Meet The Press heads up- The General is IN- Sunday on MTP

for those that haven't had a chance to see him articulate, now you can.

His popularity exploded after his last appearance in June. I expect a good showing. Hopefully he will put some of the Shelton crap to bed.

"General Clark, are you sure you're a Democrat?"
"General Clark, why do your former military colleagues speak so ill of you?"
"General Clark, your position on voting for or against the IRW is unclear. Would you like to clarify that for us now?"

Next, Tim will spend lots of minutes reading articles to a grown man. This has to be one of Tim's most annoying habits to me... reading, like, lengthy article excerpts to grown thinking people.

I'm looking forward to Clark's appearance, but I doubt we'll learn anything new. Just the same-old, same-old. The press isn't satisfied with your answer to their question, until you give them the answer they're looking for...

... to go after Clark really hard. Russert takes his talking points right from the right wing. And I saw what he did to Dean - really pissed me off. Then Cheney gets to sit there and LIE while Russert helpfully says stuff like " you meant, reconstitutued programs not weapons didn't you Mr. Vice President" The republican ass-kissing doesn't stop.

but he can get his clock cleaned by Clark.

Clark is on the other end of the intellectual spectrum than Russert, and I figure he will show this tomorrow. Russert is a GOP shill, and can eaten alive by anyone with an IQ over 90.

O8)

I've seen the RW talking head show hosts try to interrupt the Genaeral when he's in the middle of an answer.....he just kept on giving his answer. He doesn't take their shit and I expect the General to give Russert "The Shill" a run for his money. This is going to be a great interview! :bounce: Go General! :bounce:

Russert considers himself a "test" that each of the Democratic hopefuls must pass. He considers it his job to take each of them down as much as possible. He did it to Dean, he did it to Edwards.

He's going to try to savage Clark. I hope Clark was watching what happened to the others and is ready. That nice interview he had with Russert a while back was the set-up for this one. It's Russert's standard M.O.

I think he likes him.

The first time I ever saw Dean on television was on MTP. It was during the run-up to war and Dean was great. We all saw what happened the second visit, once Dean was a viable candidate.

I think Russert prides himself in tearing down the Democratic candidates, even if he has to take cheap shots to do it. Clark is now very much a viable candidate for the nomination, and I will be surprised if Russert doesn't try to take him down.

He says that before he started doing this people whould claim they never said that or were taken out of text so he wants to put the quote up. I like Russert because no matter who goes on they don't get softballs. This isn't Larry King.

and its not just my bias showing. Russert lets the repugs get away with bs. He never tries to twist their words, never does the follow ups, and allows obvious lies to go unchecked.

We will see what Russert has planned for Clark. I assure you it will not be pretty. Lottsa when did you stop beating your wife questions, sprinkled with those questions Russert likes to use to induce a defensive posture. "Isn't it true...blah...blah...blah.." And expect a fully litany of framing inorder to provide the context which will be out of context.

Clark calls these programs "wrestling" with so and so. He usually does well and seems to actually enjoy it. God only knows why.

One other thing, Clark, who has lived life a straight arrow, has a great sense of honor. I expect to Russert attact that to the max knowing it will be the one way to get Clark to rise to the bait! The repubs usually study their subjects and in Clark's case they have access to piles of psychological accessments from the Pentagon. All of Russert's questions will have been carefully prepared in advance in hopes of delivering a knock out punch.

Clark will make him stammer and pause, just like he did so many times to that other superstar wanta be Hannity.

Russert is not Hannity and this is no off-the-cuff interview. They do not want to run against Clark. Russert is nothing but a GOP mouth piece.

Clark has sparred with Russert before, but this is much more serious. Also, I expect to see Safire at the round table dissing Clark and/or calling him a liar. Safire is a crazy over the hill mofo who needs his clock cleaned.

I suspect Clark would work him over pretty badly, and it would help him immensely -- all the other candidates have been humbled. I wouldn't be surprised if Russert soft-pedaled the interview, as it would be safer for him personally, and preclude the possibility that Clark hits a home run in the interview. To keep the baseball analogy intact, I suspect the interview will be the equivalent of an intentional walk.

just having fun here but i think i called this 1 pretty good :).

He gets a big smile on his face and a crazy look in his eye.................. cracks me up.

First debate against Bush I expect Clark to be almost giggling uncontrollably.

"I expect Clark to be almost giggling uncontrollably"

While in full military uniform with his 4 STARS shining BRIGHT at Mr. AWOL! :7

:grouphug:

he's right about bush using the vids of Clark praising bush in bush political ads. i hope those things aren't public domain.

