Clark on CNN this morning - transcript

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0312/10/ltm.12.html
Highlights:
On Gore
"CLARK: Well, Vice President Gore, back in the 2000 campaign, said elections were about the people, not the powerful. And I think we need to let the primary process play out. I think especially voters in New Hampshire don't want to see elections decided by endorsements. They want their chance. People here and in South Carolina, Oklahoma, Arizona, they're relishing the opportunity to help the nation decide who the candidates will be and shape the election.

They respect Al Gore. They, many of them like him, they voted for him. But I think their response in general has been, please, you know, don't try to cut this off, let it play out, we want to hear from people, we want a chance to have our voices heard. It's about democracy. "
snip
on Dean's VP hoax
You ever talk to Howard Dean about being his running mate?

CLARK: No, he talked to me about it before I ran. And I told him, I said, Howard, look, this is not, you know, I'm not interested in talking about that. I'm not even thinking about that. For me, there's only one question in my mind -- and this was in early September of this year -- I said am I going to run to the be president of the United States or am I going to stay in private business?
snip
on Hillary
HEMMER: General, back to you, then. You said this week, again, you said it yesterday, you would consider Hillary Clinton to run on the same ticket as you. She has said repeatedly again this past Sunday that she has no interest in not completing her term as New York's senator.

If that's the case, why suggest that publicly?

CLARK: Well, I didn't suggest that. Somebody asked me in a question. I've suggested nobody publicly. But I do respond to people. Bill, the Democratic Party has all kinds of talent. We've got so many people there. This party is so ready to help America move ahead again. And I'd like to be able to consider all of the talent in the Democratic Party. I'd like to bring the very best people in America, representing America from all backgrounds, all walks of life, to help shape our vision for the future. And Hillary Clinton is certainly one of those that anyone would consider. She's incredibly talented. She's a real leader. She's very dedicated to public service. I think she's terrific.

and his supporters are causing some of my discomfort on this issue...Gore has a right to endorse whoever he wants. He is not trying to cut off the process at all as he has made clear. For Clark to suggest otherwise turns me off. For his supporters to be so outspoken and spiteful about it turns me off even more.
Any you can take this for what it is worth. I am leaning towards Clark despite Gore's endorsement. One thing that can blow it for me is misrepresenting what Gore has done and who he is.

that Gore doesn't have a right to endorse any candidate?

The only thing that has all non-Dean supporters a little annoyed is the 11th commandment idea.

Clark's just saying it ain't over till it's over.

Regarding Gore's endorsement of Dean. Traditionally Democratic ex Presidents do not weigh in publically during the nomination process, and Gore in many peoples minds is virtually a Democratic incumbant President, let alone Ex, at least we know he should be. The titular Party leader serves an important role as unifying figure within the party, the person best able to step in after all the inra mural blood letting, and rally everyone around the eventual nominee, handing off the Crown so to speak. Both Clinton and Carter have played by those "rules" because they serve a valid purpose in best preparing the Parry for victory in November. Now Gore has weakened his ability to play that role since he is now one of the partisans on public record praising one candidate over the others. That is why many supporters of other Democratic Party candidates feel some sense of betrayal by Gore, which does not come into play with any other endorsement made by a sitting member of Congress, Gov, former Supreme Court Judge or whatever, no matter how prominent they may be. That does not mean that Gore otherwise hasn't won our loyalty and support for the work he has done for the Party and the Nation. Clark certainly didn't trash Gore.

He's been extremely respectful of Gore's decision - much more so than myself.
When they ask him if it's over , do you expect him to pack and go?
I thought it was the most diplomatic answer of all candidates.
personally, I think that while Gore is perfectly entitled to his choices, his stature in the party required that he didn't meddle in the primaries. Clark is not bitter. But I am. I loved Gore and I feel betrayed.

that in any way suggests that any supporters or canidates fall in line.

Gore could have worded his statement where he gave praise and support to Dean WITHOUT appearing to shortcircuit the primary process.

