We went to a Clark Fundraiser in Chicago last night... NEW CLEAN THREAD.

[in_cog_ni_to]

We went to a Clark Fundraiser in Chicago last night and


I just have to tell you about this.

As General Clark was leaving he was shaking hands and when he got to my son, who is 10 years old, my son asked him, "What is your position on the draft?" Clark said "What's my position on the draft?" "We don't need a draft." "Let me ask you this. If we needed you, would you volunteer?" My WONDERFUL 10 year old son said....."No." eeeeeek! Then, Clark said, "No?" "Well let me introduce you to Mr. so & so (a guy who was 4 people away in the line) his son just graduated from the West Point Academy as a Lieutenant and as long as we have volunteers like his son, we won't need a draft. OK? Just keep that in mind."

After Clark walked down the line, my son asked me "Mom, was it OK to tell him I wouldn't volunteer to fight in a war?" (bless his heart!) and I told him it was ABSOLUTELY OK! It was the truth!

I must say this. I was somewhat disappointed in the fundraiser. He was an hour late. He gave a 5-10 speech, shook some hands and left. It was like something that should have taken place at a rally, not a fundraiser where people paid money to hear him and meet him. I would say he was in and out of there in about 30-45 minutes. Very disappointing. I understand that New Hampshire is most important right now, but I was disappointed that he flew in and flew out the way he did.

Then, one of the organizers was taking everyone's books, papers and such that they were going to have autographed and my son had a bumpersticker to be autographed. She took it and said the General would autograph it while in the car and they would give it back to him. WELL, by the time we got our coats and made our way downstairs where they were giving back the autographed items, SOME ADULT THIEF had taken my sons bumpersticker! Grrrrrrrrrrr! Whoever it was was a huge jerk. They knew that wasn't their bumpersticker, but stole it from my son.

I don't think we will be going to any more fundraisers. We will just donate to the campaign and stay home. All in all, it was a disappointing time. It was nice to meet the General though and he's still my candidate.

[democratreformed]

1. I didn't post on your last thread but

I am really sorry this happened to your son. There is no excuse for rude inconsiderate people.

Also, I'm really sorry you were disappointed in the fundraiser. I applaud you for being able to look over your disappointment and still support the candidate.

[tsipple]

2. I'm Sorry to Hear About the Bumper Sticker

A bit of friendly advice. I would suggest sending one into the campaign headquarters with a post-paid return envelope (to save them some money). Give it a little while, but it should come back to your son.

In fact, you could have some fun with it and do the same with each of the campaigns. Make it educational. Use it as a geography lesson, for example. Show him where Burlington is, where St. Louis is, where Boston is, etc. And then turn that into a history lesson.

I remember my dad taking me to a Democratic event when I was about 12, and I pretty much hated it. (It literally was a smoke-filled room in a small town. It was actually difficult to see six feet. Talk about second-hand smoke!) So it's time to make lemon out of lemonaide.

[Spazito]

3. I hope you do e-mail the Clark people and tell them what happened...

to your son. I have no doubt they will send him a replacement and they should know this kind of thing is happening.

[Logansquare]

4. A 5-10 minute speech is common

at fundraisers. You were very luck to get "face time." I went to a Dean fundraiser earlier this year and his speech was about 10 minutes, and he shook hands on his way out, but that was pretty brief. Frankly, if you go to a $100 per person fundraiser, that's about what you will get. I'm willing to bet that there was an earlier "cocktail hour" meeting for the $5000 and up crowd--that is also common.

Last year I went to an event for Rahm Emanuel's congressional run, and Clinton came to give an endorsement. Now, talk about getting your money's worth! It started late, as is per usual with any event associated with President Clinton. He talked for 15-20 minutes and then stepped back while Emanuel spoke. Clinton stayed in the room for 30-40 minutes shaking hands and allowing people to have their pictures taken with him. That's our dear former prez, though--he loves people too much to stay on schedule.

