Clark caught in a lie?

Clark is under pressure to decide soon from organizers of a draft-Clark movement, who fear that the momentum they saw building for his potential candidacy would begin to dissipate, according to one knowledgeable Democrat. In an interview with CNN's Judy Woodruff yesterday, Clark said, "We're going to have to make a decision and if the decision is yes, we want to be ready."

In the interview, Clark denied that John Weaver, a senior strategist for Arizona Sen. John McCain's Republican presidential campaign in 2000 and now a Democratic consultant, had been asked to run his campaign but turned down the offer. Weaver later said in a telephone interview that he had done so for health reasons. "It's no reflection on him," said Weaver, who met with Clark in New York two weeks ago to discuss a campaign.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62275-2003Sep11.html

Lie? No. Not any more than the ridiculous "Dean lies" or "Gore lies". Seems to me that all we have here is a breakdown of communications. Probably something as simple as Clark saying "Too bad about your health, Jim. I sure would like to have you running the show if we get into this."

They've been trying to smear Kerry (aloof, "hid" his Jewish ancestry), Dean ("too mean", "too liberal", "McGovern") and now Clark. Pay no attention to the media whores.

just looking to get some responses.

saying XYZ candidate lied in the subject is always a good way to ensure that.

:evilgrin:

Not calling you a troll (I don't hang out enough at DU these days to recognize who is who) but when you say you post something just to get a response, you are saying you do exactly what trolls do. Were you trolling? Seems to be what you're saying...

www.technomania.com

These people have $$$$$, straight from Rove and Scaife and the Looting of America. I have the feeling that there are many such places full of cyber-Brownshirts making $8/hr.

:eyes:

And insane.

the clark folks will soon feel the wrath we dean folks face daily.

put on your armor... it gets ugly

it's always that but the media plays the role of the little trollop here too........

the media herd finds something they like about, say candidate x, and brnd candidate x an underdog. The current frontrunner is villainized and the underdog is praised until the underdog acheives a "stunning" victory.

Candidate X enjoys a short honeymoon with the media and then they get bored and pick another underdog.

The net result is that they always create a horse-race...and people will buy books, magazines, newspapers and watch even the most god-awful commercials on tv in order to catch the latest news in the horse race.

The press is getting bored with Dean after they have played him as something of a folk hero. But they're getting bored now so they have to pick a successor and recreate the horserace.

You know, I honestly think you just might be an even bigger Dean fan than I am. Couldn't be by much, 1/2 an inch maybe. Sometimes I worry you might explode.

We'll get through this. :evilgrin:

Eloriel

Clark said there was not a firm offer made. That means there was a speculative conversation or a general suggestion, which was answered by a vague comment of unavailability.

To call that a lie is stretching it quite a bit. I've had a number of conversations like that in a pretty short professional life. People try to get at a person's interest in a potential position, and that person gives a theoretical answer.

As a former Republican;
I have a unique insight into their tactics.
1. AdHomineum attacks (attack the person, not thier programs or thesis)
2. Divert the discussion (sidetrack into irrelevancies)

3. Strawman diversions:
Pick at the details if the thesis is unassailable.

eg; That can't be a 'pine forest', I see a hardwood among those pines.

Eisenhower had many warts.
Amerika's media are Republican lap-dogs and will sling mud at any Democrat and kiss ass on any Republican.

Bashing Clark might be helping the RNC re-elect Bush.

Any genuine General could be victorious over the Deserter-in-Chief,
and with good advisors, restore our Constitution and rebuild the American Dream.


Or:
"Democrats" could help the RNC bash and destroy our best hope of taking back the White House.

Choose!

I think supporting Clark guarantees Repub victory, so chill out. We're a long way from Tipperary. Besides, those dirty tricks you talk about happen on both sides of the political fence.

Thanks for providing my laugh for the day.

:eyes:

Without seeing the question we have no idea. Was he asked if he turned him down for a specific reason (different from health)? Had the man been offered the position or did he turn him down without an offer? Those are just two of several senarios.

Fuck 'em

Heads up: the General will be on American Morning @7:00 (don't know what that is in military time. CNN

You're right Will_they are certainly doing him some favors. Has Clark found a campaign manager?

ACK. That's 4 AM here. I guess I could program my VCR but it would just wake me up clicking on.

7AM is 7:00 in military time I think. I have no idea what it is in Greenwich Meantime.

MzPip
:dem:

Sounds :scared: ominous...in a :tinfoilhat: kind of way. :-)

n/t

You coy bastard . . . Do the hard work of running or get the hell out of the way.

a few more days.

I could just as easily start a thread asking "Why did the 9 declared candidates announce SO FUCKING EARLY?"

The first primaries are months away, and the general election 14 months away.

There's plenty of time. Clark doesn't need to run on OUR schedule. I suspect he's pretty good at strategizing and will trust him to do it on HIS schedule.

There's plenty of time. Clark doesn't need to run on OUR schedule. I suspect he's pretty good at strategizing and will trust him to do it on HIS schedule.

the election is happening in 14 months, and it's not going to wait for HIS schedule.

the other 9 dems saw fit to start early because they understand that this is going to be a hard fought election and the dem party needs to get a running start if it wants to beat an incumbent with a huge campaign war chest. they've been doing the hard work of rallying the troops, raising money, raising the party's visibility, debating, selling the party's ideas. while Clark has been gazing at his navel trying to decide whether he's really a democrat.

lots o people have said they like Clark because he's a general not a politician. that seems dumb to me. look at the odds. the great majority of our elected presidents have been politicians, not generals. come on folks. this is the USA, not some two-bit banana republic. have we really slid that far down the slope toward fascism, that it's somehow become the accepted wisdom that we need a general to run the country?

and a general with NO electoral track record?

that 14 months is enough time to run a presidential campaign. In fact, personally, I believe it's two to three times longer than necessary.