It would only do the following:

1) Look as if bush had fucked so bad he lost a follower

2) Make it easier for disenchanted repubs to cross the line

3) Create the impression that bush was trying to insult someone for saying nice things

If the impression to be made was that Clark was an opportunist, the effect would be of no consequence in a General election. It would also take away from the argument that bushco will be making that Clark's policies are wrong for America.

Considering the risk involved, I doubt if bush would use the tapes. Afterall, those tapes were dug up by the repubs to be used at this time to suppress support for General Clark among Dems, not repubs.

"What a fool you were to respect, trust or believe us!"

So go ahead on, let's hear it out loud: "Admiring us is for chumps."

This salient aspect seems to make contactless passage through the air in the heads talking on the tv.

Let's see what Clark has to say about the latest casualties out of Iraq.

He is good one on one.

I thought for sure he would be on again to paint the rosey picture that we have in Iraq. Perhaps losing 21 soldiers in one day was a bit much for even bremer to bluff about....

is packing his bags. War's over in 6 months. Rove has spoken.

<edit> Don't you wish that just once the General would kick it up a notch and just break into his GW imitation. Timmy the boot asks a question about the administration's non-policy and Wes says: wee're gonna take 'em dead or live or in a cave or with a bunkerr busterrrr. Ah...er...'ciz terra esssst hate uz ciz weee're freedomb loverrr'z. Amen and Muzlimbs are not al' baaad."

of the Sunday shows--He was MIA on the networks--I wonder if he made it to Faux...

the campaign to photocopy a bunch of PNAC reports and pass them out before Russerts asks the big "7 states in 5 year" question.

It allows him to strongly affirm his credentials as a Democrat.
It will probably provide a nice boost to his money numbers.
It's a great chance for him to clearly make his electability argument (whether you buy the argument or not).
etc..

:hi:
DemEx

Hi :hi: Where are you located and can I come live with you?

Half kidding but if they steal it again, there will be no
(next election) to restrain them.

*

Also on this MTP you will be able to see his first actual tv ad that will be shown in New Hampshire.

Go Clark!

And you're right, they played the ad, or most of it apparently.

:toast:

Brilliant...

More later

Ohmygodwhatanass.

Tim, that is.

It's not on here yet. What is a "St. Paul moment"?

or scripturally speaking, a blinding light that causes re-evaluation and change of heart.

... draws a GOP-whore inference and tries to attack you, throwing in as a bonus (for FReepers) an easy-to-remember phrase to reinforce his biased, fact-challenged point.

That's right, kiddies -- we have a new term for one of the sleaziest tactics of the Eric "Respect Mah Au-THOW-Ra-Tah" Cartman of Sunday pundits.

So, remember: anytime Tim tries this again, he's having a "Saint Paul Moment."

to watch. It will be interesting to see how Clark handles the rightwing attacks and talking points which will surely be on display today.

It is really difficult to write a summary because there was so much information, questions etc. Clark was firm, relaxed and in command of so much information it makes your head spin.

THe only moment of discomfort was the Shelton question, which he answered well, but you could tell he was tense about it.

He said that Bush was ultimately responsible for 9-11 and he also, in so many words, slammed PNAC.

Most people on DU already know the topics, and even what his responses would be. It is the demeanor which is so striking.

He is so smart, confident and so in command of facts. It is amazing to watch that mind, and to compare him with the doofus in the White House now.

Lastly, it does all of our candidates good that Clark can speak up with such command.

On edit: one more thing I forgot to mention which I DIDN'T know..Clark will have to take some time off in December to go testify in the Milosovik(?) trial in the Hague.

He even looked pissed. He sort-of grimaced, grit his teeth and looked off-camera, just after addressing the question.

I can't even imagine what it must feel like, to have gone as high as one can go in the US Army, only to have your detractors take cheap, completely unsubstantiated shots at your "integrity and character" for the purpose of politics. Integrity and character is what it's all about to a military officer. I'm sure Clark would like to have words with Shelton.

It was an excellent exchange. Clark performed admirably, and I'm sure he was well-prepped for the "Shelton Question."

here in Atlanta. Looking forward to it.

Excellent so far! I am waiting for Russert to be his usual asshole self.

He is responding to Russert's question as to whether we could lose Iraq.

These are excellent answers!

Giving the $87B to Bush is just a "blank check without a strategy."

Clark is very poised.