[TLM]

28. Wow, I went to 3 Dean fundraisers so far...

And at each one he spoke for at least 30 minutes.

And at two of them I got to shake his hand and personaly speak with him. At the thrid I could have, but I figured I'd already done so twice before so I hung back and let others go shake hands and meet him.





This one was a free public event and Dean just walked through the crowd meeting folks and signing stuff.

[Logansquare]

29. Guess I went to the wrong one

:-)

[Eloriel]

57. I guess so -- or perhaps you have your candidates mixed up

I've been to 2 Dean fundraisers. One was in Atlanta in August, $100 event, and he was there for at least an hour, probably more.

The other was a House Party, where Dean typically gets on a conference call linking all the houses. He spent at least 30 minutes with that -- talking for about 15 minutes and then answering questions.

I've also never heard any other complaints of the brevity of Dean's appeareances at fundraisers.

I can only say maybe there was a plane to catch or something? 'Cause that's just not like Dean at all.

Eloriel

[Tom Rinaldo]

37. So much depends on the schedule

Time available at a fundraiser depends on specific scheduling for that day and the next; which planes have to be caught, what hour the candidate needs to be up and on the early AM talk show the next day, is there another fund raiser scheduled after the one you attend, was there one before it that ran late etc. etc. Clark's instincts are to spend more time with individuals at events than his handler's probably want, but at some point time simply runs out. It's almost a no win situation. If you spend too much time at too few evenrs you get blasted (rightly so) for not running hard enough, but everyone wants time with the candidate. Fortuantely one's fervent supporters are usually a forgiving lot. If you are ever fortunate enough to catch Clark at a town hall meeting or the like, it's really great. In front of a non decided crowd, handlers are more likely to ensure that a candidates schedule is flexible enough for him to work the audiance.

[in_cog_ni_to]

42. THAT sounds like

my cup of tea! I know I would enjoy something like that much more than a regular fundraiser. I will be sure to keep my eyes and ears peeled for a Townhall Meeting...a question and answer fundraiser would be great.

[wndycty]

5. Check your private message. . .

I PM'ed you. I am trying to get you a bumper sticker but I need you to write me so that I can pass you concerns along to the campaign.

[in_cog_ni_to]

6. The "draft" issue

is a HUGE subject in our house BECAUSE of our son. I knew what kind of answer my son would get to that question.....it was expected from a 4 Star General, but I was surprised he went to such lengths to make a point. His point is correct though. If we have enough volunteers, we won't need a draft, but MY son won't be one of those volunteers. :) I think General Clark means it when he says "War should be a LAST resort." He has seen war and knows the repercussions. He won't go to war unless it's absolutely necessary. I see him as a man of his word and trust him when he says that. I honestly do.

[CWebster]

8. Yes, I agree with your son

and I noted the subject has been avoided by other posters who would rather discuss bumperstickers.

I did not mean to gloat or be cynical, but Clark's ongoing recruitment efforts targeting our young for military service bothers me tremendously. I am quite sincere about this which drives my opposition and distrust of Clark's candidacy. It has less to do with being pro-Dean and more to do with being anti-Clark. This is my honest appraisal.

[Cogito]

10. Question

How would you answer the question: "if your country needed you would you volunteer?"

Perhaps I don't understand where you are coming from but if we are going to have a military then we are going to need to recruit people to serve in it. Why would recruiting young people for military service bother you tremendously?

[CWebster]

15. Because to resolve world conflict I would seek a

department of peace and encourage our young to become doctors and teachers or other worthwhile occupations with a commitment to helping those who want, rather than encourage them to become soldiers who kill as a solution.

I have read too much of war and within my own lifetime have seen my own generation devastated by unneccessary war to be so easily led by the latest war frenzy. Look at the reality and note the serious disconnect between the glorious image of war heros and the suffering of war. The army just opened another investigation into war crimes as an everyday occurrence in Viet Nam and many of the soldiers involved won medals. Years from now, you will hear stories about Iraq. It is the nature of war. Always has been, always will be.

