For General (Clark), Mostly Salutes or Hoots

[DoveTurnedHawk]

More than 40 years ago, a high school swim team here showed up one man short for a state meet. Everyone assumed they would forfeit the relay race -- the organizers, the school, even the team, which was resigned to loser status. But the teenage captain had a different plan.

Young Wes Clark announced that he would swim twice in the relay so the team could compete.

<...>

Wes Clark won the relay for Hall High School that day, demonstrating the traits that would define his life and his career: a supreme confidence in himself, an absolute disregard for conventional wisdom and a relentless force of will. Those gifts, and an undisputed brilliance, would carry him through a modest childhood shaped by profound loss, through West Point to the highest levels of the Army, and into the presidential race today -- his first foray into politics.

<...>

Scott Thompson, a colleague in the White House fellows program, is indebted to Clark for emotional support and advice when Thompson -- who was then married with children -- decided to publicly acknowledge that he was gay.

Dan Christman, a West Point friend and retired general, said that when he became very ill with spinal meningitis in the early 1980s -- before screening techniques for HIV-tainted blood were fully developed -- Clark doggedly canvassed their entire War College class to find a suitable blood donor for his friend, and he did.

<...>

Ultimately, <Clark> makes no apologies. "In any organization, there are personality conflicts," he said. "The worst thing you want in the military is a guy who follows the gang, 'Hey, I'll just go along to get along.' I was never that kind of a leader."

<...>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45166-2003Oct18.html

[DoveTurnedHawk]

1. Simply an INCREDIBLE Article

Please read it. Thanks.

DTH

[FrenchieCat]

4. Finally, calling a spade a spade! Europe's finger's crossed!

I'm glad he was no brown noser....and it will be good to have someone in the WH that actually is ambitious and smart....

instead of the current lazy and stupid pResident in there now!

[sandnsea]

5. Dean must have evolved

"It is clear General Clark also supported the war at this time."

That's what he said Thursday.

So either General Clark isn't "saying the same thing" Dean was saying, or Dean was supporting the war as well. I guess we'll see which story Dean decides to stick to.

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=9936&security=1&news_iv_ctrl=1301

[Julien Sorel]

6. Like most inveterate liars, he'll see no problem with sticking

to both stories. For someone like Dean, the truth is whatever serves his ends.

[ozone_man]

7. I think it depends when you ask Clark.

He supported the war early on, but then changed his mind after it seemed like the thing to do. Dean is right, he is against the war and he was for the war.

[Shakespeare]

8. No, he DIDN'T support the war early on...let's debunk the myth once more:

Anyone who's watched Clark respond to questions on this should have this straight by now. He was NOT in favor of the war, and would not have voted for. This is what he would have voted for, so kindly note the difference:

HE WOULD'VE VOTED FOR A RESOLUTION THAT GAVE THE US LEVERAGE WITH THE UN, AND THAT WOULD HAVE ALSO REQUIRED BUSH TO COME BACK TO CONGRESS FOR AUTHORIZATION BEFORE LAUNCHING A WAR.

Do you understand what he's saying? Two things: vote for a resolution that gives you leverage with the UN, and also require Bush to come back to Congress for PERMISSION to go after Iraq. That IS NOT voting in favor of war.

WHY is that so complicated for people to understand? If you don't get what Clark's been saying about the war, then you're either 1. stupid, or 2. willfully misrepresenting what Clark has said.

Jesus, people. It's not that difficult.

[ozone_man]

13. I will believe you if you can show me on paper

where Clark outlined this position.

[Shakespeare]

14. New York Times, September 18 (among other places)

Google is your friend, ozone_man.

From http://www.clarkmyths.com/myth3.html

The New York Times reported September 18 (taken from clarkmyths.com because I'm not paying $$ to access the NYT archives):

"General Clark said that he would have advised members of Congress to support the authorization of war but that he thought it should have had a provision requiring President Bush to return to Congress before actually invading. Democrats sought that provision without success."