"War is technically legal," but the "underpinnings are not there." No WMDs!

being technically illegal. Clark gave a long and but clear answer denoting the difference between getting approval from the NATO countries, and what Bush did in Iraq.

Why can't Kerry be this clear?

Best line, something like "This president loves to take credit, but he will not take responsibility."

Worked in the Truman 'Buck stops here' dictum against Shrub; particularly pointed out that the intel community is not responsible for the Iraq debacle, they are not president.

Very good showing. Helped himself, I believe.

Clark is prosecution witness.

:spank:

I thought he did well. (He looks tired, though. Drawn.)

Russert was utterly speechless, and Clark paused for a beat or two to accommodate Russert's silence.

Once you embarrass him he calms down so he won't get embarrassed again. You have to let Tim know that you know something that he doesn't know. Works every time.

I think that's the moment when Russert realized he couldn't get Clark. And I LOVED it.

Too bad his purported impressions of aWol, etc. must remain under wraps til after the campaign.

:silly:

Clark admits he made a mistake. The Senators running for Prez have yet to admit they made a mistake in giving Bush a blank check to go to war in Iraq.

On edit:

This is the incident that Clark was talking about:


Serbian Gen. Ratko Mladic (second from left) next to Gen. Wesley Clark in 1994 in Bosnia

Clark also admitted that he "misled" the American people about how long troops would be in Bosnia because it was "good for negotiations." He then tried to blame it on not being "prepared" for the resistance they received. Does this man really think he can win the Presidency? Russert nailed this guy.

but he failed.

Clark may have misled the Serbs. Any 'misleading' (as you characterize it) of the American people was done by Bill Clinton, who did indeed think he can win the Presidency, and in fact was reelected after this.

Also, the mistake with the gifts from the Serb brass occured long before Mladic was indicted. Still a misjudgement, but the 'war criminal' sauce, while nice rhetoric, was premature at that point.

it was good to see him admit error. i can't trust someone who can't admit when he's blown something. errors are sign posts on the correct path. if we ignore them, we get more lost and screwed up the further we go.

Clark just got slammed on his support for this war.
His attempt to spin it is a pathetic failure.

there is no spin here.

On edit:

No one he spoke to had any concrete information about an imminent threat by Saddam on WMD.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

...I can see where one would hope/seek/pray for anything in Clark's performance to call a pathetic failure.

Watch the replay/read the transcript. He wasn't slammed for supporting the war, and his answer was very astute.

Timmy tried hard to paint Clark as a 'supporter' of the war Clark has called our 'greatest strategic blunder'. No soap, to anyone half-listening.

The other side of that coin, the attempt by the admin and their supporters like Timmy, is to paint the war opposition as unpatriotic or sissies or both. No soap, big time, when they go after Clark with that drivel.

war was wrong and anyone who supported it ought to be discreditied? What about Cheney in that case? He's still climbing out of the cript with spurious evidence up his you know what!

Shouldn't they also be attacking Cheney instead of pulling a 180 whenever he's in front of the mic and kissing his ass like it's the Holy Grail?

As I always say, the Cabal can't even think one move ahead--they'd be beaten at tic tac toe, let alone the Grand Chessboard!

Excellent precis of their capacity for strategic thinking!

I did.

I am more sure of my support for Clark than I ever was. Clark can take the right wing spin and turn it back on them. You haven't got a chance dissing him. Go home and try again.

It's over here.

You know, I'm starting to think that the difference between us and them is nuanced thinking. Conservatives think in very black and white, all or nothing terms. We admire General Clark because he is able to explain, but much more importantly to understand, complexity. He simply does not live in a black and white world.

Is this a plus, though? George Bush is popular precisely because his world has no shades of gray. His policies are easily understood because there is no ambiguity. The downside is that type of thinking results in the use of a lawnmower where a scalpel is required. This administration is ham handed ... at best. BUT, they are as dim witted as the majority of the American people. Can a Clark candidacy succeed? Thank Zeus, he only has to win 51% of the vote.

specifically on the war but on everything else as well.

I am not a Clark-man, but he is an excellent candidate.

My support is really close between Edwards, Kerry, and Clark

The death penalty is one of those issues, one is either for it, or against it.

The problem arises when everything is seeing through a bipolar filter, a common characteristic of religious fundamentalists of any stripe.

and Clark is for the death penalty. Except in his case, the people he killed did not even get a trial.

Because as you know your input is greatly inspirational

And your candidate?

of people who are too scared or stupid to think in anything but B&W terms. The only way he got into the WH was help from the GOPs crooked cronies in FL and DC. When his popularity polls hit bottom, then we will know how large the opposition truly is (if you believe polls)

There's just a handful of people we need to beat--the corrupt officials who manipulate our votes.

