CNN question to Clark: Is Iraq off the table? WTF?

This is an absurd question. Is the war now over? Judy Woodruff was flabbergasted when Clark told her he stood by his statements that Bush was incompetent. Clark was also careful not to criticize too much since he was on foreign soil. CNN has totally lost all credibility with me.

Clark handled Judy pretty well.

It was priceless, just priceless. :evilgrin:

:dem:

I saw that exchange and was absolutely flabbergasted. At least Clark stood his ground. I suspect that, on any other day, he would have told Judy where to stick those questions.

Indeed, every time I've turned on CNN today, it's been disgusting. I'm sitting back with a nice "I Dream of Jeannie" repeat now.

The three cable "news" channels have become mostly unwatchable. Complete propoganda! And the so-called "liberal" commercial broadcast media isn't very far behind. With four more years of this regime in power, I don't even think we'll be able to recognize public broadcasting any more.

.

Woodruff is nothing but a clowning joker...

God I wish I was in charge of CNN - I'd immediately fire Wolf and Woodruff and get in some real talent that asks real questions about actual issues, instead of just playing politics with our lives...

she really wanted the scoop- Clark Slams Bush In Interview w/Judy MediaWhore While On Foreign Soil...

Instead, Clark just very simply and matter of factly said Yes, I stand by my statements....

:evilgrin:

Clark has mastered handling the media... I had worried a bit but am glad he's got it!

when he said that he had not changed his views. He's not my #1 choice for nominee, but that's my Favorite Media Moment for today!

Clark said he stood by his statements, and Judy huffed, "Even at a time like this?" What the hell is that supposed to mean? She was blatantly judgmental, and way out of line.

As it happens, I'm right in the middle of a term paper on the sorry state of political reporting by U.S. media. Hmmm, maybe Judy can be an example? I'm already using Ted Koppel. . . :-)

koppel, while aweful in that debate, still does some intelligent reports on Nightline...

Just need to find a transcript of today's exchange to add to my ever-growing reference list. It's amazing how much has been written on this topic. Too bad it's not as easy to fix it.

witnessed.

She was promoted after moderating the debate in which she told the candidates not to attack Bush.

Judy Woodruff is a real piece of work.

until our troops are home.

at sitting at home around theirs.

;)

and when all of our soldiers can do the same, then we can say the war is over."

Or Clark could have said:

"Judy, so you're telling me that there will be no more attacks against American troops. The war is over, we can take down the walls around the Green Zone, and our troops can freely walk the Baghdad streets unarmed, without fear of attacks."

The capture of Saddam has essentially validated Bush on the issues both Clark and Kerry bring to the table. Democrats know the difference, but everyone here who is assuming that Clark and Kerry are the best choices now aren't looking at this as a swing voter will. I AM a swing voter and keep trying to tell you guys that if you push Clark and Kerry just because Saddam was captured Democrats are going to lose. You can't win by trying to out-hawk a hawk, AND you risk losing the respect of your core voters.

It's time to shift gears to Domestic Issues and toss in either Clark or Graham as the VP just to reassure the nervous Democrats who are afraid about defense and foreign policy. Swing voters are MORE concerned with jobs, the deficit, schools, health care and things that affect them directly. These are the winning issues, not trying to out-hawk a war monger.

unbeatable in my opinion...unbeatable!

Dean has the best and strongest record and experience on domestic issues. He's also the only one with a knack for defining which are the issues of the day.

I don't dislike Edwards at all, I like him, in fact...but his specialty is dealing with big business and legal issues. What better spot for him than AG? One day he'll be president, but not after not even serving a full term in Washington.

See this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=908306


:dem:

Therefore, even if the capture of Saddam revives sentiments among pro-war Democrats, they
are far more likely to throw their support to former Gen. Wesley Clark, who, while losing ground
to the surging Dean, has been presenting himself precisely as the one Dem candidate most
capable of blasting Bush on national security and defense issues.

And Clark's central premise, which he hammers home repeatedly, has not been invalidated or
discredited to the slightest degree by the capture of Saddam. That is his contention that in
their Iraq obsession, the Bush team have disastrously neglected the primary goals of U.S.
domestic homeland security and the war against al-Qaida and its associated groups.

It is too early, in my opinion, to determine what effect, if any, this is going to have on the primaries and the general election.

Saddam's capture has yet to bring one soldier home, stop one bombing, produce one WMD. He is, again in my opinion, a hot potatoe that pResident Bush may find burns his hands very thoroughly.

General Clark's call for maximum transparency in regard to any trial of Saddam underlines a clear danger to this administration.

What transpires if, at some point in the trial, Hussein announces, apropos of nothing, that George Sr gave him clear authorization to invade Kuwait as a payoff for all the years Iraq served as the U.S.'s surrogate vis a vis the war with Iran. I imagine Ambassador Wilson will be able to neither confirm or deny that story and how disprove it?

What if, at some point, Saddam states that all persons who had dealings with Virginia Plame have been put to death, just in case, following Bob Novak's column.

What if Saddam explains that the chemical weapons used against the Kurds were provided by the US?

And so on and so forth.

