The final word: Clark *is* a Democrat, and here's PROOF

[Padraig18]

> Clark's Lack of Party Affiliation Normal
>
> By DAVID HAMMER
> Associated Press Writer
> http://tinyurl.com/pi5p
>
> October 2, 2003, 4:31 PM EDT
>
> LITTLE ROCK, Ark. -- Wesley Clark is typical of many voters in
> Arkansas. When he registered to vote, he declared no
> party affiliation.
>
> snip
>
> Clark spokeswoman Kym Spell said Thursday that Clark will declare
> himself a Democrat with a form awaiting his signature at his Little
> Rock, Ark.,
> headquarters.
>
> "A piece of paper doesn't make you a Democrat," Spell said. "Wesley
> Clark is a real Democrat, and this is simply a tactic that the other
> guys are using to distract Americans from the real issues."
>
>snip
> Only 4.4 percent of Arkansas' 1.5 million voters have declared any
> political party, said Janet Miller, the secretary of state's deputy
> for elections.
>

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

Now, can we get past this BULLSHIT non-issue, and discuss some REAL issues? :eyes:

[Bread and Circus]

1. I am naming my first born child...

Padraig.

Thanks.

:grouphug:

[Padraig18]

3. You're welcome

I'm tired of this non-issue, and have e-mailed Howard's campaign about it, too; I very nicely and diplomatically asked that they "shut up" about it. *grin*

There are plenty of REAL issues and policies to discuss. and this sort of GARBAGE distracts us from them.

[Bread and Circus]

6. Wow...

I am so super impressed. You do Howard Dean
proud. He's lucky to have you as a supporter.

If more people were as balanced as you, DU would
be a better place.

I have to admit, I have been part of the problem
and will try to do better.

Everytime you and Clar (meaning Clar, not Clark) post
a balanced and reasoned statement that promotes
fairness and accurateness about the candidates,
you improve this forum and represent Democratic
ideals well.

[bicentennial_baby]

7. I'll second that!

"Everytime you and Clar (meaning Clar, not Clark) post
a balanced and reasoned statement that promotes
fairness and accurateness about the candidates,
you improve this forum and represent Democratic
ideals well."

My 2 favorite Dean supporters! :toast:

[Padraig18]

8. Thanks!

I want Howard to win, but I will not engage in character assasination on a fellow Democrat; I will otherwise fight tooth and nail for the nomination, but I will *NOT* get down in the gutter to do so.

May the best candidate win, and...


"ANYBODY BUT BUSH!"

:)

[janekat]

26. You are a Class Act

Thanks!

[RandomUser]

29. My sentiments exactly

Way to go Paidrag! You're one Dean supporter I actually admire :)

[Zuni]

39. Amen

I never try to trash Democrats, even if I am not a big fan. I am even restrained against lieberman, who is a moderate Republican in my opinion.
I save my critiscm for George Bush, Dick cheney and John Ashcroft.

[Rowdyboy]

25. Padraig, you are a credit to your candidate...

Governor Dean is my second choice (behind Clark). Should Dean win the nomination, I'll give him my heart, sould and 100% support-just as I will any of the Democratic candidates.

Too often, people think the best way to represent their choice is to attack other candidates. This is just stupid and extremely irritating. More division is the last thing liberals need.

Thanks Clar, too. Your views are reasoned and your attitude is positive. I repect those qualities above all else.

Thanks, guys, for making me want to come back here day after day.

[_NorCal_D_]

76. Thanks Padraig.

I think it's important to at least be objective in these arguments over who is the most legitimate candidate.

Go Clark!
Go Dean!

[MIMStigator]

157. Good find. Is Dean still lying about Clark?

hope not

[Padraig18]

10. Hehe!

It is an old and honorable name; I am named after Padraig Pearse, one of the Irish Republic's revolutionary heroes, whose words are my signature. :toast:

[remfan]

2. Interesting

Arkansans couldn't even declare party affiliation until 1996, when an amendment to the state constitution let voters add optional party information box to their registration forms.

[Padraig18]

5. "Optional"

That word just SCREAMED out of the article at me, as did the 4.4% figure for the percentage who even do declare.

In this 1st partisan primary in which he could vote, he called for a Democratic ballot; good enough for me.

Next! :)

[leetrisck]

13. This is true and I put this on several

other threads. Lived in Arkansas for awhile and that was definitely the case. You simply registered to vote.

[Brian Sweat]

69. So, most likely Clark registered decades ago

When it finally became possible to specify a party, Clark just never go around to it.

[Padraig18]

90. Quite likely

But you will NEVER convince the " :tinfoilhat: brigade " of that.

[RandomUser]

154. You're probably right -- n/t

eom

[tjdee]

4. You couldn't even DECLARE until 1996!

Kym Spell is one abrasive so and so, but she's right on with this.

This has to be one of the dumber issues in this campaign, IMO (also that calling Rove on the phone thing)....

[Spentastic]

9. Proof?

This is proof of nothing

"A piece of paper doesn't make you a Democrat,"

is exactly right. When he signs that form how much more of a "democrat" does he become?

Personally, I have no axe to grind here. I'm from the U.K, I'm just concerned that the MIC may have some influence over the good General.

[Brian Sweat]

70. But the Clark bashers have been saying that he is not a Democrat

because he does not have a pice of paper saying he is a Democrat. You can't have it both ways.

[TLM]

118. I've been saying he is not a democrat for a lot f reasons...

His campaign just lied about him being registered Dem.


However what tells me he is not a democrat is the stuff he has said about Bush, Reagan and W at a republican fundraiser a few years ago... less than a year after he claims to have voted for Gore.


"And I'm very glad we've got the great team in office, men like Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice... people I know very well - our president George W. Bush. We need them there."


Well gosh, you claim to vote for GOre, then turn around and heap praise on W and his gang... the same people Clark now says are not fit for the office?

Seems Clark's story changes 180 degrees depending on who he is talking to. He's a two faced liar.

Yes, it is very true that he speaks of democratic ideals very well... THIS MONTH OR WEEK. Yet just a little while ago he was speakign just as well about THE EXACT OPPOSISTE POSITION.


"We were really helped when President Ronald Reagan came in. I remember non-commissioned officers who were going to retire and they re-enlisted because they believed in President Reagan."

"That's the kind of President Ronald Reagan was. He helped our country win the Cold War. He put it behind us in a way no one ever believed would be possible. He was truly a great American leader. And those of us in the Armed Forces loved him, respected him, and tremendously admired him for his great leadership."

"President George Bush had the courage and the vision... and we will always be grateful to President George Bush for that tremendous leadership and statesmanship."


