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 : WHO IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT IN 2004 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Raymond Duray who wrote (4164)8/21/2003 4:40:41 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 10965
 
NPR's Daniel Schorr comments on Wesley Clark...

women4clark.com

August 10, 2003

LIANE HANSEN, host: Wesley Clark's flirtation with running for president prompted NPR senior news analyst Daniel Schorr to consider the strengths that other former generals have brought to the Oval Office or to public service.

DANIEL SCHORR:

Wesley Clark, whom I know slightly, shares one quality with General Dwight Eisenhower, one of the most popular presidents of our time, and Colin Powell, who might have been had he chosen to run. It is the ability to jettison military jargon and address civilians in civilian terms. This quality served Clark in good stead in 1996 when he faced mandatory retirement under the Army's Up Or Out policy. The three-star general was completing his term as director of strategic planning for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the military command had no four-star assignment to offer him. The smooth-talking general managed to enlist the interest of Defense Secretary William Perry and even of President Clinton. And so Clark ended up with the Southern Command and four stars. The Rhodes scholar who was also first in his class at West Point and was wounded in Vietnam has the necessary pedigree for a candidate in a time of security concerns.

But for one who has spent most of his presidential life in uniform, he also has an unusual ability to address civilian concerns. On television he argued for affirmative action and against a big tax cut. On CNN's "Crossfire," he spoke out against permitting a long-term deficit. On NBC's "Meet the Press," he spoke out against the abridgement of civil liberties in pursuit of the war against terrorism.

Will the former supreme commander of NATO forces run for president? I suspect that this is, for him, a strategic issue; that he's conducting a feasibility study, or call it reconnaissance. Can he, starting late, raise enough money before the primaries to make him look electable? Do people respond to a soldier-intellectual? I imagine he'll try only if he thinks he has a chance.

This is Daniel Schorr.

(Soundbite of song)



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (4164)8/21/2003 4:58:43 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 10965
 
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK IS INTERVIEWED ON NBC'S "TODAY SHOW"

women4clark.com

7/14/2003

SPEAKERS: MATT LAUER, NBC ANCHOR

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK (RET.)

LAUER: Retired U.S. Army General Wesley Clark served as NATO's supreme allied commander in Europe and led NATO's military action in Kosovo.

General Clark, good morning to you.

CLARK: Good morning, Matt.

LAUER: There's a cover story in Newsweek magazine this week, General, that talks about a secret Iraqi document that lays out orders for a guerrilla-type war after the fall of Saddam Hussein. In other words, that this--these types of attacks we're seeing on the daily basis were part of the Iraqi plan all along. Did we do enough to prepare for this situation?

CLARK: I think the answer is clearly no: first, in terms of putting adequate forces on the ground during the operation to sweep all the way through the country; second, in terms of quickly cutting out the sources of resistance afterwards; and finally, in terms of bringing in international forces and international legitimacy to help us get control of this problem early on. We haven't done it.

LAUER: You disagree with an early decision by Ambassador Bremer in Iraq to disband the Iraqi army and the Baath Party. I think what you said is something like it created huge groups of people who are now unemployed and yet trained to kill.

CLARK: That's exactly right. What we should have done is we should have put that army in the barracks and used it. Same with the Baath Party; should have lined them up, got the information, paid them to stay on duty and then let them take a loyalty pledge to the new organization.

LAUER: And could we have believed that loyalty pledge? These are people who are, you know, critically loyal to Saddam Hussein.

CLARK: Couldn't have believed the pledge. You would have had to check on it and confirm it and watch their actions. But it's always better, in cases like this, to get the potential adversaries out into the open rather than leaving them under cover.

LAUER: So what is the option now, General? Obviously it is the Americans who seem to be targeted on a daily basis. There have been some talks that NATO should come in and take over control of this operation from now on. You're a former NATO guy; what's your opinion on that?

CLARK: I think it'd be a wonderful thing if we can get NATO in. We can't do that unless we go back to the United Nations and get a full U.N. mandate for this operation, which means giving the U.N. increased political authority. If we do that, we might be able to get NATO in.

But you know, Matt, the first thing to do is to follow through on what Paul Bremer's done with the Iraqi council and let the Iraqis have more authority in the decision making. And also pull together that Iraqi police force, the rump army that's being formed and get the Iraqis out to help secure their own facilities and do their own work.

