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: Karen Lawrence who wrote (28215)	9/19/2003 4:59:05 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Respond to of 89467

Limbaugh Update Today on Rush Limbaugh's radio show, Limbaugh was again denigrating Wesley Clark, whom Limbaugh was comparing to the character Ashley Wilkes from Gone With The Wind (based on a comment from a Village Voice story by Richard Goldstein). Limbaugh summed up Wesley Clark's candidacy as the triumph of "symbolism over substance." Limbaugh also referred to Clark as "a myth." Let's compare Clark versus Limbaugh on matters of substance: Education: Clark: First in his class at the U.S. Military Academy. Holds a Master's Degree in Philosophy, Politics and Economics from Oxford University where he was a Rhodes Scholar. Limbaugh: Dropped out of Southwest Missouri State University during his freshmen year. Courage: Clark: General Clark is a recipient of numerous U.S. and foreign military awards, including the Silver Star, Bronze Star and Purple Heart. He has received honorary Knighthoods from the British and Dutch governments and was made a commander of the French Legion of Honor. In August 2000, General Clark was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian honor. Limbaugh: Got out of serving in Nam because of of butt cyst. Limbaugh has repeatedly lied about this. Experience: Clark:During his thirty four years of service in the United States Army, he held numerous staff and command positions, rising to the rank of 4-star general and NATO Supreme Allied Commander. From 1997 through May of 2000, General Clark was NATO Supreme Allied Commander and Commander in Chief of the United States European Command. In this position, General Clark commanded Operation Allied Force, NATO's first major combat action, which saved 1.5 million Albanians from ethnic cleansing in Kosovo. From 1996 to 1997 General Clark served as Commander in Chief of the United States Southern Command, Panama, where he was responsible for the direction of U.S. military activities in Latin America and the Caribbean. From 1994 to 1996, he served as Director for Strategic Plans and Policy for the Joint Chiefs of Staff with responsibilities for worldwide U.S. military strategic planning. General Clark is also licensed as an investment banker. He joined Stephens Inc. as a consultant in July of 2000 and was named Managing Director, Merchant Banking of Stephens Group, Inc. from March 2001 through February 2003. He is currently the chairman of Wesley K. Clark & Associates, a strategic advisory and consulting firm. Limbaugh: Got into radio because his wealthy father owned the station. Fired from numerous radio jobs until catching fire with talk radio. Despite coming from a wealthy background, Limbaugh depended on government largesse, namely unemployment benefits, instead of relying on his family. Family Life: Clark: Has been married to the same woman since 1967. Limbaugh: Twice divorced. Third wife was an aerobics instructor whom Limbaugh married when he weighed over 300 pounds--not that I'm accusing Limbaugh's current wife Marta of being a gold digger and trophy wife or anything. Character: Clark: read above and click here. Limbaugh: among other things, along with Roger Ailes, Limbaugh tried to implicate the Clintons in the death of Vince Foster. Limbaugh has engaged in wholesale libel against those whom he considers political enemies. UPDATE: Responding to a caller who claimed to have previously been under the command of General Clark, Limbaugh responded: You said something. You called this guy a maniacal general. What did I say yesterday? This guy reminds me of these maniacal generals that are always in these Bob Ludlum novels, these malcontent generals that have retired from the U.S. or NATO or whatever and they join some super-secret conspiracy club that can take over the world. [unintelligible] Everyone still calls them general and they still dress in their military fatigues and everything and run around at super-rich private clubs having lunch, concocting schemes to take over the whole world. Here you’ve come along and confirmed it, that’s what Wesley Clark--We’ve got to take this all under advisement, I mean he doesn’t come across as one of these world domination types. It’s worse than that: he comes across as someone who might surrender to the world domination types, that’s my big fear with a guy like him, and the Clintons and everybody else. REALITY: Can Limbaugh at least make up his minds with his smears? Yesterday, Limbaugh spread the bogus tale that Clark was going to start World War III. Today, he’s doing the opposite: Limbaugh is accusing Clark of cowardice. Where’s the outrage?

To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (28215)	9/19/2003 5:11:45 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Kinda silly to compare Rush, a radio pundit, to Clark who is running for President in that manner.....

To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (28215)	9/20/2003 6:17:40 AM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Snapping to Attention _______________________________ By BOB HERBERT Columnist The New York Times September 19, 2003 nytimes.com Democrats wandering like outcasts in a desert of disillusion have spotted—— what? Is that a four-star general out there? You say he's from the South? And he's a Democrat who wants to be president? All right, all right, calm down! Yes, the original lineup of Democratic candidates — Dean, Kerry, Lieberman, et al. — was a caravan of disappointments. But some questions must be asked. Is Wesley Clark — first in his class at West Point, Rhodes scholar, former NATO supreme allied commander, holder of the Purple Heart and Silver Star — the real deal, or just a mirage? Is this (by all accounts) brilliant former general really a dream candidate for the parched and leaderless Democrats, or just a dream? In theory, he's almost perfect. He inoculates the Dems against the G.O.P. canard — now more than half a century old — that they are somehow less than patriotic. General Clark was severely wounded in combat in Vietnam and led the successful military operation in Kosovo in 1999. Republicans are not eager to have the general's career contrasted with the military misadventures of George W. Bush, who escaped Vietnam by joining the Texas Air National Guard and who celebrated the alleged end to major combat in Iraq by staging his very own "Top Gun" fantasy aboard the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln. General Clark's instincts (or at least the little we know of them) seem to push him in the direction of bridge-building and cooperative efforts, which would be good for a party in disarray, and even better for a country that needs as many allies as possible in the fight against terror and other threats around the world. With regard to the fight against terror, he has said the first order of business for the U.S. should have been an alliance of the U.S., the United Nations and NATO against Al Qaeda. As for Iraq, in a telephone conversation yesterday he told me the American people deserve to know a lot more about our rationale for invading. "It's important to ask why the administration set the timeline in such a manner that they were unable to wait for an international coalition to emerge and work together," he said. "And why is it that they failed to plan adequately for the postwar task? Certainly the officers in uniform understood very well the difficulties and what could happen afterward. Why is it that the administration didn't want those difficulties aired?" The problem, of course, is that presidencies are not won on paper. It takes awhile — sometimes too long — to determine what's real about a politician, any politician. Lyndon Johnson ran as a peace candidate in 1964. Richard Nixon said he had a secret plan to end the war in Vietnam. George Herbert Walker Bush told the voters to read his lips. Bill Clinton said, "I did not have sex. . . ." And George W. Bush assured us he was uniter, not a divider. So we'll scrutinize General Clark, undoubtedly a lot more closely than he would like. Meanwhile, he's the flavor of the moment. He comes across as less angry than Howard Dean (who can give the impression that one-on-one he might put the president in a headlock). He seems more personable than John Kerry, more mature than John Edwards, more telegenic than Joe Lieberman and so on. The general cheered Democrats with this swipe at Mr. Bush on Wednesday: "For the first time since Herbert Hoover's presidency, a president's economic policies have cost us more jobs than our economy has the energy to create." But he also said that while his campaign is committed to asking hard questions and demanding answers, "we're going to do so not in destructive bickering or in personal attacks, but in the highest traditions of democratic dialogue." The comparisons of General Clark to a fellow named Eisenhower are as overblown at this point as they are inevitable. But there's a lot that any candidate can learn from the Eisenhower model: the quick and endearing smile, the optimism, the quiet sense of strength, the ability to read and reflect the national mood. We'll know a lot more about General Clark soon enough. Meanwhile, the Democrats should welcome him not as a savior but as someone with the potential to energize their stagnant field of presidential contenders.