SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Mannie who wrote (24386)8/6/2003 11:21:00 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
Powell doesn't do ranch wear or ideology
_______________________________

By MARY DEJEVSKY
BRITISH COLUMNIST
Wednesday, August 6, 2003

How hopeful the world seemed then, and how distant that world seems now.

When Colin Powell was confirmed as U.S. secretary of state, his first act was to call all his staff together and give them a pep talk about the noble tradition of American diplomacy. It was a thoughtful and necessary morale boost for a department mired in petty scandals about missing laptop computers and downcast over Bill Clinton's last failed effort to secure Middle East peace. The new head of U.S. diplomacy was ecstatically applauded.

Now, more than a year before the next election, it has been reported that Powell and his deputy, Richard Armitage, have signaled they will not serve a second term, even if George Bush is re-elected. In a way, this is no surprise. Few expected Powell to serve more than one term. He had never concealed his distrust of politics and had to be cajoled by Bush to join the administration at all. Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff during the 1991 Gulf War, Powell had retired to found a charity for disadvantaged young blacks.

When he agreed to join Bush's campaign team, two factors seem to have swayed him. The first was the offer of the State Department, which would capitalize on his wide international experience. The other was his highly developed sense of duty. As a black, moderate Republican, he appreciated Bush's stated intention to form an administration that was ethnically and philosophically inclusive. Like some other moderates in the Bush administration -- most now departed -- Powell may also have felt responsible for giving moderates a voice in the innermost recesses of power.

Yet Powell was never one of the Bush crowd and never really assimilated. Visiting the Bush ranch at Crawford before the formal announcement of his nomination, he arrived in a navy blazer and grey flannels. Noting the discrepancy between his garb and Bush's well-worn denims, the four-star general quipped to reporters: "You see, I don't do ranch wear."

Powell didn't do ideology either. Nor, one may deduce from his reticence over the past year, does America's senior military veteran-turned-diplomat do unilateral foreign policy or pre-emptive wars. His natural preference is for a cooperative approach and, as a former soldier who has seen combat, he would rather not see American troops go into battle if fighting can possibly be avoided. It does not take much imagination to suspect that Iraq would have been very much not Powell's sort of war.

Misgivings about the war, augmented by the U.S. failure to find those much-vaunted weapons of mass destruction, may explain why Powell has put his eventual departure in the public domain now. He had, after all, given one of the most authoritative presentations about Iraq's supposed weapons at a crucial time in the United Nations Security Council's discussions.

But there are other possible explanations for the reports about his departure and their timing. By signaling that he will step down, but not yet, they clarify that Powell has no intention of resigning immediately, so fending off pressure for him to go. The fact that Powell and Armitage -- much more a Bush type than Powell -- apparently intend to leave together also suggests that they may view U.S. diplomacy under their tutelage as unsuccessful and are offering Bush a clean slate, should he win a second term.

If so, Powell has reason to feel aggrieved. The terrorist attacks of 9/11 undercut his authority and that of administration moderates at a time when they were competing on equal terms with hardliners for the president's ear. By remaining in his job, however, even after the prevailing mood of the administration shifted, Powell also allowed himself to be used.

Known as a moderate, and an honest broker with a cosmopolitan outlook, Powell was a huge asset to Bush in persuading other countries, especially in Europe, that his administration could be persuaded to take a multilateral, co-operative approach. Public opinion was almost won over; Europe's professional diplomats were merely confused.

If there is to be a clear-out at the State Department before a second Bush administration, the widespread assumption is that this last repository of relative liberalism will be yanked to the right. Condoleezza Rice, the current national security adviser, could become secretary of state, with Paul Wolfowitz, one of the chief proponents of the Iraq war, moved to the National Security Council. Thus a second Bush administration would at least be speaking with one voice, even if we foreigners didn't like what it said.

This assumption, however, is premature. The continued ascendancy of the hawkish right depends to a large extent on the course of events in Iraq. American deaths, spiraling costs and the reluctance of other countries to help out are quietly pushing the president into a more cooperative relationship even with the United Nations. The "Rumsfeld doctrine" of smaller, lighter armies has been challenged by the reality of occupation and Wolfowitz returned from a recent visit to Iraq a quieter and less ideological warmonger than when he left.

Foreign policy is rarely a determining issue in presidential elections. But the combination of Iraq and those empty chairs at the State Department could well ensure that it is high on the agenda for 2004.

Mary Dejevsky writes for The Independent in Great Britain.

seattlepi.nwsource.com



To: Mannie who wrote (24386)8/6/2003 11:57:58 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
General Clark's Backers, Brewing Up a Draft

By Ann Gerhart
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 6, 2003; Page C01

On a typical evening at Stetson's on the U Street strip, the paper Heineken bucket is for hauling chilled beers to your table for serious swilling. This night, the bucket holds "regime change," and look there -- four quarters, five dimes, a nickel and a penny, to fund the effort to draft a certain former Army general to run for president.

