Clark Was a Republican. Does This Bother Anyone?

[Composed Thinker]

I'm not bothered by this as much as I thought I might be. I think that his values are most important, and while I don't agree with everything he says, he seems to be firmly in line with many beliefs of the Democratic party. So no matter what label he attaches to himself, what he actually says is more important.

Does anyone else agree?

[fertilizeonarbusto]

1. no

Reagan was a Democrat. The converts are more zealous than the born. 'Nuff said.

[liberalnurse]

5. They say that about new Catholics and

ex-smokers too. This has been your thought for the day. O8)

[meegbear]

2. People change parties ...

if he's on our side, then more power to him.

[Caution]

3. Thurmond was Democrat

People change. As a liberal I believe that people have the capacity for greatness and change. I seriously doubt i will vote for Clark in the primary but it has nothing to do with his past political affiliation. I won't vote for him because he has given me no reason to vote for him. He's a candidate and a democrat. Other than that his stances on the issues are vague. Until he can provide substance I'll stick with who I intend to vote for. If Clark comes out with a statement on the issues and falls in line with my beliefs, well, I may re-evaluate.

[hedda_foil]

69. Thurmond was not the kind of Democrat you're thinking of.

He was an old-style Southern Democrat. Nothing liberal about those old boys at all. He didn't change his thinking at all.

[leftwingnut]

4. yes...it bothers me....

like someone else said somewhere in these threads...'i don't want Clark to forget he's a democrat if/when he gets the nomination'...imo...he's pretending to be a democrat right now...

[WilliamPitt]

6. I love the ability for humans to be able to change their minds

based upon facts and evidence. It is, in the end, all that keeps us from descending into chaos.

[bowens43]

21. Facts and evidence, that's the problem.....

with Clark, WE have no facts or evidence to support his claim that he is actually a Democrat. With the other candidates we have, at very least, voting records and a verifiable history. Maybe his views have changed, maybe they haven't. Maybe he is testing the water to see which views garner the most support or attention. So, yes, it does bother me that he voted for reagan, reagan was one of the worst.

[JVS]

26. Yes

There are young people graduating from college who have more of a political record than this man.

[JVS]

7. Maybe it is the parties that are doing the changing while people...

remain themselves.

[GainesT1958]

8. Doesn't bother me a bit; he's seen the light!

Just as John Kerrey, another decorated vet of Viet Nam, did.:kick:

Not to mention Jim Jeffords--even if his reg. sheet says "Independent", we know his heart's with US now! :D

B-)

[leftwingnut]

13. jim jeffords...

'moving' to an independent and Clark just one day deciding he's a democrat...is not the same thing...

[ronnykmarshall]

36. Oh please!

[GainesT1958]

9. Doesn't bother me a bit; he's seen the light!

Just as Bob Kerrey, another decorated vet of Viet Nam, did.:kick:

Not to mention Jim Jeffords--even if his reg. sheet says "Independent", we know his heart's with US now! :D

B-)

[Composed Thinker]

11. When did Kerrey become a Democrat?

[WilliamPitt]

17. Delete this

My bad.

[Composed Thinker]

10. Many here have made good points

[ronzo]

12. I agree, no big deal.

I'm an ex-repub myself, I can't blame the guy. As if the gop wasn't squirrely enough, now they've been hijacked by the neo-con hawks. What a mess they've made...

[bif]

14. Yeah? So was Jeffords.

there once was a time in this country when there were moderate and even liberal Republicans. So who cares if a moderate Repub switches sides?

[KoKo]

15. It doesn't seem to bother any of his supporters....but it bothers the rest

of us. Having had to observe Lieberman, Zill Miller and Biden (that shifty character)& Bayh. We know how much damage Repuglican Light values can do. That's why some of us are concerned. You have to know someones core values as closely as you can.....we can see the votes of the Liberman types....but who knows what lurks in Wes's heart? And who is friends are? Who he pals with.....who he might owe favors to.......all of that. Chimp was a one term Govenor and a put up job. Maybe if he'd truly been a politician he wouldn't have been the way he is......and could have stayed a failed CEO working for Poppy's people and we wouldn't have had to suffer with him.