And this:

"Let's make one thing real clear, I would never have voted for this war," Clark said before a speech at the University of Iowa. "I've gotten a very consistent record on this. There was no imminent threat. This was not a case of pre-emptive war. I would have voted for the right kind of leverage to get a diplomatic solution, an international solution to the challenge of Saddam Hussein."

from his speech in Iowa, reported in a wire story here: http://www.adn.com/24hour/iraq/military/story/1004770p-7049576c.html

Other places--just a few picked at random from a long list of results on Google--where you can read the same thing:

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/6814922.htm
http://www.msnbc.com/news/968595.asp
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1050721,00.html

[ozone_man]

15. I don't see anything here dated at the time of the war onset

that would indicate a position. "I would have" does not really prove anything. Do you have something from back in March or April or better yet last year when the Iraq war resolution was voted on? The folks in congress (Lieberman, Kerry, Gephardt, Edwards) have a record to go by. Dean made his position clear back before or at the onset of the war. That's all I'm asking for.

Positions 6 months or a year after the fact don't have much weight. Also, there was alot of flip flopping in September, which has me puzzled. Either you're for it or against it.

"Let's make one thing real clear, I would never have voted for this war," Clark said before a speech at the University of Iowa. "I've gotten a very consistent record on this. There was no imminent threat. This was not a case of pre-emptive war. I would have voted for the right kind of leverage to get a diplomatic solution, an international solution to the challenge of Saddam Hussein."

[Shakespeare]

16. ofergodsakes...

The NYT piece is dated September 18, which is when people were INCORRECTLY calling it a "flip-flop." He gave a complex answer to a complex question, which unfortunately doesn't fit into the business-as-usual soundbyte politics.

At the time of the onset of war, he was on CNN (as their paid military analyst) consistently saying there was not cause to go into Iraq. Your insistence that he answer a question about why he would or would not have voted for it six months ago is a little silly, considering he wasn't a candidate until September--ergo, why would a reporter have asked him about it? In the small handful of interviews he gave between March and September, he consistently spoke out that Bush did not have cause to invade.

I don't mind hearing questions asked about Clark--I certainly have plenty of my own. I just get very, very tired of the intellectual dishonesty behind a lot of the posts here that are made simply to bash the man for any reason.

I do not, however, expect this to in any way mitigate your anti-Clark position. :eyes:

[ozone_man]

17. So you can't show me a position paper or memo

that might indicate his position back in Spring when we were trying to stop the war. I don't watch CNN, for the same reason I don't watch FOX. Maybe CNN archives has a copy of his discourse that would indicate his position. If you are convinced of this, then I will take your word, but If I were him, I would get some of these transcripts or a video clip to post on his web site.

OK, Sat. night, time to log off.:party:

[MIMStigator]

18. Try this one

I remember seeing an article he wrote for CNN before the war. Still searchign for the article but looks like Joe Conanson mentioned it in the NY Observer

<snip>
Still, there can be little doubt about Mr. Clark’s basic approach to security policy, or his deep differences with the President. He has outlined their disagreement many times. In dealing with Saddam, he wrote in a prescient essay for CNN last October, the United States must act "multilaterally, with friends and allies, with every possible effort to avoid the appearance of yet another Christian and Jewish stab at an Islamic country, with force as a last resort, and with a post-conflict plan in place to assure that the consequences of our action do not supercharge the al-Qaeda recruiting machine. It’s not just about winning a war—it’s also about winning the peace."
<snip>

[MIMStigator]

20. here it is

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/10/timep.iraq.viewpoints.tm/

Let's Wait to Attack

[Shakespeare]

21. Thanks, MIM....

I thought his rebuttal to my links was pretty lame, and your addition of the CNN links further reinforces what he doesn't want to admit--that Clark has always been against the war in Iraq.

:hi:

[Julien Sorel]

19. 'A lot of flip flopping?'

I think you need to document this. From a Dean supporter, 'a lot of flip flopping' would have to be enough to put IHOP out of business, considering that Dean's symbol is becoming the waffle. So show me this 'flip flopping.'

And you were the one who stated he was for the war; you never provided evidence supporting that statement, and now you're demanding that other people provide you evidence that he opposed the war. Let's get some consistency.

[leetrisck]

2. Now compare that to Slimy Shrub who won't

answer a question about his life before 45 yrs of age

[diplomats]

3. Thanks for posting this, DTH

:)

[Dr Satan]

9. help

Im trying to find what exactly is "breaking" about this news.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

10. The Fact That It Was Published Today

And is about a candidate currently running for President.

DTH

[GOPBasher]

11. If Clark is the nominee,

he will beat Bush. But ONLY if it's a fair election, so something must be done about black box voting.

[MIMStigator]

12. Fantastic bio of President Clark

GO CLARK