How can I possibly support a candidate whose worldview and basic philosophy about the role of the military as the force for peace is in conflict with everything I believe to be moral?

A better world is possible.

[Cogito]

16. Should we disband the military?

It sounds like you are a pacifist. You ask: "How can I possibly support a candidate whose worldview and basic philosophy about the role of the military as the force for peace is in conflict with everything I believe to be moral?"

I don't believe that pacificism will work but that is not really the issue. I don't agree with any of the candidates on all the issues. Nevertheless I support Clark because he is MUCH better than Bush and Clark is the only Democrat in my view who stands much of a chance of beating Bush next November.

I agree that a better world is possible...not perfect or even close...but better. That is why I support Clark.

[CWebster]

17. Probably leaning more that way as I grow older.

and see the repeated stupidity of unnecessary war.

[lumpy]

67. So does General Clark.

nt

[lumpy]

68. So does General Clark.

nt

[TLM]

33. I would not disband it...

But I would seek to remove the profit motive.

War is too profitable for the people who have control over war policy.

That's a fundimental flaw in the structure of our defense system. Look at all the stuff the corp of engineers used to, that is now farmed out to private corporations who are motivated by profit, not good policy.

Clark was/is a part of that problem. As soon as he got out of the military, he did exactly what CHeney did, and went about selling his influence to defense contractors to help them get their fingers in the defense pie.

I do not want war criminal turned defense lobbyist to be in charge of defense policy anymore than I was a sec of defense turned ceo of halliburton to be in charge of defense policy.

[returnable]

18. Question...

"How can I possibly support a candidate whose worldview and basic philosophy about the role of the military as the force for peace is in conflict with everything I believe to be moral?"

Then how can you support Dean?

Dean is no anti-war, anti-military guy. He supported the first Gulf War, the Kosovo conflict, and the Afghanistan war.

If you fault Clark for what you perceive of his "worldview", it seems disingenuous to support another man who endorsed all of those military actions as well.

[CWebster]

23. In a country driven by war frenzy

and with all the macho strutting and posturing about military duty, I am not fool enough to believe a pacifist has a shot in a culture with a well-funded and aggressive military\corporate war machine. Yet, at the same time I am not looking to bolster up the Left's very own representitive of that same fixation.

What a vicious circle, the more we use our military to attack and invade, the more terrorist reaction, and the more we attack.

[DemCam]

30. I've changed my mind on the military just recently.

Reading WAGING MODERN WAR and WINNING MODERN WAR gave me a whole new perspective.

In order for a nation to survive, we must have a strong defense. Bullies have always been a part of being a human being...and sadly, always will be. Bullies, unless they are stopped, will always take advantage of those who are perceived as weak. The history of the world is rife with stories.

We can even say our struggle with the bullying tactics of the right-wing and those in charge of the Republican Party is a case in point. Everyday I read about "wimpy" democrats in pink-tutus.

Like it or not...we have a very erratic force unleashed in the world right now...terrorist organizations who are "crazed" with their fervor. There is no reasoning that will stop them. But a united front of many nations joined together to eliminate the perpetrators and at the same time improve conditions that foment terror tactics will go a long way.

This was my "St. Paul Moment"....we must defend ourselves and help others defend themselves.

That said...attacking states instead of terrorist cells...building bigger and more powerful bombs, constantly telling "scare" stories as Bush does in the new RNC ad...is egregious...and its wrong.

That's why I support Wes Clark. I want his experience in the world and with fighting bullies and terrorists. Besides that he is truly compassionate and empathetic.

(I know you disagree, CWebster...okay by me.)

[CWebster]

38. Bullies have always been a part of being a human being...

including US bullies.. Within the military establishment is this unquestioned assumption of the moral goodness and high ground of US policy and this image is marketed to the US citizenry, wrapped in the flag. History shows, no matter how loudly the drums of arrogant and self-important nationalism bravado are pounded, that the US has been the biggest bully of all.