We still have the electoral college. A majority in the popular vote does not ensure election, as we all know too well.

bush for 9/11", Clark would discuss the WH stonewalling of 9/11 documents and their "agreement" to "edit" the documents.

"the buck stops here...this President does not take responsibility."

It delineates exactly the kind of values that a president should have.

And it's so much in contrast to what we have now.

becoming his asshole rightwing shill self. Gotta love his constant references to "the President", did he do this while Clinton was in the WH?

What a Bu**sh** eater!!!

It's over!

If it's a stunt, it's a far better one than prancing around on an aircraft carrier. :crazy:

MzPip
:dem:

He replied something like, 'Are you suggesting that?' Yep, call Russert on his spinning for Repukes.

Often, the vintage MTP clips played at the end point up this fact.

Russert never seriously tripped him up. Almost like Clark had the questions before the interview.

I've seen Russert slice and dice a lot of people. Clark comes out looking pretty.

You all know me to be a rabid Clark supporter... but I see his "problem."

...if it can be described as a problem. Perhaps a handicap in another time but it might play well in these days.

He's fair. He's country before party. His response to his "praise" of the Bush team was (as always) humble and fair. He wanted them to succeed. He, and the rest of us, had a vested interest in this administration doing the right thing after 9/11.

He's not afraid to admit he was wrong or mislead about them and their policies.

He passes on the chance to take cheap shots at his critics but leads you to believe he could stab them and twist the knife if he wanted to.

Either Russert likes him or he couldn't lay a glove on him.

Solid solid performance.

GRAND SLAM :toast:

I was worried about this interview because I know what a jerk Russert is. Russert was a jerk but Clark was amazing.

and then some. I was very pleased and proud of his appearance.

I find Clark an intelligent but also very wise man. I think he handled the 'interview' very well, despite a constant barrage of trip-up attempts.

I'd like to see Bush* handle such an interview. *That* would be really funny!

kitchen sink at Clark but Clark knocked them right back at Russert.

He did very well and laid everything out clearly. He handled Russert expertly leaving his words in your memory, not whatever 'zingers' Russert tried to throw. That's really important. I think he could handle the nomination expertly and the Presidency as well. And what he learned from Rwanda, when something is wrong you do everything you can to make it right, not just follow protocol. He wouldn't have done a Colin Powell at the UN, he learned you don't do that from Rwanda. That's very good and probably why the military doesn't like him. He's not a 'good soldier'. I've been waiting to hear something to verify that to me.

(But I still think he would have voted for that resolution)

Russert bashes Dems, and the Dems get stronger.

I take his spin as a sign of our strength.

Michigan. Nearly every year we'd see posters all over town. They said stuff like "Goody, Goody! Bo beat Woody!"

Michigan is such a great place to grow up. And we don't teach our kids to pee on cars. We have toilet-training seats shaped like Ohio. haha

To friendly rivaly between two great states! :toast:

Julie

Im not a Clark supporter, but I must say he really did very well. Anytime I am forced to watch Russert I feel soiled.

take a shower AGAIN. Clark handled fat timmy's attempts to smear him well, my gut says he is on the ticket next year.

Russert. He is trying to twist and turn every news article that he can in order to discredit Clark. At first I thought he might be asking tough questions in order to "get it all out there"---rumors. But I clearly see what a prick he is and how biased he is towards this administration.

I hate this bastard. :mad:

Imagine how humiliated Russert must feel that he gave it the best he had and was trounced by Clark.

Talking about how we had been deceived into going into Iraq.

He is very emotionally involved in this bogus war. He calls it by all the right names, and that Bush and co wanted to go in right away after 9-11. He accurately calls it a distraction from the real war on terror and holds Chimpy accountable for failing to get OBL and the re-emergence of the Taliban.

Clark was brilliant. He was humble, handled Timmy without getting defensive. I wish he could have been more explicit about Shelton and Schwarzkof and how they loved him until they discovered he was a Dem.

Are you a democrat?

he must not be refering to the war years.

I'd just like to say

I wish that he got to talk about issues.

but he doesn't take responsibility"

He's doing a great job

"This is a president who likes to take credit when things go right, but fails to take responsibility when things go wrong."

He's cleaning Russert's clock, and Russert is loaded for bear.

and other Generals that don't like him (3 in total)

Shelton let a policy decision become personal, I warned them about the situation in Europe and then in Rwanda, but they wouldn't listen....

