Wesley Clark: That man can sure frame the issue.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

It must come from being in a command position over people from all walks of life.

I tremendously admire him for meeting with Cindy Sheehan and having a respectful conversation with her.

This quote was discussed on another thread, and it's a perfect example of his ability to connect in this media driven day and age.

Clark said the anti-war movement should demand that Bush establish a “regional dialog with other Arab states, including people we don’t like, like Syria and Iran,” and focus on “changing the minds and cutting off the recruiting” of those now blowing up tanks and buses in Iraq.

My take on how Kerry would say this:

"We should have diplomatic interactions with those foreign entities with whom we have fundamental ideological and geopolitical differences, to assist in the assimilation of the current status of Iraq and to further advance ongoing discussion and policies focusing on the socioeconomic chasm that may contribute to the acts of malfeasance seen in...etc.,etc."


My take on how gwb would say this:

"There are evil-doers over there who hate us for our freedoms. We must stay the course. We will stay as long as we're needed, not one day more. We will stand down when the Iraqi's stand up. We must fight them over there, so we don't have to fight them here.
9/11, terrorists and God bless America."

Clark is a smart man who can communicate effectively. I look forward to hearing more from him. MKJ

[Wickerman]

1. Whatever you think of WJC, he can only serve to raise the level

of discourse in politics for 2006 and 08. Nice to hear a guy speak with a level of intelligence after 5 years of Bush**.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

3. He speaks clearly and coherently. I think his greatest strength

is that his message is easily understood without sounding as if he's condescending or, as in gwb's case, "dumbed down."

And, he doesn't sound like he's spouting "talking points". which, sadly, is what many of our Dem leaders seem to do. MKJ

[Totally Committed]

6. Not ot be nit-picky, because I love your post!

But, it's WKC, not J. No big deal, just a great man!

TC

[Wickerman]

11. Damn early morning fingers!

Right you are, and thanks! :thumbsup:

[madrchsod]

2. i will agree

i wanted clark to be the candidate but i didn`t get my wish. i never liked kerry and when he said nothing about the election fraud in ohio i lost all respect for him as a man. clark and edwards were my picks and i think they would be ideal canidates in 2008

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

8. I supported Kerry, but my heart was with Dean. I must admit, I

didn't know enough about Clark and shrugged him off as a late entry who was in it for some personal agenda.

But when Kerry would pontificate about his positions, I would just cringe. I knew what he was saying, but I knew, at least measured by the freepers in my workplace, it would not be comprehended by a good number of the "undecideds" and almost none of the repubs.

The Dem candidate was too patrician and intellectual when we needed smart and confident.

I wish I'd paid more attention to Clark and fully intend to do so over the next few years. MKJ

[Tennessee Gal]

4. More impressed by Clark all the time!

How about a Gore/Clark ticket?

[Tatiana]

9. This is my prayer. n/t

[OnionPatch]

22. Mine too

What an awesome ticket that would be!

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

10. Now that would be a ticket I could get behind 200%. eom

MKJ

[bobbieinok]

28. 'Buddhist fund raiser, invented the internet, Love Canal, Love Story,

needs woman to tell him how to dress manly', etc etc ad nauseum

[Adelante]

17. Clark/Gore

The commander in chief needs to be in the oval office.

[Totally Committed]

5. I agree with you.

Wes's innate dignity and moral courage are the "frame" for his language. He speaks the truth, no matter the consequences.

Other candidates parse their words, or parrot what some focus group has told their advisor they would respond to best, and some just bloviate and obfiscate -- all with one objective: Political viability. But, not Wes. He just says what he means and means what he says, speaking truth to power -- and anyone else listening. He has a clarity of spirit that just operates better out in the open, and that's where he is content to leave it -- out in the light of day for all to see.

I do think he has gotten more confident and more skillful at public speaking, that's true, and in that way, maybe more "effectively". But, he has always communicated the TRUTH, and to me, that is as about as "effective" as we could dare to hope form a man who may be a candidate for POTUS in 2008.

I am proud to support Wes Clark!