I lost a bit of my respect for Gore in the WAY he endorsed Dean. Not the timing nor the endorsement itself.

In 2000, the GOP stopped the Democratic process.
In 2003, Gore allowed it to appear that he encourages cutting the process short.

By the way, Gore was freaking NASTY in the primary with Bradley... and that election was just as important as this one.

Watching Tom Harkin' Steak Fry in Iowa a few months ago has influenced why I am so disappointed in Gore's endorsement.

Bill Clinton was there--boosted all the candidates and boosted all their supporters. He made his statement about "falling in love" with a candidate during the primaries and falling into line once we have a nominee. This is what I call the "elder statesman" role--he encourages everyone in the party to become invoved in the process and allows people to have their say. He has said he will not endorse until the spring.

Gore has been somewhat in the same role of an "elder statesman." He has the right to endorse anyone he wants. Some of us simply feel he should have followed the Clinton example. We want a strong unified party in the spring--not a railroaded flock.

When I say I would not have welcomed a Gore endorsement for Clark--I am being honest with you. I want Clinton to stay true to his word and to support everyone until the process has worked. Most people are just starting to tune-in and to pay attention to the process--Do we really want the masses to tune in and to hear the pundits say they no longer have a choice??? If there is no choice--there is less reason for people to feel they can play a role.

On Edit..When Clark said last night he has not considered a Clinton endorsement--and some doubted his sincerity in answering the question--I believe he told the truth. I don't believe Clark has contemplated a Clinton endorsement because Bill Clinton has made it clear he supports the process and would let it work itself out.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2003/12/10/clark_makes_the_most_of_the_moment/

"Still, at a time when the race for the number-two spot in New Hampshire is wide open, Clark made it clear he was a candidate worth listening to"


actually im actually seeing quite a bit of good media this morning.
yaay!

" She's incredibly talented. She's a real leader. She's very dedicated to public service. I think she's terrific."

this morning already...I say...

I say....good. His answer was great today on CNN

Dean asks Clark about how he felt about running as VP? The same Clark he called a republican in the debates?


Doesn't anyone see the irony in this?

Clark scores again.

but "I" think that behavior from Dean is probably what why Clark has said NO, he will not be his VP. Dean attacked Clark early on in the debates and probably made Clark's decision on whether he would be VP, very easy.

And all of you posting in as Clark Supporters.

Cheswick as much as we love Al Gore, I believe his timing was off for those of us working in other candidates campaigns and most of us are his own supporters.'

He strongly can express and endorse whoever he wants and he's watch and listen to the debates and picked Howard Dean. Most of us watched and listen and as been in this fight since our votes weren't counted.

You've been a trooper like most DUers' and I'm happy you are thinking of the General. I deceided to post who I'm supporting only for the fact that we need to win this and like those wonderful words of truth,he spoke last night, General Wesley Clark is the man to stand toe to toe with George W. Bush on National Security and show who makes a better Commander and Chief with alot of compassion in the mix!

Howard Dean would be a wash out in the important issue to alot of us who has sons at home who would be draft age if that was to come around.
Not knocking Al Gore endorsement but my own observation of watching him say we spent enough time talking about Iraq, and Ted Koppel said, not so and you are exaggerating on it Howard. I say there is a fine example where he does not know anything of National Security and would look weak in a debate with Bush.
Maybe if he spent some time in Vietnam he would see how very important Iraq is to most Americans.
And to add this I didn't bother supporting the War but the occupancy will be there for awhile.
Howard Dean says what will get him in the white house but he has no substance to back him up.... and we can't afford to have him nominated. We need a real leader and I think last night alot of Americans seen that in General Wesley Clark.

Some reporter asked last night,how far are you going General, and the General's answer,
"All The Way."
and so is his supporters with him!

I'm so happy to see you. I am also supporting General Clark. I agree with your comments above.

I'm very happy to hear we are on the same team and very happy to see you too!!!
General Clark is The Man We Need in the White House!

(((joanski01))):hug:

Wes Will Win the primaries .....and if he doesn't.... we are screwed!