The terrorist threat is the fuel they use to feed the frenzy, it is the same tactic they used with the red scare. The same fear-mongering. but can't you see, the more we attack, the more terrorism is created?

It works out perfectly for the business of the military-industrial complex--as long as they have an enemy target they have a self-perpetuating reason to.. wage modern war. See Israel.

[DemCam]

66. For once, we agree, CWebster...

If by "they" you mean BushCo wrapping itself in the flag...right-wingers in particular wrapping themselves in the flag.

I also agree that violence begets violence. I also agree that the military-industrial complex has a vested interest in the weapons industry.

At the same time, we must answer the call of self-defense and responsible leadership in the world...especially since we are in the delicate position of being the lone "superpower".

Wes Clark is the man of the hour.

[KittyWampus]

65. cwebster- your ignorance and bias is really boring

Clark Has Proposed His Own Version of A "Department of Peace"

As did George Washington (a general) who left money from his estate for the establishment of such.

Often, it seems, men who have seen war close up are the last to engage in them except as a last resort.

[CWebster]

69. then of couse

they wouldn't ne playing mind games with little boys.

[democratreformed]

13. Could you explain

more about why you feel that Clark is recruiting? What does he do that makes you feel that way?

[CWebster]

24. Went to his site and read a couple of speeches

where he discussed it.

[TLM]

31. How can you see him as a man of his word...

when those words do a 180 depending on the audience?

"And I'm very glad we've got the great team in office, men like Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice... people I know very well - our president George W. Bush. We need them there."


"We were really helped when President Ronald Reagan came in. I remember non-commissioned officers who were going to retire and they re-enlisted because they believed in President Reagan."

"That's the kind of President Ronald Reagan was. He helped our country win the Cold War. He put it behind us in a way no one ever believed would be possible. He was truly a great American leader. And those of us in the Armed Forces loved him, respected him, and tremendously admired him for his great leadership."

"President George Bush had the courage and the vision... and we will always be grateful to President George Bush for that tremendous leadership and statesmanship."

[Renew Deal]

35. If you have a problem with people changing their positions...

or telling the truth, I don't know how you support Dean. Waffle Powered Howard is bold enough to say that he wouldn't politicize the $87 Bil. vote and then he did it. Dean supports this, then that. The whole thing about glass houses...

Who has the quote of Dean saying Bush is doing a good job with the war on terra? Probably Dr. Funk.

[returnable]

39. You mean this one?

http://rutlandherald.com/hdean/38357

[TLM]

44. As ususal when you can not refute a point about Clark..

you try to attack Dean... as if anything Dean's ever said or done changes what Clark said and did.

And so far as I know Dean has never gone to a republican fundraiser and said Reagan and Bush sr. were great leaders.

"Who has the quote of Dean saying Bush is doing a good job with the war on terra?"

You mean these from Nov 2001...


The way the administration has handled the situation in Afghanistan has been very, very good,” he said. “I think the way the administration handled bio terrorism has been fair — not great — fair.”

<snip>

“I have to admit military tribunals bother me. I don’t like the idea of arbitrary, secret justice but I am willing to cut the president slack on the notion of defending the country,” Dean said, reiterating President Bush’s argument that the traditional justice system is slow and can, at times, make it difficult to keep sensitive information from being revealed in open court.



So again we see the misleading spin. Dean said that Bush's dealing with Afghanistan was very very good, not that his overall dealing with the war on terror was very good.

And that was in Nov 2001. Do you recall how far along Afghanistan was in Nov 2001?

[Renew Deal]

53. It's a double standard.

That's what I am saying.

[Cogito]

7. Sorry to hear about your experience

I think you should post this comment at the Clark blog. Feedback is good for the campaign.

The thing that sticks with me from your post was the interaction between Clark and your son. Clark's question "if your country needed you would you volunteer?" I think my kids might have answered "No" just as your son did. I would be interested to know if you followed up by talking to your son about the exchange. What did he think about it? How did he feel about the question and his answer? What did you say in turn?