All I know about Clark is that he says he thinks he's a Democrat now......and people like him because he was in the military. :eyes: I want to see more of a "core" Democratic belief.....How has he practiced it in his life.....

I imagine we will see more as he campaigns and debates to make a better judgement on what his beliefs are.

[leftwingnut]

28. exactly! good points eom

nt

[gully]

114. I'm with you Koko01 I'll watch with interest...

It bothers me greatly, but perhaps a converted Dem is even stronger in his/her convictions. We have many posters here who are former Repugs, KWIM?

I am quite concerned about it, but I plan to give him a shot. I think it's hard for me personally as I was 'raised' a liberal. My dh was raised a staunch Repug, and after about 10 years of my making sense, he's converted. ;)

[lindashaw]

16. Nope, one of my best friends in a Republican Justice of the Peace.

I always vote for her.

[otohara]

18. Yes - I Want To Know Why

I'd like to know what part of their extreme right-wing platform was so appealing for so long that kept him on the right. Was it just for the tax cuts?

[Cappurr]

19. What you don't realize is that he was in the military...

So when you say "He was a Republican" its rather meaningless. He could not participate in any political activity whatsoever. He may not have even registered to a particular party. He DID vote for Nixon (ugh) Ford (so did I) Regan and Bush I. He began voting Democrat with Clinton in 92 and voted for Al Gore.

I just finished Sidney Blumenthal's book. And he talks about Clark a little. And from everything I read, Clark seems progressive globally and one of the reasons he was hated by the Pentagon was because he was considered too progressive. (And because he wouldn't toe the party line).

[bloom]

20. It bothers me that he was at a Republican fundraiser 2 years ago

even if it was local. I've been to these kinds of things and people take it pretty seriously - who the speakers are and all.

It worries me that maybe he just wants a promotion and doesn't really care what he has to say to get it.

http://www.politicsus.com/campaign%20documents/091703APClark051201.htm

[Cappurr]

41. You gotta be kidding...

Do you know how many of those local yokel things I have gone to? Friends sell tickets. You can't say no. They are your friends. They beg you to come. So you go. Then you leave. Then you vote for who you want to vote for.

[otohara]

44. Give Money To The GOP - No Way

I draw the line at giving money to help elect these people.

[roughsatori]

55. He was the Keynote speaker, the draw to get the funds

Not at all the same thing as what you suggest. That is raising money for the enemy. You may not consider the GOP an enemy, many of his supporters seem not to be bothered by it--I and many others are disturbed by that.

[bloom]

56. He was the Keynote speaker at a Republican fundraiser

"Clark was the keynote speaker at the Pulaski County Republican Committee's annual Lincoln Day dinner."

yes - it's small town - but we always got someone to fire up the Democratic base for ours. It seems odd to me for him to speak at a Republican one and turn around and run for the Democratic Presidential race.

[JVS]

57. So he helps them get money and we are supposed to help him become

president? BULLSHIT.

If he gets the nomination, I'll vote for a more legitimate Democrat, myself.

[Cappurr]

80. Do you have a transcript of what he said...

That might be important to know. If it was Rah Rah Repugs then he's toast. But if it was his thoughts on global affairs, it is a horse of a different color.

[bloom]

106. I doubt one exists - being a county event

The best that I can figure - is that the references to what he said about Reagan are be in an archived article in US News... ($).

Chances are - being a rah, rah, Republican event - he probably said rah, rah, Republican types of things. That is how those things are.

[roughsatori]

47. One report from the event says he talked highly of Reagan

at the dinner, and did not ever mention Clinton, this was in 2001. Reagan was an awful President. He was the one who started the Shrub idea of: All Americans can get ahead--IF you are willing to leave the poor and disabled behind.

His followers make all kinds of claims about what he believes, most of it is extrapolation based on a few sentences. When I go to the original sources at the links they provide it does not back up what they claim.

I will not vote for Clark, even if he wins the primary. And yes I will vote for anyone else who should win the primary.

[Abe Linkman]

22. What DOES bother me

Is that I've yet to find anything in Clark's background that suggests he has any capacity for empathizing with people who are less well-off than he is. Here's a man who has lived on the public dole (and very well, thank you) since the early 60's, and after being removed from his last command post three months early, returned to Little Rock where he promptly went to work lining up "pork" contracts for private interests doing business with the Government.

