratings......either that or 75% of the American people are repukes. Do you think those who supported are in the mood for Dean and the like??---you better give them a veteran who bashes Bush and not a "medical deferred", I don't like the war but didn't have to vote for it candidate. And since I'm 58 and come from the Nam era, all of us from that era could write a book on what those 'medical' deferrments really were. AWOL will look good stacked up against "my daddy's physican got me out of serving at all"---and that's exactly how it was "back then"--actually, papas pull for W look positively saintly compared top that.

[ewagner]

27. Whoa!

Starpass,

we're almost the same age and came out of the same era...you're right about medical deferrments but even at that, I think it would play only a minor role if Dean becomes the nominee.

You are also absolutely correct that there must have been some dems in that 75% approval rating during the war, but the problem is the Sheeple who are not informed. Those sheeple want to know they're safe and secure (prolly to watch American Idol) and for whatever reasons, the Repubs have owned the defense issue. Clark would give us a chance to own that issue again.

[jumptheshadow]

17. All the above reasons...

especially the pragmatic argument that he can beat Bush, plus:

1) I agree with everything he has said so far about all the issues. I tend to more inclined toward blanket gun control than he is -- he supports the precedence of local gun control laws except on the issue of attack weapons, which must be reserved for the military. His stand is probably much more compatible with swing voters than mine.

2) I admire his intelligent grasp of issues. He is a bright man who studied the ethics of war with the Jesuits. He has spent years overseas, observing and analyzing international politics and learning fluent Russian. When he was in his 20s he found out that his late father was Jewish. Apparently he then embraced his Jewish heritage and did research on his Jewish family. I admire this about him.

3) In the months before the war Clark was a clear, objective voice to the jingoism and evangelism of the pro-war movement. In fact, his objectivity seemed refreshing after the constant barrage of ideological themes that were being forced down our throats.

4) I like the fact that he came from a middle class family and spent decades working his way up through the military. Our current crop of serious candidates have a few contenders whose wealth has buffered them from the experiences of most working Americans.

5) I get the impression that this guy has a sharp logistical mind. He will need to use it to clean up the huge mess that Bush will leave in his wake. But he will start any presidential term, I think, by winning back the support of the world community who will welcome him because they know he will mold the U.S. administration into a professionally managed, non-ideological entity that is responsive to reason and science.

[BeHereNow]

20. You are most concise-

Thank you for your well thought out and executed post.
That is the type of response I was hoping to hear as I
gather more information from those who are more versed
in the facts about various candidates.

Still interested to know, because I think it warrants consideration
as far as future influence on his decisions regarding FP,
who are his primary campaign contibutors?

Anyone know?

Thanks-
BHN

[ignatiusr]

25. Contributors/MIC

BeHereNow- It's really refreshing to read your posts. There are a lot of savage posters on DU, and a lot of arbitrary haters of Clark simply because of his military background. I have a lot of respect for someone who admits to reservations but is open to new information.

Anyway, I wanted to add two things. First, about the whole MIC thing: Clark is certainly not a traditional military man. He seemed to have a lot of trouble with the Old Republicans in the Pentagon, being perceived as too much of a "politician" and "internationalist."
These are qualities that I admire, but that are frowned upon by the traditional military. His foreign policy stances, which really manifested themselves in Kosovo, were focused on multilateral solutions and respect for countries abroad. After Kosovo, he was a hero in Europe, and ignored in America. His willingness to go against the old Pentagon belief system caused him to be prematurely relieved of his post in early 2000. So I definitely see him as a champion of peaceful and dignified foreign policy, which is especially impressive given his deep military background.

Also, Clark just recently criticized military spending in an interview with Newsweek, saying that he thought a lot of the economic stimulus we're seeing right now is a result of defense spending, and that he thought there were far more effective ways to use our money.

The beauty of his sound foreign policy and stance on defense spending is that his credibility would allow him to really make genuine changed on both of those fronts, if he chose to do so. Someone like Dean has zero clout in these areas, and therefore it would be exponentially more difficult for him to sway opinion and make things happen.

Finally, about contributions: Small donations should have a huge impact, just as they have been doing with Dean. Clark has a similar grassroots following and appeal, and the core draft members have already pledged over a million dollars in contributions as soon as he runs.

Also, there seem to be indications that he will have at least some of the fundrasing backers that Clinton had during his run, since they're both from a similar scene and have similar connections. Clark was on the board at the Stephens Group in Little Rock, which was a major player in helping finance Clinton's campaign in '92.

Hope that helped.

[kanrok]

23. I was an Edwards supporter

And still am. I send him dough every month. However, I am begining to think he has a slim chance of winning the nomination presently. I like Clark because he shuts out (completely) the repug argument that dems are not sufficiently experienced in military issues. He is whip-smart and moderate on issues close to my heart (environment, social issues, tax issues). He would crush the current resident in any debate, and has the best chance of any current dem candidate (including my absolute favorite, John Edwards). I love Dean's approach, but I am concerned that he is perceived (and I stress "perceived") as being too far left to be elected. This opinion has nothing whatsoever to do with the relative "merits" of this assertion, but, insted, recognizes the reality of the right-wing spin machine that would likely chew up and spit out Dean, like it did to Gore in 2000. Simply put, I want Bush outta there, and, in my humble opinion, Clark gives us the best chance to knock that idiot out of the park. I will support our candidate, whomever that may be, but I truly believe, and will humbly support, Clark, if he chooses to run.