Funny he claims that Bush I was such a great leader and we will all be greatful to him... yet he also claims he voted against him. And if Bush Sr. and Reagan are Clark's idea of great leaders and great leadership, then I do not want this guy near the white house. However I think Clark just says what he thinks his audience wants to hear... be they republicans or democrats.

I also think Cleark is lying about being a dem because of the people he chose to work for and with... like the head of the Carlyle group, Henry Kissinger, and the NED.

So far the only argument I see for Clark being a dem is that he says the right things... so i guess if Cheney or Ashcroft read those same lines, that would make them democrats to and these folks would vote for them.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

11. Just ignore those Clark-bushers.

So what he took a couple weeks or months
or whatever to decide he was a Democrat.
What do we want a guy who just goes enny mini
miney mo? No. We want a man that thinks
things out and takes there time and looks
at all the many many different little things
about if he is a Republican or a Democrat. If Bush
put half as much thought into doing things as
the General put into whether he is a Democrat
or a Republican, we would be a lot better off. I
wish the General would of taken a couple more
months to decide if he was a Republican or
not just to show these Clark-bushers what for.
They are just jealous of General Clark, the
General who takes his own sweet time to decide
if he's Republican or Democrat or whatever, the
thinking man's General.

[Bread and Circus]

14. I like that....

"The thinking man's general".

Has a nice ring to it.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

17. Does General Clark smoke a pipe?

I could see a ad where he is smoking
a pipe and smoke is curling up around
his blue eyes and he is all thinking about
something. Then... The Thinking Man's General.

[Spentastic]

19. Yeah!

There could even be a book in shot! He could have a pipe, a book, a dog and wear a cardigan.

He'd be like the thinking man General with a touch of the Grandfather about him. It's genius.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

28. What book?

It should be something brilliant.
Brilliant and soothing.

[Spentastic]

32. I'd suggest something

Worthy but non threatening.

There must be a book titled "why generals are brilliant"

[A-Schwarzenegger]

34. No, no, no, no, no, no. Huh?

What? That would be too conceited.
It shouldn't be anything regular people
would look at and scratch their head.
Maybe a nice novel. Popular, but
thoughtful and romantic, with touches
of history and philosophy.

[davidinalameda]

150. sounds like Mr. Rogers!

"There could even be a book in shot! He could have a pipe, a book, a dog and wear a cardigan."

But it will be a beautiful day in the neighborhood when he beats Bush

[RandomUser]

31. Me too

"The thinking man's general" :)

[molly]

16. Who do you support?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

20. General Clark,

The Thinking Man's General.
No enny mini miney mo. A lot of regular
people don't understand how a brilliant
man like General needs a lot of time
to think about things like Democrat, Republican,
etc. A lot of regular people just go enny mini miney mo.

[TLM]

119. Are you joking?

I never really thought that it took a lot of in depth thought to figure out if you're dem or repuke... it is like figuring out if you're a boy or a girl.

Usualy the signs are pretty obvious... but then again I guess a guy who is a member of the NED, works for Kissinger, works with the carlyle group, and thinks reagan and bush were great leaders might have some trouble figuring out where he stands.

But I do love how the Clarkies are spinning the idea of having a well defined political affiliation and record as being "enny mini miney mo." That's nice... make knowing where you stand a bad thing and the merky undecided gray area of fence sitting and waffeling a good thing.

I still think Clark was waiting for the repukes to offer him Cheney's seat... and when rove did not return his calls, he went to plan B, duping the democrats who are stupid enough to vote for a man because he's got some shiny stars on his chest and can read a script... while ignoring his YEARS of republican service, pro-republican statements, and his working for KISSINGER and with the head of the carlyle group in the NED.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

149. I would not joke about that sort of thing.

"I never really thought that it took a lot of in depth thought to figure out if you're dem or repuke... it is like figuring out if you're a boy or a girl."

That is why you are not the Thinking Man's General.
Think of General Clark as a political RuPaul. I think
both my good friends RuPaul and General Clark would
appreciate that because they have a good healthy sense
of humer.

"But I do love how the Clarkies are spinning the idea of having a well defined political affiliation and record as being "enny mini miney mo." That's nice... make knowing where you stand a bad thing and the merky undecided gray area of fence sitting and waffeling a good thing."

Thank you. I wish that other Deanetts would try
to be nice like you and Padraig18.

[JustJoe]

155. "Think of General Clark as a political RuPaul." !

That is out-ra-geous.

[Catch22Dem]

12. Thanks

I've sent this to several of my friends.

[molly]

15. Thanks!

perhaps you should either post this over in P&C or refer to it there?

:yourock:

[bluestateguy]

18. Aren't military officers supposed to be registered independent?

Norman Schwartzkpof, a known Bush lover, was registered as an indepdendent, and I think Colin Powell was an independent too.

Only fools like Oliver North are so openly partisan while in uniform.

[Padraig18]

21. I know a few retired 'lifers'

All of them said that while they were in uniform, they didn't declare a party affiliation, and most even avoided voting in partisan primaries. Oddly enough, they are among the MOST vocal defenders of civilian control of the military.

[Bread and Circus]

22. That's the point....

The military is supposed to be non-partisan
and under civilian control. Clark espouses that
liberally.

"It is fundamental to democracy".

[libertad]

23. I was always registered as a Dem when I was in the Navy, my

father was a loyal Naval Officer and a loyal Democrat, too. My grandfather was a Naval Officer and a registered Democrat, too. There is no rule stating you must support rethugs to be in the military. I don't think it is foolish at all to vote your conscience.

[Art_from_Ark]

24. Clark was still undecided in late 2001

He was offered the chance to run for governor of Arkansas as a Democrat in 2002, and he turned it down, even though it would probably have been a cakewalk for him and would have given him experience in governing a civilian population.

http://www.google.co.jp/search?q=cache:wRzcikZ6H1wJ:www.arkansasnews.com
/280143421098684.bsp+brummett+clark+governor+Democrat&hl=ja&ie=UTF-8&inlang=ja

By the way, I have voted in a Republican primary in Arkansas before. That was because most of the Democrats were unopposed. Voting in one Democratic primary in Arkansas does not neccessarily make one a Democrat.

[tjdee]

27. He didn't run for governor so he's not a Democrat?

So here you have a man who voted for Clinton AND Gore, stumps for Max Cleland, and is asked by the Dems to run for Governor in the same year. Says no.

So that means he isn't a Democrat. Ummmmm....

Wow, people are really going to milk this thing for all its worth.

We don't know how many Democratic primaries he voted in.

