I thought Gen. Clark was great on "Crossfire"

[Composed Thinker]

I just listened to the audio interview. I thought he was terrific: he was clear, concise, and didn't make asinine statements (i.e. "I will overturn any Supreme Court decision that..."). And although some seem to be angry that he hasn't said he's a Democrat, isn't it possible that he's doing this to help him in what may be a future campaign?

[foxglove1]

1. I thought he was great also

Well spoken, concise, clear language. First in his graduating class at West Point ... Rhodes Scholar ... graduated from Oxford. He not only looks like a president, he has *the voice*, too

Sue

[Nashyra]

2. I thought he was pretty good too;

I think he is using not declaring as a strategy for exposure and using it to be able to draw centrist and moderates from the Repug party to look at him before he gets labled as a "liberal"

[Composed Thinker]

3. Exactly

I can't imagine him running as a Republican with the views he's expressed.

[HootieMcBoob]

4. there's no way he's a repug

or running as a repug. They wouldn't stand for anybody running on the pro choice anti-iraq platform that he has been pushing. He's a fiscal conservative, against the bush tax cuts, etc. He would send Bush out to make him clean the latrines if he ran against him. I'm relatively confident that he will be running and that he will run as a Dem. I want to know what his position is on a national health insurance program is though.

[Catch22Dem]

6. He has talked about it before

in so many words. He has stated that in the military, EVERYONE gets healthcare from the highest general to the "day one" (newbie, boot, pinger, whatever you wanna call them.) Said America needs to take care if its citizens the same way.

[zekeson]

34. Its in his book

http://www.draftclark.com/domestic.shtml
Safety Net
"I grew up in an armed forces that treated everyone as a valued member of the team. Everyone got healthcare, and the army cared about the education of everyone's family members. It wasn't the attitude that you find in some places, where people are fending for themselves and the safety net doesn't work." (Source: Waging Modern War)

[Composed Thinker]

7. Why do you think he's a fiscal conservative?

[Catch22Dem]

5. Audio?

Where can I find the audio interview?

[Composed Thinker]

9. Here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=116308&mesg_id=116308#116487

[eileen from OH]

8. Hmmm, I dunno. . .

I was a tad disappointed that he didn't clearly STATE that he was against the Iraqi war. I mean, he said it in so many words but, I am thoroughly sick of politicians who say things "in so many words" instead of answering the damn question. (Not to mention the fact that he won't even admit to being a Dem. This doesn't bother me from a strategical standpoint but it really feeds into the "ashamed of being a Dem" crap.)

Also, he really hedged on the "don't ask, don't tell" thing. It struck me as a politically expedient answer, though, to be fair, he knows a helluva lot about the military and what will and will not fly.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a Dean supporter. And, like many, many, MANY Dean supporters, I would love to see Clark on the ticket. But I'm also worried that if he runs for the big job it will turn into one of those "oh, those whacky Democrats with their candidates-du-jour" things. And he will draw oxygen from ALL the candidates, adding to the "none of these guys is good enough" stuff, they need a "savior" - when we know that ANY of them would be better than what we have now.

eileen

[Composed Thinker]

10. Uh

When Novak or Carville asked him if he remarked that the war with Iraq was the "greatest strategic blunder since..." he said yes.

[eileen from OH]

13. Yeah, but. . .

There was another point (and I'll have to wait until the transcript is posted) where I thought he was asked, point-blank, if he was against the war and he didn't say just a simple "yes" with an explanation, but instead launched into something considerably vaguer.

Could be wrong, just remember that I was disappointed in his answer and it sounded (to me, at the time) as someone who was hedging his bets.

Don't get me wrong - I really love the guy, but, despite what we may think of his name recognition, there's also a lot of "Wesley Who?" out there. And this from friends who follow the news. What we don't need is yet another candidate (for the top job) who has to work on name recognition.

eileen

[Composed Thinker]

15. Hmm

I don't think the question merited a one word answer, but that's just me.

And I think you're right about the name recognition factor. That's why it might be better to have him as a VP candidate.