My 8 year old son shook hands with Dean this summer at a rally and he still remembers the moment and talks about it. But your son got much more from Clark than a mere handshake. It seems to me that Clark's response was just about perfect. He did not pressure your son but rather pointed to someone else whose son was willing to volunteer. Leadership by example rather than by command.

Actually, upon reflection it seems to me that you and your son got much more out of that short fundraiser than anyone could have expected.

[CWebster]

9. It struck me that Clark

was using the example of the other boy to shame the boy who wasn't with the program.

Sorry, that is my impression.

[returnable]

12. "shame the boy"?

Wow, that's not how I read it. Seems to me Clark was saying the kid didn't need to worry about a draft cuz others were willing to volunteer.

Remember, Clark actually told the kid "We don't need a draft."

[democratreformed]

14. That's how

I see it too. It seems that he was saying that it's okay that not everyone wants to volunteer.

[TLM]

36. I don't know... the kid was made to feel he did something wrong

by saying he wouldn't want to fight... even asked his mom if it was OK for him to say that.

So obviously Clark made him feel he was wrong/bad for not wanting to fight.

[returnable]

40. "the kid was made to feel he did something wrong"?

Funny, but the kid's mom didn't say that.

She wrote "the General was saying to him was that as long as people volunteered we wouldn't need a draft and if he chooses NOT to volunteer, it's OK because there are others who will. That was how I read it too."

But I suppose you know more about how her kid feels than she does :eyes:

[wndycty]

43. Yeah its pretty low. . .

. . .to put words in the original poster's mouth. Tell me where in this thread did she mention that her "kic was made to feel he did something wrong?" But I am sure its fair as long as its not a bash on Dean its fair, right?

[TLM]

47. She said clearly that her son asked her...

"Mom, was it OK to tell him I wouldn't volunteer to fight in a war?"


Sounds to me like he was worried he'd done something wrong.

Why would he ask if he did something wrong, unless he was made to feel he had done something wrong?

[wndycty]

50. Do you really think. . .

. . .that if her child was traumatized by Clark that the original poster would be firmly in his corner?

[in_cog_ni_to]

55. He asked me that

because my husband and I were laughing about him telling a 4 Star General "No I will not volunteer to fight a war." Right after the exchange, he heard us laughing and talking about it (we thought it was WONDERFUL) and that's when he asked the question.. "Mom, was it OK to tell him I wouldn't volunteer to fight in a war?" That is when we explained how WE read the Generals intent, which was to tell him..."Others will volunteer, so don't worry your pretty little 10 year old head." :shrug: If he meant it the way you "think" he did, it went right over our heads.:shrug: In fact, right after General Clark walked away, my son said, "Wow, he's really nice!" The lady standing next to him said, "Isn't he nice? He sure did like you!"

My son DID pick up on the fact that he had said something to a 4 Star General that was <ahem> "unusual."(he saw us laughing about it) :) The MOST important thing to come out of that exchange was Clark's statement..."No, we don't need a draft."

[lumpy]

70. The kid might just have an overload

of force-fed so-called patriotism, constant war talk, terrorism and US enemies. At the same time consider what must be going around in the thoughts of Iraqi youths.

[returnable]

51. They're grasping at straws here...

What a surprise :toast:

[CWebster]

52. Sort of like the recruiters going into elementary school

and some child protests, and the recruiter says, well, so long as we have Timmy here, who graduated a lieutenant from West Point...but this was a General, running for president, speaking to a 10 year old boy, at a time when our youth are being picked off everyday in a war without end.

Incognito has her reasons to support Clark, but it bothered her enough that she posted this thread. Twice.

[returnable]

54. She posted the thread twice...

...to voice her disappointment in how short the event was, how someone swiped her kid's bumper sticker, and to share a story of her son talking with a presidential candidate. No where does she say the exchange between her son and Clark "bothered" her.