He was never known as a soldier's General. Indeed, he was well known as a vain (had his stars dipped in silver, or something similar), brown-nosing, arrogant man who showed a regard only for those who could be of use to him personally (like Bill Clinton - who fought like H--- for himself, but caved in to the right on policy that affects US).

Why would anyone give their support to a rich General - unless he were to begin advocating for the rest of us to be able to enjoy some of the same "socialistic" amenities he has enjoyed he has enjoyed for 40 years?

[tabasco]

35. The military is "living on the public dole?????"

I recommend you spend a day or two in the military and find out what a tough job it is. Do you think he started out as a generral? Last time i checked, officers start out as a Second Lieutenant at about 25K per year.

[Composed Thinker]

86. What are you talking about?

Who hasn't backed up what has been printed/said?

[bif]

23. And Barry Goldwater saw the light

When he got older. He became very liberal, at least according to an article I read about him several years ago.

[Ilsa]

24. I'm an ex-repuke.

It took me awhile, but I changed parties when I was about 29.

[Skittles]

25. BYRD WAS A MEMBER OF THE KKK ONCE

people change. THEY CAN EVOLVE.

[JVS]

29. Byrd renouced the KKK

calling his affiliation with them something along the lines of "the biggest mistake of my life"

I've yet to hear Clark renouce his Right wing voting past.

[Julien Sorel]

40. Rebublicans = KKK?

[JVS]

43. Republicans = constant opponents of the Democrats

If you want to be head of the democrats you should at least be able to offer up criticism of the Republican part, past and present. If you are unable or unwilling to do so, you do not want our nomination seriously enough!

[TLM]

52. Billy I just do not trust a 4-star general who suddenly

changes sides. That tells me he is an oppertunist looking for power any way he can get it.

[Julien Sorel]

72. I can respect that decision, even If I don't agree with it.

It actually has some logic behind it, unlike 90% of the rest of the bullcrap posted here daily. Furthermore, I'll bet you that nearly every Clark supporter has thought about this issue -- I know I have.

That being said, equating the Repubs with the KKK is kind of silly, especially given the prevailing environment here. So I thought I'd point it out :-) It's tough to win a fight if you don't see your opponent for what he is; especially when so many people are having a hard time seeing their friends for what they are.

[dfong63]

100. Clark changed sides once,

... so who's to say it won't happen twice?

[roughsatori]

59. Republicans are Worse then the KKK

The actual damage the GOP is doing to American citizens and our environment far surpasses that of the damage being inflicted by the KKK.

I would not vote for a past member of the KKK to be President either, particulary if he had been raising funds for them 2 years ago.

[Julien Sorel]

82. So if the KKK ran someone for president, you'd consider their

candidate a better choice than Bush? Answer honestly.

[noiretextatique]

87. who do you think KKK members are more likely to vote for?

of those that vote, that is. in 2000, something tells me it wasn't alan keyes :eyes: and certainly not gore/lieberman or nader. perhaps buchannan? or maybe even bush.

it's funny...rw extremist groups all seem to have ties to more legitimate groups, like the republican party, for example, the CCC, which is often likened to the political arm of white supremacist groups, like the KKK.

[Julien Sorel]

89. Why did you make this post

if you weren't going to answer the question?

[JVS]

90. Who died and made you the grand inquisitor?

[noiretextatique]

91. it is an answer...bush is the choice of the KKK

:shrug: why would they need to run another candidate? :shrug:

[Julien Sorel]

92. Not an answer at all.

It's ducking the question. Or are you saying Bush is a member of the KKK? Or that Bush is behaving the way a KKK member would? There was a reason I asked for an honest answer.

[noiretextatique]

97. i am saying: many republicans, like bush, appeal to racists

recall bush's visit to bob jones university...maybe that really was just a coincidence?!?! what do YOU think? i doubt a blatant racist and KKK member, like duke, would get many votes, with or without his hood. and again...why bother? there is always the republican party, the party of trent lott and others longing for segregation :eyes:

[Julien Sorel]

103. Another non-answer.

As you wish.

