Clark is being vetted for VP - Newsweek

"Jim Johnson, a longtime friend of Kerry's, is supervising the process, which has fully vetted two contenders so far, Rep. Dick Gephardt and Sen. John Edwards. A third is undergoing the process now, NEWSWEEK has learned. He is retired Gen. Wesley Clark—a further sign of Kerry's interest in the commander theme."

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4881085

HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! :bounce:

an asset to our party.

would be a very formidable team, imo. I'm still pulling for Edwards, though. Gephardt would be a snoozer, imo.

I am an Edwards backer, but I also like Clark a lot. Gephardt would be a major mistake.

MAybe they are listening to us!

it's been edwards at #1 and clark and #2 for several weeks now.

for the wonderful news!!!!!!

Woo Hooooo!!!

I looked at the Kerry online forum tonight & the overwhelming choice there was for Wes Clark!!!!

and Kerry doesn't get along all that well with the Clintons.

Clark has been acting as Kerry's surrogate in the media since he dropped out. It was obvious when he endorsed him that Kerry likes Clark, a lot.

The Clinton connection is WAY overblown.

that you see in the corporate media.

In case you haven't noticed, they do a terrible job of accurately reporting the facts.

That's part of the beauty of a VP - the Pres can delegate the attack dog role to the VP when necessary.

Much as I really wish it could be Edwards, with all his good qualities, Clark can come back at 'em as a retired general. AND I hear that he won't be eligible for Sect. of State since he hasn't been retired long enough.

Edwards would, however, make a GREAT Sec'y of Labor!

Clark for VP!

on neoconazi talk radio.

It's Sec'y of Defense that has the 10-yr. retired from active duty requirement.

I think Clark would actually make a better Sec'y State or NSC chair than VP, but I don't really care as long as he's up there somewhere!

This would pretty much quash the weak on National Defense baloney. The man has a LOT of positives.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

Wesley Clark.

Maybe they are actually thinking! Clark or Edwards....either one offers so many positives. I'd go for Clark first because of the mood of the country....and the press: terror-terror-war-war.

he's got the international credentials to pull America back into the global community.

go WES!!! I knew there was a reason I kept my WES WING license plate!

He is an amazing man!

I'm glad he's being considered. He has to be scoring points for the wonderful way he's defended Kerry's record over the last couple of months.

I hope the Kerry people are making winning the election the priority over political payback when considering their decision.

weaknesses showing through more everyday now, we need a heavyweight on the ticket with him. Clark fills the bill, and would make it a slam dunk.

Kerry-Clark
in 2004!

I hope Kerry will add the General to his journey, so tat together they can help save this great country.

is sorely needed NOW.

:kick:

DemEx

This is the very very very thing that might get me back wasting time here on DU again...LOl

GREAT news! Thanks for sharing!

going to be verrrrry interesting, IMO.

saying something about supporting the confidential nature of the process of choosing a veep and that he was "not interested" I was truly hoping it was to cast doubt and it was a Wink Wink answer, thanks for the post.

Look who the hell it is. Wife!! How ya been?

Where the HELL have you been, Wife?! :)

strong grass roots following. Interesting....

More than once I have heard Gen. Clark take the Bushies to task over going to war in Iraq. His bottom line has been that war should be the alternative only as a last resort. He comes across as big-time credible.

He'd make a great asset to the ticket.

either clark or edwards would be great picks.

no gep though...

It's gotta be the General!

DTH

I was leaning to others when it looked like the economy was the main issue. Also, leaning to others when it looked like it would be important to have someone on the ticket who could bring in a mid west battle ground state. Now, it looks like national security will dominate the election. Clark on the ticket tells the country that Kerry is serious about national security and the war on terror. Both Kerry and Clark will form a team that has actually been tested under enemy fire and who are ready to command. I think the country will respond. I think Clark has the chance to help in the South. Toward the end of his campaign, he was talking about faith in a way that the South will respond to.

My only concern about Clark is how much he will help in the Mid West battle ground states. Although, I do think that he can certainly hold his own there. If you get both of them going through the Mid West talking about security both national, economic, and personal, then I think we will be just fine.

But he did very well in OK, NM, AZ and ND, the only semi-mid-Western states he competed in. I'd say he'd be an asset across the board. But I'm prejudiced.

Republicans would be able to justify their war crimes by pointing out Clark's war crimes.

