Clark supporters, what issues do Clark and Dean differ on?

[gully]

I am somewhat familiar with Clarks positions on the issues. In fact, they sound quite similar to Dean's positions from what I recall.

Buttttt, Can you tell me where the General and the Doctor differ?

Thanks :)

I would research it myself, but Clarks issues page is still not up. I realize you guys have lots of sources that I dont. Also, I am only asking those of you who know off the top of your heads, I don't expect anyone to to massive research.

Much appreciation.

edited to add: Lets not turn this into a flame fest please.

[KittyWampus]

1. Clark Would Cut Pentagon Spending

Dean would not.

[maha]

4. Has Dean said he wouldn't cut Pentagon spending? n/t

[gully]

8. No, Dean said he'd eliminate waste in the pentagon

but feels we are not doing enough by way of homeland security. HE want's to eliminate the patriot act though, and use $$ from the pentagon waste for other means:

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_statement_foreign_homelandsecurity_oped

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_statement_foreign

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_speech_foreign_drake

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_speech_foreign_cfr

etc...

[KittyWampus]

15. I Distinctly Heard Dean Say He Would Not Cut Pentagon Spending

During a debate. Dennis Kucinich said he would cut Pentagon spending and Dean got snippy and said HE woud NOT and went on to link Pentagon spending with protecting the United States from Terrorism.

So if Dean has position papers saying he would trim waste in the Pentagon... Then that means CUTTING Pentagon spending.

And whether you call it "trimming waste" or "cutting the budget" this would not be easy for Dean to do because he would be labelled as "Soft on Defence"- the classic GOP talking point.

[gully]

18. No it doesn't. You can trim waste while keeping the same

budget.

[KittyWampus]

22. What Would Be The Point In "Trimming Waste"

if you're going to keep the budget the same?

Funding first responders has NOTHING to do with the Pentagon's Budget.

And you just PROVED MY POINT NICELY.

Clark said he would cut Pentagon spending and Dean would not... he'd just trim waste.

[gully]

30. Because waste is 'wasteful'.

That's the point. If you have waste, you can put the funds to good use elsewhere.

"Funding first responders has NOTHING to do with the Pentagon's Budget."

Uhm, you brought it up. I simply pointed out Dean shares the position.

[KittyWampus]

33. So If You Put "Funds Elsewhere" Other Than Pentagon

You are cutting the Pentagon's budget.

Which is what Dean said he would NOT do.... on National Television during a debate.

[gully]

38. Dean will not cut the Pentagon budget...

He will eliminate waste. What is so difficult for you to grasp about this?

HE can spend the same $$ doing productive things with the budget, while eliminating non-productive spending.

The Pentagon spends money on many things. So what's the confusion?

This may give you some understanding.

"Indeed, Department of Defense and related defense spending accounts for the majority of federal spending in nearly every state. And the U.S. accounts for 43 percent of world military spending."

http://www.peacefulresistance.com/article.php?story=20030801153915872

[KittyWampus]

9. Nope And Unfortunately He Linked It To Terrorism

I am very much against the notion that we need a bloated Pentagon to fight terrorism and kick terrorist ass "over there"...

The 'War on Terror' needs to be addressed by funding our first responders and working in cooperation with foreign intelligence.

Further, the Pentagon has lost over 3.6 Trillion dollars over the last 3-4 years. So no Democratic candidate has an excuse for not using this in lambasting the Pentagon's budget.

[Rose Siding]

12. Dean has also linked renewable energy

to nat'l security, which is an interesting concept.

[gully]

14. That is exactly Deans position. Read my links...

:D

[KittyWampus]

19. DEAN SAID HE WOULDN'T CUT PENTAGON SPENDING

And he said it on National Television.

So essentially, he lied on television.

[StopTheMorans]

21. kind of like Clark saying one day that

he "probably would have voted for the resolution" for the war and the next day saying "I have a record on this, I never would have voted for it" right?

on edit: spelling

[KittyWampus]

24. Why Change The Subject To Iraq War Vote

The issue I'm addressing is Dean's comment on National Television that he would NOT cut Pentagopn spending.