If you read her other posts in this thread, she did NOT see this as the General shaming her child. NO WHERE does she say her child felt intimidated or shamed by Clark's answer. In fact, she said her kid liked the General and thought he was friendly.

She included the anecdote to celebrate how her young son got to meet and interact with a presidential candidate!

The armchair analyzing from the peanut gallery here is too damn funny.

[Tom Rinaldo]

56. No, more like a kid walking up to the recruiter

with a question, than having the recruiter walk into a school. This ten year old had the poise and courage to ask a serious question to a Presidential candiate, the reality of the military was not being involuntarilly thrust at him in his school. Billy initiated questioning Clark about the draft. Good question. Clark did not act condencending in any way towards that 10 year old. He treated the question seriously, and asked a thought provoking answer back. That was a good response by Clark in my opinion. There was no lecture involved, Clark's question went to the crux of an important issue that many of us struggle with. Billy may conclude differently than Clark would how one can best serve one's country, or whether or not one has any obligation to serve one's country at all, under any circumstances. On the most basic level Clark was giving a true straight answer to the question. If the United States continues to believe in the need for a military, either enough people will enter it voluntarilly, or there will be pressure for a draft. Clark's point was there is evidence that enough people will enter voluntarilly. I think Billy deserves praise for askig a tough question, and Clark deserves praise for taking the time to engage in a short serious exploration of that question with a ten year old non voter.

[CWebster]

58. Waking up to the Recruiter,

eh?

Hey, you said it.

[Tom Rinaldo]

62. lol, OK, that's a fair gotcha!

I'm dangerous at a keyboard. You should see some of the typos I did catch! There's never an "L" around when you really need one lol - hey, there they are!

[in_cog_ni_to]

59. CWebster

My MAIN reason to post the thread was to bitch and complain about the fundraiser not being what I expected :) and to post the exchange between my son and General Clark. I didn't want to start a Clark flame thread. :( If I thought for a minute that Clark meant what you think he meant, I would have been more than BOTHERED. I would have been pissed as hell and would have said something to him, General or not. Honestly, it wasn't the way you see it. Do you think, just maybe, that you want to see the worse in him because you despise him so? Just maybe?

[returnable]

60. I think you're on to something

"Do you think, just maybe, that you want to see the worse in him because you despise him so? Just maybe?"

:toast:

Betcha never thought some Deanies would try to politicize your son's conversation with Clark, did ya? :hi:

[wndycty]

61. I appreciate this thread

and Clark need's supporters like in_cog_ni_to! This is someone who supports the General but is not afraid to criticize him. I took her concerns to the campaign and hopefully we will get them addressed. As you can see not one Clark supporter accused her of betraying or bashing Clark (even though we knew some others on this board would use this thread as excuse to bash), we heard complaints and supported her. Some assured her that most fundraisers are very quick and not very personal, while others encouraged her to contact the campaign.

I am proud of in-cog_ni_to and the other Clark supporters who posted on this thread.

[CWebster]

63. No, just based on what you reported

Even those among your fellow supporters were anxious about your report, and you even stated that it was a topic of discussion in your household. I was only observing. Fundamentally it comes down to your comfort level around the issue, obviously I am less inclined to support Clark philosophically and do not think his presence in our party bodes well for the future, which is already tenuous enough. I support Dean because I feel he has a better ability to unify the factions within the party while still maintaining a Democratic identity. Clark represents the faction that resents the base and adheres to a Republican model that will only serve to divide rather than unite.

[TLM]

46. "Mom, was it OK to tell him I wouldn't volunteer to fight in a war?"

Why would the kid ask if he did something wrong, had he not been made to feel he did something wrong?

[returnable]

49. Oh, come on!

We're talking about a 10-year-old kid here!

Because he asked his mom if a question was appropriate, you're trying to spin it into some kind of "Clark scared the bejesus out of a child" moment. Talk about a stretch job.

If he felt so much shame at the menacing militaristic hands of Clark, why does his mother write that he "liked Clark a lot" and thought he was "friendly."