This garbage does not belong on a progressive Democratic board.

There are sites readily available that DELIGHT in calling Clark a war criminal but, here at DU, we tend not to cut the throats of the best and the brightest our party has to offer.

The only one that should be accused of 'War Crimes" is GWBush.

that Kosovo-lover Michael Moore endorsed him, and warmonger Ralph Nader quoted him twice in his bloodthirsty editorial, "End the US Occupation of Iraq" ( http://www.dissidentvoice.org/April2004/Nader0424.htm ).

Come off it already. The central Republican attack against him pretty much dissolved when Milosovich used it -- and if it didn't, Clinton and Albright will be able to speak out this time. I'm almost eager to find what they make up next.

Nooooo we don't need somebody like that to help lead our country!

Slackin' :tinfoilhat:

Clark may be a better choice than Edwards. I like Edwards but if Defense is going to be the theme for Nov. then Clark is a better choice. Again, a war hero vs. Dick Cheney. The contrast will be fun.

The dream ticket of a lifetime will kick bush and cheney's asses.


I LOVE YOU, WES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Go get 'em General!!

This is some very good news. Thanks for the info.

By the way, that's a very cool picture in your sig.

Now, when we retreat from Fallujah, now, when we see these unspeakbly horrible images of abuse and rape, now, when Kerry's campaign (seems to be) treading water, now, after the deadliest month of this W-ar, and
with a movie coming out soon (on t.v. I think) on Eisenhower, etc., etc.
Here are some reasons I think Wes Clark is THE choice for VP (Not necessarily in order of importance):

1. He has respect, integrity, and international experience that is recognized
around the world.
2. He has a unique and rare combination of intellect and compassion I have
not seen in anyone, in a long time. Check out the 60 Minutes II Interview.
3. He knows diplomacy, and how to consider a wide range of views in a
way that gets results (Dayton Peace Accords, Milosivec to the Hague, etc.)
4. He led a successful war where not a single American sodlier was lost,
and even though he had to take "politcal" risks to do so, he saved the
lives of 1.5 Ethnic Albanians in the process.
5. He is a true hero; ask Richard Hollbrooke, who was there when Clark
risked his own life to recover bodies of soldiers , earning a Silver Star
in the process.
6. He comes from a humble background.
7. This one might not seems a big deal, but in American Son, there was a
man who said Wes was his friend when others wouldn't, and that
means a lot. I am a teacher, and I see how sad it is when some students
are left out. It has lifelong effects.
8. We has no political record to attack, BUT he has a record of successful
politically-related experience, as NATO Supreme Allied Commander in
Kosovo.
9. He has educational experience (Taught economics at the college level).
10. He has business experience.
11. He has been happily maried for more than 36 years.
12. He is a Southerner, and has extensive military experience.
13. He is maverick, in the sense of sticking to what he believes is right, even
if it steps on toes, no matter whose they are.
14. He was not "attackable" on anything of substance, so all the
RW media could do was to ignore him.
15. I know a soldier who fought under Clark, and he said he was a
great general, leader, and person.
16. He is a DEMOCRAT! Like Al said, (I'm paraphrasing here)"I'd rather see
a new Democrat, than an old Democrat who's been acting like a repulican
all along."
17. The repiglicans are SCARED $hitless of idiot boy; believe that.

With General Clark's combination of integrity, compassion, heroism, character (unlike Shelton-who is/was on Edwards' campaign), intelligence, military experience, diplomacy, etc., etc, how could Kerry choose anybody else?



P.S. Thanks you for posting that article from Newsweek! I think (some) people are getting sick of Edwards being shoved in our faces. Don't get me wrong about Edwards; he'd be good, but it's 4 more years of hell if he's Kerry's pick as VP.

Thanks for posting. I do think I could get excited about such a ticket. I would imagine Clark as Secretary of State is not out of bounds even if he isn't chosen for VP?

Now think beyond election day to the enormous imperialist mechanism that just staged a coup in Haiti and wants Columbia and Venezuala's oil in guaranteed US control.

Recall that the Genius Generalissimo was at one time in charge of Southern Command which includes these countries.