The man is clearly naive about partisan politics (which is why he spoke at the Lincoln thing, and your linked article puts that in the best light I've seen yet), but that's changing, obviously.

[Art_from_Ark]

30. No, that's not what I meant

On rereading my post, it does seem a little muddy.

The point I was trying to make is that he was asked to run, but he would not divulge his party preference at that time, even though that would have been a great opportunity.

His support for Clinton has less to do with party politics and more to do with Arkansas Old Boy networks, in my opinion.

And his support for Cleland could have been due more to the fact that Cleland was both a fellow veteran and recipient of both the Silver Star and Bronze Star.

[tjdee]

33. What of his support for Gore?

I can see the point you're making, and I may be inclined to agree that he at the very least was an independent.

My point of contention is that everything he says has been to the left of Lieberman and Zell Miller(for example). If Lieberman is allowed to run in the Democratic primaries, just because he has a piece of paper (to use Spell's phrase), so too should Clark if he feels he is a Democrat. He just as easily could have said he was a Republican, and run for Senate or governor somewhere this or next year. It really comes down to whether you think he is an opportunistic liar, or not. I don't.

Btw, I'd also argue that this independence makes Clark more attractive as a candidate to the general public, even if it pisses the base off. What are they going to do, vote for Bush? I don't think that much of the base is irritated though....maybe the base on DU....

[Padraig18]

35. This election will live or die with the 'swing/independent' vote.

Some Democrats, in their committment to liberal ideological 'purity' in the Democratic party fail to acknowledge 3 facts, IMO:

1.) The 'liberal' party they lament has been dead for a generation, essentially; weep at it's grave if you must, but acknowledge the reality of its death.

2.) NEITHER party has an electoral majority among self-identified voters; the voters who provide the winning majority come from the independent 'swing' voters.

3.) Only the party which puts together a coalition that garners a majority of electoral votes from 51 separate state elections for President will control the machinery of the executive branch of government.

I am, above all, a brutally-cold realist about electoral politics.

[Larkspur]

37. All we have is Clark's word that he voted for Gore, but his actions

speak louder than his word. In 2001 he helped raise funds for Republicans and praised the Thief in Chief.

We have no proof that Clark voted for Gore in 2000, and since his word is suspect and he has no background as a Democratic politician, Clark's word is meaningless.

[kiahzero]

40. "praised the Thief in Chief"

Then went on to criticize his policies. Just because he said something nice about the guy and his administration before detailing how they are wrong, some of you guys seem to want to crucify him.

[Larkspur]

44. Crucifying Clark would not be harsh enough punishment

He is at best a fraud and at worse a Trojan Horse candidate who will undermine the Democratic Party as a whole.

He is too untrustworthy to be the Democratic Party's standard bearer, and I will fight him and his supporters "tooth and nail."

[tjdee]

63. But vote for Dean though!

You will fight Clark AND HIS SUPPORTERS?

Are you kidding?

If Dean wins the nomination you're going to need those supporters, don't you think?

:eyes:

[Larkspur]

73. If I can't trust Clark, how can I trust his supporters?

Dean's campaign is still growing, despite Clark.

[tjdee]

86. How can I trust you?

I don't trust Dean particularly, either.

What a ridiculous thing to say!

Dean needs more than just his internet activists to win a national election, and his supporters need to understand that (most of them do, I've not seen ANYONE on DU but you say you don't *trust* and will work against the supporters of another candidate.)

[Padraig18]

93. It IS ridiculous

DEMOCRATS support whoever the party nominates. Howard has stated that he will support whoever the party nominates. What are you trying to tell us about yourself, if I may ask? :wtf:

ABB!

[Larkspur]

96. That I am EXTREMELY suspicisous of Clark's motives about

running for the Dem Prez nomination.

Clark has done NOTHING to convince me that he's a Democrat. He's got NO RECORD to point to to prove that he has supported Democratic principals.

Also, he has no record governing in the civilian sphere. That is also a black mark against Clark.

[Larkspur]

100. I'm not a sheep following the herd

I will support the Dem nominee, unless it's Clark. Right now, Clark has done nothing but make me very, very suspicisous of his real motives for entering the Democratic Prez race.

[TLM]

123. I do not hold it against all Clark supporters...

We have to remember that most are just excited and don’t know all the facts about Clark.

Clark's corps have done a really great job of hyping him up and avoiding ANY tough questions by attacking Dean or the questioners.

Only a small chunk of Clark boosters are knowingly lying to people and the rest are just afraid that there is no way to beat bush without a military man.

Clark says the right things and he seems to be a big shiny military guy who can win... and so a lot of dems are willing to get behind him. They don't want to know Clark has been working for the same fucking people who are pulling W's strings. The Carlyle group, world bank, NED, and Kissinger.

Clark may be the very pinnacle of the repuke say one thing and do another methodology. The best way to beat the dems, is take a repuke and give him a dem script, let him lead the dems like the pied piper... right of a f-ign cliff.


Most dems wouldn't want Clark if they knew the truth... they just want to win. They are scared and Clark looks like the guy to fix things, but the man behind the curtain is not the great progressive hope he is being presented as.

[TLM]

121. Really.. look at this harsh criticism of republicans...

"And I'm very glad we've got the great team in office, men like Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice... people I know very well - our president George W. Bush. We need them there."


and oh he really sting red ink reagan here...

"We were really helped when President Ronald Reagan came in. I remember non-commissioned officers who were going to retire and they re-enlisted because they believed in President Reagan."

"That's the kind of President Ronald Reagan was. He helped our country win the Cold War. He put it behind us in a way no one ever believed would be possible. He was truly a great American leader. And those of us in the Armed Forces loved him, respected him, and tremendously admired him for his great leadership."


Oh and look at the spanking he gave Bush Sr.

"President George Bush had the courage and the vision... and we will always be grateful to President George Bush for that tremendous leadership and statesmanship."

Well there you have it...


Tell me something, how can you praise the leadership of Reagan and Bush, then the next year turn around and claim you are a democrat who supports a style of leadership that is a total 180 from what you previously said you thought was the great model for leadership?

Face it, Clark is a man who tells his audience what they want to hear.

[Larkspur]

36. No, it is an issue with me because the Prez nominee is the Party's

standard bearer.

If Clark was running for dog catcher then I would be forgiving, but he's running for Dem Prez nominee and has NO RECORD of behaving like a Democrat in elected civilian office, in fact he has NO EXPERIENCE running for and managing the affairs of elected civilian office. The fact that he helped raise funds for Republicans in 2001 and praised Bush & Co. in the same year, convinces me that he is a Republican at heart.

I do not and will never trust Wes Clark. He is a fraud.

