Why is the media "downplaying" Clark's comments on MTP...?

about Bush not protecting our nation on 9/11? About the "buck stopping with the CinC"? I thought Clark more or less stated in no uncertain terms that Bush Knew and he did nothing about it. In my opinion, his comments were very damning toward Bush and, if it had been another candidate, I wonder if it would have been disregarded as were Clark's comments this morning?

Clark has not cut Bush a lot of slack on 9/11. He is saying things that no other Democrat is willing to say, it appears to me. Are they afraid to say such a thing that Bush Knew? Is that too conspiratorial for their campaigns? ...even if it is true? How long can they continue to cover for the gross incompetence of 9/11? How could people possibly vote for a person that permitted such an act to occur? Do they now think that he has the experience to prevent it from happening the next time, since he was asleep the last time around?

There is absolutely no proof to back up the LIHOP theories, and there is good reason why people who subscribe to those theories, before the Kean commission or any other major investigation is finished, are not taken seriously by important and/or powerful people

Clark is not a kook, just because he doesn't believe in the scapegoating of the intelligence community that resulted in operation ignore(not operation LIHOP)

I thought he was layin responsibility at the feet of George w Bush.

But he didn't go as far as LIHOP. :)

which is about zero.

But not sole responsibility which the LIHOP people advocate

about why the media are acting like they're just not hearing what's being said regarding 9/11. their families are being threatened, the media is complicit in LIHOP and/or MIHOP, or they've been stepforded. cut them and see if they bleed. they have children - they must at some point when their head hits the pillow at night have a glimmer of something like a conscience or the least little bit of concern for their children's futures. i just don't get it. too perplexing. guess it's up to us to find the answer and expose it.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3849657/
MR. RUSSERT: General, you also said something else. And this is how the Baton Rouge Advocate captured it: "Clark said the president `didn't do his duty' to protect American from attack on September 11, 2001. `I think the record's going to show he could have done a lot more to have prevented 9/11 than he did.'" What else could George Bush possibly have done, and why didn't anyone else in Congress or in the military suggest things that could have protected us on 9/11?

GEN. CLARK: Well, when this administration came to office, Tim, they were told that the greatest threat to American security was Osama bin Laden. And yet, on 9/11, there was still no government plan, no plan sanctioned by the president of the United States, no plan directed to go after that threat of Osama bin Laden. The ship of state was on autopilot. People in agencies were doing what they had been told to do. But the top leaders in the government hadn't focused the resources of the United States of America to take action against the greatest threat facing America. And that's the job of the president of the United States, especially when it comes to national security. The buck stops on his desk. He's the man, or woman, who's supposed to pull things together and get the focus right. He didn't do it.

:)

last Monday...the local News...Republican Dominated mentioned nothing....

http://www.pensacolanewsjournal.com/news/123003/Local/ST004.shtml

bizzare to say the least....


http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/election_2004_/2004/01/should_the_democrats_be_describing_911_as_completely_unforseeable.php


And this is the guy that used to accuse Clark of being a Republican!

The Anti Dean Jihad apparently doesn't !

Not particularly about 9/11, but should have been prepared for 9/11; is what Clark is saying.

is the media downplaying anything? Have any major newspaper, magazine or Op-Ed articles been published since this morning? Have any TV pundit shows been recorded and aired since this morning?
They MAY downplay it, but it seems a little early to come to that conclusion. :shrug:

about him from the media all night. The media has a total blackout. When Dean was on MTP all the stations talked about him all day. The last time Clark was on MTP they did the same thing. When Dean was on Crossfire he was discussed constantly. We as a nation...really have to be concerned that our media is in control of our primaries and the 2004 election. Even the Dean people should see that and ask why he is the darling of Corp Media and why the Clark blackout? Doesn't that tell us something? I'm worried and scared. WE ARE GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER 4 YEARS OF BUSH! (and a stacked deck of conservative Supreme Court Judges) Yes...I'm SCARED...DAMN SCARED!

Just realized...that was my 100th post. Patting self on back.

was a debate today as well - Clark missed out on a PR opportunity - most of the discussion today was about the debate. Had Clark done both, there probably would have been more talk about his comments in both MTP and debate.

Having said that, Clark has not been the only person to say these things - other candidates have stated the exact same ideas - it's something I believe the entire Democratic Party (and probably some Republicans) believe. Bush and his administration dropped the ball. That's why they are stalling on the 9/11 report. Not only did they screw up dealing with Al Queda, he and his team then took the "opportunity" of a national tragedy to roll out "new marketing" aka PNAC wetdream war with Iraq. And then he lied to us about the reasoning for that war as well (which many of us saw through from the beginning).

And we're worried about beating this guy?

Yeap. The most newsworthy part of the show - the Thanksgiving skying joke...

Clark Says His Dean Joke Fell Flat

1 hour, 47 minutes ago

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040104/ap_on_el_pr/clark_dean_1
By WILLIAM C. MANN, Associated Press Writer

Forget about tax plan, forget about W and 9.11, reducing veterans' benefits - these are non-HD related stories, therefore boring to AP.

from Clark's MTP appearance was to replay Clark's statement that he wasn't running for VP.

So they switched to candidates.


(Clark has said this many times in many forums, sticking the buck on Bush. He has called for a criminal inquiry into the misleading into unnecessary war. So the media want to know, will he be Dean's VP???)

:shrug:

the media, to their delight, could've portrayed him as the anti-dean.

The main issue is presenting the best candidate for President to the voters.

Not rubbing their face in the feces they dropped when allowing W to take over the WH in 2000, by staying home in disgust over the miserable "Nader and the Gorebots" show.

Eyes on the ball: it's W, stupid!

(Edited to clarify that the last sentence was a generic rib, and not aimed at slinkerwink)

that the roundtable discussion following Clark's MTP interview was all Dean, Dean, Dean. I would think they would discuss the interview that had JUST been done, but NO...Dean, Dean, Dean. Safire said TWICE...."I hope Howard Dean gets the nomination.....he'll go down like McGovern." They cemented by firm belief that the media pundits are RW, WH talking heads who are working for KKKRove.

The media is complicit in selecting our candidate for us and it sucks!

We have to get Clark nominated and hand the media their asses on a platter! They CANNOT choose our candidate for us. :grr: