Anti-Clark roll call

[Enraged American]

who here is anti-Clark and will only support him if he gets the nomination?

This is to see which DU'er is on my side in ensuring that a populist gets the nomination and not Clark.

[goobergunch]

1. Anti-Clark?

I don't know enough about Clark to have an opinion yet.

[mot78]

2. I'll Support Whoever the Nominee Is

Be it Dean, Kucinich, even Lieberman if it come down to him.

[trotsky]

7. Amen.

That's really what it's all about.

[RetroLounge]

3. Sorry, I think we all are sick of this kind of post.

We are not on your side, or anyone elses side, except NOT on Bush*'s side. That's the point remember. Keep your eye on the ball...

I am anti-bush.

If my candidate doesn't get the nomination, I will vote for and support the one who does. WHOMEVER IT IS...

[SammyWinstonJack]

21. I don't have a dog in this fight as of yet

Though I am considering Dean. However I will vote for and support the Candidate that secures the nomination, period.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

4. right now I'm with Kucinich, but other than him who's the populist?

Kucinich and I guess Sharpton are populists, and Edwards might be the closest we have to an establishment populist, but otherwise who?

[Enraged American]

8. Gephardt and Mosely-Braun

I know for a fact that Gephardt is for American workers. I am pretty sure Mosely Braun is.

I guess the media would consider Dean a populist. I don't like Dean much but at least he has something called BALLS.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

12. Gephardt, yes, agreed, he's a populist

He has been my second choice after Kucinich, but his campaign isn't well represented on DU :)

Dean isn't a populist, although he's sounded some populist themes recently.

[mhr]

5. Info on Clark's Troubled Past Can be Found Here

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles8/DVNS_Wesley-Clark.htm

[kstewart33]

6. Would you kindly do me a favor?

Shut up. Please. I have had it with all the Clark bashing. What's next--Clark isn't a fitting Dem candidate because of the car he drives? Or the baseball team he favors? I've had it.

Shut up.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[im4edwards]

18. Please don't tell me he a Yankees fan anyone but the Yankees !

n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

9. Anti-Clark Roll Call

I think you are one hundred threads too late....

[Shanty Oilish]

10. Not sure I'd support him even if he were nominated.

I'm leery of sudden conversions---including Kucinich's on pro-choice. But at least I'm 100% sure he's a Democrat. He's got a voting record. He didn't become a Democrat last month when the wind blew that way. He doesn't exalt Republicans at their fundraisers a few months after they usurp power from the legitimate winner of a presidential election.
I'd feel like an honorable loser, voting for Kucinich. I'd feel like a fool voting for Clark.

[Justice]

17. And How Would You Feel If Bush Won Election?

Not re-election cuz he was selected the first time.

[Pepperbelly]

46. self-righteous?

I bet that's the answer.

[bigluckyfeet]

38. I will Vote for

Dennis Kucinich in the primary,and then support who ever wins the nomination.

[im4edwards]

13. I do not favor Clark, I guess I'll ABB if I have to

but I'm pretty confident that I'll be spared that choice.

[salin]

14. This is silly

Far to early to be pulling this line up on one side or another stuff.

Personally, I know far too little yet to declare one way or another for the General. It is my job, as a voter, to get information as it comes my way, to listen, read policy positions and watch. It is also my job, as a informed voter, to read each item of new information with a dose of skepticism - is it coming from a source trying to sell me or trying to sell me away? What can be verified elsewhere so I can piece together for myself an accurate picture?

Far too many people, it appears, are being swayed to make a decision quickly, to read (dis?)information (from either direction) and declare it as fact before studying it and its sources, and to line up to be counted on one side or another.

This is true regarding other candidates as well.

IMO, silly, silly, silly.

[Gman]

15. This is more GD garbage

Again...

[Rebellious Republican]

16. I was undecided, and liked three candidates....

Dean, Clark, and Kuchinick as my top three, however the whole feild looks pretty good with exception of one or two. However if this is a sample of the kind of campaign Kuchinick is running. I am not so sure about him now. Win at all costs, do whatever it takes, winning is everything, screw anyone or anything that gets in the way kinda of thinking, reminds me of Republican philosophy. I should know, I used to be one! Is it impossible to just say who you like and to talk about their merrits, their strong points, so on and so forth. Without having to dis someone else. So much for DEM tolerance! Get a life and just say no to Bush.

:kick:
ANYONE BUT BUSH IN "04"

[Mairead]

31. What are you talking about?

Dennis isn't involved in this.