WHen I left NATO, Shelton never mentioned this stuff....

That makes me happy. Thanks for the updates folks. I read every word . Im now in a good mood and ready to handle the world.

So the press lets Hugh Shelton get off scot-free when he expresses an opinion without backing it up with detailed facts. And then in practically the same breath they crucify Clark for saying that Bushco tried to have him fired from CNN without disclosing his source?

If I were Clark perhaps I wouldn't have mentioned the CNN incident in the first place because I would have known that I ultimately had to protect my source. However, there's no doubt in my mind that Clark knew key people at CNN who told him a true story and that he can't tell us who they are.

"and let me know when you get an answer, as I haven't yet received one."

I guess GE passed the word down this morning.

and talk about the economy and it's domestic and international impact. Once again, Clark would blow Timmy away, and show how absurdly simplistic Chimpy is in his discussions of the economy and tax policy.

What the hell is this black and white clip stuff?

Russert is a bastard, but he's good.

I know him fairly well now on the issues he was asked about. But for people listening to him for the first time.....he was extremely impressive, (so said my 80-year-old life-long repub mom and step-dad.) They particularly liked the balanced perspective in his responses.

This will be the headlines tomorrow. Although we all know he kicked ass.

I will give credit where credit is due ...

Clark was damned impressive ...

Under Russert's usual assault, Clark was eloquent ... and effective in responding ...

What made him so effective was that he wasn't defensive when responding to challenging questions ... he had solid, sincere responses ...

A very appealing candidate ... we democrats are lucky to have him ...

At least that's what we see here at DU. I think in the end we will have Clark\Dean - Dean\Clark. Most people want it. The two of them generally get along and they complement eachother well. I prefer Clark\Dean because Clark has more to offer up front and a better background, education and experience.

I hope so.....My instincts are that they are the team to beat Bush...

(despite my wish to see a woman as VP and eventually President soon, I'll bide my time...)

I think Bush is enough of a prick to shrug off Dean's anger in a debate, but I could see a Dean/Cheney debate getting REALLY heated.

Cheney better make sure his pacemaker's all charge up. :-)

at least Dr. Dean could get him jumpstarted again!

One of the reasons I favor Dean/Clark is because I want to see Clark pick Cheney apart on National Security.

I believe Clark has a great shot at winning the nomination and I hope he does. But no matter what happens this man has strengthened the Democratic cause. He will be listened to by a broad array of Americans because he has credibility, intelligence, and comes off as a reasonable man.

Clark was the consumate General on MTP today. I just can't even explain how impressed I was at the way he handled Timmy.

For my money, it was the best full-length appearance by a Dem Candidate on MTP yet. Clark just never let Timmy get to him.

We, as a nation, would be lucky, fortunate and blessed to have a man like Clark leading us. I only hope it comes to pass.

Agreed.

His victory was so complete it is difficult to appreciate. Would there could have been an additional hour to talk domestic issues, and why he should be president instead of aWol.

He's just SO good in the long form. I think he will devise a way to similarly dominate with excellence in the short, sound-bite world as well. God, I'm proud to have him in our party.

:D :D :D

Clark is the man of substance in this primary race. The only one, the best one. My opinion, of course. A leader. The leader I was promised as a little kid... I'm happy to say that again and again and again.

It would have been nice if Timmy had dispensed with the rehash of old news and irrelevant questions(predicted by many DUers before-the-fact, including my post yesterday). But, given that time was short, Clark just loomed over that conversation like nobody's business.

I loved it, when questioned about the "White House called me after 9/11" issue, said, "Well, it's not productive to give you examples of each instance... it was a concerted effort, exactly as I said... I haven't presented any evidence, because, were I to present that evidence, people would be in trouble. But, I'm under no obligation to present that evidence... if I weren't confident about it, I wouldn't have said it."

I also enjoy looking at that enormous West Point class ring that stands like the unseen elephant in the room. Interesting that it's the only piece of jewelry he chooses to wear... no wedding ring.

I'm going to keep this on my Tivo and watch it a few more times, likely. :-)

....as their wedding ring.

Interesting, Shakespeare! I was not aware of that.

No doubt about it.

decorated tough-as-nails soldier/general would be a slaughter! Oh, I am already whipping out the credit card to support a chance at getting to see this.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

What's the big deal? Why do you need a new thread? The vast majority of comments in this thread are about the interview today. There's no good reason to clog up the front page of GD with numerous MTP threads when there's a perfectly good one going right here.

