I am Democrat because . . . excerts from a Gov. Warner speech

http://www.vademocrats.org/Whats_At_Stake/Warner_Mississippi.asp

From this, I think he sounds pretty damn good. Keeping my eye on him that's for sure.

Great section of his speech:

I am a Democrat because since Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence – and since Jackson spoke for the common man – our party has never been the party of the status quo.
Instead, we have been the ones to see a challenge – and do something about it. Let’s be honest – it hasn’t always worked perfectly. Sometimes it has gotten us in trouble. Sometimes it has split us apart. But sometimes, those are the wages of progress.
And yet, I am a Democrat because the greatest and most noble political experiments of our time had their birth in our party.
I am a Democrat because the New Deal literally saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans.
I am a Democrat because a generation after a Democratic president started the Peace Corps, you can still find faded photographs of John F. Kennedy on the walls of homes from South Africa to South America.
I am a Democrat because fighting for working men and women is always the right fight.
I am a Democrat because our party led the struggle for civil rights – in the tough places like Virginia and Mississippi – and because we recognize that discrimination and bigotry are not dead – and that we must continue to seek equal opportunity for all.
I am a Democrat because despite our failures, our missteps, and our excesses – we know that waging a war on poverty does not mean fighting the individuals who are poor.
I am a Democrat because we know that today’s battle is about the future versus the past – and it’s time to put aside yesterday’s battles of us versus them.
I am a Democrat because we know that criticizing success won’t create a single job.
And most of all, I am a Democrat because when my three daughters go out into the world to make their lives, I want them to find a world where there’s less hopelessness – less selfishness – and less violence.
I want them to find a world where there is more opportunity – more understanding – and more hope.



Not bad, huh?

but some here will call him a DINO.

Has he used the word Liberal yet though....cause that is the question.

How's that relevant?

the world liberal has been ruined. Time to create our own frame around the work progressive. Warner is a good Dem. If Clark doesn't run, I'll support him.

Clark's VP, if I like what I find out about Warner.

Once I learn more about Warner, if Clark doesn't run, and depending who else runs, and depending on Warner's stance on certain national issues and how I warm to him as a person in general, I might also support him.

However, I still don't know if I can wholeheartily support a candidate who has no National Security experience in this post 9/11 world. Especially if the Rethugs end up with a Hagel or a McCain.

Even worse if the GOP end up with a Frist, a Santorum, or a Jeb Bush. The one thing those last three have lacking for sureis National Security experience (Jeb can probably try to claim some....considering how many Terra alert they have had in Florida)....so why run a candidate that equally matches their lack/Achilles heels?

the issues could be completely different. Regardless, I'd rather run someone with no national security experience than run a Senator again. Clark is my first choice. However, if he doesn't run Warner is the next best candidate.

give his "State of the State" speech, because I wanted to hear this guy in more than a soundbyte.

I've heard lots of good things about him, but I remain unimpressed. Each time I hear him, he registers 0 on my richter scale.

I'm sure he's been a good governor, & maybe he'd make a good senator, but he doesn't strike me as Presidential material.

I won't decide who I'm backing until a: Everyone has declared and b: after a few debates
But I'm not ruling him out, he has some very good qualities

OK, I've watched a lot of his speeches online. He's got everything a presidential candidate would need, except for his mediocre speaking skills. However, this is a minor detail, and one that can be fixed with proper coaching.
He's still one to keep your eye on.

some National Security experience of some kind.....in these days...as well?

Which is why Clark would be the perfect running mate.

But for some reason I think he is going to run for Senate in 2006.

In terms of his qualifications (not a Rhodes Scholar, but not everyone can be)...but remember that next election will not be the same as 1992 or 1996. We will not have "Peace on Earth" by 2008, no matter I much I wish it.

You want as little competition for General Wesley Clark as possible...



Just kidding. If Clark runs again in 2008 I cant think of one candidate I would back over him either. B-)

Posted it on DU since I thought he looked pretty good (not everyone who replied to the thread was similarly impressed but par for the course....). I lived in western VA for five years -- if he can win as a Democrat there, he's got a bright future ahead of him.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1481623