That hardly sounds like a kid who felt the General was shaming him.

But why take the word of the kid's own mother when you can warp it into a Clark smear, right? :eyes:

[TLM]

34. Yeah don;t worry Billy....

that boy over there is not a coward like you, and he'll protect us while you go hide and do bong hits you little hippie communist!


I do not think Clark was intentionaly doing that... rather I think the military culture is so ingrained in him that he can't help but act like that toward those who do not wish to serve.

[Clark Can WIN]

45. sounds more to me like you're projectiing

your own percieved deficiencies onto poor little Billy

As long as we're doing 30 second bullshit pop psychology here I thought I'd play along too.

[TLM]

48. Imagine that, a personal attack from a Clark supporter...

...who can't refute the point.

Boy that's about as unusal as rain falling from the sky.

[Clark Can WIN]

64. I'm sorry

so you are a child psychologist with personal knowledge of the child then?

Or is it just purely bullshit pop psych?

What's regular and predictable is certain notables of the Dean cult spilling their kool aid all over any thread with the word CLARK in it.

[Tom Rinaldo]

41. I remember RFK calling for end of student dererrals

I was lucky enough to see RFK speak at my High School in 1967. He believed all should serve or the poor would disproportionally be placed in harms way. That Clark believes in service is without doubt. It is consistent with the choices he made in his life. His platform emphasises that Americans should try to give something back to their nation and communities through direct service, but not necessarily through the military, but through any means that contributes to our society. Clark opposes a draft. He is concerned though that too many see personal self advancement as their only goal in life. He's one of those "ask not what your country can do for you..." types.

[in_cog_ni_to]

20. My son

asked me "Mom, was it OK that I told Genaeral Clark that I would not volunteer to fight in a war?" I told him it was ABSOLUTELY OK because it was the TRUTH! My husband told him that what the General was saying to him was that as long as people volunteered we wouldn't need a draft and if he chooses NOT to volunteer, it's OK because there are others who will. That was how I read it too. My son said, "OK, because I'm not going to volunteer!" WHEW! says mom! :) He may feel differently in 8 years. I hope not, but you never know.

My son met Dean this past summer at a rally/convention and LOVES the guy! He liked General Clark a lot too. He thought he was very friendly. The General saw the Clark T-Shirt he was wearing and said..."Nice Shirt!" My son asked me why all the candidates say the same thing? because Dean said the same thing when he saw his Dean T-Shirt. LOL! He enjoys participating in political functions and I like him doing it. He will be an involved citizen when he grows up, I hope!

Since this was my first fundraiser, I guess I expected more? I thought he would hang around and schmooze with the people. I didn't know he was sandwiched between 2 other fundraisers. If I had known that perhaps I would have expected what happened. It WAS still a thrill to meet him. He's a very nice man and too good looking for words! :)

[Cogito]

71. I think Clark handled it well.

I also think you handled the interaction with your son very well too.

Still, I wonder if you could say a bit more about how you feel about your son's response. The general asked the question "if your country needed you would you volunteer?" and your son's answer was "NO." I expect that if you asked either of my kids whether they would volunteer to join the armed forces they would answer the same way your son did. I am also sure that I feel every bit as protective of my kids as you do for yours. But, there is a strong part of me that wishes that your son and my kids would answer the General's question differently. If we are unwilling to serve in the military ourselves or to encourage our kids to serve then by what right should we expect other people's children to put their lives on the line on our behalf?

This is a rhetorical question as much as a real one--a question for me as much as for you. As a good liberal I would say that there are many ways in which one can serve the community and the nation. That is, of course, true. But, that answer doesn't take the General's question seriously. The premise of the question is that your country legitimately needs YOU for the armed forces. How can there be any legitimate answer to that question except YES?