That's what he's supposed to do. Kudos to him. Now if he would only do the same to the pugs.

I think it reveals a lot about a candidate when he's on the hot seat like that. I once had a professor that I used to talk to outside of class, that talked about how impressed he was that Kennedy at press conferences was never afraid to call on reporters he knew to be hostile to his administration. And he's right, it does reveal a lot about how intelligent, how forthcoming, and generally how strong a leader is.

We should thank Russert for showing us how strong General Clark is. He took quite a pounding and came up smelling like a rose.

that too, especially as Russert continued to grill Clark on something that he thought would make him squirm, but he (Clark) held strong. Still though, I wanted to bitch-slap fat-faced Russert with his obvious bias towards bush. He just rubs me the wrong way--on a continual basis.

Active Dean supporter chiming in here (Clark is my #2)....

I thought it was a very good performance. I particularly liked the part when he said the "Buck stops here" regarding Bush and 911, as Russert kept trying to blame it on Clinton.

I was ready to post already, and ten Clark touched on something very important to me. I am an employment counselor at a state workforce office. The way Clark described what happens to someone when they lose a good job, and it causes them to lose their self-rspect, was really very true. I see it everyday at work. I see former CEOs, lawyers, marketing directors, managers who have worked for the same company for 20 years, etc... people whose lives were built step by step with their careers... and now their lives are turned upside down. They take $10 an hour data entry jobs, (IF they are lucky enough to get them)... and THOSE are the people George Bush is bragging about going back to work... I have very few cases of people getting better jobs than they lost, these days, and that is a major failure of our economy.

I read your post and didn't notice it was the first. Anyway, welcome to DU. Good start

:hi: :pals:

Thanks for the welcomes, chaska and bleachers7!

I have lurked for months, registered so I could vote in some of the polls, but just hadn't officially posted yet. I like to come here to see what other candidates' supporters and undecideds have to say. Lurking at other candidate's blogs seems too sneaky!LOL! Plus, I think we all probably tend to be more territorial on our candidates' blogs, and more open in an open forum like this. Also, I get a lot of info on new articles here. So, I may be new to posting, but I have been getting good info here for months now:-)

And you aren't the only on lurking. Specific posts from here have been read or used by Limbaugh, the Wall St. Journal OpEd page, and others.

an excellent first post ...

thanks for highlighting the human dimension on dry, unemployment statistics ...

unemployment does much more than just hurt those who have lost their jobs ... it hurts all workers ... when workers cannot easily change jobs, it shifts the balance of power from workers to management ...

this is what the republican party is really all about ...

I wonder if Dept of Labor has stats available about down-scaling employment, ie, the old lost job's pay/benefits vs the new job's pay/benefits. And perhaps which companies/sector 'gain' from this, to be correlated with repuke funding sources.

And welcome to DU!
:toast:

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

I would love to see my guy shining like the star he is!

Thanks for the info on this, everybody.

:loveya: Clark

DemEx

I will see if I can get a electronic version.

DemEx

check your local cable tv listings

:hi:
DemEx

Each of Russert's questions provided Clark yet another opportunity to tell us about his involvement in serious matters affecting the nation. And make us aware of how inteligent and grounded he is.

I kept thinking that Bush* would be talking about Iraq and 9/11 in his often whining, hostile and impatient manner. Clark, on the other hand, takes the hits and shapes a cogent response with ease and confidence. He never appeared hostile towards Russert.

The interview boiled down to my having trust in him to run the country. Clark is my candidate of choice. However, I feel this confidence about several of the other candidates. It's a very strong field that makes me feel so proud to be a Dem.

IMO, he was covering all the GOP talking points but did it in less than his usual confrontational manner.

Personally, I think Tim sees potential in Clark's candidacy and wants to get on his good side.

Look, it's Tim's job to grill Clark as someone previously said, and this interview gave Clark ample time to respond in a measured, confident way.

Clark, as terrific a candidate as he can be, NEEDS to get beyond the questions Tim lobbed at him... hopefully after this interview Clark can move forward.

And those 2 b&w clips at the end...

Carl Sandberg seemed slightly senile.
The General said that only a broadminded general should consider being President...

Clark is nothing if not broadminded... Clark often metnions that we are a product of the Enlightment. He should pick up the theme of "Broadminded" and seeing the "Big Picture".

It was a very half hearted attempt to please his masters.

Clark is thorough, thoughtful and methodical. He keeps his cool. He also spoke with passion (Rwanda/Kosovo). While not sound bites, his answers did not dodge, but gave intelligent answers. I think he did an excellent job in harse harse circumstances. Wow, he can take it.

