If elected,Clark's the in strongest position to govern of all 2004Dems

Unlike all the other 2004Dems, Clark has a intimate knowledge of the White House and the Pentagon. Wes can hit the ground running to figure out what the hell is really going on. Kerry would have a shot at this as well, but just because we win the election doesn't mean we'll necessarily get much control of the government. Clark can get respect in places in the government the others don't even know about.

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

good reason....Clark04!

I think Clark will be a good leader, and that he'll be able to bring people over to his positions, both the constituency and the politicians. He's a good communicator, he always shows people the respect they deserve and doesn't try to belittle them just because he disagrees with their position, even *.

I'll let ya tell it. Doesn't make it true, of course, no matter how often it gets repeated.

:eyes:

Dems - Clark isn't one.

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

conveniently became a registered Democrat sometime in October.

Decade and a half? You mean he only voted for Poppy Bush, not for Jr.?

which by my count is a little less than 15 years ago. Don't accuse others of lying unless your own house is in order.

. . . qualities and track record, he may actually be in the WORST position to govern among the Democratic candidates.

One of the things you have to remember is that Washington, DC is often viewed as a "closed shop" in political circles. Someone like Clark will be viewed as an outsider of sorts, and will never really be trusted even by many Democrats.

is all politics. Getting there and the job once there, all politics.

. . . are interested in THAT kind of politics. Because Clark will always be answering questions about why his career as NATO Supreme Commander came to a sudden end.

I'm not sure I would want to be the guy who has to explain why a limp-wristed sissy like William Cohen fired me.

. . . especially when that Defense Secretary's BOSS is one of the people now supporting Clark. I think Clark's campaign would just get sidetracked by a lot of questions about it.

And remember that Cohen was a Republican Senator at one time. I don't trust that bastard -- I'd be concerned about him making all sorts of shit (true or not true) public right around October of 2004.

interest you:

The "Big Dog" Defends Clark Against Milosevic (Shelton smear)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=926365

secondly, Clark got a medal for his leadership of the Kosovo campaign.

This smear is not going to work for the repubs because even Shelton can't explain it.

I just watched a new clark video called "American Son" produced by the Clark campaign. It is pretty powerful. If your interested check it out here:
http://www.us4clark.com/mediaclips.html#ny

The Road to the White House Series presents Gen. Wesley Clark (Ret.) at a fundraiser in New York City. The "American Son" film is shown. (12/10/2003)

Cheers

Clark has no political track record. he's spent his entire adult life in the military, and has the blinders to prove it. as for respect - he'd get more respect from me if he'd prove himself by running for senate or governor first. if he'd develop a track record as a dem first. oh yeah, and if he'd stop saying stupid things like, "let them do the software in India."

another 4 star general, did a pretty damn good job in the White House.
He didn't have to prove himself by running for the senate or governorship or any other electoral position previous to his election. By the way, he was courted by both the Repub and Dem parties to run as their candidate. He had no party affiliations and ultimately chose to run with the Repub party. One of the better Republican presidents. As far as respect goes, Clark has earned a great deal of respect in the world community and would not try to 'go it alone' as Bush has done. In turn Clark has respect for the UN and the world community and has proved his love for this country by exhibiting principle above politics.

He'd do a great job. My biggest pro Clark argument is that he really has the credentials and knowledge to slash the Defense budget and I believe he's said he would do that. That might be the best thing for this country for years to come.

The man is a war hero, multi-decorated soldier, and a 4 Star General, and one time Supreme Commander!

He has lived a life of orders and command. The US Army is a tool of the Democratic principle, but it is not developed to operate on those same democratic principles.

You do not govern in the military, you lead, or you follow. Often, you do both at the same time.

Clark is an excellent American, a tribute to his country. But he is not a governor, not by a long shot. Not yet, at least.

I hope to see him again in a few years, with an ever better resume than he now carries, a resume that will carry him to the Presidency in 2012.

I wish him all the best, in that capacity.

governors in my lifetime. In fact one of them was a governor from the state of Texas.

Come on, I'm referring to those who have experience in governing, not just state Govrnors.

And we all know that the job of Texas Governor is like a warm bucket of spit.

Texas power sits elsewhere, in the Lt Governor, I believe.

Bush had ZERO experience governing.

run a state of 600,000+ of a mainly homegeneous state?
That has no foreign policy during a time of war?
That shipped nuclear waste off to texas to be buried near some poor hispanic town
and had health care for all of the children....paid mainly for by the Federal government.....

Yea...that sounds so much better than...

a Rhode scholar with a masters in politics, philosophy, and economics,
that taught econommics at West Point,
that was a White House Fellow,
an assistant to Joint chief of Staff (with budget responsibilities),
that ran command post after command posts, and turned them around,
that negotiated with Dictators and got a Peace treaty out of them which are still holding.
That ran a war where no American casualties occurred.
That used diplomatic skills with 19 countries to hold a Nato alliance together?

And has the Presidential Medal of Freedom hanging in his closet along with Knighthoods and so many other medals, Don't know what to do with them...

Yea, that's right, the 4 star General who was Supreme Allied Commander of NATO......A real Commander in Chief.

I would go on, but I am tired of typing.
OK.
Yea....let's contrast and compare.

He's a General, as you said - a commander.

the POTUS is also the CIC, but apart from those duties, he is head of the executive branch of our Government.

Clark has spent a lifetime learning to take orders, then give orders.

IMO, and we are discussing opinions here, Clark will be less able to "hit the ground running" than Dean, who, although he comes from a small state, has governed that state well.

And though Texas is a large state, it has a constitutionally weak governor. Obviously, the size of the state is not the primary rule by which to measure the Governor.

Let's face it - there is very little you can do that will prepare you for the job of President of the United States.

I think Clark is a damn good candidate, and if he wins the primary, he'll be a damn good President. I just think Dean is a better candidate, and will make a better President.

Now, if Dean were to win, and Clark were to agree to be Dean's VP, then Clark would be in position to be a truly great President, perhaps one of our very best ever.

In my opinion, Clark is good, but not the best for the day. Dean is.