The other dems sought to start early for a lot of reasons, some of them honorable, many of them not. Whoring for money is a necessity, I know, but I would also hope that it's not THE major reason for announcing early. But alas, I fear it is.

Yes, most of our presidents have been elected officials, not generals. I also think most of them have them have NOT been Governor of Vermont or a Representative from Ohio or a Senator from Florida. So what? It's a pointless argument.

Why must you describe Clark as "gazing at his navel" trying to determine if he's a Democrat? It's an insult and meant to insinuate that he wasn't clear before last week about his party affiliation.

He has voted in the DEMOCRATIC primaries in Arkansas, which is all that's required to be a Democrat. He was also in a professional position for most of his life that precluded taking positions in partisan politics.

However, since he's declared himself a democrat, he has done so forcefully and repeatedly. Even better, he has defended himself as a LIBERAL!

Even Dean won't call himself a liberal.

As for Electoral Track records... well, none of the candidates have ever received an electoral college vote. If you mean elective office... then no, Clark doesn't have that experience. But I do know that he managed more people as SacEur than Howard Dean managed as Governor of Vermont.

Then WHY do you object that his schedule will hurt him ? ....

Chuckles .....

Some people live by hatred: .. it is their life's blood .... it is their foundation ...

Pitiful ....

He's mucking up the waters now -- pollersters are having to ask "who do you support if Clark runs . . . if Clark doesn't run?"

This is a life or death battle for what was formerly known as our country, not a time for dithering.

I'm by no means saying that Clark is RFK. Not by a long shot.

But why do you have to begin a campaign a freaking year and a half before the election? I'm a political junkie and I'm already getting bored with the Democratic primary.

I think back on Hunter in '72:

"How long, O Lord...How long? Where will it end?"

It is not hard to imagine that the Dem candidate would be chosen by March 9. Wesley can keep waiting if he wants to.

January 13th, 2004
District of Columbia Presidential Primary (Closed)

January 19th, 2004
Iowa Presidential Caucuses

January 27th, 2004
New Hampshire Presidential Primary Election* (Closed)

February 3rd, 2004
Arizona Presidential Preference Primary (Closed)
Delaware Democratic Presidential Primary (Closed)
Missouri Presidential Primary (Open)
New Mexico Democratic Caucus
North Dakota Caucuses
Oklahoma Presidential Primary (Closed)
South Carolina Democratic Presidential Preference Primary
South Carolina Primary Election

February 7th, 2004
Michigan Democratic Presidential Caucus
Washington Democratic Caucus


February 8th, 2004
Maine Democratic Presidential Caucus

February 10th, 2004
District of Columbia Democratic Caucus*
Tennessee Presidential Primary (Open)
Virginia Democratic Presidential Primary (Open)
Virginia Republican Presidential Primary* (Open)

February 17th, 2004
Wisconsin Presidential Primary (Open)

February 24th, 2004
Idaho Democratic Caucus

March 2nd, 2004
California Presidential Primary (Modified Closed)
Connecticut Presidential Primary (Closed)
Georgia Presidential Preference Primary (Open)
Hawaii Democratic Caucus
Maryland Presidential Primary (Closed)
Massachusetts Presidential Primary
Minnesota Democratic Caucus
New York Presidential Primary* (Closed)
Ohio Presidential Primary (Open)
Rhode Island Presidential Primary
Texas Presidential Primary (Open)
Vermont Presidential Primary (Open)
Washington Presidential Primary

March 9th, 2004
Florida Presidential Primary (Closed)
Louisiana Presidential Preference Election (Open)
Mississippi Presidential Primary (Open)

March 16th, 2004
Illinois Presidential Primary (Open)

April 27th, 2004
Pennsylvania Presidential Primary (Closed)

... at best it shows once again that Clark is evasive and seems to have an allergy to giving straight answers. he's been flirting and playing word games on the talk show circuit for months now. you'd think he could give a clear and honest answer to something like that.

Can you explain "the lie" being discussed?

The original post is not worded in a way that provides an easy answer.

Soledad O'Brien trying to goad Clark into Dem candidate put downs....

Whose campaign do you think you would hurt the most?

Clark: Well, I think the pResident's...(he went on to cite the boil boy's lack of military experience...)

Way cool!

I wish all Dems who get to use the airwaves would say "resident"...personally I never use the "p" word when talking about the bastards who stole the democracy. I ain't living their lie.

How can you tell spelling from a television appearance?

. . . then Clark is the greatest candidate ever.

I live in DC. Everyone has been asked by everyone to work on everything. Just ask them.

It's exactly like the entertainment industry. It's not important if you are working; it's important that people are talking about you.

I am sure someone from Clark's campaign spole to this guy at some point about something - maybe running the campaign, maybe if he knew a good Thai place. It doesn't matter. It's enough to call the "News and Whispers" column in the Post.

I've created a new rule. If someone bashes a Dem before they even get 500 posts, I ignore.

Perhaps www.technomania.com will have another assignment for you.

Good gob, soldier.

(YAWN)

How very Fair and Balanced of you.

eom

Say what you want, they just won't. They will stay up into the wee hours of night discussing this and spitting and pissing on Clark. And when W points to him and says LIAR----oh, I think this time, the American people will just double over laughing, don't you?? (tell me your lies George--and they are some fucking, fucking big ones--and I'll tell you mine).