[Hamlette]

23. its pretty easy to see why Dean supporters

don't like Clark. The nomination is Clark's if he wants it. All the rest of them are dead if Clark runs.

We not only need to get someone who the Dems like but who the Repugs can't destroy. Clark's the guy.

I predict a Clark Kerry ticket. Maybe Clark Edwards. Dean isn't too liberal, he's too mean. Or at least he comes across that way...which is, after all, what counts.

[killbotfactory]

39. This Dean supporter likes Clark.

And they seem to have similar political views. Dean even said he took advice from him and used him as an example of what kind of people he would surround himself with in the white house.

If a couple Dean supporters don't like him, that doesn't mean all the supporters don't like him.

[Woodstock]

11. He keeps his head under pressure

Just finished listening, I think Clark did very well on Crossfire. Thanks Wonk for the mp3.

The Diane Rehm interview was a good one too:

http://www.wamu.org/dr/2003/drarc_030721.html

[otohara]

12. He Knows When To Stop An Answer

probably all that training in the military - If he weren't such a smart guy, I would be leary of having a military guy. But then again, he might stop all this nonsense spending in the Pentagon on systems that won't protect us from a guy with a box cutter.

[unfrigginreal]

14. I hope you're genuine CT

Clark's appearance was fantastic. I'm starting to wonder about all of your posts though. It's probably just my tinfoil hat, but you have made an inordinate amount of posts about Clark. Again, I hope that you're just a strong supporter.

[Composed Thinker]

16. Definitely

I think he's exactly what the Democrats need right now.

[Adjoran]

17. Clark's a great guy

and he would make a good VP, especially for someone like Dean without extensive foreign policy experience. I don't think we're desperate enough to look at a candidate with no elective experience at all as some kind of savior, though. If he wants to get in and get his hands dirty working the caucauses and primaries like everybody else, we'll see what he is made of soon enough.

[maine_raptor]

18. On Clark

At the risk of being sorry I'm not wearing my heat-proof undergarments at the moment:

In order to vote out his shrubnessand all his evil, the Dems need a candiate that can win votes and not just at the White House level either. And in the modern age of elections that person has GOT to look the part (sorry, folks, I don't like it any better either). Ronnie Raygun proves my point.

Aside; If your candiate IS an idiot, then make sure the news media makes your opponent look like a worse idiot; but that's another story.

So you need a candiate that looks PRESIDENTIAL.

As for Clark's stance on the "issues", so far from what I've seen, he looks acceptable to most main-stream D's on the major ones (and his "review taxes from the top down" idea is a helllva sound bite and appealing issue).

I'll reserve judgement on him for now, but I think he's coming in as a D. And quite frankly if the D's want to win in 2004, they'd be well advised to welcome him with open arms.

I'm sitting here in Maine, where the unemployment rate is 30%, and people are grumbling about Bush, but don't like the "looks" of the current crop of D candiates. IMHO, with Clark at the head of the ticket, in 2004 the D's could harvest those votes.

You may now commense with your flame.

[Composed Thinker]

19. Do you happen to live in a liberal part of Maine?

Or does your area not really fit any labels? I'm not trying to start an argument; I'm just curious.

[maine_raptor]

20. By no MEANS liberal,,,,,,LOL

Nope, I'm over 50 files north of Bangor in the shadow of Mt K, the end of the Appalachian Trail.

This is or was I should say, "Paper Country". In the last 2+ years, several paper mills have claosed and what was a thriving economy is now a trickle. It's not only the paperworkers, it's mom and pop stores, banks, food stores, book stores, etc.

Politically, it's big Rush/Howie Carr time up here. In fact during the 1920's this was big KKK country, beleive it or not! Local library has a photo of Main Street during a march in the 20's.

But, they're not happy campers right now. And Bush is wearing thin. Someone like Clark, I think, would attract their attention. And with such a contrast to Bush, well I think a lot would jump.

As for how well I know my community, lets put it this way: I was voted in as Mayor 3 times.