Clark wasn't confrontational or combative after MTP basically scrounged up every bit of dirt and right/left criticism of him.

But I was craving him to say PNAC, I know, I know inferred inferred

Also when Tim said about dollars for body armour ($87 billion) I wanted him to talk about body armour not protecting limbs and the consequences for the injured troop, the artificially low death count and high level of severe injuries., maybe next time

At the same time this interview illustrates why those on the right and left have a hard time with him, he doesn't easily fit into a box. He has reflective evolving positions. It is not black and white.

His photo with the Serb General also shows his approach of trying to be as close to all parties as possible, for the reason of knowing thy enemy or knowing the facts. Or treating your adversary with respect. It is his style. Similar to the criticisms people of laid on him about being to close to repugs. Many on the right and left believe the other to be scum of the earth and should never be acknowledged, let alone engaged. At the same time in the case of the Serb General, perceived 'cosiness', but what was the end result? could we hope for the same with Shrub and company? I hope as a whole we leave this black/white. good and evil crap behind with the failed Bush Administration. the stakes are high but way to polarized.

Clark also uses a lot of military terminology, but he is really talking about good management practices.

excellent post--

I couldn't agree more that Clark's experience is broad and multileveled.

I don't see him as the kind of mass-produced factory model General that as Sandburg (a notorious RWer, BTW) notes, we shouldn't dream about putting in office. Clark is way beyond that, apparently.

And BTW, when he started talking about Rwanda and how frustrated he felt about our inaction there, I got such a wave of sincerity and righteous anger coming from him that it really bowled me over-- quite a contrast to the rest of his wary, controlled performance guarding against Russert's vicious partisanship. Bravo, Clark!

Still not endorsing him--waiting for the primaries--but somebody with a Rhodes scholarship education ought to be on the ticket--and he's a PHd economist too!

like lisa, I was a long time lurker, but got sucked in.

Re: your comments on sincerity
I got the same feeling, it was a rush

Through most of the interview, I had kind of a 'you go buddy! nail that S.O.B.' sideline cheering when he was refuting the dirt. It was all the sweeter,(but also rollercoastery) because MTP did their best to get him from all sides with enough 'evidence' that the producers must have thought it would have been a TKO. They wanted to be the outlet to 'end' the Clark04 run. not so

but

When Clark spoke about Rwanda, Kosovo and the Jobless economy, I felt a kind of a deep inner 'whoa'.... not many leaders can inspire that kind of response.

The interview showed why Karl is TERRIFIED OF CLARK.

I be proud of this man named Wes,
who went on to Meet the Press.

He's the fellow who could be the Prez
Cause he'll knows how to handle the current * Mess.

Clark handled Russert Blow for Blow
and when it was all over
he left us to know
that this is the man with the real mojo

Know that a Great President is hard to find
so take a closer look y'all or just stay blind

If Democrats cannot see this one,
and that is my guess
Then they'll deserve what they've get
Not more, but a whole lot less.

By Frenchie

:D

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

because you apparently cannot understand the concept of what a duplicate thread is. If you look at all of the posts on this thread, the vast majority are from today, about the interview, in real time. There was no need for extraneous threads on the same topic.

what an intelligent, articulate man! And he has humanity and compassion. I don't think Russert laid a pinky on him...he did very well.

actually intimidated Timmy. Timmy had a very hard time looking into the General's eyes. He diverted them to the side or down at every chance he got.

I agree that Clark was excellent. I liked it when he said I am under no obligation to reveal my source. Ha Ha Take that!

Russert was loaded for bear and had all his clips and quotes ready to massacre the General. However, the General is very adept with the English language and is very quick on his feet. He did admit he made a mistake with exchanging hats with the Serb general and by taking gifts. This is probably what Hugh Shelton is referring to when he talks about the "character and integrity" of General Clark? But, as Russert has noted, General Clark is not an easy mark.

First, kudos to Volcano Jen who called it last night. You go!

Keeping up with the arguments on this board, has caused me to read volumes of Clark's words. Literally. While I started out seeking to defend someone I felt deserved more respect than his detractors pay him, I ended up with an education in history and foreign policy. And I came away those 200 hundred post threads convinced that if there was one person able to lead this nation in mending ties with its allies, a pursuit of urgency for our future, it was Wesley Clark. He told the tale recently of having started at West Point in math and science, something that came very easily to him, but working on some original documents for a Russian course, he became facinated by foreign policy and changed his major. He has been studying and writing about his subject for over 30 years. He taught political philosophy: Plato to Marx at West Point. Listening to him is like attending the lectures of a teacher who can both explain complex issues in understandable terms without ever talking down to student.