During the coup in Haiti, one du-poster offered this analysis of why the US would want to conquer little ole Haiti. This is excellent analysis and I'm sorry I don't have their du username to credit them. Think about this with Clark in the White House:

"American dominance of the region has been almost complete since World War II, but in the last decade or so a lot of countries have started to slip through our fingers. Most of the countries are small and not that significant, but all together the problem is starting to loom very large.

The big keystone is of course Venezuela, with Cuba acting as a sort of "university nation" turning out skilled people who have experience working within a socialist structure and exporting them to Venezuela to help build the Bolivarian system, which is emerging as a big threat to basically take over South America in the wake of the failure of the industrial export capitalist system that we had been trying to impose via IMF/WB/WTO.

The U.S. planners obviously feel they have to stop this. Unfortunately for them, since Reagan's Iran/Contra adventure it has become much harder for us to exercise control over the region with our old methods - basically, train and arm a mercenary force and send them in to overthrow the government, a la the Nicaraguan contras, who were recruited and trained mostly in Guatemala and El Salvador (which had already gotten this treatment decades before.)

The other choice is to finance opposition groups in country and get them to do it; the problem is that these types of groups don't generally bring the proper brutality to bear on the population. That's why the Venezuelan coup failed - before you attempt something like what the Venezuelan opposition tried, you have to have a sustained terrorist campaign against the local population so that they will be too weak and frightened to resist.

In Haiti, so close to the U.S. mainland, we were able to pull off the old model and thus had a successful coup. Now we'll install a military dictatorship with some sort of pseudodemocratic fig leaf on top of it, and we can then use Haiti as a recruiting ground for whatever the next invasion is going to be, probably Cuba.

So "cheap labor" is kind of correct. But the "labor" is in fact warmaking - we need dark faces to send to war in the region, and Haiti, completely poverty-stricken, is a perfect place to recruit mercenary terrorists.

It's not so much that Haiti itself is important, but think of it like a game of Risk. You can't take on the big battles until you've attended to the small problems in your position. So you take over Kamchatka or whatever which has one enemy army on it that could never be a threat to you - you do it as a strategic preparation for a larger conflict.

We're merely starting in the places where we feel we'll be most likely to succeed. You don't engage your enemy on his turf unless you have to. You engage him where you have the advantage. Thus we're going to lock down all the easy targets in Central America and the Caribbean while doing our best to destabilize the hostile Bolivarian democracies to the south. Then we take out Cuba, cutting Venezuela off from its source of skilled labor and intellectuals, and then go for the big prize - a U.S.-backed puppet government in Venezuela, with the rest of the region falling into line after that.

This may seem too grand and strategic, but this is how these PNAC folks think. Sort of Sun Tsu meets Charles Manson. Scary stuff, but big-time power politics is not nursery school.

This is why you see all the saber-rattling from Chavez right now. He sees the situation for what it is - I think Hugo may be the sharpest political leader on the planet since the retirement of Bill Clinton. He may actually be smarter than Clinton, but it's hard for me to compare because I don't speak Spanish (yet.) Chavez is trying to make Bush angry enough to make some sort of move before the table is really set, because he thinks (correctly) that Venezuela would have a better chance defending itself today than it will in 2 years with bands of Central American and Caribbean terrorists roaming the streets and killing people.

So that's it in a nutshell. Haiti is just a jumping-off point. Cuba is the immediate goal, with Venezuela the ultimate target."

was awarded for service in Vietnam when he continued to lead his men after being shot four times. The equally-heroic action Holbrooke describes occurred in 1995, when they were involved in the Bosnia negotiations. On vehicle in their convoy of diplomats went off the road and rolled down a mountain. Clark (by this time a 50-year-old General) rapelled down the mountainside, despite gunfiire, to try to rescue the men from the burning wreck. Clark has proved twice -- that he is a genuine hero. He and Kerry, together, would make Bush and Cheney look like such lame, yellow-bellied weenies...

with Kerry/Clark: War Heroes vs. Warmongers

I want ont too!!

he took the wedding ring off the soldier's finger and returned it to the man's wife.

I posted that without refering direfly to my source. But the source was an article in Oxford American, May/June 2003. I just posted what I thought I remembered. Thank you again.

Kerry/Clark is an ideal ticket to go up against Chimp/Snarl.

We're lucky to have several gr8 potential VP nominees, and wes Clark is one of them. :)

Trying not to get my hopes up too much, but I really hope he chooses Clark. Incap, thanks so much for posting this!