[Rebellious Republican]

36. Thats the kind of post I am talking about, thanks Mairead...

Your post has not attacked anyone, you have spoken up as to who you are for. You posted examples of what you feel are their merrits. Thank you and well said! :thumbsup:

:toast:

[mike_c]

19. On the basis of what I know now, I won't support Clark even if...

...he gets the nomination. A Clark nomination would be the death knell for my 30 year loyalty to the Democratic Party.

[BeachBuckeye]

48. Bullshit like this thread......

is the reason Democrats have been getting the short end of the stick. Anyone who says they won't vote for our eventual nominee may as well vote Republican because a Republican victory is what they are helping to insure. If you are so self-rightous that you have to have a candidate who is 100% in sync with your views you are not living in the real world. Its that attitude that contributed heavily to our loss in the 2000 Presidential race. For God's sake, don't you realize what you have helped the Bush's do? Stop whining and be a Democrat or go play with the neo-cons.

[Padraig18]

20. Shame on YOU!

This is unadulterated FLAME bait calculated to further 'stir shit'!

:grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr:

[thebigidea]

22. what do you expect from a big Paula Zahn fan?

Oh, and according to EA, Rumsfeld was a "decent Defense Sec"

[bicentennial_baby]

23. Don't forget

North Korea's not so bad either, in that poster's opinion

[thebigidea]

25. I can see how all these things are natural for a "Kucinich supporter"

Uh huh.

[sujan]

24. I am anti clark

[Eloriel]

26. No, I won't support Clark

quite probably not even if he's nominated.

He's a Trojan Horse candidate:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=423043


Eloriel

[classics]

28. Clark isnt even a Democrat.

Hes a neo-con dressing himself up in democrat clothing. He doesnt seem to stand for... well, anything, except jingoistic patriotic nonsense.

[w4rma]

27. I support Dean. I'm not anti-Clark. (n/t)

[salin]

29. great - another thread - with a slight twist

that fits with a bunch of other threads on this topic.

I appreciate your point - but could you make it on one of the existing threads?

Or is no discussion besides Clark or Dean allowed in GD anymore? Because the net effect of starting a thread that fits with several existing threads and that will result in a mirror Dean thread is pushing ALL substantive ISSUE topics off of the front page. Within minutes.

Sorry but this is frustrating.

*this is todays pat response to the proliferation of identical threads that has shut down all other conversations among people, on issues, that are about beating BUSH, fighting back against BUsh policies, but devoid of clark or dean.* If ya'll can spam the forum - then I can spam your threads.

[Rebellious Republican]

32. HIP HIP HOORAY, thanks salin, well said!

I have been around this board for awhile, and your posts have always been full of substance and you rarley (never) post meaning less drival.

:yourock:

[salin]

34. I am doing something today I have never done before

I am spamming these threads with this message. They are spamming the board in the rudest and most disruptive way I have ever seen at DU.

Thanks for the nice words.

[dfong63]

30. Clark is a war criminal and a crass opportunist

[Padraig18]

33. Proof?

"War criminal" is a VERY serious phrase with a very PRECISE legal definition under international law. Do you know this for a FACT, or is it just a cheap shot you threw out rather than trouble yourrself to marshall evidence to support it? :eyes:

[dfong63]

49. here's one link

robert fisk on amnesty intl report on serbia bombing
``...
Only five days after NATO was "exonerated" by the International War Crimes Tribunal for its killing of civilians in Yugoslavia last year, Amnesty International today publishes a blistering attack on the Alliance, accusing it of committing serious violations of the rules of war, unlawful killings and – in the case of the bombing of Serbia's television headquarters – a war crime. ...

Some of Amnesty's harshest criticism is directed at the 23 April bombing of Serb television headquarters. "General Wesley Clark has stated, 'We knew when we struck that there would be alternate means of getting the Serb Television. There's no single switch to turn off everything but we thought it was a good move to strike it, and the political leadership agreed with us.'

"In other words, NATO deliberately attacked a civilian object, killing 16 civilians, for the purpose of disrupting Serb television broadcasts in the middle of the night for approximately three hours. It is hard to see how this can be consistent with the rule of proportionality."
...''

[Padraig18]

50. Response

``...
Only five days after NATO was "exonerated" by the International War Crimes Tribunal for its killing of civilians in Yugoslavia last year, Amnesty International today publishes a blistering attack on the Alliance, accusing it of committing serious violations of the rules of war, unlawful killings and – in the case of the bombing of Serbia's television headquarters – a war crime. ...

COMMENT: The IWCT, the legal entity regognized under international law and charged with investigating and prosecuting war crimes, EXONERATED NATO and, inter alia, General Clark.