It's Meetup night for the Draft Wesley Clark movement, and early Monday evening, there's a sign on the door leading upstairs: "Closed for Private Party." There, the guys who started this mini-movement in April are bustling around the two pool tables and the Dr. Who pinball machine, putting out bumper stickers and buttons, pasting up a banner. Priscilla Chism climbs the stairs, sees she's the first one there, asks hesitantly, "Do we sign in anywhere?"

"We're still waiting for our sign-in sheet to show up," says John Hlinko, one of the co-founders of DraftWesleyClark.com. "But you can have a Clark bar."

"I'm chronically early," Chism says apologetically.

Unlike the non-candidate. He's late.

Nine Democrats have been running for months, raising money and building support. None of them is good enough for those who would draft Clark. It's nothing personal; most Clarksters just think the declared candidates can't win in a campaign that will turn on national security. But how about that four-star general? Impeccable bona fides on that, they say. Led the NATO forces trying to put the Balkans back together, believes in America working with its allies, shot four times in Vietnam, Bronze Star, Purple Heart.

Some 30,000 people have sent Clark letters begging him to run, and $338,000 has been pledged to his campaign if he gets in, draft organizers say. On Monday night, Clarksters gathered at 92 Meetups across the country. "Something is going on here," says Hlinko.

As for the conventional wisdom that says Clark is too late to the party to raise funds and build support, co-founder Josh Margulies trots out the practiced answer: "The last time a Rhodes scholar from Arkansas announced against an incumbent named Bush who had just won a war in Iraq, he did okay. And he declared in October."

Clark himself, in an appearance on CNN last week, said, "I am approaching a time when I am going to make a decision," adding: "I think one of the principal rules of making decisions is, you never have to make a decision before it's time to make a decision. And it's not time to make this decision."

Vacationing with his wife in California, Clark was unavailable for comment yesterday on his unsolicited faithful. But a curious aide could not resist asking, "Those Draft Wesley Clark people -- what do they look like?"

In Washington, the 60 Clarksters who show up look like this: Mostly white, ranging from their early twenties to the two old friends from the Class of '48 at Yale Law School. Folks with their government ID badges still hanging from their necks, folks in shorts and shirts, suits and ties, a young woman with good pumps and an Ann Taylor bag, a middle-aged lady with artisan silver jewelry, a pair of neighborhood guys with their big gym bags by their sides, a young black couple who just moved into the District from Maryland.

They sound like this: earnest, well informed, worried about the direction of the country, not kooky. Oh, there are the blowhards, and you can hear their voices droning on above the general murmuring of regular people having beers after work. The blowhards say things like "another interesting statistic in the Franklin Pierce College poll" and "based on my analyses" and "back when John Anderson ran in '80." The other Clarksters nod politely and never get a word in edgewise. That's just Washington. Live here, and you deal with it.

Then Hlinko climbs up on a chair, clinks a pen against his Corona bottle and promises that the evening will be "an extravaganza felt by all. It will be fun, wacky, wild and exciting." He promises a toast to Wesley at 8:04 p.m. -- "that's 20:04 in military time, 2004, get it?" -- and an auction of dinner for two, which consists of MREs, a Draft Wesley mug and a dessert of Clark bars. "Do you know how hard it is to find Clark bars?" muses Hlinko. "My cousin spent the entire day online, and he finally found a distributor in Pittsburgh." Apparently, they speculate, Clark bars have been eclipsed by Butterfingers. This may be because they taste like "chocolate-covered barley," says Hlinko.

In addition to these raucous political festivities, the Clarksters break into four groups and brainstorm on juicing up the Web site, getting media attention, getting all the volunteers something to do and fundraising creatively. There is no speech touting Clark's position on the issues, to the disappointment of a pair of Howard Dean supporters, who wonder how to distinguish him from Clark. "We're trying to figure out what he stands for," Rick Parker says as his wife nods. Told that there are no issues, because there is no candidate, they look bewildered.

"I love Howard" Dean, says Pam Helton, 43, a professional clarinetist from Laurel, "and then it hit me like a brick wall: The man is totally unelectable. But then I heard the general on 'Diane Rehm,' and that was it. The man is absolutely it."

DraftWesleyClark.com was born three months ago in Otello, an Italian restaurant in Dupont Circle. Hlinko, 36, a veteran of several campaigns, was eating lunch with David Wallace, 37, a media relations manager. They were talking politics and bemoaning the lack of a galvanizing Democratic candidate. They talked about Clark, who at the time was all over CNN, commenting on the Iraq war. He seemed perfect: statesmanlike, articulate, smart. In his 34 years in the military, Clark had always dutifully answered the call to serve. Perhaps he would answer theirs.