Please check it.....Is there a typo that is changing what you are trying to say?

song--and badly at that. Best ignore her.

I can't even understand why anybody would even try to sing it at this point!!

in standing up for that position. At least it gives one faith in the American educational system.

at being bad, Crunchy

Would be a wise choice given current conditions.

Bringing it ON.
:headbang:

The only strategically correct chouce is Gephardt.

Hell even if it wasn't for the Rose Garden, or Iowa I wouldn't want Gephardt in there. He failed to lead Congress at a time it was needed most. He'll probably end up labor secretary anyway, but even that's more reward than he deserves.

As for Clark.... well I thought he would have made an excellent VP for Dean, and I'd still pick him over Kerry. So why not?

No offense to all those Gep fans out there, but while he might have done some good stuff for labor, Gephardt is an on-paper winner, but an in-the-flesh loser. The guy is a turnout KILLER.

The guy couldn't get delegates in a Iowa, his state of strength that he's been working for 10 yrs. There is NO way he's going to put Ohio over the top, and there's a good chance that he might not be adequate to carry Missouri either, as he doesn't exactly have huge statewide appeal. Plus, the Green/Indy defections would be rampant.

I have to believe that the DNC must, must, must realize that as well as geographic and ideological balance, stylistic balance is key. I have issues with Edwards, but the man can stump, and he gets people excited. Wes is learning to stump, but the guy has a ready-made movement behind him and star power. Gep's main constit is the backroom ghouls...he doesn't even seem to be able to mobilize the unions anymore.

So, although there's smart guys like Alterman who agree with you, I think you need to consider how important turnout will be, and Gep is just not going to do it.

that I've seen in a long time. I honestly didn't even think they were going to bother to consider him. After all he's done he at least deserves that.

I don't dare yet to hope that he will actually be chosen, but I pray for it nevertheless.

I'm happy to be the bearer of good news! Thanks to Scoop for giving me the info first on DU Clarkies. :)

Oh My God.

Let it be. Let it be. Let it be. Let it be.

Please, oh please.

Go Clark Go !!

..I might be reaching here (because General Clark was my pick for the top spot) but should I be reading into anything that AFTER they've vetted Tricky Dick and John Edwards that they're STILL looking....??

I know that they have to be thorough and all that, but in the real world the only reason to keep looking is because you haven't found the right candidate.....

A Kerry/Clark ticket would be phenominal....and a VERY attractive-looking ticket to the swing and independent voters....PLUS...it means that Wes would be the presumptive Presidential nominee in 2012....

GO WES GO!!!

I saw this too and was going to exictedly post on DU, but I got distracted by meaningless non-Clark stuff like work!

Great spot, tho...that's the most exciting 9th paragraph of a crappy conventional wisdom news story I've seen in a long time!

Strong on international relations and sensible defense. Mr. No Casualties.

word he is getting "vetted."

I'm hoping this is the start of a media drumbeat which will heighten interest in the campaign....just as Kerry starts his "biography" ads.


Be still my heart....Wes juices up the foreign policy message....Kerry can talk domestic stuff.....Wes does FP concisely, with force, and challenges, challenges, challenges......My dream is to witness him FLATTEN Cheyney......

so? Sometime in late May.....

I'm trying to stay positive here, but I think there are too many things working against Clark: one he is a former candidate (I think picking a former candidate needlessly divides the party), it might bring back that BS that flew around toward the end of Clark's campaign (it is such BS that I am not repeating it), and his very limited experience doesn't convince me that he'd be good on the attack (which is a must for a VP candidate). I think he's a fine person and public servant, and I think there are other ways he can continue to serve the country and Democratic Party (he'd be a pretty good Secretary of State or National Security Adviser, or Governor of Arkansas).

I think there are other, better choices:

Mark Warner: Governor of Virginia. All Va. Governors are limited to one term. Just go budget reform past through his state. His package will keep cops and firefighters on the streets and teachers in the schools. He got this passed through a Republican-dominated legislature. He's effective, articulate, well spoken, southern, and successful. He's a rising star within our party. The fact that Virginia only allows its Governors one term might hamstring him a bit, though I think he might be able to put Virginia into play--it's becoming more suburbanized, and more Democratic--slowly, but surely.