[StopTheMorans]

26. because the subject of your post wasn't just the

pentagon spending issue, it was "Dean lied on National television". Since you made that a large part of your post, I felt that it would be constructive to point out that Dean does not have a monopoly on lying, and I also felt that it would be most instructive to add the incident in which Clark lied and completely changed his position on consecutive days so as to make my point.

[KittyWampus]

28. No, Dean Lied On TV About His Position On Not Cutting Pentagon Spending

that was my post. And further down this thread there's a discussion on how both Dean AND Clark's stance on the Iraq War Vote
"evolved".

[gully]

36. Dean did not LIE, cutting spending and triming waste are not the same

as a former accountant I am certain of the obvious here.

[KittyWampus]

40. Taking Money Out Of A Budget By Trimming Waste

IS STILL CUTTING THE BUDGET!

for pete's sake, Gully...

Anyway, I'm still waiting to see if Clark reiterates his statement about cutting the Pentagon budget to pay for healthcare.

[gully]

43. HE'S NOT TAKING MONEY OUT OF THE BUDGET

for petes sake!

Why do you insist they are the same. They are not.

IF were spending $450.00 for a hammer and we decide to spend a more reasonable $2.00 (thus trimming waste) we have saved $480.00, thus we can buy another 24 hammers with the $$ we saved? It's not that difficult to understand.

[gully]

5. Interesting thanks.

:)

[StopTheMorans]

2. Clark would have voted for the war, Dean wouldn't have

but, people in both campes will argue that both waffled both ways:)

[maha]

3. We don't know that.

The war resolution would have been OK had it been written in a way that required Shrub to get UN approval before he ordered the invasion. That's what Clark said, and Dean said pretty much the same thing in pre-invasion interviews.

The real question is, what plans to they have for getting us out?

[wyldwolf]

6. Right... I recall Dean wanting to wait 60 days for Saddam to comply...

[gully]

13. Not quite. This is 'spin'...

In the article in question Dean said first:

"GOV. HOWARD DEAN, D-VT: Not quite yet. There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat to the United States and to our allies. The question is, is he an immediate threat? The president has not yet made the case for that.

I think it may very well be, particularly with the news that we've had over the weekend; that we are going to end up in Iraq. But I think it's got to be gone about in a very different way. It really is important to involve our allies, to bring other people into the coalition, to get a decent resolution out of the U.N. Security Council.

And if Saddam persists in thumbing his nose at the inspectors, we are clearly going to have to do something about it. But I'm not convinced yet and the president has not yet made the case, nor has he ever said, this is an immediate threat.

In fact, the only intelligence that has been put out there is the British intelligence report, which says he is a threat but not an immediate one."

"DEAN: Sure, I think the Democrats have pushed him into that position and the Congress, and I think that's a good thing. And I think he is trying to do that. We still get these bellicose statements.

Look, it's very simple. Here's what we ought to have done. We should have gone to the U.N. Security Council. We should have asked for a resolution to allow the inspectors back in with no pre-conditions. And then we should have given them a deadline saying "If you don't do this, say, within 60 days, we will reserve our right as Americans to defend ourselves and we will go into Iraq."

C:\Documents and Settings\DENISE\Desktop\CBSNews_com Print This Story.htm

I think Dean played this card in the best possible way. Note he said the president has not said such and such. Before you know it, Shrub had to say what Dean asked for. Because of this, we now know Bush lied and it may very well be his undoing.

No matter what happens with Dean, he has helped our cause.

I don't want a flame fest guys, I want real differences. Thanks

[Kahuna]

17. Exactly. It is easier for a camel to go thru the eye of..

a needle than for Dean to tell the truth.

[rucky]

20. This WAS a good thread

thanks for your constructive input. The Clark campaign would be proud.

[gully]

23. What crap.

I won't play the slam Clark game today though, thanks.

[StopTheMorans]

25. it's easy to make claims such as yours

when you take a line out of context. When you look at the context of that line, your claim holds no water. Do you seriously believe it?

[wyldwolf]

32. Did I make a "claim" or did I say "I recall" something...?

...did I take a line out of context or did I say "I recall something..."

Someone already gave an explanation for Dean's supposed statement yet you still found it necessary to jump in with an accusation that, in itself, holds no water.