[noiretextatique]

105. here's your answer

even a KKK candiadate could conceivably be "better" than a coked-up, awol, fratboy and pathological liar. some white supremacists, like tom metzger, are actually virulently anti-corporate and downright populist (aside from the nasty racist stuff)

i would no more vote for the "better" KKK candidate (who would likely run as a republican) than for the dumbass (who will run as a republican). i don't think the KKK is registered as a poltical party...why would they bother? they are welcome under the republican party's big hood.

[Skittles]

93. um

yes

[KoKo]

30. Oh Skittles........that was a low blow....the man is 85 years old......and

we've hashed that out on DU so many times. Robert Byrd has been so wonderful.....I'm sad you said that.

:-( but....I'll forgive you if you find a better example. ;-)

[noiretextatique]

64. huh? it's a PERFECT example

of freeing one's self from the herd mentality, and renouncing the hatred and bigotry that was perfectly acceptable at the time. i can't think of a better example of a person truly facing himself, and truly changing...and evolving into a true patriot. if anything...i hope clark is more like byrd than some other 'switchers.'

[Skittles]

94. HEY KOKO

I WAS NOT DISPARAGING THE MAN - I USED HIS PAST AS AN *EXAMPLE* OF SOMEONE WHO EVOLVED.

[madmax]

27. No

[Richardo]

31. So was I (I got better)

so what?

[janekat]

32. As someone who used to be a Republican - No....

His stance on the issues is quite liberal - THAT's what I'd really look at more. In addition, I like to look at what they have actually DONE when it comes to the ISSUES. Many politicians will say all kinds of things in order to get elected and are a HUGE surprise when the get into office.

Compare this to Dean:
He has been neatly labeled a Liberal - but has several "conservative" stances: pro-death penalty, pro-gun, against medical marijuana. In fairness to Dean, perhaps ALL of the Dem candidates have a few conservative stances on some issues.

He has even stated over and over agian that he is NOT a Liberal - and has actually said "I hope they (his supporters on the left) don't figure this out until "AFTER" the primaries. Dean has for the most part been open about this - but many of his supporters do not seem to hear this.

[hedda_foil]

73. Excuuuuuuuse ME??????

You've got a cute little piece of garbage stuck into your discussion of Dean. Everything you say about him is quite true (and the VAST majority of his supporters are completely aware of it, contrary to your opinion) but where in the world did you come up with the statement that he hopes his supporters on the left don't figure out he's not a liberal until after the primaries?????? He goes FAR out of his way to make SURE his supporters know EXACTLY where he stands. If you have a link, post it now. Otherwise, I'll assume you picked it up from someone who was badly misinformed.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

33. Fo course it bothers me..and WHAT HE DOES is more important than what

he says or used to be.

I do have issues with this and will consider it when making up my mind. I simply will not automatically write him off for it.

[salin]

85. Agreed.

Even without this info - due to lack of track legislative or administrative track record I would read his policies very closely and look for consistency; and I would listen exceptionally closely to him speak for consistency. With no record that is all that can be used to evaluate. With this info - the process of really trying to get a feel of where he stands, and what that is likely to mean in terms of policy - is even more important. But, I would do this at a more careful level for any person (eg Sharpton) who has not held office and thus does not have a governing record so to speak. Alone it is not a reason to take too seriously, or to dismiss too seriously.

[dfong63]

101. Clark is not in office - he can't DO anything other than emit words

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

104. He can win and veto bad legislation..you have already made your position

clear on him and therefore can't help me to arrive at any reasonable conclusion.

[dfong63]

119. you're putting the cart before the horse

He can win and veto bad legislation..

you're putting the cart before the horse. Clark has to prove himself BEFORE being elected. unf he has zero track record in electoral politics, and there is no time for him to get one. the other candidates except Sharpton have already proved themselves. they have gotten elected to office and done things and we know where they stand. with Clark it's all promises and platitudes.

you have already made your position clear on him and therefore can't help me to arrive at any reasonable conclusion.

oh, so only undecided people can help you arrive at a reasonable conclusion?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

121. Of course he does..that's why I will continue to listen and see if he is

worth my vote.