TC

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

7. Yes, I should have added that the reason he doesn't appear to

spew "talking points" is because he is genuine when he speaks.

I didn't mean to imply that the framing was superficial, but that he understands how to explain his position on complex issues in way that is clear and easy to grasp.

MKJ

[ksclematis]

31. General Clark can talk

to and be understood by anyone from the Prez, generals, cabinet members and of the highest officials abroad as well as any common mill, factory, farm or office worker, and even me!. He knows his audience and speaks to it/them.

He's my #1 choice.....

This is in response to message #7.

[WA98296]

12. Is he smart enough to NOT be Hillary's wing man?

Clark was the best choice last time, that is why the repubs worked so hard so very early to make sure he was not the nominee. I often think his last run was more to introduce us to him in preparation to run with Hillary this time. Hope if that was the case, he knows better now.

Last time I loved much of what Dean had to say, but he also lacked in some fineess. For that matter Sharpton and Kucinich had a lot of great things to say, but that doesn't make them presidential material.

Repub are hoping above all hopes that Hillary is our next nominee, and you can bet they've got their own reasons for that.

She'll never get my vote based on her willingness to give up our privacy rights (let's all be injected with an electronic chip with all of our medical records -- what the hell is next?). S

Republicans are drooling, just hoping that we send Hillary to the plate. Forget it, stick with your instincts and get a brilliant man with lots of pertinent experience to lead us out of this mess.

For now, I'm thinking CLARK

[guajira]

13. Clark was always my Favorite - - Clark/Clinton for 2008!

I think Hillary would have a better chance to get VP than Pres.

She and Clark would be perfect - he has military, business experience, she has all the necessary political experience.

[derby378]

14. I'll take Wes over Hillary come 2008

A Clark/Clinton ticket wouldn't be too bad, though...

[FrenchieCat]

15. Wes is the man, as far as I'm concerned!

In his Op-Ed published on 9/14/01, Wes Clark demonstrated a clear calm logical plan on how we chould have dealt with 9/11, and an all out "War" wasn't necessarily "IT"....meanwhile the politicians were singing on the Capital Steps, and Bush was working his bullhorn!

A Long, Tough Job
By Wesley K. Clark
Friday, September 14, 2001; Page A37
The Washington Post
snip
For the United States, the weapons of this war should be information, law enforcement and, on rare occasions, active military forces. The coalition that will form around the United States and its NATO allies should agree on its intent but not trumpet its plans. No vast military deployments should be anticipated. But urgent measures should be taken behind the scenes, because the populations and economic structures of Western nations will be at risk.

And the American public will have to grasp and appreciate a new approach to warfare. Our objective should be neither revenge nor retaliation, though we will achieve both. Rather, we must systematically target and destroy the complex, interlocking network of international terrorism. The aim should be to attack not buildings and facilities but the people who have masterminded, coordinated, supported and executed these and other terrorist attacks.
snip
Our methods should rely first on domestic and international law, and the support and active participation of our friends and allies around the globe. Evidence must be collected, networks uncovered and a faceless threat given shape and identity.

In some cases, astute police work will win the day, here and abroad. In other cases, international intelligence collaboration may be necessary. Special military forces may be called on to operate in states that are uncooperative or simply unable to control their own territory. In exceptional cases, targets will be developed that may be handled by conventional military strikes.
But in the main, this will be arduous, detailed and often covert work to track, detain or otherwise engage and "take down" our adversaries, rolling them up cell by cell and headquarters by headquarters.

Some will call for full disclosure and near-legal standards of evidence before acting. Others will arm a hair trigger, seeking to use the most readily available information, even if scant. But we must not pose legality and expediency as opposite extremes. To be expedient, we must act within the bounds of international law and consistent with consensus among the allied coalition that is emerging. And maintaining this consensus will be one of the prime challenges we face.
snip
We must strengthen our protective measures at airports, at utilities and other public service facilities such as communications networks, and prepare necessary public health and disease control capabilities for the possibility of nuclear and biological events. And if we are successful in preventing further attacks, another challenge will be to maintain our resolve.
http://wesleyclark.h1.ru/usa_attack1.htm

[WA98296]

16. Remember Hillary signed on for war

Clark knew what to do, Hillary should have known better but voted to give authority to Bush to go to war.