[Padraig18]

38. Kick

:kick:

[Nikia]

80. I agree

For such an important office, it is important to have someone who is really a member of our party. Even if he is now a Democrat, the fact that he was hesitant to announce his party preference and helped the Republicans as recently as two years ago makes me hesitant about supporting him. I do welcome recently former Republicans and independents to our party, just not as our presidential candidate. I would vote for him instead of Bush if it came to that next November.

[poskonig]

41. Good post! My comments:

Clark is getting shit for "not being a Democrat" because of two reasons. One, when Clark went into the race, he said he was "still deciding" his party affiliation to lure centrists and conservatives on board. Secondly, Clark, who has degrees in philosophy, political science, and economics, is pretending he doesn't know where he stands on the issues in order to lure the same demographic.

Hence, though while I believe Clark philosophically is on the Democratic side of the fence, he will get crap about "not being a Democrat" for the above reasons until Clark moves from mindless platitudes to crisp and clear issue details.

Clark has a don't-rock-the-boat / make-everyone-happy attitude which enabled him to succeed bureaucratically. While this helped him get things done in the pentagon in the past, saying nice things about Cheney and Rumsfeld sounds a lot like "some of my best friends are Nazis" to many Democrats. I'm not sure what the Clark campaign can do to change this situation.

The bottom line: Given I do not know a single Republican that supports affirmative action, ispro-choice, believes America was founded on progressive taxation, etc, we can safely claim Clark is a Democrat.

[dkf]

66. Actually, isn't that Colin Powell also? And He's a repub.

The bottom line: Given I do not know a single Republican that supports affirmative action, ispro-choice, believes America was founded on progressive taxation, etc, we can safely claim Clark is a Democrat.

[TLM]

128. Heh your description fits Arnold....

except for the tax thing perhaps, and he's running as a repuke.

I think what we are seeing here is a very intentional blurring of the line between repuke and democrat by the right.

Clark was working for Henry Kissinger as a DC lobbyist until the day he declared.

You know a lot of dems who work for Henry Kissinger as a lobbyist, who heap praise on the great leadership of Bush I and Reagan, who are directors of the NED, and who work with the head of the Carlyle group?

The republicans... or more to the point the big wigs pulling the strings of this administration know that Bush is gone in 2004... he will lose to the dem nominee. SO what do they do... let someone like Dean or Edwards get in there who will not support their interests and may even go after them?

They can not afford that, not now. So they take one of their guys, Clark, give him a populist democrat script, hype him up real good, and run him as the unbeatable general that just discovered he's a democrat.

Clark wins, gives lip service to the liberals, while continuing to push the agenda of these groups like Carlyle and NED and PNAC. Then after a crappy 4 year run of not really doing anything more than talking about change... the repukes will have another run.

All Clark is right now is a giant history of republican service and ties to the worst neo-con groups and war profiteers, with a great liberal script. He's shown me NOTHING but words... words that are in direct contradiction to his actions and other words.

[SWPAdem]

42. My thanks to a fair and balanced Dean supporter

Real democrats are focused on beating Bush, not engaging in games of "my candidate's better than yours."

[Padraig18]

43. Spot on!

:thumbsup: "ANYBODY BUT BUSH!"

[Art_from_Ark]

45. Actually, real Democrats are focused on beating Bush

with a real Democrat

[SWPAdem]

49. It's all in the eye of the beholder

BTW, I worked my ass off for Gore, I love him still, and I think that he would have been a President for the ages. However, he has made it quite clear that he IS NOT running. What do you plan to do if:

Gore is not drafted or does not accept a draft and Clark is the nominee? Will he be enough of a Democrat for you then?

[Art_from_Ark]

60. This is the primary stage

The nominating process starts next January 27 in New Hampshire. The convention is next August.

What happens between now and then is anybody's guess.

The goal is to find the best candidate who most closely believes in the humanitarian, political, social, economic and environmental principles of the Democratic Party.

It is very hard to judge a candidate who has not been an active member the party. I should point out that in the last 140 years, at least, no Democrat has been elected President without first having had some experience in public office. Clark is a political neophyte and is seeking the highest office in the land, without first gaining experience at a lower level. He comes from a background where orders are given and taken without question-- the opposite of liberal free-thinking. He claims to be a liberal, but it has been my impression, in conversing with past and present members of the military, that liberals tend to serve their time and go on to other things; those who make the military a decades-long career tend to become detached from their liberal roots.

Naturally, there are exceptions to every rule, and Clark could well be an exception. But I am skeptical at the present time.

Nevertheless, if he does become the Democratic nominee, then I will support him. The upcoming election is crucial. Voting for third parties with no chance of winning, or for neoconservative Republicans, is not an option.

[SWPAdem]

72. That is what I wanted to hear

"Nevertheless, if he does become the Democratic nominee, then I will support him. The upcoming election is crucial. Voting for third parties with no chance of winning, or for neoconservative Republicans, is not an option."

Nevertheless, I find it a little amusing that those who are quick to throw out the "not a real Democrat" charge will find him Democratic enough, if necessary.

[Art_from_Ark]

Amusing?

Bu$h is not an option. Third party is not an option. Not voting is not an option.
What is amusing about that?

[SWPAdem]

88. The use of labels is what is amusing.

Bush and his cabal are nightmares. I don't believe that I mentioned their names in conjunction with the word "amusing"

[TLM]

131. And Clark is tied to that same Cabal... the same nightmares

Clark just has a better script.


Clark worked with the head of the carlyle group in the NED, he worked as a lobbyist for Kissinger, he heaped praise on the leadership of Bush I and Reagan at a repuke fundraiser... what more does this guy have to do to prove he's a two faced fraud?

[SWPAdem]

137. Simply being on the board of those organizations is not HARD proof

Show me actions, statements that categorically prove that Clark has signed off on nefarious activities. Perhaps, his time on these boards has shown him how evil these people are and that is why he is coming forward. If you can't come up with proof, the allegations are nothing more than the opinion of diehard Clark haters. Personally, if you told me the sky was blue, I would have sincere doubts.

[TLM]

130. Dems are also focused on getting the people pulling Bush's strings.

Bush is not the problem, because Bush is just a puppet. THe problems are the neocons behind BUsh... and Clark works with and for a lot of those same people.

Anybody but Bush... even if it is another guy beholden to the same groups like Carlyle, NED, World Bank... etc.

[Gringo]

46. What meaningless "proof"

This adds absolutely nothing to the debate "somebody in Arklansas says it's normal there, so there"

Nobody is saying that Clark is an ogre. We all know that there are millions of registered independents. As such they are, for the most part NOT democrats. They DON'T have the same level of commitment to progressive/democratic causes as those of us who register and consistently vote democrat, IMO.