LAUER: As you know, there was an audio tape that surfaced not long ago. It's now believed to contain the authentic voice of Saddam Hussein, so we now think he's still alive. Can this resistance be crushed while people in Iraq still think that Saddam Hussein is alive and might return?

CLARK: No. We have to get Saddam Hussein and his sons.

LAUER: Let me ask you about intelligence, and the flap over the intelligence that led U.S. forces into this war. During a State of the Union address, the president cited an intelligence report that talked about Iraq attempting to buy uranium from Africa. That report has now been discredited. Did the administration, in your opinion, do enough to check the veracity of that intelligence report?

CLARK: No, they didn't, Matt.

But the real issue is not that specific intelligence report. As Condi Rice said yesterday, the president didn't go to war because of one intelligence report or one statement in the State of the Union speech. The question is--and this is the issue--why precisely did the United States, in the middle of the war against terror, decide to attack Iraq? When did we make that decision and why?

LAUER: Well, the reasoning was there was an imminent threat, according to the administration, that Iraq might use or sell its weapons of mass destruction.

Do you think this was a case of an honest mistake, since clearly we haven't found the weapons of mass destruction, or was this a deliberate game, in your opinion, of spinning public opinion?

CLARK: I think there were a lot of factors that converged that made it seem like a good idea right after 9/11 to have a hard target like Iraq, or a state whose government we could take down. And all the polls showed that the American people were predisposed to believe that Saddam was somehow connected. The simple truth is we haven't seen the evidence of that yet.

LAUER: The president is mulling a decision now, General, as to whether or not to send U.S. troops to Liberia. If you were the president, would you send them?

CLARK: Yes, I would.

But the United States armed forces are overstretched because of Iraq. We need to take measures to take care of the men and women in uniform. They need reserves called up. They need a rotation plan. Because, let's face it, we're going to have to sustain the force in Iraq for some time.

LAUER: Let me stick on the subject of ``if you were president.'' There's a grassroots organization called draftWesleyClark.com. They're running radio ads in several states. Coincidentally, those states have early primaries.

Are you going to ask them to stop running the ads?

CLARK: Well, I haven't made a decision on what I'm going to do.

I'll tell you one thing though, Matt: There's a lot of real grassroots support out there. I think what you're seeing, not only in this draft Clark movement, but also in the support for Howard Dean and John Kerry and many other people, is that the American people are increasingly engaged, they're using new tools of communication, like the Internet, in ways that we haven't seen before. And I think this is a very positive thing for the American democracy.

LAUER: How connected are you to that grassroots movement?

CLARK: Oh, I'm not connected to it at all. It started without my knowledge, and I really don't know who's in it, other than a couple of people have told me that they've got about 30,000 people in there of all ages--it's not just young kids. And it sounds pretty impressive.

But what they actually are doing, I really don't know.

LAUER: I'm sure you've talked to some people, General. Obviously, running for president is an expensive proposition. Do you think you would be a candidate who could raise the kind of money it would require to make a successful run?

CLARK: Were I to decide to do that--I just haven't looked at raising money as the principal problem.

There are many issues associated with this. It's a decision my family and I have got to consider, and we are considering it. I am talking to a lot of people. I've received a lot of encouragement on this. And so I'll just have to go through the process and work it out.

LAUER: General Wesley Clark. General, thanks for your time. We appreciate it.

CLARK: Thank you, Matt.

END



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (4164)8/21/2003 11:30:18 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 10965
 
Clark may truly be the candidate who could go all the way to The White House...

Message 19230128



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (4164)8/21/2003 11:48:45 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 10965
 
"G. Gordon Liddy says that Democrats haven't given the President enough credit. I think the president deserves full credit. In fact, I think he should be held fully accountable."

-Gen. Wesley Clark



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (4164)8/21/2003 3:06:10 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 10965
 
Wesley Clark talks with CNN's Wolf Blitzer...

cnn.com

8/17/03

BLITZER: Welcome back to LATE EDITION. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington.

The last U.S. general to be elected president of the United States was Dwight Eisenhower, and that 50 years ago. In 2004, voters may have another retired general as a candidate. The former NATO supreme commander, Wesley Clark, is considering, considering a White House run.

He joins us now live from Little Rock, Arkansas.