Mary Landrieu. Two term Senator from Louisiana. Served as Mayor of New Orleans (I think). Well spoken, articulate, moderate, appeals well to moderate/conservative women. She has gone on the attack in the United States Senate on occasion, and she is pretty good at keeping the Republican's honest. She's from one of the few southern states that has the potential to go Democratic. She has a pretty strong national defense record (she serves on the Armed Services committee), and any Republican attack that says she's unqualified to be commander and chief would reek of sexism. I still think she's the best choice. She has said some complimentary things about Bush in the past, but I think that can be put to rest with this line, "The President hasn't followed through."

Max Cleland. Good friends with Kerry; campaigned on his behalf long before it was the popular thing to do. Served in Vietnam, lost 4 limbs. Had a term in the US Senate, but lost in a bid for re-election after Bush/Chambliss/RNC ran a pathetic smear ad that likened him to Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Picking him would be a reminder that Bush and Company routinely question the patriotism of their political opponents and a reminder that questioning someone's patriotism is not an ok thing to do. He's well spoken, can give a fiery speech, and I'm pretty sure he'd have no problem attacking the administration.

Dick Gephardt--bash him all you want, but he'd be a solid choice. He's well liked by the unions, and do not underestimate the power of the union votes in the battleground states. It's critical to get union voters out to the polls to vote for John Kerry in Michigan and Minnesota among others. If they don't vote, or vote for Bush, Kerry loses period. Gephardt would play well in the industrial Midwest. He has the baggage of being minority leader in an era of partisan redistricting when winning back the house wasn't a realistic goal. He probably got us to as close to a majority as possible in 1998.

So, I think Landrieu would be the best choice, Warner the second best, Gephardt the third, and Cleland the fourth. But that's in my book. It's John Kerry's book that counts. And what it should come down to is: a. who can help him get elected and b. which of those people would make the best president if something were to happen to Kerry.

UNITES THE PARTY...duh!

Clark was many's Democrats 2nd choice. Many Dean supporters wanted Clark on that ticket.

Your analysis that picking a former candidate divides the party is something you made up.....and is not backed up by anything but you saying it. That's not how facts are backed up in my book.

Your meme is just that!

And whomever is going to be the VP will get trashed. Well Clark has already been trashed...and is still standing with pride.

In reference to the old "Rumor" thing.....it ain't gonna get brought back up...cause it was totally debunked. All of it...from the "intern" info to the fact that Clark never made the statement. I've got an email from Jonathan Alter who was responsible for running with the Drudge story in Newsweek. In it, he admits that saying that Clark had anything to do with the rumor was not one of Newsweeks' best performance.

Clark would no longer be alone, fighting against the Democrats and the Republicans.... He'd have the entire Democratic Party, and millions to fight back......for John Kerry!

A. Not everyone, and from reading the polls, I'd imagine DU is a bit more on the liberal side was behind as their second choice Clark in the primary. Edwards was most voters second choice, and he clearly finished second in the primary. If the second choice should get the second spot, then it should be Edwards.

Clark's campaign--which was once the front-running campaign with a shot to derail Dean--faltered because of his inexperience.

He's an ok guy, but the primaries showed he's not ready for the big time. At this is as big time as big time gets. No mistakes is what it's going to take to beat Bush.

You are repeating the media meme put out to extinguish his run. This is what Wes Clark puts on the table for VP...., please give me a better list from another candidate:

Had strong polls numbers nationally and in many states (southwest & the south) until the media tried smearing him....They then gave up and started ignoring him instead....

Southern and comes from a battleground state

Applied and tested National Security credentials

Name recognition nationally and internationally

attractive in a masculine manner with humble star magnetism

Articulate

attack pitbull that doesn't take any shit

attracts both the left and the right and the middle

shores up Veteran vote

shores up Security Mom vote (formally Soccer moms)

Shores up Nascar Dad votes (it's the machismo of a General on the ticket appeal)

was Nato commander who won a war w/t no casualties and is a genuine 4 star

Negotiated peace treaty

Will better Muslim relations (saved 1.4 million Albanian Muslims)
was endorsed by the Arab's largest magazine

Knows the pentagon inside out....Dick Cheney and knows where the bodies are buried

Knows the State Department.....has Security clearance

Self made man from humble roots

38 years of public service with no votes to dig up

Married 36 years to same woman.