To be fair, even candidates with a statewide track record have something to prove on a national level..it's not as though candidates from states such as Arkansas are experts on national security but Clinton seemed to be on the ball with it.

I am not forming an opinion yet...and no I don't need to rely on an undecided opinion just not one with so much anti bias that it colors the ability to be objective in the matter.

[CWebster]

34. it is not what he says

It is what he does.

At a time when the dems are suffering from TOO MUCH Republican identity, it is a consideration, since there is so little about Clark on the issues to consider.

[The Backlash Cometh]

37. It bothers me.

Why, exactly, do Democrats have to get a Republican to run as a Democrat? The message that sends is that there are no qualified candidates in the Democratic party. Can this be true?

[CWebster]

46. Isn't it the trruth?

Simple as that. Damn scary who brung us this.

[w13rd0]

38. I'm probably more alone than with the crowd with this one...

...but I'd rather vote for person and policies than party. Problem of course...well, it's been discussed quite a bit. I'll keep checking Clark's statements and his On the Issues page and see what evolves...

[Pastiche423]

39. The fact that he was/is a repug

combined w/the reluctance to firmly and proudly state he "was" a Demcorat until only two weeks ago, bothers me greatly.

An opportunistic Democrat is not what our country desperately needs now. Nor should it be want our party wants.

By the age of 44, one's ideology is prety much ingrained. While it is true that some people have epiphany, I ain't buying this one.

[noiretextatique]

53. i'm having a hard time reconciling this myself

as a person who never voted republican, and never will. then again, i am willing to keep an open mind because i know people can and do change (i certainly have). still...it is troubling.

[gulliver]

42. More BS from CT.

Innuendo is CT. He/she never says his/her own opinion. Every Dem opinion is attributed to the Democratic party. This is just another pot stirrer from the master.

[Cappurr]

45. You know.....you guys are brutal

So quick to judge. How many of you have read his book? How many of you really know a damn thing about him?

Can't you just withhold judgment until you hear what he has to say. Until you hear what his platform encompasses?

[w13rd0]

61. I read Powell's book...

...I'm willing to read Clarks...

[CWebster]

62. This is nothing compared to what is coming--

or is it that you just want everyone to jump up on the bandwagon when it rolls by? That's like running out to buy a hula hoop, not considering the future guidance of the country. And these things matter when formulating an informed perspective.

As for his stand on the issues--everything will be poll-tested or molded on demonstrations of present sucess. Notice he will mimic Dean. Everything else, if there is anything, will be measured and centrist with the Clinton's handwriting all over it.

[Cappurr]

76. Ahhh

Methinks you are a Dean supporter pissed because Clark entered the race and shook it up.

Look...I want the best person to represent the Democratic party. This election is important. I have a lot of respect for Dean....he's a hell of a fighter and I like a lot of his policies.

But I do think he will have a problem in the General election. Hell, I think Hillary would have a problem and I absolutely LOVE her.

I'm not jumping on the Clark bandwagon. But I've been watching him for a long time now on CNN and I have been impressed. The reading I've done about him impresses me. And the sheer fear of the right wing impresses me even more. lol

We need time to find out what he's about. That's all I'm saying

[theboss]

48. Reagan was a Democrat

There you go . . .

[JVS]

51. He had been a Republican for more than two weeks before running for...

the republican presidential candidacy though.

[Melsky]

49. It doesn't bother me much

I'm not thrilled about it, but I plan on judging by his policies and not what party he used to be in.

I think it could help to make republicans more comfortable changing sides and voting for him. I much prefer this to a candidate who has always been a dem but acts like a republican.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

50. I Have Been Voting Since 76

was a Kennedy delegate in 1980...


never pulled the Republican lever in my life....


wouldn't vote Republican for $1,000,000.00


and I'll give Clark a pass if he can beat *

[bowens43]

60. I also have been voting since 76

never voted for a republican but I would, for $1,000,000. Everybody has a price, what was Clark's price to switch to the Dems? Maybe he had a revelation or change of heart or maybe he just wants the power and knew he couldn't get it through the republican party. The point is, we just don't know. There's no history.