General Clark, welcome back to LATE EDITION. Thanks very much for joining us.

Are you running for president?

GEN. WESLEY CLARK (RET.), FORMER ALLIED SUPREME NATO COMMANDER: I have not made a decision yet, but I am coming to closure on the matter, Wolf.

BLITZER: When will you make that final decision?

CLARK: Sometime in the next two or three weeks, I'll continue to move toward closure.

BLITZER: What are the factors?

CLARK: I really haven't speculated on that. This is a very tough call for someone who hasn't been climbing the political ladder. I've been in public service my whole life, but it's been in the military. And this is -- you're dealing with new language, new groups, new issues, new ways of thinking about how to do this.

It's not so much the problems of government, but it's the problems of the organization and the mindset it takes to move ahead in a political elective process.

BLITZER: The Wall Street Journal quotes Senator Hillary Clinton from New York State as having told one of the Draft Wesley Clark volunteers that perhaps your wife of many years is a reluctant political warrior, reluctant to see you step into that political fray. Is that true?

CLARK: Well, what wife isn't reluctant to see her husband and her family exposed to that. I think that's a universal condition, as I've talked to so many people in political life now since I got out of the military. The wives all say that, whatever they may say publicly.

But we've been in public service our entire marriage, and I'm confident my family will support whatever the ultimate decision is, and they'll do it very, very well.

BLITZER: Some of your fans out there, and there are plenty of them apparently, are not waiting for you to make that formal announcement. They have a Draft Wesley Clark movement under way. They're already starting to run some ads. Let's show our viewers some of them.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: Unafraid to speak his mind. Unwilling to put politics ahead of duty. He has never failed to answer our country's call. Now we call on him one more time to preserve, protect and defend our nation and all for which it stands. Draft Wesley Clark for president.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: You're not telling them to stop running those ads, are you?

CLARK: I haven't, Wolf. I've thought about that. I thought about it a lot when this movement got started, but I -- because I had not made a decision and I have nothing to do with this movement.

But I do say this about it. This is an authentic expression of political feeling, and I think people should do that. They should be encouraged, they certainly shouldn't be discouraged from doing that in a democracy. I mean, that's what democracy is all about.

So regardless of whatever decision I come to, I applaud their effort. I think they've really caught fire and really have done something very, very important.

BLITZER: Let's show our viewers some of what they've done. We'll put it up on the screen. They've raised apparently $600,000 so far. They have eight full-time staff members. They're running these television commercials in New Hampshire, Iowa and Arkansas. That's your home state. They've got members. They've got committees all over the place.

And you, yourself, are certainly sounding and acting a little bit like a candidate. You recently went up to New Hampshire. Have you been to Iowa lately?

CLARK: I haven't been to Iowa since I got an honorary degree there in 2002, Wolf.

But I'm concerned about the issues, more concerned about the issues than the process. And I think this country right now is -- we're at a turning point in where we are. We're at a turning point both in our foreign policy and in our policies at home. And to me, that's the real motivation, and it's why I've been speaking out.

BLITZER: Some of the political pundits out there are suggesting that it's a little late to start running for president right now, with Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, they're coming up early in the new year.

Look at all the money that has been raised so far. You've raised obviously very little yourself, if any, money. Look at this. George W. Bush, without any challenger, he's already raised $34 million only in the second quarter. John Kerry, Dick Gephardt, Howard Dean, Joe Lieberman, John Edwards, they've raised millions and millions of dollars.

Is it too late to start raising money to be competitive in those early states?

CLARK: Wolf, I don't know if it's too late or not, but I do know this, that when people get up and speak the truth and they speak their mind and they talk about the issues that are of concern to ordinary Americans, that I can't believe that, should I do this, that the money is the issue.

That's not the issue. The issue really is the issues. It's what the -- what does America stand for? How do we want to behave in the world? What does it take to fulfill America's dreams at home?

BLITZER: In our CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll that was released early this month, we'll show you what registered Democrats are saying right now. Right now, Joe Lieberman with 18 percent; Howard Dean, 15 percent; Gephardt, 15 percent; John Kerry, 12 percent; everybody else down into single -- way low single digits.

What do these nine candidates not bring to the table that you might bring? What are they -- where are the Democrats missing that would require you to run?