Hillary, probably more of a liablility than an asset. We need new people, new names -- not running back to the past.

[FrenchieCat]

19. I agree!

I still don't know what's all of this Hillary talk is all about! What has she done exactly besides marrying Bill, standing by her man, offering a Health Care plan that was sunk on the day it was introduced, and run as a Senator in NY because she was married to Bill. Can someone enlighten me as to what her other claims to fame are? thank you.

[Stinky The Clown]

23. In fairness .... about that health care plan ......

Her (and Pres. Clinton's) heart was in the right place. The issue was two-fold. The plan was so completely convoluted and arcane it was, as you say, sunk on the day it was introduced. That was the result of a strategic blunder in using painful triangulation to make it acceptable to everyone. But the intent was good.

The other probelm with it was her. Pure and simple. There are those on the right who will never, ever, ever, agree with a Clinton. Where some who change were 'Blinded by the Right', the Right is "Blinded by the Rage". And Clintons are the center of that rage. That ... and she was, to them, just an 'uppity woman'.

[FrenchieCat]

25. To be fair....health care is still a huge issue

and Hillary's proposal and the timidity in handling that whole situation was a Clinton administrative failure....as were the 800,000 Rwandans that were machete to death.

The Clintons lost their political will on the issue of Health Care for the next several years......and so in end their hearts being in the right place took us 3 steps back.

So what whole Health Care debaco showed was that although many speak in glowing terms about the Clintons, that they were not as "strong" as many want to now say. Just because Hillary said the words "the Right Wing Conspiracy" doesn't mean she is or was as tuff as many want to portray her. And running for a senatorial seat in New York against some young guy wet behind the ear when you have name recognition up the yang-yang is not my idea of the most impressive accomplishment that would garnet a rational for running for the White House.

[Stinky The Clown]

26. I agree with you

[Quixote1818]

18. Clark has the ONLY workable plan to move things forward in Iraq

It's not as simple as simply pulling our troops out as so many on DU want to do. We have to bring all the Arab nations up to the table because they have incredible influence on Iraq and the insurgency. If you can't beat them then pull up a chair and work out a deal with them. In the end the US will have only marginal influence over Iraq but at least we will have some and be on negotiating terms with these country's. This way we can pull out and save face and won't be the laughing stock of the world. We already know Iran and Syria want to talk to us so why not?

It's either that or let Bush's plan drag out and collapse after perhaps another ten years of death, destruction and money down the toilet.

Basically Bush has fucked us and Clark has the only plan to get things somewhat back to the way they were before the invasion with 'some' even if it's just a small amount of influence and negotiating power over the region. It's a much better plan than just pulling out cold turkey. And hey, if it dosent work then we do pull out cold turkey.

I watched Clark on Meet the Press with three other Generals and he was intellectually SO FAR OUT OF THEIR LEAGUE! Clark is an intellectual General which is something that comes along about once every hundred years.

[FrenchieCat]

20. and plus Clark is a Democratic 4 star.....

and I don't think that is something that has come along....EVER!

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

21. That's a compelling argument...once in a hundred years.

I think I need to pop over to the Clark forum. MKJ

[CarolNYC]

27. Hey MKJ,

Please do stop over at Clark's community blog too....
http://securingamerica.com/ccn

[OnionPatch]

24. When I hear him speak

I feel like, My God! Here's the person who could get us out of this mess and help guide our country to a course of rational and moral foreign policy. His view of how we should or should not be using our military is spot on, IMO.

[xkenx]

30. NOT SINCE BOBBY KENNEDY

have I been so inspired by a public figure as I have been by Wes Clark. He is THE one to lead Dems. and the country forward.

[MisterP]

29. he does have to be careful, though, not to go into the "furn fighters" bs

put out by the Pentagon