Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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: Rascal who wrote (26472)	8/26/2003 7:30:16 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Gen. Wesley Clark: A Call to Arms ____________________________ Dave Eberhart NewsMax.com Monday, Aug. 25, 2003 Former NATO Supreme Commander Wesley Clark is on record that he’s just weeks away from declaring whether he will jump in the presidential race. In an exclusive interview with NewsMax.com, he acknowledges the attention is flattering and that he believes he has valuable experience to offer the nation in its war on terror. The movement to draft him for one more assignment, the nation’s biggest, is “stunning,” he says. The details, however, aren’t so riveting. When NewsMax asks if he has even decided on a venue for the announcement, he says only, “I haven’t worked out anything.” The West Pointer, top of the Class of 1967, is fresh back from a business meeting in Guadalajara, Mexico and having his shoes shined at Dallas International when NewsMax catches up with the retired four-star, who has so captured the imagination and support of a nationwide Draft Wesley Clark campaign. The campaign, which lives and thrives on the Internet and in informal “meet-ups” of supporters, has been sorely frustrated by their hero’s reticence thus far. “I know they'll be an explosion of support here if (when) the General does declare,” says one ardent supporter in a Yahoo group. “But until then, I'm wracking my brain trying to convince people that he's seriously considering it. It's ‘call me when he's running’ that I keep coming across.” Clark says that when the magical moment comes for the thumbs-up or down on a run, he will give his supporters “appropriate recognition.” When informed that much of the chatter in the draft-Clark Internet forums is about his lack of broad name recognition, Clark says, “I don’t do polling.” He adds that an issue such as name recognition would not be “an inherent, intrinsic” factor in his decision. Wants Public to Have ‘Good Look’ Surely adding to the frustration of his rank-and-file troops, Clark is still playing coy about his party affiliation. He says only that he has “been warmly welcomed by Democratic groups.” This past July, during an appearance on Fox News Channel’s “Hannity & Colmes,” Clark said that he had not ruled out running as a Republican. As NewsMax’s Insider Report noted last week, the Bush White House is nervously tracking his plans. Republican strategist David Horowitz has said, “Clark worries me the most.” When asked about the consequences of jumping into the crowded fray as just another face among the Democrat presidential wannabes, Clark advises, “If one considers moving ahead, one has to accept the political process.” Meanwhile, he notes that veteran groups around the country have been “very supportive,” including his fellow alumni of the U.S. Military Academy. Even before NewsMax asks about the inevitable comparison to Dwight Eisenhower, the Republican draftee in the last century, Clark brings up the subject himself: “With Eisenhower the people didn’t get the opportunity for a good look.” He says that if he runs he wants the American public to get that good look. Too much the gentleman from West Point to render much in the way of contrary opinions about those already in the race, he says that there are fine Democrat leaders in the contest. How about Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., the only candidate with a distinguished war record in Vietnam, the recipient of the Silver Star for valor while serving with the Navy during the Vietnam War? Would Kerry be the next best alternative? “Kerry would be a fine president,” Clark replies. When switching the emphasis to foreign policy, however, he opens up. A quote from one fan on an Internet forum is read: “I see terrorism as criminal acts of small groups of individuals. War just provides more fuel for the underlying social and political reasons that bring about terrorism but is not a solution. For Bush and the neo-cons, 9/11 was an opportunity to do things on a much larger scale than would otherwise have been possible. None of the things Bush has done have provided us with a more secure nation.” “Does that resonate with you?” asks NewsMax. “Yes,” is the unqualified answer. ‘It Never Was WMD or Regime Change’ As for Iraq: “It is clear we need more boots on the ground. We can’t even secure the road from Amman to Baghdad.” He says that alone makes a “prima facie” case for more troops. Clark is not Johnny come lately to the bash-Bush-on-Iraq that has emanated from many of the Democratic hopefuls after the fall of Baghdad. As a CNN commentator, Clark warned before and during Operation Iraqi Freedom that the U.S. was woefully undermanned for the operation. Clark offers similar candor when it comes to the loaded issue of the administration’s justification, or lack thereof, for the invasion of Iraq: “It never was WMD or regime change,” he stresses, noting that these were good things regardless. “The connection to the War on Terrorism was not shown.” His theory for the invasion: “To get American troops on the ground” and illustrate that we as a nation had the fortitude to hang tough and were willing to do more than fire missiles or drop bombs. In a breather from the policy dialogue, Clark is asked if he could delineate a defining moment in his long service to the country that drives him yet today. He identifies his return from Vietnam when he was posted to the 623rd Armor at Fort Knox, Ky. Describing how those were arduous days when many were electing to depart service, he was nonetheless overwhelmed by the “incredible dedication” of his troops. “I loved them. It kept me in,” he says reflectively after an uncharacteristic pause. Continuing with policy matters, his pace picks up. As to Afghanistan and Iraq, he laments, “It’s all in the timing of the opportunity.” There’s a window of opportunity to make people change their minds, he notes. "That window was allowed to close." He blames the continuing losses of troops in Iraq on poor planning. There was “premature celebration” over Iraq, he concludes about the conflict he envisions having three levels. Level one is the guerrilla warfare that continues. We still have a “fighting chance” to win at this level, he opines. After all, despite the complexities, “we are still the world’s mightiest military power, and we are not opposed by a superpower.” Level two in his estimation is the daunting task of rebuilding. “There is still 60 percent unemployment.” The third level, however, represents the biggest rub. Clark describes the formidable Shia Muslim million-man army, which festers in the wings, “waiting to see if we can handle the guerrilla war.” Adding to the monumental problem, he concludes, are the Kurds in the north who “haven’t given up their ambitions.” Lessons of Kosovo Clark’s swan-song war was, of course, Kosovo. At the time, he was Supreme Commander of NATO. Despite a victory that resulted in no U.S. deaths, he laments that after all was said and done, there was “no recognition of victory.” Instead, he says, allies came away from that conflict with the feeling that they were “never going to let America dictate to us again.” In the end, “both sides pulled away – setting the stage” for the frustrations to follow in Iraq. “NATO is inherently a problem solver,” he concludes. The justifications for the Iraq war presented by the U.S. were never enough to trigger NATO’s involvement, a process that starts with studies and leads to binding consensus. After three years as a Supreme Commander, Wesley Clark is a retired general without an army. But politics is war by other means, and there’s still so much “Duty, Honor, Country” to measure up to. On the poignant subject of 9/11, Gen. Clark wistfully admits: “There’s lots of work to do to prevent another.” newsmax.com