CLARK: Wolf, I think the American people are looking for, first of all, hands-on leadership experience. They are looking for a proven track record in leadership.

And I think, secondly, they are looking for, and especially people in the Democratic Party, are looking for the articulation of what the Democratic Party means, what it can represent for America.

And as I've gone around the country, again and again, I find just an enormous hunger for leadership. And I think the draft movement is evidence that, to some extent, there is still that hunger out there, despite the number of candidates in the race and despite the president's polling.

I'm getting a lot of letters from Republicans and people who say that they wish they hadn't voted the way they had in 2000. They want an opportunity to do it a different way in 2004.

BLITZER: And those Democrats, those nine other Democrats, don't have the leadership that you would bring to the table?

CLARK: I think the other people in this race are great people. Every person is different. I think that's really a question for the American people to answer, not for me.

BLITZER: What about George W. Bush? How vulnerable is he to defeat next year?

CLARK: Well, I guess the conventional answer is, people would look at polls. But what I look at are the realities. And I think the American people will begin to see the reality.

Number one, Iraq is not -- if it is the centerpiece of the war on terror, it shouldn't be. We went into Iraq under false pretenses. There was, you call it deceptive advertising, you'd be taking him to the Better Business Bureau if you bought a washing machine the way we went into the war in Iraq.

We're there now. We're totally committed to this. We have got more than half the deployable strength of the U.S. Army there. We're taking casualties.

We haven't made America safer by this. We've made America more engaged, more vulnerable, more committed, less able to respond. We've loss a tremendous amount of goodwill around the world by our actions and our continuing refusal to bring in international institutions.

At home, we've got a jobless recovery. We've lost 2.6 million jobs since this administration took office. Just to maintain the same level of employment in America, we have to create about 1.3 million jobs a year, and instead we've lost 2.3 million.

So, the statistical unemployment rate, it doesn't really address what the problem is that Americans are feeling out there. There are millions of people who aren't in the labor force. There are other people who are employed, but they're underemployed in terms of their skills. We've got problems.

BLITZER: General, I want you to listen, during the war, when you were still working for CNN -- and just want to alert our viewers, you're no longer working for CNN as our military analyst.

CLARK: Right.

BLITZER: But during the war, early in April, Tom DeLay, the majority leader in the House, really hammered you directly. I want you to listen to what he told our Judy Woodruff then.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) REP. TOM DELAY (R-TX), MAJORITY LEADER: Frankly, what irritates me the most are these blow-dried Napoleons that come on television and, in some cases, have their own agendas.

General Clark is one of them that is running for president, yet he's paid to be an expert on your network. And he's questioning the plan and raising doubts as he becomes this expert.

I think they would serve the nation better if they would just comment on what they see and what they know, rather than putting their own agenda forward as an expert.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Well, pretty strong words from Tom DeLay going after you. What do you say to that criticism?

CLARK: Well, first of all, I'd be happy to compare my hair with Tom DeLay's. We'll see who's got the blow-dried hair.

But beyond that, Wolf, he's got it exactly backward. It's upside down. I am saying what I believe. And I'm being drawn into the political process because of what I believe and what I've said about it.

So it's precisely the opposite of a man like Tom DeLay, who is only motivated by politics and says whatever he needs to say to get the political purpose. And so, you know, it couldn't be more diametrically opposed, and I couldn't be more opposed than I am to Tom DeLay.

You know, Wolf, when our airmen were flying over Kosovo, Tom DeLay led the House Republicans to vote not to support their activities, when American troops were in combat. To me, that's a real indicator of a man who is motivated not by patriotism or support for the troops, but for partisan political purposes.

BLITZER: Well, he was hammering you, and you're hammering right back.

General Clark, good luck to you. Thanks very much for joining us.

CLARK: Thanks, Wolf.

BLITZER: We'll be standing by for your announcement in the next two or three weeks.



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (4164)8/21/2003 3:50:46 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 10965
 
"...45 percent saying they would support Bush and 48 percent saying it's time for someone new in the White House."

nbc6.net

Ray: It's time for regime change in the White House...Americans are starting to wake up and question things.

-s2@GeneralClarkMayBeAbleToSaveThisCountry.com



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (4164)8/22/2003 6:20:57 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 10965
 
A Strategy Memo Prepared For DraftWesleyClark.com

draftwesleyclark.com