Some of Amnesty's harshest criticism is directed at the 23 April bombing of Serb television headquarters. "General Wesley Clark has stated, 'We knew when we struck that there would be alternate means of getting the Serb Television. There's no single switch to turn off everything but we thought it was a good move to strike it, and the political leadership agreed with us.'

OMMITTED: "... There's no single switch to turn off everything but we thought it was a good move to strike it, and the political leadership agreed with us.'

COMMENT: NATO, a recognized 'regional security organization' under the UN Charter, is under the control of its member states elected CIVILIAN governments; a military officer carrying out a lawful order from his/her civilian commander(s) cannot, by definition, commit a 'war crime'.

"In other words, NATO deliberately attacked a civilian object, killing 16 civilians, for the purpose of disrupting Serb television broadcasts in the middle of the night for approximately three hours. It is hard to see how this can be consistent with the rule of proportionality."
...''

COMMENT: This section appears out of order and out of context .

CONCLUSION: Nothing contained in the A.I report is *proof* of anything, and to accuse General Clark with being a 'war criminal' is irresponsible, at best, and defamatory bordering upon criminal libel, at worst.

I am all for fair comment and critique of any candidate, including my own, but tripe such as this is unfair.

*Edited to correct typos

[Zuni]

53. this 'war criminal' stuff is nonsense

His war was fought to the highest standards any modern war has ever been fought. Civilian casualties did happen, but those are a feature of all wars throughout history.
I wonder what would have happened if no one did anything about the Serbs? As it was some 250,000--300,000 were killed in the Balkans as a direct result of Serb agression and etnic persecution. Unopposed the number could have been catastrophic.

That TV station was broadcasting Serb propaganda, and was also a possible communication link after regular military communications were severed.

[IranianDemocrat]

35. More GD bullshit.

.

[Enraged American]

37. This isn't "bullshit"

this is political discussion. I feel that as Progressives we should do everything in our power to cause a leftward shift in the Democratic base. Clark's nomination would signal a shift to the militaristic side of the American psyche, a shift I would wholeheartedly oppose. I'd vote for Clark to get rid of Bush, but Clark doesn't seem to have any convictions. I just smell an opportunist.

[IranianDemocrat]

39. Earth to Enraged American.

We have already "shift(ed) to the militaristic side of the American psyche" after 9-11.

[Enraged American]

41. 9-11 doesn't erase the struggle of the worker my friend

9-11 doesn't make the oppression of the worker disappear. If you think that 9-11 justifies exploitation, then I have news for you. I am not going to fall for the propaganda. "We are living in a different world now. Fuck the American worker, fuck domestic industry." I am not of that mindset. America can fight terrorism but it must do so multilaterally . Militarism and national egoism should be done away with.

[Zuni]

54. Agreed

But Clark would be a million times better for our workers than George 'I am shipping all of our jobs to China' Bush. Clark has said he favors fair trade over free trade, and any agreements had to protect workers and environment.
I do not think Clark is a militarist (he is no General Tojo), but rather a military man who is concerned with the directions Bush has led us in both Domestic and Foreign policy.

I agree with you largely on the question of the best way to deal with 'terra'.
The most effective way to battle 'terra' is by working closely with intelligence and police forces around the world. Al-Q is not wanted in many countries, and those countries and us have a vested interest in sharing intelligence and cooperating.

Going off the deep end and unilaterally invading and what not will only make the problem worse.

[Oracle]

40. That would be me...

Only if Clark gets the nomination. (though I would support any Democrat including Lieberman over ant debate with a republican.)

[Enraged American]

42. kick. n/t

[Pastiche423]

43. I will not support clark. Period

[FlashHarry]

44. Instead of posting an anti-somebody roll call...

...why not post a pro-candidate thread, which might be a tad bit more constructive.

Just a thought.

[Padraig18]

45. OMG!

A constructive thread???? What are you, a HERETIC? :9

[Walt Starr]

47. I will say I'm concerned about how "cozy" Clark is with the Repukes

Don't know if I can trust the guy.

[opihimoimoi]

51. MONGO> MONGO> MONGO> GO MONGO

He is my first choice, then Clark, then Xerxes

[Zuni]

55. Why flame an opponent of Bush?

save the venom for Bushco. Clark is now on our side and is a valuable asset.
I support any one who can remove the Bush Junta from the WH. I think Wes Clark may have the best chance. Either him or Howard Dean. As it is, I support all of the Democratic frontrunners and the Democratic Party in it's struggle to return the White House to the Party that won it in 2000.

[zeemike]

52. I will support the nominee to a point

But if I see any meddling in the process by the RW I will vote green of for someone else.