He is an independent who is USING the democratic party as a vehicle, because he would NEVER win as an independent.

[Larkspur]

47. You hit the nail on the head!

.

[Padraig18]

51. No, he didn't

He swung at a nail that isn't THERE!

[Padraig18]

50. 95.6% of the people in AR are 'independents'

Surely you gest to suggest that at least half of them aren't Democrats? The registration is MEANINGLESS, because some states (like my own, IL) don't even ASK. Dick Durbin(D-IL) isn't a 'registered' Democrat, and he is one of THE most 'Democratic' senators in DC.

:wtf:

[Larkspur]

52. When I lived in Illinois, I was a registered Democrat and it was

important at primary time to know party affiliation. I was an Illinois resident from 1961-1983, 1980-83 was when I was eligible to vote.

As far as Sen. Durbin, I would have problems with him being a registered Independent and claiming to be a Democrat. I don't know enough about him to say any more.

As far as regular people being Independent, they are not running for the Democratic Presidential nomination, so it's not as important for them to be registered as it is for candidates to be.

[Padraig18]

54. I just called my County Clerk

And since *at least* 1971, when the new Constitution became effective, there has been NO 'party registration'. Maybe before '71 you were, but not after, unless she's lying.

[Larkspur]

75. I registered as a Democrat in 1980

People may be able to register as Independents or No Party Registration, but I know that I registered as a Democrat.

[Padraig18]

81. I just checked again

There was NO--- zero, sip, none--- 'party' registration in 1980. She is calling me back with the URL to the Illinois law, as soon as she gets a minute.

[Gringo]

55. You have a good point if the stat is correct

Anything to back up the 96% figure?

[Padraig18]

56. The original post

It says only 4.4% of AR voters even choose a party on their voter-registration form.

"Only 4.4 percent of Arkansas' 1.5 million voters have declared any political party, said Janet Miller, the secretary of state's deputy for elections."

:)

[Gringo]

57. Duuhhhhh.....

Oh, sorry, teacher, I was daydreaming there for a minute.

;-)

[Padraig18]

64. *grin*

's OK; even in 2003, they still put erasers on pencils! :hi:

[Brian Sweat]

71. He is not a registered independant.

Up until 1996 Arkansas did not allow for party affiliation on voter registration. Therefore, not being registred to a party in Arkansas does not make you a registered independant.

[TLM]

132. I think it is deeper than that... Clark is the darling of the status quo

The same special interests and current power players who want to hold on to their money and power at the government tit... are the ones backing Clark.

Look at who he worked with... he's got his fingers in the same pie as W and his crew. Clark worked with the head of Carlyle in the NED, with world bank, and was a lobbyist for Kissinger.

Clark is these special interest folks plan B... Bush is going to lose, and they need someone in the white house who will keep their corrupt system running and the big contracts flowing.

CLark is that man... he is their safety net. This is exactly how the repukes beat Cynthia McKinny. (sp?) They ran another black woman against her in the primary, who claimed to be a liberal, and got rid of her. THey are doing the same crap with Clark... take a repuke fundraise and lobbyist for kissinger, give him a great liberal script, and send him into the race to make sure that no real dems gets in the office and fucks up their plans.

And too many dems are falling for this ploy.

[Larkspur]

135. Yes, this is how I see Clark's candidacy

He is plan B should Rove's tactic backfire and cost Bush the election.

The Dem Party needs a house cleaning as well as the White House.

[Evil_Dewers]

48. Personal anecdote...

I used to live in a state where if your were registered as an independent, you could vote in both the Dem and Repuke primaries.

If you were registered as a Dem--you could only vote in the Dem primary. Vice versa re: a registration as a Repuke.

I registered as an independent, voted for the good Dem candidates and the most unelectable Repuke candidates.

I guess some here would claim I wasn't a Dem because I wasn't registered as a Dem, even though in elections, not primaries, I have never voted for a Repuke in my life.

[Larkspur]

53. But you were not running for the Dem Prez nomination or any other

office.

Candidates should be straight about what party they are representing.

[Padraig18]

59. Question?

Has he ever said at any place or time that he IS a Repugnicrat? He HAS said repeatedy that he is a Democrat. Seems as though the burden of proof has shifted to you to prove that he is NOT, given his staterments AND the documentary *proof* in front of you now. :eyes:

[Padraig18]

61. PS

You are NOT helping Howard by persisting in this; if anything, this sort of lunacy is driving people away from him. See the BIG picture, please.

[Larkspur]

79. As a registered Democrat and member of my town's Dem Comm

I have real problems with Clark saying he is a Democrat and NOT Having a record to back it up. His words are not good enough for me, and if my antagonism drives Clark supporters from Dean, then they are shallow anyway. If Clark was running for dog catcher, then I'd give him a break, but he's running for the Dem Prez nomination and standard bearer of the Dem Party without having a record to back up his Democratic claims.

I will never support Clark for President, even if he "wins" the Dem nomination. In my mind, he's a Trojan Horse candidate who will be a different face than Bush but both represent the same body -- corporate cronys and the military-industrial complex.

[Padraig18]

89. Awesome!

Then you must be in the "baby with the bathwater" wing of the party! Sounds like the formula for *'s re-election in 2004, to me. Hope you like living in "AmeriKKKa"!

[Larkspur]

106. To me Clark is another face on the same body Bush fronts

and that is the corporate cronys and the military-industrial complex.

To me, Clark is just as much the enemy as Bush. Trust is not won with TV appeal. It is earned and Clark has done nothing to earn trust as a Democratic candidate for the Presidency. Mouthing Democratic platitudes is not a credible sign that Clark is a Democrat. Con men do that to swindle their victims.

[SWPAdem]

95. Count me as shallow, then

I waited for months to see if Clark would declare before throwing my support to Dean. What I have seen from some of his supporters on this board, is a bullying stance of "my way or the highway", that is very unattractive. One of the concerns that I had about Dean was the fact that I have spent over thirty years in nursing and I have dealt with more arrogant and misogynistic doctors than I can count. Dean has that whiff of arrogance. A lot of nurses that I work with have also voiced that opinion. It isn't something that would necessarily keep me from voting for him, but the actions of a lot of his supporters are making me feel that I am 100% correct in my assessment....you know.... like draws like.

Unlike you, I will be mature enough to vote for our eventual candidate, whoever he is, because I am putting America before pride and party. IMO, your unwillingness to vote for Clark if he does win the nomination belies all your avowals of Democratic credentials and is not a credit to your candidate. Perhaps, I will take Padraig's example and email my concerns to Dean's campaign.