[StopTheMorans]

34. "holds no water"

either you stand by your "recall" statement or you dont. if you want to play semantics, hell, by the same logic, I could just say "I recall Wesley Clark saying that he wanted to eat babies" and then get offended when someone called me on it simply because I attached "I recall" to the statement. If you're going to post something that is false when taken out of context, then you should be prepared to get called on it IMHO.

[wyldwolf]

45. ahh...the scent of absurdity...

...not that I really have to point it out because it is obvious to everyone reading how ridiculous your statements are...

either you stand by your "recall" statement or you dont.

I do stand by my "recall." And the person who first answered my post explained where the the 60 day quote came from.

if you want to play semantics, hell, by the same logic, I could just say "I recall Wesley Clark saying that he wanted to eat babies"

Perhaps you have a different opinion on the definition of logic than the rest of us. Find me one credible source that alludes to Clark eating babies then I might agree with you.

and then get offended when someone called me on it simply because I attached "I recall" to the statement.

Demonstrate to us where I was offended when the next poster, Gully, showed where the 60 day quote came from. In fact, show me where I responded AT ALL?

If you're going to post something that is false when taken out of context, then you should be prepared to get called on it IMHO.

Again, I recalled the 60 day quote, and Gully demonstrated accurately where it came from.

If I was being "called" on it, then so be it. I take it as Gully clearing up a misinterpretation.

However, I take your responses as reactionary, irrational, and silly.

[w4rma]

42. Clark on whether he'd have voted on the IWR

Clark Says He Would Have Voted for War
…
General Clark said that he would have advised members of Congress to support the authorization of war but that he thought it should have had a provision requiring President Bush to return to Congress before actually invading. Democrats sought that provision without success.

"At the time, I probably would have voted for it, but I think that's too simple a question," General Clark said.

A moment later, he said: "I don't know if I would have or not. I've said it both ways because when you get into this, what happens is you have to put yourself in a position — on balance, I probably would have voted for it."
…
"I want to clarify — we're moving quickly here," Ms. Jacoby said. "You said you would have voted for the resolution as leverage for a U.N.-based solution."

"Right," General Clark responded. "Exactly."

General Clark said he saw his position on the war as closer to that of members of Congress who supported the resolution — Representative Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri and Senators Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, John Kerry of Massachusetts and John Edwards of North Carolina — than that of Howard Dean, the former Vermont governor who has been the leading antiwar candidate in the race.

Still, asked about Dr. Dean's criticism of the war, General Clark responded: "I think he's right. That in retrospect we should never have gone in there. I didn't want to go in there either. But on the other hand, he wasn't inside the bubble of those who were exposed to the information."
…
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/19/politics/campaigns/19CLAR.html

Clark Explains Statement on Authorization for Iraq War
…
"I never would have voted for war," he said here this afternoon in an interview and in response to a question after a lecture at the University of Iowa. "What I would have voted for is leverage. Leverage for the United States to avoid a war. That's what we needed to avoid a war."

Speaking about the resolution on Thursday, General Clark said, "At the time, I probably would have voted for it, but I think that's too simple a question."

He then added: "I don't know if I would have or not. I've said it both ways, because when you get into this, what happens is you have to put yourself in a position. On balance, I probably would have voted for it."
…
About Iraq, he said "There was never an imminent threat," and called the war "a major blunder."

"We're not the sort of `you're with us or against' kind of people," he said.

"We're a come-and-join-with-us kind of people," he told a crowd of 1,000 in the main lounge of the Iowa Memorial Union. "Americans know in their hearts that you don't make our country safer by erecting walls to keep others out. You make us safer by building bridges to reach out.

"We also have to recognize that force should be used only as a last resort, when all other means have failed."
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/20/politics/campaigns/20CLAR.html

Clark on whether he'd have voted on the IWR and Dean's response
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=401401

[StephNW4Clark]

7. Tax Cuts

Dean: roll back middle class tax cuts
Clark: do not roll back middle class tax cuts

[rucky]

11. Then how does Clark intend to find money for Healthcare?

Dean & Kucinich are the only candidates I know of who have explained how they intend to pay for their healthcare plan.

