The Dangers of Wesley Clark

..."I would vote for any of the Democratic nominees except Wesley Clark. After doing a good deal of research I find him to be one of the most dangerous politicians in America. Today we have tense relationships with several countries and military operations in at least two. The one thing that we cannot afford is an erratic, trigger-happy, dishonest, testy, petulant kind of militaristic leader. We do not need someone that is so disliked by his fellow military men that none of them attended his candidacy announcement and even the General who fired him from the military, called him a “nut”." ...

Much More

there's an extra http// in there

should work now

This primary has really been an eye-opener.

Somebody on the internet doesn't like Clark!! Pardon me while I go rearrange my worldview.

Especially to bush!!!

If Clark gets the nod, and people like you don't vote or vote 3rd party, please don't come back whining if Bush gets 4 more years.

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04dem.htm

And, according to the latest zogby poll...

"The president would outpoll any of the current leading Democratic contenders if the election were held today. He would earn 45% of the vote against retired General Wesley Clark's 35%; would beat former Vermont Governor Dr. Howard Dean, 47% - 37%; would poll 47% against Massachusetts Senator John Kerry's 37%; and would win over Missouri Congressman Richard Gephardt and Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman, 49% - 37%."

Another flame bait from the Dean supporters. Come on guys! Clark is not any more "dangerous" than any of the other 8 candidates.

and if you say you have I want a citation, criticised any of the multiple seemingly hourly anti Dean threads. And again if you answer yes don't you dare say go look.

Including #22 in this thread and my criticism about the Dean "Soft Racist" thread in others.

I think most of the flame bait threads would go away if people ignored them. But if the person likes trash then instead of ignoring some stupid thread he/she will create another five unreasonable threads just to counter.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=61462

Would it be flame bait, too?

It's a dumb thread just like the unreasonable thread that calls Dean a "soft racist".

But this thread right here is as unnecessary as the one you mentioned.

There's a lot to read there, alright. Unfortunately it is hard to find that many nice guys in position of power. It is also hard to find perfect people. I will be considering several of the candidates seriously, including Clark. I will say that I agree with most of what he is saying now. I do not agree with what Lieberman says. I like Dean, and I like Kuchinich (however he spells it), so does that great American Willie Nelson. Who has the best chance of winning is a pretty major consideration.

regarding Dean and/or Clark, I've pretty much stated that I'm voting for Kerry.

I have said that I like Dean and I see nothing wrong with Clark.

But screw this crap (is that nice enough). This crapola makes me not want anything to do with the Deanie crowd.

In fact, the tactics remind me of the Greens.

Clark almost started WW3 and all that crap. I heard them today from Rush's replacement. They were on Free Republic a couple of weeks ago.

people who bash Dean, too. But I don't..I just pay attention to
the candidates and what they are doing.

That poster just hit and ran..whose to say he's a real Dean person?

By trying to create the perception that Dean supporters are too annoying to alienate others.

I've heard that so many times. "It's not really Dean supporters who are such frigging assholes. It's repukes PRETENDING to be Dean supporters! They are trying to discredit us!"

Crap.

Not ALL Dean supporters are assholes, but there are quite a few. And they're LOUD.

Because I never have either.

If he gets the democratic nomination I will vote for him, even though I'd rather not. He has ONE BIG thing going for him - he's not Bush.

by the words of a few. Dean supporters are no more obnoxious than some Clark, Kucinich, or Kerry supporters. I guess it just depends what side of the fence you're on.

their supporters around the internet. The candidate will be President without those supporters - I mean the impact on this country will be made by whoever is elected, not by those who support him/her. I can just skip sites that are hateful, and threads that do nothing but flame and hate bait.

However, I have come to the conclusion that in Dean World, the attitude, like in so many organizations, is set by the Top Dog. In this case, the bashing based on emotions and blanket assertions that are based on mischaracterizations, if not outright untruths is rampant throughout the organization, and I believe that tone is set by the candidate himself.

So, I think that Dean has shown what kind of President he will be if elected, and IMO, it's not a pretty picture.

Please! Dangerous Politician! "erratic, trigger-happy, dishonest, testy, petulant kind of militaristic leader", sounds like a fair description---of George W. Bush! Consider the sources of where these statements came from, right-wing, pro-war, poor foreign policy, Republican't military higher ups...That description of Clark from them is even more reason to back Clark. He was NOT fired from the military and if being a Rhodes Scholar, #1 in his West Point class, Silver Star, Bronze Star, Purple Heart, Presidential Medal of Freedom isn't enough trust, service and leadership for you, then go believe the right-wing lies and slanders. It's understandable though that not only the Republicans but our fellow weaker Democrats must try to criticize unfairly because of the fear. And all this talk about Clark nearly starting World War 3, ask yourself how you would have been able to save 1.5 million Albanians from the ethnic cleansing going on in Kosovo? I'll tell you that George W. didn't think of that before going to Iraq...

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/16/politics/campaigns/16CLAR.html

A real website, not some nut.

"Clinton's advisors met nearly weekly on how to stop bin Laden...I didn't detect that kind of focus from the Bush adminsitration."
- Two Star General Donald Kerrick

And here is something else: Gen. John Shalikashvili, who is retired and who is also a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in an interview Tuesday that he was friends with both Generals Shelton (who has criticized Clark) and Clark and did not want to officiate between them. But General Shalikashvili called General Clark an outstanding commander who was "quick of mind and an extraordinary strategic thinker." He said General Clark would not have been promoted repeatedly if most of his commanders did not agree.

And I can just see one of Clark's campaign ads IF the Bush administration isn't totally trashed in the public's eye regarding Iraq...

(FADE IN PICTURE OF COLIN POWELL)

Fomer General Colin Powell, George W. Bush's secretary of state, consistantly polls as one of the most trusted men in America...

Colin Powell once said, : "Wesley Clark is an officer of the rarest potential..."

General Wesley Clark for president...

I posted more excerpts in Latest Breaking News.

despite what his supporters say.

Clark has the air of a flim-flam man and I don't trust him and his claim at being a Democrat. Lip syncing the Democratic platform out of one side of his mouth and praising Bush from the other does not make him a Democrat.

Whether I'd vote for him or not in the general election should he become the Dem nominee has a lot to do with how he "wins" the nomination. If he is "selected" by backroom deals at the Dem convention, then I'm inclined to vote third party because it shows that the Dem Party barons care more about keeping themselves in power than it does serving the people. If he wins the nomination fair and square, then I would most likely vote for him in the general election but would continue to work to toss guys like him out of the Dem Party hierarchy.

is a Washington insider:puke:

A third party vote is a vote for Bush.

Simple as that.

Ever notice how the people who start these claptrap, flame bait, BULLSHIT posts never stick around much after the fire gets caught?

I find it odd...

I notice this. I also notice that they are often in the low post range. I am not accusing anyone of anything, but it's probably a good idea for newer people to first avoid intra-party fight-provoking of this kind. We have "bigger fish to fry."

wherever you are, if you have problems with Clark-don't vote for him. There are eight other candidates to choose from.