[Larkspur]

105. Generals are more arrogant than doctors

The military extablishment is a hierarchal structure that demands obedience from its subordinates. That does not translate well into a civlilan democracy.

If Clark wanted to win trust as a Democrat, whey didn't he run for governor of Arkansas when the Dem party gave him the chance? Why didn't he run for a lower political office than President to prove both his claim as a Democrat and to that he could be an effective politician.

As far as Dean, he has already indirectly but publicly challenged Clark's credentials as a Democrat. He referred to Clark as a Republican until the day Clark filed his papers.

[SWPAdem]

112. So good of you to admit that Dean is arrogant.........

And you would be basing your opinion of the military on personal experience, I assume? I am former military, the daughter of a veteran and I work with military people every day. Yes, there are arrogant officers but I can tell you that Clark is not one of them.

True Democrats do not bash other Democrats. I was very disappointed when Gephardt et al attacked Dean, and I am just as dismayed by Dean bashing Clark. You are not a person that should be questioning anyones' credentials.

[Larkspur]

115. I am a voter and a registered Democrat and I have a right to protect

the welfare of my Party. I have every right to criticize Clark's credentials.

You are not a person that should be questioning anyones' credentials.
This is typical authoritarian military speech and it shows the military's and obviously your contempt for civilians. This is why I oppose generals or military people becoming president without making the transition to civilian political life.

No, I was not in the military. My mother was in the US Army during World War II, and she never voted for Gen. Eisenhower for president. While she respected him as general of Allied forces during World War II, she thought he was not fit to be president. At best, Eisenhower was a mediocre president, and it was his admin that sanctioned the overthrow of Iran's democracy in favor of a pro-American dictator -- the Shah of Iran -- and both the Iranians and us are still suffering the consequences of that decision.

[SWPAdem]

120. You have stated in more than one post

that you WILL NOT vote for Clark if he is our party's nominee. That is precisely why you do not have the right to question anyone's Democratic credentials. My entire family are also registered Democrats and never-miss voters. We feel that the salvation of our country and party lies with Clark. If anyone is authoritarian here, it is you, assuming that only you have asked the right questions and possess the correct answers. If we all follow your requirements, NO ONE would ever be able to run for elective office for the first time, civilian or not. That first time around, we have only their word to go on.

I am no longer in the military but often work in a military hospital. Your posts show a definite prejudice towards the military that does not help the Democratic Party. Ike may have been a mediocre President but he was the GENERAL that warned us about the MIC, no? Therefore, they cannot be all bad.

[Larkspur]

133. Ike was a hypocrite over MIC

He fronted for them his 2 terms, so while I agreed with what he said, I don't have a lot of respect for him because he didn't mention the MIC while he enjoyed the perks of the White House.

As far as my right to criticize, to bad you don't like it. My argument for Clark -- run for a lower civilian political office, like governor, first as a Democrat, manage that office well, win re-election at least once, and then run for President as a Democrat. Only then will Clark have credibility in my eyes.

Am I prejudice against the military? I believe that the military is servant to the civilian population. Does that make me anti-military? I'm pro-democracy and that means the military is servant to the civilian population; otherwise, we have a military dictatorship. When generals-turned-corporate-hacks, who help raise funds for the opposing political party, run for President of the United States on their military record and rhetoric, that raises lots of suspicions in my mind about the generals' sincerity and qualifiations to be civilian political leader of our democracy.

[SWPAdem]

140. You just answered the question

You are prejudiced against the military, automatically assuming that all of them are the tools of the MIC. You have no PROOF, only assumptions. You act as if the very people that are willing to lay their lives on the line to protect democracy are all plotting to take over this country.

You are entitled to your narrow and self serving opinion and I don't care who the hell you criticize. It is your tactics, lack of tolerance and respect, and bullying attitude that are so offensive. Come to think of it, those are all the attributes that the authoritarian branch of the military are so famous for. Just expect that whenever you enter a positive Clark thread to spew this propaganda, I will fight YOU tooth and nail.

[Larkspur]

143. If you want to live in a military dictatorship, go live in Turkmenistan

I have respect for military people who remember that they are servants to the civilian sector. I have contempt for military people who have dreams of being Ceasar. Clark is a Ceasar wannabe.

[SWPAdem]

147. Again, proof?

Please enlighten me as to just how Clark, who is a civilian, is going to cause a military coup in this country? Go on, let's see where you and your tag team partner go with this one. Maybe we should force everyone out of Congress that has prior service, also. Would that make you feel a little more secure?

BTW, it really isn't very DEMOCRATIC to tell someone to go live in another country when they don't agree with you. As a matter of fact, it is downright, well I can't say that word here.

[TLM]

136. Fuck that noise! You are WRONG!

"That is precisely why you do not have the right to question anyone's Democratic credentials."


EVERYBODY has the right to question a presidential nominee's credentials, and not you or any other authoritarian with a hard on for a military run state has a damn bit of justification to tell them otherwise.

Welcome to America sister, where we don't have to follow orders from some tin pot dickhead simply because he has stars on his chest or he puts on a flight suit.

I will not vote for Clark. If he gets the nomination, I will write in my vote for a real democrat. I will not vote for a Kissinger puppet or Carlyle crony.

[SWPAdem]

141. another bully for Dean

I thought that we were already following orders from some tin pot dickheads and a moron in a flight suit and the point of the election is to get him out of office.

Welcome to America, a**hole, where YOU don't have the right to force your damn opinion on me, or tell me who to vote for. Got that?

Have at your "conscience vote" because anyone that votes against the Democratic nominee, even if it is Clark, will be voting for a neocon/Carlyle puppet.

[TLM]

134. See this is what bugs me about the clark crew...

"You are not a person that should be questioning anyones' credentials"

Attacks on the very idea of questioning... a very military reflex in reaction to a high ranking officer I suspect.

The very idea that even daring to presume to ask Clark to prove he is a democrat is arrogant and petty, and that you should simply shut your damn mouth and vote for this brilliant ubber-human general, is frighting to me.

Will this tendency to attack questioners and to silence criticism be a part of a Clark administration.

I thought we wanted to get rid of that shit when we flushed Bush?

Sorry I'm not a member of the military, and Clark can not oder me to shut up, neither can you. I will continue to ask these questions and point out the fact that the Clark mercinaries want kept silent.

[SWPAdem]

142. So tell me...what do YOU call so-called Democrats

that repeatedly state that they will not vote for Clark if he is the Democratic candidate? Certainly not true-blue Democrats......