Son served in Armed services as well

has voted Republican in the past (this is now an advantage)

has a strong "stand-alone" organization--Internet and on the ground
Stellar fundraiser

Rhode scholar = intelligence

Genuine War hero

Masters in Economics

Has Commander in Chief experience/Executive

Soros liked him....Buffet donated to him....Hollywood loves him

He was the second choice of many...and Many wanted him as Dean's VP

was against the Iraq war and was very prophetic in it's outcome

knows those who work in Washington on both sides of the aisle

not typical politician....not an insider

Ultimate patriot

Can speak on faith

was on debate team at West point.....and when participating in a REAL debate, will wipe the floor with Cheney.

Is a positive selfless man who is energetic, in excellent health
Is not a "I, I, I" man -

The Right Wing is scared of him

Understands what PNAC represents and is not afraid to talk about it.

Originated some of the best lines of the campaign...including, Going Toe to toe with Bush....They will not take this flag away from this party....Bush did not do all that he could do before 9/11....

Is being quoted by Nader and was endorsed by Michael Moore...which shores up those who are supporters of each to do the "right thing".

Was already vetted by the media during the campaign...and vetted by a Republican Congress as recently as 1997.

Want's Bush out really, really, really badly....



There's more......but I'm tired at the moment!

Clark not ony had a shot to derail Dean, there are many indications that he would have. The reason his campaign "faltered" was because it was directed at competing with Dean, who "everybody" thought had the nomination sewn up. Clark started WAY too late to have an alternate strategy. He had no money and no staff in time to play in Iowa, and that's what ultimately did in his campaign.

Clark made a few misteps along the way--they ALL do, no matter how experienced. You don't need to look very hard on DU to find Kerry misstatements now (or watch CNN a few minutes to see a half dozen Bush ads). If Edwards or Dean were the nominee, we'd be hearing theirs instead.

But the RNC and their media dogs went gunning for Clark as they did no other Democratic candidate, exploiting every error. I would bet that if you could pull up Drudge archives, you'd find more attacks on Clark than all of the others combined. And I specifically remember RNC chief Gillespie repeating Drudge lies about Clark, on TV and in the mainstream print media. He scares the livin' shit out of 'em.

But whoever gets the VP nod will be the subject of unrelenting GOP attack, and Clark will fare no worse than any other. Probably better since so much of it's out there already. And I know he's got the right stuff to handle it. There is no one better under pressure--that was one of the hallmarks of his military career.

a Clark entrance. Remember "Nobody does it better....Makes me feel sad for the rest....Nobody does it better than you can....Baby you're the best. Go, Wes, God bless!!!

offensive. I don't want another suit.

I hear a week or two.

i will be jumping for joy if either clark or edwards are on the ticket. i can vote and be proud.

sweeeeeeeeet! :evilgrin::evilgrin: :evilgrin:

Then again if there really was a god Clark would be President. I'm very pleased with this news though.

Despite what some say I think he's handled himself smartly and wisely for the long haul ahead. By moving Clark up the list he's indicated he is willing to confront Bush head on with security issue. He can say Bush has failed (which is the truth) and the inevitable attempts by Rove to question patriotism will backfire.

This frees up Kerry to focus on his strong points where public perception already shows him with an advantage. The economy, jobs, the budget, the deficit, Medicare and the environment.

Another plus: Clark will pass the vetting process with flying colors. He is the last living boy scout - and I mean that in the best possible way. ;) He'll be a VP we can all be proud of.

I can't hardly speak. :D

:kick: :kick: :kick:

DemEx

Clark is the difference.

I can't help it. It's just the way it is.

woo hoo ... those are the 3 qualities the "fathers" of the Dem Party are putting out there as the ones required for VP ... who better than Clark?
From your lips to God's ears on this one :+

and hearing him (zzzzz) with Franken on AAR.

I cannot imagine Gephardt holding his own against Cheney in debate or in talking points stumping for Kerry.

He is Bland, monotonous and ineffectual.

The only thing he has going for him against Cheney is military service - Missouri Air National Guard (1965-1971). But this service record could just legitimize bush's ANG (lack of) service, couldn't it?

Is there one more plus for Gephardt? His daughter came out during the campaign - but Cheney's daughter is gay, as well. Do they cancel each other out?

Having Gephardt on the ticket would dilute Kerry's strength big time. The man adds no juice to the mix.