Next day, they bought the domain name. They sent out feelers through Meetup, a cyber meeting ground intended to connect people who wanted to talk about cocker spaniels and Dungeons & Dragons. Dean's campaign already had begun to exploit the Internet's potential to build a new kind of grass-roots operation, and the Clarksters ran with it. They have never had a conversation with Clark about it. "It would seem like collusion," says Hlinko.

Maybe Clark will get in. Maybe he won't. "Please declare already," Hlinko says Monday, flecks of Clark bar on his lip. "I gotta get my life back."



To: Mannie who wrote (24386)8/11/2003 11:26:58 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
GOP should fear Wesley Clark
_____________________________

By Bronwyn Lance Chester
VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Posted on Sat, Aug. 09, 2003

He's whip-smart, silver-haired handsome, articulate and a retired general. He sounds like an Arkansas good-ol'-boy, but was first in his West Point class and a Rhodes scholar at Oxford University.

He saw combat in Vietnam, commanded NATO forces and fared well toe-to-toe with Tim Russert of NBC's "Meet the Press," perhaps the ultimate test of candidate battle-worthiness.

He is potential presidential candidate Wesley Clark, the one Democrat who might strike fear in Republican hearts - if only he'd run.

Ask many Americans their thoughts on the current crop of Democratic presidential hopefuls and be prepared for eye rolls, groans and name-calling. Instead of excitement, Democratic candidates have largely produced dyspepsia, even among party faithful.

Joe Lieberman? Damaged goods. Dick Gephardt? Boring. John Edwards? Ken Doll. John Kerry? Too effete. Bob Graham? Who? And so on.

Howard Dean, the current media paramour, has generated the most buzz and has raised millions in an Internet-driven campaign. But the former Vermont governor insists the Democratic Party has moved too far to the right, and he wants to shift it leftward, where most Americans aren't.

None of these guys make pulses race. Few make voters want to cast ballots for them, though lots of voters are against President Bush. Instead of running scared, Republicans are stockpiling election night champagne.

Clark is perhaps the one guy with the personality and national security credentials to change this. While he was skeptical about the Iraq war, his military career counters any anti-patriotic charges. "NASCAR Dads" would be attracted to this man who owns guns and hunts. His background would play well in the South and Midwest.

A group of dedicated Clark supporters hopes a slew of voter letters will spur the general to run. Clark's will-he-or-won't-he candidacy has almost become an anecdote in this election's larger story, the use of the Internet in reaching out to supporters.

The grass-roots movement, www.draftwesleyclark.com, has consistently scored second or third out of all presidential candidate Web sites - even Bush's - according to the Alexa Web ranking service, said John Hlinko, the Clark effort's co-leader in Washington.

The lower the number, the higher the ranking. As of last Sunday, Howard Dean's site was ranked 15,210. Draftwesleyclark.com was 19,133. By comparison, JohnKerry.com scored a paltry 50,989. Clark, however, hasn't even said he's running and voters have had to sleuth to deduce that he's a Democrat.

Hlinko believes the Web hits show strong interest in Clark: "People don't visit Web sites because they randomly stumble across them. People search them out. And people had to dig to find us."

Reminiscent of the Internet-driven flash-mob phenomenon, Clark supporters have been gathering simultaneously once a month in nearly 100 cities across America.

I ask Hlinko why he thinks Clark might stand a chance. "Because he has an appeal that crosses party divides," he says. "People are intrigued by him. Perhaps the best way to explain it is that he's the president we were promised as kids. He's a larger-than-life figure."

Why should Republicans be scared of him? "In the way Reagan brought over Southern Democrats, Clark could bring over moderate Republicans. The right-wing should be worried because of Clark's swing-state appeal."

Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics, thinks it might not be so easy. "It's awfully tough for draftees to pull upsets," he said Monday.

Stephen Medvic, assistant professor of government at Franklin & Marshall College, agrees, but notes: "Democrats realize that security is going to be a crucial issue next year, and rightly or wrongly, they won't be seen as being as tough on those issues as Bush."

Medvic said of the Clark phenomenon: "I'm hearing a lot of Democratic friends say they like this or that candidate. But then they say, 'But who I really like is Clark."'

If the general decides to run, he'll be behind the eight ball in Iowa and New Hampshire, as well as in the crucial fund-raising game. But Clark may be gunning for a vice-presidential slot, where he could draw voters hesitant about a too-left-leaning Dean or Kerry candidacy.

First, Clark must show he's game. As Hlinko said: "Like any good general, he will only go into battle when he has the necessary ground troops. We feel that if we show him it's a battle he can win, he won't dodge the draft."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bronwyn Lance Chester is a columnist for The Virginian-Pilot in Norfolk, Va. Contact her at bronwyn.chester@pilotonline.com.
_____________________

tallahassee.com