[Starpass]

29. kanrock--thank you--this is what we are trying so hard to get through

the head of this insane "Dean the Savior" movement going through the DU and elsewhere. He may turn them on; but he will not appeal to the general public. I agree that Edwards (and he was one of my early picks) is not going anywhere and heard on C-Span that he probably will be the first to drop out because of having to consider his re-election to the Senate. His campaign, in essence, agreed but said he would stick with it until mid-October and then make his announcement. Edwards has more appeal to the general public than Dean. The media is promoting Dean in the hopes of making him, in essence, the cartoon caricature of "da Liberal" -as the man who said he was the Democratic branch (or whatever) of the Dem Party keeps screaming "I'm not a liberal"....so I don't quite get his original pronouncment. Clark gives us a chance because it removes the possibilities of being cast as that cartoon character of weak on defense (which this whole '04 campaign will be about as dictated by Bush and Rove).

[Donna Zen]

24. The MIC

What administration has ever feed the MIC more than the current one? Huh? And how many of them have ever worn a uniform never mind four stars? I reject even thought of the answer being dubya...a drunkin' deserter who had the gaul to campaign for pro-Vietnam candidates while failing to show up for duty.

And finally, if you had caught four bullets on a battlefield, managed to get their troops to safety and then spent months in recover learning to walk again, would you be in a hurry to send others into a senseless conflict? I can only speak for myself, but I assure you I would let my nightmares be my guide.

The one person running, including Kerry, who has the authority to question pork barrel, wasteful weapon systems is Clark. The beauty of all of this is that no one, not even in the whoring media, can pin the label "liberal" on this man; there is not enough room because his chest is covered in medals.

Yes, I want to win but not at the cost of my soul. Clark is very liberal, or progressive, take your pick. Nevertheless, he has carefully described himself as the "center." By chosing where he places the center means a great deal, because it exposes the rightwing.

His over riding themes are accountability and Constitution Legitimacy. He believes we have permitted our leaders to forget both the notion that they are accountable to the people and thus, that we have strayed from the tenets set out by the Constitution.

In his own words...On Cuba:

“The way to deal with Castro is to send Cuba American tourists, American goods and American farm products. There could be no better way to deal with this last vestigial form of Communism than to turn American business and American agriculture loose on them.”

the environment....

“ would have renegotiated the Kyoto Agreement, rather than rejecting it outright, pointing out that the consistent pattern of rejecting international agreements set down by President Bush makes it hard to get international cooperation."
 
“If you look at a vision for America …ou have to ask yourself this: A hundred years from now, what will America be like? What kind of America would we want to have helped create? A hundred years from now, most of us won't be here. But the environment will be here, and the constitution - our legal architecture - will be here. And we have to start working now if we are going to produce the kind of environment - physical and legal-institutional - that we want to leave to our grandchildren. That requires work now. So I think we have to look after the environment.”

more @

http://www.meetclark.com/faq/index.asp?faqid=37

[Mz Pip]

28. Clark does something

that I rarely see in politics today. He is able to draw from a wealth of knowledge and experience and speak extemporaniously, pulling history, politics and economics altogether. There is a depth of knowledge and understanding that I do not see in the other candidates. Bush is intellectually lazy. Clark gives me the impression that he is continually studying, learning and expanding.

He has seen the best and the worst of humanity, unlike sheltered Chimp Boy. He has worked for his success rather than have it handed to him by connections and legacy.

He has said that war should be the last resort. He has the background and the experience to justify that statement.

MzPip
:dem:

[DemExpat]

32. These are my thoughts exactly.....

Wish I could express them as you did.....:-)

:hi:
DemEx

[FDRLincoln]

30. leaning clark

I am officially undecided, but I am leaning to Clark if he gets in. Here's why.

1) So far, I agree with everything I've heard him say about domestic issues.

2) So far, I agree with everything I've heard him say about foreign policy issues.

3) He is comfortable on TV, which neither Dean nor Kerry are.

4) He can insult people without looking mean, unlike Dean.

5) He is excellent, the best of any of them, at demolishing GOP spin points.

6) He seems to understand the danger that guys like Tom DeLay represent to our democracy.


I am officially undecided because he's not in yet. But once he gets in, and once he comes out with official positions, I'll likely support him.

[Clark Can WIN]

31. Everything mentioned above plus this..........

Clark is the only challenger on the plate with a fudgepops chance in hell of beating Bush in my state, NE. I know that sure as I know my name and my mothers laugh.

In addition to all of the many qualities also mentioned, Clark provides a "safe" alternatives to the SANE people out there that may have voted for Bush last time but now want to know where the hell their job went, where the hell their 401k went and why their nephew is now sitting like a duck in some God forsaken sand patch with a Chimp in Chief that declared "Mission Accomplished" and then proceeded to tell those picking off the soldiers with RPG's to BRING IT ON! There's plenty of room to pick away enough voters in 2004 to take it by a LANDSLIDE, but folks in this state will never get behind someone percieved as too liberal and partisan.

Wesley Clark can batter bush like a pinata full of Godiva chocolates at a Mary Kay comsmetics party.