You made my day!!! I was so down in the mouth yesterday when CNN was talking about all of the VP possibilities and Wes was not even mentioned!! :cry::cry: It really pisses me off how they try to ignore THE BEST VP CANDIDATE there is, but they did the same thing to the best presidential candidate, didn't they? :grr: ANYWAY!....WOOHOO!!!! I am thrilled to FINALLY hear this. :bounce::bounce::bounce::party::party::party:

I'd be happy with Clark or Edwards either one.

A Dream Team!

Dean for Sec. of Health & Human Services?

General Clark is the best!

Wes Clark said he would not have ran if John Kerry was doing better at the time that he threw in his cap. Clark felt that it was important that the Democratic Nominee have National Security experience. That's why he waited so long to announce...and why he got out quickly and endorsed John Kerry.

The media tried to put a wedge between Kerry and Clark......with the rumor of a rumor put out by Drudge. The media was caught with it's pants down.

Both John Kerry and Wes Clark want to get Bush out badly...which makes them a perfect team.

Gives John Kerry a theme of Warriors with brains to go up against Chickenhawks with no hearts!

Clark is the only one that will shore up Kerry's weak National Security flank and define the Kerry ticket as the Heavy Medal War Hero ticket to pit against the Wartime incumbent president and his mighty VP, the War Zeros!

Clark is articulate, Rhode Scholar scary smart, hard angle Good looking but humble, and a real attack dog....though done in a smooth but profound way. He's an outsider who'll get results. The one who was against the war all along. The one that correctly predicted Iraq exactly as we see it today. The one that put the flood lights on Bush's shortcomings on 9/11 long before the other Clarke spoke out. The one who started the discussion of Bush's war service record. The one who started the ball rolling in saying that dissent is patriotic! The one who first stated that the flag did not belong to the Republicans. The one who correctly linked religious faith to Democratic family values, e.g., Jobs and health care. The one called a Republican throughout the primaries (good for the general election I believe!)

When the Republican party starts talking about not switching horses in the middle of the stream (cause now they've got it right!)....we can say....BUT THE HORSE WE GOT IS WAY MORE EXPERIENCED FOLKS!

We get more Veteran votes, we get more southern vote, we get the Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oaklahoma, Wisconsin and New Mexico vote....We even get tbe majority NASCAR Dad votes plus the Security Mom votes (formerly known as the Soccer Moms)....hell they may be hesitant in voting Kerry....but they ain't gonna turn their backs on a real live 4 star General....As they start realizing that the Bush Machismo is nothing but a myth! They will happily vote for a southern General during these scary times(yes, they are scared....just like us of what Bush will do next...just don't want to admit it! The NASCAR Dads want someone to vote for.......it's all about mano mano imagery and pride for them!

The April Marist poll showed that the issue of National Security tops the concerns of 53% of Americans (the War on Terra (33%) and the Iraq Situation (20%)) while the economy is at 44% http://www.maristpoll.marist.edu/usapolls/PZ040426.htm

"but support from women is not Kerry's biggest problem. Closing the male side of the gender gap is." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4863243 /

The quote above from this article should remind us all of the meme that was being floated in New Hampshire back in January (the one that spurred all of the "sweater stories"....that Wes was not polling as well with women....but was doing extremely well with the male vote).

And the best part is that the Repugs already threw all of their garbage at Clark during the Primaries...

Shelton said, and I quote....when asked about the comments that he made on Wes Clark's character....when called by the Hague Procecutor, during the Misolovic trial back in December....."it's just politics".

This election is a War to win back our Democracy...and we need goddamn WARRIORS ON THE TICKET!
Ain't no doubt about it, We must win!

Clark is so lucky to have so many intelligent, informed fans to speak up for him. :hugs: to everyone.

:hi: Long time.

to make Cheney cry on national television. Chris Matthews to Peggy Noonan style.

Scuttlebutt posted on one of the Clark mailing lists.....

I thought I had heard a week or so later for his PAC to get started...

Fingers crossed this all means he'll be VP!!!

Arkansas is close in the last three polls; 5 points, 3 points and flat tied--plenty close enough for Clark to carry. So he can deliver his home state, which unfortunately neither Edwards nor Evan Bayh can. (NC and IND are dead-red states right now) We need Arkansas and New Hampshire and Florida because we may lose PA and Oregon makes me nervous because of Nader.