To: Rascal who wrote (26472)	8/27/2003 9:06:38 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

If Clark runs, all bets are off __________________________________ By Robert Kuttner Columnist The Boston Globe 8/27/2003 WESLEY CLARK has told associates that he will decide in the next few weeks whether to declare for president. If he does, it would transform the race. Call me star-struck, but he'd instantly be among the top tier. Clark, in case you've been on sabbatical in New Zealand, is all over the talk shows. He's the former NATO supreme commander who headed operations in Kosovo, a Rhodes Scholar who graduated first in his class at West Point, and a Vietnam vet with several combat medals including a purple heart. He has been a tough critic of Bush's foreign policy. His domestic positions are not as fully fashioned, but he'd repeal Bush's tax cuts and revisit the so-called Patriot Act. More interestingly, Clark is progressive on domestic issues by way of his military background. Though it is very much a hierarchy, the military is also the most egalitarian island in this unequal society. Top executives -- four-star generals -- make about nine times the pay of buck privates. In corporate life, the ratio of CEO to worker bee is more like 900 times. The military also has America's most comprehensive child care system. And, as Clark likes to point out, everyone has health care. He's also pro-affirmative action and prochoice. My favorite Clark riposte is on guns. He grew up hunting, in a family that had more than a dozen hunting rifles. But he's pro-gun control. "If you want to fire an assault weapon," he says, "join the army." The NRA can put that in its AK-47 and smoke it. Clark is the soldier as citizen. Even better, he's the soldier as tough liberal. Just imagine Clark, with his distinguished military record, up against our draft dodger president who likes to play "Top Gun" dress-up. Imagine the Rhodes Scholar against the leader who can't ad lib without a speechwriting staff. Oh, and he's from Arkansas. The draft-Clark people have already raised over a million dollars. Clark's not-yet-announced campaign is the second Internet phenomenon this year, after Howard Dean's. If he declares, Clark will have lots of volunteers and donors. Like John McCain, he'd be a terrific draw for political independents. Except he's a Democrat. The downside is that it's hard to get into the race this late. A lot of the fund-raisers and campaign professionals are already committed. Bobby Kennedy jumped into the 1968 presidential campaign a lot later, after the February New Hampshire primary, when Eugene McCarthy proved that LBJ was vulnerable. But that was a different era and he was Bobby Kennedy. On the other hand, a lot of the support for the existing candidates is soft, with the exception of Dean's. Some of Dick Gephardt's own closest backers wonder if he can really do it, and that also goes for John Kerry, Joseph Lieberman and John Edwards. This year, just about everyone engaged in Democratic politics has a higher commitment to the goal of ousting George Bush than to any single Democratic candidate. Clark could probably peel off a lot of donors and campaign professionals -- and grow some new ones. And, as candidates drop out, many professionals will soon be looking for work. If Clark gets in, Kerry would be hurt the most, because Kerry is most like Clark. His military record and defense expertise make him the most bullet-proof of the Democratic field on national security issues. But, paradoxically, Dean might be hurt, too. Dean has been the favorite of the antiwar activists and he's also the freshest face. Clark is an antiwar candidate and a former four-star general and an even fresher face. As someone who's not an identified liberal from a conservative part of the country, he'd also pull votes from Lieberman, Edwards, and Graham. Who might Clark pick as a running mate? Someone with domestic political experience: a Western or Midwestern governor or senator. Maybe New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, a former Clinton Cabinet official and a Hispanic. Or how about Michigan's effective and popular governor, Jennifer Granholm? Or Illinois Senator Dick Durbin? Dwight Eisenhower was the last general to make it to the White House. He could have had the nomination of either party. He decided that he was a Republican, but he governed as an old-fashioned moderate, and he was phenomenally popular. Now all of this may just be an August sunstroke fantasy. We'll soon find out. And if Clark doesn't get in, he'd make one fine vice presidential candidate for any of the bunch. __________________________ Robert Kuttner is co-editor of The American Prospect. His column appears regularly in the Globe. © Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company. boston.com

To: Rascal who wrote (26472)	8/28/2003 1:07:03 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Draftwesleyclark.com got $1,000,000 in pledges. They got it 6 days ahead of schedule...WOW...Momentum continues to build... Meetup numbers keep going up too -- over 9,000 right now. draftwesleyclark.com

To: Rascal who wrote (26472)	8/28/2003 1:25:56 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

See for yourself what the buzz is about! digitalclark.com 433 days until Wesley Clark is elected to the office of President of the United States of America.