Therefore, those people, including yourself, need to stop questioning when and if Clark is a registered Dem....

[Larkspur]

146. I call us real Democrats and Clark a faux-Dem at best

I will not vote for Clark for President in 2004. He has to prove to me first that he is qualified to be the Democratic nominee for President and he has failed by announcing to run for the office of the Presidency without

being a registered Dem or at least having a history of involvement with his local and state Dem Party, by

raising funds for Republicans in 2001, and by

having no record of holding civilian political office as a Democrat.

Clark is a faux-Democrat at best.

[SWPAdem]

148. Faux is as faux does.

n/t

[Padraig18]

160. *You* are the faux Democrat

REAL Democrats support whoever is the nominee of the party.

[Art_from_Ark]

65. Read this article which describes Clark's indecisiveness

He claimed to be neither Democrat nor Republican in late 2001, after he supposedly voted for Gore.

http://www.google.co.jp/search?q=cache:wRzcikZ6H1wJ:www.arkansasnews.com
/280143421098684.bsp+brummett+clark+governor+Democrat&hl=ja&ie=UTF-8&inlang=ja

[Larkspur]

82. Clark helped raise funds for Republicans in 2001

after he supposedly voted for Gore.

Just because Clark says he voted for a Democrat doesn't mean he did. We have no proof that he voted for Gore, just his word, which is useless to me.

[Padraig18]

87. Clark was a PAID speaker!

Some of you folks are grasping at straws, and you're turning people off of Howard, as a result. :eyes:

[Larkspur]

108. Judas Iscariot was paid 30 pieces of silver to betray Jesus

If Clark was paid by the Republicans to speak at their fundraiser, that's more evidence that he's not a Democrat and does not have the welfare of the Democratic Party in mind.

Thank you for finally convincing me that supporting Clark would be supporting the final collapse of the Democratic Party.

[SWPAdem]

113. Perhaps

we should just tell everyone that attended the DNC meeting that they are also suspect since they actually applauded Clark.

[Padraig18]

117. I guess we need 9 new candidates

According to Larkspur's logic, since all 9 have said nice things about Clark, they are obviously unfit to call themselves Democrats. :tinfoilhat:

[TLM]

138. Keep mouthing that line... and maybe all the supportes of other guys

will shut up and stop asking those hard questions.

this is about the 5th or 6th time I have seen "The way you keep asking tough questions about Clark really turns me off to (insert name of candidate questioner supports)."

The PAID speaker stil said:

"And I'm very glad we've got the great team in office, men like Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice... people I know very well - our president George W. Bush. We need them there."

"We were really helped when President Ronald Reagan came in. I remember non-commissioned officers who were going to retire and they re-enlisted because they believed in President Reagan."

"That's the kind of President Ronald Reagan was. He helped our country win the Cold War. He put it behind us in a way no one ever believed would be possible. He was truly a great American leader. And those of us in the Armed Forces loved him, respected him, and tremendously admired him for his great leadership."

"President George Bush had the courage and the vision... and we will always be grateful to President George Bush for that tremendous leadership and statesmanship."


But hey he was paid to say it... so I guess that means he's only a repuke if the money is right.

And that proves he's not a two faced liar, how?

[SWPAdem]

103. And you have NO PROOF that he did not

n/t

[Padraig18]

110. A Lincoln Day dinner

I assume it is a fundraiser, since that is what our Jefferson-Jackson Day dinners are here. Our paid speaker last year was President Lou Hencken of Eastern IL University, and I have no idea what his affiliation was or is, although I seriously doubt we converted him, if he wasn't already a Democrat to begin with. It was a nice dinner, but not THAT nice! *grin* :hi:

[Brian Sweat]

74. You're right. It is so hard to tell what Party Clark represents.

The fact that he has declared for the Democratic nomination does little to clarify his party affiliation while that fact that he doesn't have a piece of paper saying his is a Democrat is extremely confusing.

[noiretextatique]

58. it seems he has registered now that he is a nominee

it seems he did sign the paper on thursday...good for him. are there any registered democrats in Arkansas? "the thinking man's general" should have thought of this sooner. why add more fuel to the fire by NOT doing this before throwing his hat into the ring? seems a really bonehead omission.

[Padraig18]

62. It was a screw up

But that's all it was. Let the 1st candidate here who HASN'T screwed up, misspoken or stepped on their own d*ck in some way cast the 1st stone.

[noiretextatique]

77. a pretty BIG screw-up

considering all the existing concern and discussion about his party affiliation. as i said, this screw-up just added more fuel to the fire.

[Padraig18]

83. Show me a candidate who HASN'T.

I agree, however, that it did add fuel to the fire. Nonetheless, he said he voted for Clinton and Gore both, when asked to state his party preference in a partisan primary, he said "Democrat", so that's pretty much the end of this 'controversy', for me. I want to discuss ISSUES with Clark and his supporters, not this sort of petty, piddly shit.

[noiretextatique]

129. this will continue to be an issue for some

as to other candidates, of course there are no *comparable* screw-ups, especially considering the existing controversy about clark's allegiances. i agree this is not defining issue by any means, but i think it's wishful thinking to hope it will go away. some see this (the allegiance thing as a whole) as one of the ISSUES with Clark.

[Padraig18]

67. Kick

:kick:

[Brian Sweat]

68. No, No, No, No, No

Haven't you heard, the Clark bashers have a Businessweek article that says that he is a registered independant. When I suggested that he simply chose not to indicate a party affiliation and that the Businessweek article had simply misconstrued this as being an independant, they told me I was wrong. So you see, Clark is not a Democrat.

Also, the fact that Dean is not a registered Democrat means nothing.

[Art_from_Ark]

78. Um, the registration means nothing in Dean's case

since he was a Democratic governor for years and thus has a record that can be scrutinized.

Clark's registration is not important either, since Arkansas (assuming he is an Arkansas voter) does not require party registration. Neither is what primary an Arkansas voter participates in. I am registered in Arkansas and can choose whichever primary I want to vote in. I have voted in the Republican primary on occasion, when the Democratic candidates were mostly uncontested.

What does matter here are, among other things, Clark's indecisiveness in declaring his party affiliation, his political naivete, his waffling on issues on which he should have had an informed opinion, his actual ability to serve as President without having held any other public office, and his trustability as a real Democrat who will not abandon his stances after the election like the current occupant of the White House did.

[Brian Sweat]

91. Duh,

I was just pointing out how stupid people are for puting so much emphasis on the fact that Clark is not a registered Democrat.

[Art_from_Ark]

98. And I was pointing out that voting in a party's primary in Arkansas

does not necessarily make one a member of that party, as some would wish to believe.