[in_cog_ni_to]

72. You know,

I was thinking about that today...because of this thread. :) I could honestly say that if we had an HONORABLE man as our Commander in Chief, who would never send our troops into harms way for an illegitimate reason, like Bush has done, I would feel differently. In fact, if General Clark were our President and he was forced to make a decision to go to war, I would know it was a LAST RESORT involvement. I would know he was being honest with the American people and I would be MORE apt to feel differently. I KNOW he will never send our troops into war unless it's absolutely necessary because he is as protective of them as I am of my son. I feel his sincerity...I know it's real. It may be a female thing? :)

Under Clark's leadership, I would feel differently. That's NOT to say that I wouldn't rather see our foreign policies changed and do everything in our power to have PEACE in the world. We should go out of our way to turn around our disastrous policies and our image in the eyes of the world. If THAT was done and something should happen in the world and PRESIDENT CLARK thought the LAST RESORT was a war....YES, in that case I would say our country LEGITIMATELY needed my son to help and would encourage him to do so, but ONLY if we have tried everything else. I would never let my child fight a Vietnam or Iraq war.

[Cogito]

73. You said it perfectly

Thanks for clarifying.

[returnable]

11. Disappointed?

That's too bad. I was there, too, but had a completely different experience.

I don't know, maybe I just had different expectations. I knew the event was sandwiched in between two other fundraisers, so I expected time to be tight.

The way I see it, I'd gladly donate $75 to the campaign just for the hell of it anyway. Being able to actually shake the man's hand and hear him give a quick stump speech was just icing on the cake.

Sorry to hear about the bumpersticker, though. Some people just suck.

[Nashyra]

19. I would donate $75.00 dollars to just see him in person

I wouldn't care if it was for just a few minutes, I have never been involved in a campaign before but I would not mind being squeezed in, the more people he gets to meet up with for however brief the better. Sorry about your son though that is enexcusable, and I also thought that the comparison of the boys was an example we don't need everyone and that your young son should not have to worry. I also think that bringing up the draft issue is the best way to bring out the moderates to vote for Clark, he is the candidate who can do the most to avoid reinstating the draft and he has the ability to challenge * on the issue.

[in_cog_ni_to]

21. I didn't know he was

at a fundraiser prior to ours and I didn't know he had another scheduled for after ours. This was my first fundraiser and if I ever choose to attend another, I will know what to expect. Your point is a good one. I would have donated money anyway, so meeting him is just an "added bonus." :)

It was still a thrill to meet him and I'm glad I did. I just won't be attending anymore fundraisers because we cannot afford $2000 a plate dinners, if those are the ones who get the schmooze time. :) I guess that's what I wanted and expected. Now I know how it works.

I will continue to donate money and time to his campaign because he is my guy.

[Renew Deal]

22. I have been to a couple of these.

It's tough to spend any quality time with him. They are usually quick. Dinners, rallys and speeches are usually longer. The best thing about the fundraisers is it is like a night out. Lots of people just having fun.

[Donna Zen]

25. Conversations with Clark

Are the town hall meeting fundraisers as well? It seems to me that they are the best.

[DemCam]

26. I just got to "see" him

and walk across the street with him. Went by in a whirlwind...less than 5 minutes. We had waited in the cold for nearly an hour. We didn't even get to hear a few words...but you know what? I was thrilled! And it won't be my last time to get to see the man.

He is running across this entire nation right now...making up for lost time...and I don't know how any of them do it.

Just think...you are among a very small number of people who have gotten to say a word, personally, to the General. And so is your son.

I can understand the disappointment, though. I patted his back as he turned to walk across the street...and said, longingly...come back and stay a little longer next time.

I'm glad you're not abandoning him, though. He's the only one who can unite this nation, I truly believe.

[in_cog_ni_to]

27. I would never abandon him.

I truly love the man. He comes across as sincere and trustworthy. ANYONE who cares about the Rowanda people enough to CRY on National TV is a sensitive caring human being. THAT is Clark. I'm not going anywhere. I know he's playing "catch up" with the other candidates and I will move on from my disappointment and continue campaigning for him.

[DemCam]

32. Makes me very happy.

Your post just made me a little afraid. :-)