[cprise]

67. His positions are not fleshed-out

...in fact they are virtually unknown. He might as well be campaigning on sound-bites right now, and that may be all he has outside his vision-thing (which I admire).

Dean is a real Dem who has gotten wise to neo-liberalism as well as the neocons. If Clark cannot come out against the DLC business as usual and attack their candidates (oh, wait he is one of them), then he may be nothing more than a poseur.

I'm sure Clark knows all about camoflage.

[mandyky]

54. It does bother me

along with that he only just 3 weeks or less ago on CNN said he was a Dem, and that seemed like it had to be pried from him.

I like Gen. Clark, I just don't like he is running as a Dem. We have enough DINOs. Plus I think it is really disingenuis for the Dem party to run a general just because it is expedient. We get on dumbya for fearmongering, so what does the Dem party leadership do fearmonger from another angle.

My gut feeling is not to trust Clark's/DLC's motives. We'll see what happens, I guess...

[w13rd0]

63. I sure as heck wouldn't want...

...him running as an Independent. And I can see the DLC doing a Dixiecrats, moreso than most of the current candidates running as an Independent if they lose the nomination.

[Trek234]

112. Fine let them

Either way we would be damned if we followed them or damned if we didn't.

At least if we didn't, and they cost us the 04 election, they would be within a years time more hated by all (real) democrats than any republican ever could be.

[Champion Jack]

58. NO

[Rowdyboy]

65. Links to any proof Wes Clark ever was a Republican...

please...I'd love to see it. Everything I've seen on the subject has been thoroughly debunked as right-wing propaganda. Perhaps you have a new source that gives you special information...Please share...

[TexasEditor]

66. Most of the GOP in Texas...

Practically all the GOP office holders in Texas -- and the people that voted for them -- used to be Democrats, they switched for a variety of reasons, mostly because "the Democratic Party left them, they didn't leave the Democratic Party," blah blah.

I've posted the following several times before, but...

My dad has voted Republican all his life (he's 84) and plans to vote Democrat in the next presidential election, he absolutely opposes Bush, his administration and their policies.

[Pastiche423]

68. Is your dad running for president?

[seventhson]

70. Yup. But That is not ALL that bothers me about Clark

But I am now afraid to say anything bad about him here at DU.

[Sinistrous]

71. he WAS a retroglican? Well, so was I,

until I saw the light.

[hedda_foil]

78. Good for you Sinistrous.

And good for anyone who sees the light. But I'm not giving my precious primary vote to a recently-former Republican general with no voting record who couldn't even manage to say he was a Democrat until two weeks before he announced.

[hedda_foil]

79. My first dupe.

[hedda_foil]

81. And my second dupe.

Whoops.

[Freddie Stubbs]

74. Reagan used to be a Democrat

[Brian Sweat]

75. I have no problem voting for a man

who went on national tv and said that he was a liberal and was proud of it.

[noonwitch]

77. No, because the GOP wasn't always an extreme right-wing party

Once upon a time, there were liberal republicans, like former Michigan Governor Milliken (who has denounced the republican party repeatedly by campaigning for Michigan dems like Granholm). Ford, despite the consevative community he comes from (Grand Rapids) was a moderate, as was Eisenhower. GHW Bush was a liberal before he became Reagan's VP. He and Babs were big time supporters of Planned Parenthood at one point in time.

[Tinoire]

83. Yes but I am more bothered by his associations

Yes, it bothers me because he's running for the highest office of the Democratic Party with no track record, no firm stances on the issues, and some unsettling statements.

While that bothers me, I am more bothered by his associations with the Markle Foundation, Acxiom, Jackson Stephens, and CSIS.

I am very bothered that we are expected to just "trust Clark". I saw one Clark supporter telling people to "read between the lines" (this was on the medical marijuana thread) and that simply astounded me.

There's a level of fanatical support for this Knight that isn't making any sense to me. Are we not in enough trouble without having to trust and read whatever it is we want between the lines?

IMO, if Clark wants to serve the American people, let him serve in someone else's administration or let him run for some other office where we can see what kind of a Dem he is. Right now, he is TOO unknown with TOO MANY unsettling associations to trust blindly like this.