[Larkspur]

84. What evidence do you have that Dean is not a registered Dem?

Just because a state does not require a party registration does not mean that a voter can not choose a party affiliation.

[Padraig18]

85. Read what you just wrote!

*Ding, ding!*

[Brian Sweat]

92. Vermonst does not allow for party affiliation on its

voter registration cards. Therefore, Dean cannot be a registered Democrat.

Until 1996, Arkansas did not allow for party affiliation on its voter registration cards. Wesley Clark most likely registered to vote long before 1996. This is the most likely reason why he does not have a party affiliation.

[Art_from_Ark]

97. Yes, but

When Clark was asked to name his party affiliation in late 2001, he said he was NEITHER DEMOCRAT NOR REPUBLICAN. Only two years ago, at the age of 57, and he was still undecided? And he raised money for Republicans the same year.

Not much of a Democrat, if you ask me.

[Larkspur]

101. Exactly!

And when Clark was invited by the Dem Party to run for governor, he declined, but he didn't have a problem raising funds for Republicans 2 years ago. Clark is not kosher.

[Brian Sweat]

126. No one asked you.

This is about registering for a particular party. Clark bashers have been claiming that he is not a Democrat specifically because he is not registered as a Democrat. We have given a valid reason why. You cannot refute this.

[Larkspur]

116. False, Vermont voter reg form does have a box for party affliliation

but Vermont law does not restrict any election to party affiliation.

[Brian Sweat]

125. Wrong, try again.

There is NO PARTY REGISTRATION in Vermont

[Larkspur]

144. Nope, you are wrong. Here's Vermont's voter reg form

Vermont does allow party registration, but the state does not require party affiliation to vote in any election. So the voter is allowed to choose a party if they want and the box is there for the voter to fill in.

http://www.fec.gov/votregis/pdf/vt.pdf

[Brian Sweat]

152. Nope, YOUR WRONG! That is NOT Vermont's voter registration form.

That is a form provided by the FEC that can be used to register in any state.

There is a link to the Vermont voter registration form on the Vermont Secretary of State's website. Here is what it says:


"If you want to register to vote in Vermont or to change the town in Vermont in which you are registered to vote, Download the Vermont Voter Application. Instructions are provided with the form."



No where on this form is there a place to specify a party affiliation and the Vermont Secretary of State's website specifically says:

"There is NO PARTY REGISTRATION in Vermont"

[bicentennial_baby]

153. Brian, you rock!

Guess that's settled, eh? :P

[DoveTurnedHawk]

156. Good Job Calling Larkspur on Her BS (eom)

DTH

[TLM]

139. Again what is the source on Dean not being a registered democrat?

I keep seeing this thrown out to try and change the subejct from Clark's campaign lying about his being a registered dem... yet I have seen no source.

on edit... oh I see there is no party registration in Vermont. So we have to go by Dean's decade as a declared democrat in office.


So what do we have to go on for Clark... his record of pro-republican supprort, his membership in NED, or maybe his lobbist status for Kissinger?

[davidinalameda]

94. A piece of paper doesn't make you a Democrat

"A piece of paper doesn't make you a Democrat," Spell said. "Wesley
Clark is a real Democrat, and this is simply a tactic that the other
guys are using to distract Americans from the real issues."


that is so well said!

[Larkspur]

99. Having a record would alleviate my distrust of Clark

Since he's got no previous elected civilian political office record to support his Democratic claims, I've got nothing to evaluate him with. And I believe that generals do not make good presidents unless they prove themselves in elected civilian political office first, and the presidency is not the office I want him to prove it to me with.

[SWPAdem]

102. Face it

If FDR or JFK were suddenly resurrected, stepped forward with the "paperwork" you so desperately require, you would not accept it.

[Larkspur]

107. FDR was a Democratic governor of New York and JFK was a

Democratic senator from a liberal state, Massachusetts.

They had records to back their claims. Clark does not.

[SWPAdem]

114. Really?

I didn't know that, having just been born yesterday. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

[davidinalameda]

151. was Clinton a registered Democrat

under Arkansas law, doesn't seem like he could have been

did anyone question him

[w4rma]

104. A white lie by the Clark campaign

…
"A Clark campaign spokesman at first told BusinessWeek that the former general had in fact updated his voter registration to reflect his newfound status as a Democrat. But a call to the Pulaski County Voter Registrar indicated otherwise. When asked to explain the discrepancy, campaign consultant Mark Fabiani says Clark hadn't yet had time to register as a Democrat."
…
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/oct2003/nf2003101_0874_db038.htm
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=448201#448927

[RandomUser]

122. This thread defending Clark was started by a DEAN supporter

Furthermore, the rules that allow one to register as a "democrat" are recent rules. Over 95% of Arkansas, and probably almost all of the democrats in Arkansas still have "independent". It wasn't even legal to register as a "democrat" until the past few years. And it certainly wasn't legal to register as a "democrat" when Clark first registered to vote decades ago.

[ronnykmarshall]

109. Thanks for posting that!

It's nice breath of fresh air when someone from one camp defends a rival DEMOCRAT!!

You rock!

[Padraig18]

111. Thank you!

The way for a candidate to win the nomination and still leave an intact party with which to win the general election is to NOT get down in the gutter and engage in character assasination!

[RandomUser]

124. I agree

Whoever wins the nomination will need the support of people now supporting a rival candidate. If the nominee has alienated those people by attacking their candidate, he'll be in trouble in the general election.

[drfemoe]

127. He just hasn't declared which party he's running for yet

I really don't like introducing these facts. It's embarassing. If none of this matters to You, then go with the Clark gig.

His stuff bothers me.

...This is the FEC site >>
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?P40002792


Presented by the Federal Election Commission
CLARK, WESLEY GENERAL ID: P40002792

Office Sought: President
Election Year: 2004
State: Presidential Candidate
District: 02
Party: UNK (Unknown)



NOTE:
Click the Display Image column to quickly view a report page by page.
Click the Display PDF column to receive and view/print entire reports in PDF format.

TRY A: NEW SEARCH NEW ADVANCED SEARCH

[Tinoire]

145. This is another problem I have with Clark the Independent

After causing a ruckus in the Democratic Party, what's to stop him from splintering, away after having messed up the primaries for other Dems by splintering their vote, and then running as an Independent?

[SWPAdem]

159. What's to stop any of them from doing the same?

Puhleez.

[SWPAdem]

158. Don't let the fact

that the rest of the Party has welcomed him with open arms stand in the way of your feelings here. You know, a piece of paper is what defines a man.