[RandomUser]

37. When asked this question

by a reporter, he specifically replied that he would do it by cutting the budgets he's more familiar, and named the pentagon specifically.

Part of the social programs funding would come from rolling back the taxcuts on individual who earn over 200K, but not touching middle class taxcuts.

In the townhall meeting, he's also indicated other ways to hold down the cost of rising healthcare -- using systems analysis, information automation of drug prescription, restructuring the cost basis of drug discovery research.

[gully]

16. Dean reminded the middle class that we NEVER got a tax cut

because in order to make up for it, our property tax, tuition and other expenses increased even more.

Dean is not pandering here. I am not saying Clark is, but most people running for Prez will not touch taxes. Mondale...need I say more. He lost the election because he was honest about taxes.

[janekat]

41. Clark: Repeal tax cut on top 2%

http://www.issues2000.org/Wesley_Clark.htm#Tax_Reform

Repeal tax cut on top 2%--make tax code progressive. (Sep 25)
Freeze Bush tax cuts which haven't yet taken effect. (Sep 19)
Tax cut is a cut in essential services. (Aug 1)
Middle- & working-class tax cuts are an economic-growth tool. (Jul 13)
Tax relief for middle class, not for the rich. (Jun 27)
$5T tax cuts for the rich are legalized theft. (Jun 20)
Supports redistribution by progressive taxation. (Jun 19)
Irresponsible to borrow to give tax cuts to wealthy. (Jun 19)
Minimize taxes but enough to meet people's needs. (Jun 15)
Bush tax cuts were unfair; use progressive taxation. (Jun 15)

[Padraig18]

10. They largely share similar views on most issues...

... which is why they are the frontrunners--- as moderates, they are resonating with most Democrats who are, coincidentally, also moderates.

[KittyWampus]

27. Agreed, And Clark Needs To Come Out More Clearly

Stating his positions... and he better do it soon.

It's not enough to hear extracts from his former writings and speeches to glean how he stands.

And I say that as a pretty strong Clark supporter.

[gully]

44. Exactly right...

His positions need to be stated in writing on his website. I am sure there ironing things out...

[janekat]

29. Clark vs. Dean on Environment and Justice System

THOSE are my two big beefs:

First let me say that this is my order of preference candidate-wise: Clark/Kuchinich/Kerry/Edwards/Gephardt.

Dean is at a disadvantage because his record as Governor is out there - if you look hard enough. Clark doesn't really have a record on many things such as the environment, justice - so you can only look at his past and current statements.

Clarks issues page: http://www.issues2000.org/Wesley_Clark.htm

ENVIRONMENT:

Dean's record as Governor shows that he has consistently sided with developers over environmentalists, he stated that he was against the Kyoto Treaty and enviromentalists have been speaking out (some very vehemently) against him.

Clark's statements:
States he is strongly for the Kyoto Treaty. Says the the two big legacies we leave to our children is the environment and the Constitution. He stated that he wanted to undo a lot of the roll-backs of the Administration. Likes the Homestead Act.

JUSTICE

Clark:
Is concerned about the lock-up policy, the 3-strikes policy, and the way we've treated people in prison. Also - what it does when it returns people.to the streets.

Dean:
Dean has made no secret of his belief that the justice system gives all the breaks to defendants. He increased funding to Prosecutors and corrections and cut funding to Public Defenders.

He tried to stop a federal grant aimed at assisting defendants with mental disabilities.

[gully]

35. Your information contradicts with mine...

In addition I think Clark supporters should lay off the enviromental issue. Clark has used Depleted Uranium in the past, and I don't know of a more harmful substances to any enviroment. I have gruesome pics of children's horrible birth defects as a result of DU but I won't share them because they are quite disturbing. In addition, many link Gulf War syndrom to the use of DU.

Also, I don't know where you get your information about Dean and the Enviroment. I do know there is conflicting information regarding the Sierra Blanca (sp) issue.

However, According to issues.org (the site you linked)...