[Composed Thinker]

21. Right

It sucks that they are in a crappy position, but it's good that they are turning against Bush.

[PurityOfEssence]

22. I thought he was terrible

He didn't answer questions and he has a timid and almost bewildered look.

I like the guy for coming forward with the administrations attempts to get him to pin 911 on Iraq immediately after the incident, but I've found his commentaries on CNN very ho-hum.

He actually sounded and looked better than I've ever seen him, but...

The sense I get from his proponents is the fear that anyone left of center is unable to beat Bush and that we need some kind of warrior to dispel the "soft on defense" myth. Both of these points are defensive and doomed.

To me, he seems to be the "not this" candidate: he's not too far left, he's not just a peacenik, he's not some northerner or some non-white, he's not this and he's not that.

What IS he?

Did I miss something? Yes, he's smart, yes he's got business experience, but where's the verve? What does he STAND for?

[Julien Sorel]

24. What questions didn't he answer?

[joanski01]

25. I thought he answered all

of the questions extremely well. I was especially impressed with his answer to Novak's question about whether he would have voted for the Iraq resolution. Clark said he would have voted for a resolution to get UN approval. If no UN approval, the chimp* would have to come back to Congress and get approval for an attack. He said the chimp* did neither. I thought he was great.

[Kahuna]

31. There was one. Bob asked him if he supports, "partial birth abortion."

He did fumble a bit around that question which is understandable. That's not the kind of question you want to give a yes or no answer to during the rapid-fire segment.

[Kahuna]

30. Oh boy. I don't know what interview you watched. Is that a Deanie..

talking point? This is the second time I've seen someone describe Clark as having a bewildered expression. What a load. He was calm and composed the whole time. He looked incredibly handsome. His face is totally symetrical. He smiled confidently after he answered every question. He must have been advised to keep smiling because he has one helluva smile. And he uses it to his best advantage. His eyes looked very settled. Even a bit tired. I know because I rewatched the video last night and mad not that his eyes appeared a little heavy. Hardly, wide-eyed and bewildered.

[Palacsinta]

26. What was his answer about ban on part. birth abortion?

I know he flubbed "I'm pro-life" and then corrected himself, but I can't remember his answer to Novak's question.

(and my purely physical reaction.......OOH BABY!! He has the sweetest smile....warms up his handsome face.)

[Kahuna]

32. He didn't answer it. And I say good for him. That's not the kind of

question you answer during rapid-fire where you give a yes or no answer. Clark is no dummy.

And yes, he does have the sweetest smile. But if you notice when he laughs out loud, his eye-teeth look like fangs. He'll need those fangs to take out smirk and cheney. :evilgrin:

[dbt]

27. Destiny may place Clark in the White House, you know

After all, the only sure cure for a Bush administration seems to be the election of a Rhodes Scholar from Arkansas.

:evilgrin:
dbt

[Q]

28. Clark supporters should do a web search and some reading...

...about his background before they get too excited.

[Kahuna]

33. Such as?

Any suggestions?

[zekeson]

35. Must be referring to

how excited the Freepers got about his stint with the NATO. Lots of misinformation on the topic, lots of politics at the international level and Clark took a lot of heat. It will be used by the uninformed and by those who are looking for a cheap, negative soundbite.

[Q]

36. I'm not a fReeper or looking for a negative 'soundbite'...

...but I will NOT vote for Clark. There are many reasons...among them being that he has used military options when they weren't necessary and his reluctance to talk about being a Democrat.

[zekeson]

37. was not referring to you

guess it could have been taken that way. I apologize. I think his decision to not talk about his party affiliation has been well explained in numerous threads so I won't tackle that here. If you would, which unnecessary military options are you referring to?

[DemExpat]

29. WooHooooooo!!!!!

Bring on the Rhodes Scholar!

:kick: :kick: :kick:

Clark does look like the only man who can do the trick.....

DemEx

[Jonte_1979]

38. It was mediocre

He didn't elaborate enough on any of the issues. Saying that federal expenditure should not exceed federal revenues seems self-evident to me.