Today, while I am disappointed that Russert failed to ask about the domestic issues he thrusts at other candidates, I was treated to a meaningful hour of network tv, a rare bird, and given additional knowledge for understanding our country's "mess."

Oh sure, it would be great to hear a candidate heaving zingers on a Sunday morning, but to me, this was very important. Russert, who wanted to play the heavy, also got sucked in about 3/4 of the way through. He began to follow up questions, not because he was playing gottcha, but rather because he wanted to know, he wanted to hear what Clark had to say. You could see it in Tim's eyes. No matter what, Russert was showing proper deferrance before the clock struck 10:00.

I'm sure upon reviewing his performance Clark will do what we all have done, wished he would have said this or that. The Shelton answer could have been more complete. But personally, I'm always glad to hear what Clark has to say. When he says that our relationships are "poisoned" America had better understand how serious that is.

Russert never layed a glove on the General Brainiac. My husband and I just laughed from the joy of listening to someone who knows articulate the real deal. After 3 years of being embarrased by watch a dolt-pretender stumble through a litany of lies, this hour was a delight.

And, thanks for the kudos. It was a prediction in which I deperately hoped I'd be wrong. :-(

That being said, Clark handled the hardballs magnificently. I can't help but gush a little here, you know? I was expecting much worse. He was so damned studied, confident. You couldn't help but feel this brewing uber-intelligence beneath his eyes. He's so much smarter than I am... it's been ages since I've been able to say, with the utmost of confidence, that we've found a man who is the American leader we've been promised our entire lives. He absolutely embodies the word "leader." He breathes life into it. It's not just a political catch-all when it's applied to the General.

I only hope that we do not, as a party, squander this opportunity that has been laid by Clark upon our laps. I hope we meet his challenge, rise to his occassion, and truly begin holding our leadership responsible. He resembles my personal favorite President, Harry S. Truman, a man who made the tough, unpopular decisions, polls-be-damned, because he fully understood what was expected of him as the American President.

If Clark were elected, I could sleep again at night. I'd feel safer, more protected, higher-elevated in the eyes of the world.

Let's take a close, close look at putting him on the ticket. My personal preference is to have him at the top, but if he'd accept (and I'm not sure he would) the bottom of the ticket under Dean, I think I could accept that, and work harder than I've ever worked before to make it come to pass.

Thanks again, Donna Zen, for your enlightening post. :-)

...Clark shutting him up for taking his quotes out of context. I think Russert was mollified with the realization that he wouldn't be able to have a "gotcha" moment with Clark, and just gave up.

"Did you read the rest of the column, Tim?"

Heh.

There it is.

And, I posted in the Clark ad thread about image being more powerful, more lasting and effective than words. This full-hour, network tv Clark image was that of a higly capable, intelligent, caring leader, with perfectly tuned talents and experience, poised to assume leadership of our nation. (To see created and sustained the stuff of such an image over a solid hour is rare media.)

The topics become almost irrelevant, the motivations and intentions of Russert not a factor. What you SEE is what you get.

I was watching it today and they were gabbing about the Dems, Dean and his chances against Bush. They tiptoed all around Clark and it was obvious they didnt want to mention him. So just be aware of the new tactic of pretending he doesnt exist so his name will drop away. They fear him tremendously and hes a huge threat to the corporate run media and their agenda. Ignore him and hope he goes away. hahaha

This is good news. Proof of fear setting in.. when you put him up against the chimp, Clark kills.

Yes, he's a threat to the partisanship that Fox feeds and feeds off.
They likely will not want him to be the nominee.

First they ignore you, then they call you crazy, then you win. Something like that.

...I'll take it.

then they laugh at you
then they fight you
then you win

the thing is the RW media appear to be doing all of the above at once. is it reasonable to say that Clark is winning, then?

This is a kick. Most of the favorable reviews of Clark on MTP (and not only from Clark supporters) were posted on this thread. If you are following the newer more negative thread about Clark on MTP, you might want to check this one out too.

The negative threads on this board are clearly flame bait and an attempt to portray his interview in a negative light. I have not responded to them because I don't want to kick those threads.

The best thing that you can do to support Clark is NOT respond to those negative posts and keep them kicked.

For the most part, the posts in this thread present a more accurate representation of Clark's MTP interview.

He was great, by the way!!!!