The administration has to kill this man, and do it as fast as they can. He is a ticking timebomb.

(of course, if anyone finds anything at all harsh or upsetting in my post please forgive me. I'd hate to give offense)

Do not forget this one

Claim: U.S. Government Spurned Peace Talks before the War with Iraq
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/World/hage031105-1.html

In short, Saddam Hussein was going to step down from power and have elections.

There were two other links to this story 6 November 2003 from Ruters and Yahoo, but the links have expired.

This is something the convenient media have seemed to forget. Bush wanted this problem just as he wanted all of the other problems in his life. The Media is very quick to jump onto anybody who criticizes Bush.

what part of that don't you get?

Dean called Russia the Soviet Union FOUR times in one interview and doesn't know why it's important to try Osama in the Hague.

Dean is an incredibly weak canididate in any regard INCLUDING Domestic issues.

He WILL be painted as an Isolationist... and his taking back the Middle Class Tax Cut is a losing proposition.

Congratulations on buying into the Bush spin.

But don't cry in your teacups when Conventional Wisdom yet again doesn't pan out and leads to another defeat.

Democrats are really, really bad at trying to figure out what we swing voters respond to. We're so easy to win over, too, which is what makes it so pathetically sad. Talk about the issues we care about most and we'll join your team. Try to be more like the guy we already have and we'll stick with what we are familiar with.

Go ahead an promote tossing out the baby with the bathwater...it's your party's funeral, not mine. I get to live in a state that doesn't suck anywhere near as bad as it does everywhere else...Thanks to Howard Dean. Enjoy your 4 more years. :shrug:

This post is so totally off topic, that I could cut and paste it into almost any thread on this message board and it would apply no more, or less, than it does in this thread.

takes anything off the table, or in any way validates W's totally incompetent handling of the Iraq situation. The war hasn't suddenly ended just because Saddam was captured. I think that this will become clear to people after the initial hullabaloo has passed.

but that is todays pop music MTV culture. Most Americans don't have a clue as to the rest of the world and couldn't care less. As long as the bombs aren't dropping on us, and they are free to shop at the malls.

I think Clark handled the interview very well BTW.

Hate to tell Nazi Judy this, but the fun is just beginning in IraqNam

you before, I am on foreign soil and I'm not going to comment on that. I stand by my statements.

Yay Rah for Clark. And yes, I saw Judy's expression, and it was priceless. She really sounded stupid with those stupid questions. General Clark is not someone you can mess around with, as they are finding out.

Looking forward to the increased media coverage of the General during his time at The Hague.

I thought they had a total blackout on Clark.

and Clark handled her well.

Seeing her stammer was just pathetic. What a loser...

First let's establish something: Woodruff has been the most determined of all the whores to silence Clark and marginalize him. She plays Dean, Dean, Dean the front runner sound bites on every show. Rove wants Dean, and Judy does Rove. No matter what Clark said, she would have gasped. I'm surprised she didn't puke from having to speak to the man.

I thought a great deal about how the Saddam news effected this race. Forget Dean...although he made many cover all bases prior to the war, he has been using the issue as a club on the trail. Clark on the other hand, has bombed Saddam when the dictator got out of hand. Clark's position on the war from his testimony before the Senate and until today was that Saddam was not the threat that terrorism presented. (If anyone has the link to the testimony, please post.) That is the part few posters have understood about this entire matter regarding Clark. Clark was against the Iraq, absolutely, because he was looking at the globe strategically and knew we needed to be in Afghanistan and working with our allies to create a better intelligence and legal system for dealing with terrorism. If he was to be perfectly honest, he would tell you that bushco would have, and could have, gone to war with or without the resolution. He said early on that this election was about leadership and what kind of country we want to live.

He still holds that view. The war in Iraq was wrong because it does not make us safer. Saddam was a thug, but not a danger at this time. Clark iirc gave us a 10 year window on Iraq during which there were many moves we could make--moves far short of war---to improve the situation. Saddam is in jail tonight, and this country is no safer than it was on 9/10/01. Now that we are threatening Syria, we are less safe.

Now to those of you who would wish Clark away. He is now the only person left of the nine who both disagrees with bush and can match him one on one for catching dictators.

That said, it does not look good for Democrats. The trial of Saddam will be timed to obscure the elections. Many things can happen between now and November '04 to change the equation, but the National Security card is in bushco bloody hands, and if we fail to choose our strongest candidate to counter that, I don't know what we can tell the children. I do know we can tell Judy Woodruff to go to hell.

n/t

He's usually good at shutting up the actors.

re: "Even at a time like this?"

I was and am not at all biased against General Clark. I simply was attempting to push him a little further, after his statement that he stands by his criticisms of President Bush with regard to his policy in Iraq.

On a day like today, with the capture of the decades-long despotic ruler of Iraq, I wanted to give General Clark a chance to explain further his views. I regret that you took it as bias. I can assure you there was no bias involved.

Sincerely,

Judy Woodruff

real good. I was really surprised when I heard Judy would be interviewing General Clark. She never even mentions his name on her show. Usually, it's Bill Schneider who has mentioned his name in passing. Maybe twice, so far.