Dean has the following positions on the Enviroment

* Free trade must include environmental standards. (Apr 15)
* No need to poison ourselves in order to have growth. (Nov 2002)
* Eliminate mercury releases by 2003. (Sep 2000)
* More state autonomy on brownfields & Superfund cleanups. (Aug 2001)
* Support State Revolving Loan Fund for flexible Clean Water. (Aug 2001)

Also please look here.

http://www.issues2000.org/2004/Howard_Dean_Environment.htm

Regarding Justice:

Here are Dean's positions on Justice according to issues.org

* Replace overzealous capital crime trials with fair trials. (Jun 17)
* Re-evaluate and reform federal and state death penalty. (Jun 17)
* Invest in social programs to avoid investing in prisons. (Nov 2002)
* Supports flexible federal block grants for crime programs. (Sep 2001)

See here:

http://www.issues2000.org/2004/Howard_Dean_Crime.htm

Your assessment of Dean is not correct. But, you are entitled to your opinion on the matter.

Also, you paraphrase for Dean and Clark and I'm uncomfortable with that.

[janekat]

31. Some of Clark's statements

http://www.issues2000.org/Wesley_Clark.htm

Wesley Clark:

Supports University of Michigan's affirmative action plan. (Jun 15)

"I'm concerned about the lock-up policy, the 3-strikes policy, putting people in jails and the way we've treated people in prison. We've got to look seriously at the American penal system and what it does when it returns people to the streets."

Supports universal health coverage

“We went into Iraq under false pretenses. There was deceptive advertising; you'd be taking to the Better Business Bureau if you bought a washing machine the way we went into the war in Iraq.”
”We're taking casualties. We haven't made America safer by this. We've made America more engaged, more vulnerable, more committed, less able to respond. We've lost a tremendous amount of goodwill around the world by our actions and our continuing refusal to bring in international institutions. “

Compared Bush to Nixon in abusing his power to bully Congress and US allies. "This is an administration which has moved in a way we have not seen any administration since Nixon to abuse executive authority to scheme, manipulate, intimidate and maneuver.”

Full sunshine review of PATRIOT Act. (Jun 19)

Supports funding for all-day kindergarten

Establish 18:1 student-teacher ratio for grade school. (Mar 1999)

Decries lack of funding for No Child Left Behind. (Apr 28)

“The way to deal with Castro is to send Cuba American tourists, American goods and American farm products. There could be no better way to deal with this last vestigial form of Communism than to turn American business and American agriculture loose on them.”

Work with the International Criminal Court. (Jul 2002)

"We've found many times in our experience that it's best to use force only as a last resort."

”Why are so many here in America hesitant to speak out and ask questions? We're going to ask those hard questions. And in a time of war, we're going to ask those questions in the highest sense of patriotism. We are going to hold the administration accountable for its policies and results.”

Disturbed that we suspended habeus corpus for War on Terror. (Mar 23)

would consider cutting defense spending if elected, he said. "We are trapped in .....an endless occupation" of Iraq".

"we should be very reluctant to use force. It has incredible, difficult and unintended consequences, which we are once again beginning to see as we deal with the situation in Iraq."

Invest 3% of GDP on development assistance abroad. (Nov 2001)

Supports ban on assault weapons

Immigration is vital to prosperity. (Jun 17)

I am very pro-immigration. (Jun 27)

The military needs to reconsider the "don't ask, don't tell" policy for gay service members.

$5T tax cuts for the rich are legalized theft. (Jun 20)

Supports redistribution by progressive taxation. (Jun 19)

Supports a "freeze" on Bush's tax cuts that have yet to take effect for people earning $150,000 or more.

Need Marshall Plan for Middle East and Afghanistan. (Jun 17)

We went into Iraq under false pretenses. (Aug 17)

Israel: bring in Syria and Iran into peace talks. (Jun 17)

NATO was the reason for our victory in Kosovo. (Sep 2002)

Palestinians decided to return to terrorism after 2000. (Mar 2002)

Solution to terrorism is not bullets but world community. (Oct 2001)

provides logistical support for 118 schools and 50,000 students. Funding new programs such as all-day kindergarten and improved student-to-teacher ratios are extremely important. Your support for this funding is crucial. Our children deserve a world-class school system with curriculum and programs to match the best. Athletics, music, art and associated after school activities are as critical as the core academic subjects of math, science, history and English.
Source: Testimony Before the House Armed Services Committee Mar 17, 1999

[w4rma]

39. Deleted message (n/t)