[Trek234]

115. The support is odd

Then again remember "republicans for clark" and other such groups. Wonder what motivation they could possibly have...

[RobertFrancisK]

84. I'm not at all. Byrd was in the KKK

And he turned out to be a great guy. People change, and I think seeing growth in someone is very inspiring. Hell, Reagn was a Democrat, so was Phil Graham, Strom,nobody questioned their conservatism. What is important is how he's going to rebuild this country. We'll know a lot more Thursday.

[Trek234]

117. <sigh>

No one questioned their "conservatism" because they had a history a mile long. And of course you have to realize that a southern democrat at that time was no where NEAR what a democrat is today. They were radical racist right wing. All those people swtiched partys when the time came. Common knowledge no secret.

Byrd is NOT such a great guy. Let me say this - I REALLY like his stances on most foreign issues. However, as an atheist and a person who is concerned about gay rights he is perhaps worse than Bush. I have NEVER seen Bush make worse statements about atheists than I have from Byrd.

[snooper2]

88. Maybe people get smarter with age...

Why, look at this...

There was a thread making fun of Clark recently because on his web page http://www.clark04.com/ there was a link to click that said (positions) and that page was blank.

The problem has been corrected now. There is no more (positions) option available.

:)

[Pastiche423]

99. OMG!

lol

His once "On Issues" page seems to be no longer under construction.

It ain't there at all!

Is that what "there is no there there" mean?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

95. I'd Like To Know

how many respondents to this thread voted Republican at one time in their life and are now criticizing Clark for doing the same....

Having never voted Republican in almost three decades of voting I am willing to give him a pass if he can beat*

This is coming from a man who would share an open mouth kiss with * rather than vote for him...


-on edit- to establish my heterosexual bonafides I'd turn down a meange a trois with Halle Berry and Cameron Diaz if the cost was voting Republican....

[Robb]

96. Hey, big deal.

Kucinich was anti-choice!

(ducks)

[CMT]

98. yes

but not enough not to vote for him if he is the nominee. My problems are these--Clark is a very intelligent man and despite his intelligence he fell for Reagan's attacks on such things as "Welfare Queens", "Tree's causing pollution", "That the minimum wage causes joblessness", "That canal (Panama) is our's --we built it...", "Many unemployed are lazy", "Medicare is socialism", ect...yet he voted for this yahoo in 1980 and 1984. He also voted for George (Read my lips) bush in '92--and Nixon in '72.

I welcome him to the party but not sure I want him leading the choir.

[Nicholas_J]

102. Dean campaigned for a Republican

Does this bother anybody.

[gully]

116. wwweally? who?

curious, I don't doubt you though?

[Mass_Liberal]

107. what I dont understand is that

clark is pro-choice, non-conservative on gun-control, and seems to be liberal on most issues. Why was he a republican. I dont know of any of his views as conservative. I con-fus-ed.

[SharonAnn]

108. No, I was a Republican too at one time

But I had to leave when the anti-women, anti-environment, Christian fundamentalistic, military jingoistic right-wingers took control.

That was in 1980, early in the Reagan administration.

[devinsgram]

109. NO

[guevara]

110. Clark is the man

Clark rules, man!! Go, baby, go!!!!!

[Kahuna]

111. I didn't like it at first. I was stunned because...

nothing in his demeanor would make me believe he is or ever was a repuke.

I'm over that now and still like and admire him as much as ever.

[spanone]

113. No

[Wapsie B]

118. Ya know................

threads like this are so transparent it would be funny if it weren't so sad.

[Castilleja]

120. Not as much as

the way he hemmed and hawed early on about whether he was a Democrat or not. I'm sorry, but when you are considering running for a major office, I think you should know that. You shouldn't be afraid to say it. I don't know what the reasons may have been, but it did bug me personally. But, that's just me...

[DrFunkenstein]

123. Part of a Larger Hemming and Hawing

It wouldn't be so bad, but he has very quickly built up a reputation for indecisiveness. Which is shocking because everyone expected him to be a military man with a mind like a steel trap.

[Hippo_Tron]

122. Yeah I don't consider Thurmond to have ever been a democrat

Because he spent a good bit of that time in the "dixiecrat" party.