Nominate another Yalie like Dean or someone who went to public school??

[giantrobot_2000]

Do we want to elect someone who's lived a life of priviledge, someone who's never known what it's like to go to public schools, to not be extraordinarily wealthy all his life? Someone who grew up on 5th Avenue in Manhattan? Someone like Dean? I don't. I want to elect someone who went to public schools, like me. I want to elect someone who's proven that he didn't make his career to get wealthy and who wasn't in it for the money. I want someone with smarts, what certainly appears to be a basically an un-fucking-assailable record (especially against Bush). Bottom line is I want someone who will make the right choices for the future of our country.

I want the only man who was truly called by the people of this country to run for office.

I want a leader who's shown that he has principles, someone who has said that "dissent is a part of American discourse." I want someone who stood up for Michael Moore when not one other Democrat dared. I want to elect a man who thinks that people have First Amendment rights, someone who not only wants to protect free speech but exercises them every day of his life. I want someone who reads books and newspapers carefully, I want an intellectual (as if anyone who's lived through Bush doesn't want someone with a brain). I want someone who understands that a clean environment lets us all live better lives. I want someone with a clear plan for jobs, someone who wants to close the corporate loopholes and make companies that make profit in America pay their fair share of taxes. I want someone who knew the Iraq war was a mistake and saw the mess unfold before his very eyes. But he was powerless. This is the one man who can prevent another Iraq from ever happening again.

I want a man who can and will appeal to every American, in other words, a man who can beat Bush.

[creativelcro]

1. You want a military savior.

You have NOT seen the real Clark yet... The smile thing does not get you up the ladder in the military, the only place he ever experienced...

[Dookus]

2. You're both wrong....

we've had great presidents from the middle-to-lower classes (Lincoln, Clinton, Truman) and great presidents from the Ivy League (both Roosevelts, JFK)

The greatest liberal presidents have been from the upper classes.


As to Clark, that's just a nonsense argument. You've seen no more of "the real Clark" than we have. If we go by his published positions, he's the most liberal major candidate running. We don't support him because of his uniform. We support him because he's eloquent, capable, articulate, incredibly bright and fantastically accomplished.

[creativelcro]

3. Clark is a Trojan Horse.

[Dookus]

6. and

that's a very thorough, well-thought argument.

Whoops! We're both wrong!

[giantrobot_2000]

4. You know what?

You know what gets you up the ladder in the Army? Not fucking up. He is highly decorated, there's nothing in his record that says he was wreckless in his youth.

Dean had a drinking problem? Sealed his records? Wonder what's going on there. Be honest with yourself. And don't tell me that Bush's drinking will prevent Rove from smearing Dean on his drinking and what might have come of that.

Let me spell this out: Rove is licking his fangs at the thought of Dean getting the nomination.

Clark is a man who wants to cut the Pentagon's budget by 15%-25%. Think Dean's going to be able to pull that off with his credibility on military matters? He's seen the military-industrial establishment from the inside and is VERY wary and VERY skeptical about the way business, politics and the military mix. He wants to depoliticize the intelligence agencies and the DoD. Generals are the ones who have to do the dying, they don't like war except when it's absolutely neccessary. After all, who warned against the "military-industrial establishment" after all? A general. Eisenhower.

[MSchreader]

7. "Generals are the ones who have to do the dying"?!

I take it you've never been in the military.

Martin

[giantrobot_2000]

9. Nice picture of Karl Marx

You haven't either.

Generals write the letters home. Generals meet with the widows and children. Clark has done that. He lost friends in Vietnam, killed in front of his eyes. Generals don't like pointless wars.

[onebigbadwulf]

5. Please dont use the term "Yalie"

as if Bush actually deserved to be there or actually deserved to graduate.

[giantrobot_2000]

8. Dean

I'm talking about Dean.

[slinkerwink]

10. Actually, Dean is one of the least wealthiest Dems

Dean could've lived a cushy life on Wall Street, but his brother's death made him decide to give up being a stockbroker and he went into medicine.

He worked in the Bronx emergency hospital, so he knows what it's like to be poor and need health care. Dean also has worked on a migrant farm, and in a concrete company in Colorado which completely financed his ski trip by pouring concrete.

Dean opened a medical practice with his wife, and his children went to public elementary school. Dean became Governor when the Governor died of a heart attack, and Dean was reelected eleven times, and balanced the budget every damn year he was in office.

Actually, Clark doesn't have a totally unblemished record. He has that photograph of him taken wearing that dictator's hat (which was dumb in retrospect) and Clark was fired even though he said he wasn't fired.

Besides, the last paragraph also applies to Dean because that's exactly what I want and I know he can do that because he is electable.

[giantrobot_2000]

11. Ski trip

"Dean also has worked on a migrant farm, and in a concrete company in Colorado which completely financed his ski trip by pouring concrete. "

This was the ski trip he took after he claimed his back was hurt to get a deferment from the draft board? I wonder if Dad pulled some strings for him.

"Besides, the last paragraph also applies to Dean because that's exactly what I want and I know he can do that because he is electable."

Dean didn't say a word when the rightwingers were trying to eat Michael Moore alive. Clark did.

[VermontDem2004]

24. Oh god

This was the ski trip he took after he claimed his back was hurt to get a deferment from the draft board? I wonder if Dad pulled some strings for him.
You have some fucking proof Dean's dad had anything to do with the deferment.

Dean didn't say a word when the rightwingers were trying to eat Michael Moore alive. Clark did.
Don't know what you mean but I haven't seen Clark standing up for Michael Moore.

[giantrobot_2000]

27. Michael Moore

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0913-06.htm

A Citizen's Appeal to a General in a Time of War (at Home)

by Michael Moore
 
Dear General Wesley Clark,

I've been meaning to write to you for some time. Two days after the Oscars, when I felt very alone and somewhat frightened by the level of hatred toward me for daring to suggest that we were being led into war for "fictitious reasons," one person stuck his neck out and came to my defense on national television.

And that person was you.

Aaron Brown had just finished interviewing me by satellite on CNN, and I had made a crack about me being "the only non-general allowed on CNN all week." He ended the interview and then turned to you, as you were sitting at the desk with him. He asked you what you thought of this crazy guy, Michael Moore. And, although we were still in Week One of the war, you boldly said that my dissent was necessary and welcome, and you pointed out that I was against Bush and his "policies," not the kids in the service. I sat in Flint with the earpiece still in my ear and I was floored -- a GENERAL standing up for me and, in effect, for all the millions who were opposed to the war but had been bullied into silence.

Since that night, I have spent a lot of time checking you out. And what I've learned about you corresponds to my experience with you back in March. You seem to be a man of integrity. You seem not afraid to speak the truth. I liked your answer when you were asked your position on gun control: "If you are the type of person who likes assault weapons, there is a place for you -- the United States Army. We have them."

In addition to being first in your class at West Point, a four star general from Arkansas, and the former Supreme Commander of NATO -- enough right there that should give pause to any peace-loving person -- I have discovered that...

1. You oppose the Patriot Act and would fight the expansion of its powers.

2. You are firmly pro-choice.

3. You filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in support of the University of Michigan's affirmative action case.

4. You would get rid of the Bush tax "cut" and make the rich pay their fair share.

5. You respect the views of our allies and want to work with them and with the rest of the international community.

6. And you oppose war. You have said that war should always be the "last resort" and that it is military men such as yourself who are the most for peace because it is YOU and your soldiers who have to do the dying. You find something unsettling about a commander-in-chief who dons a flight suit and pretends to be Top Gun, a stunt that dishonored those who have died in that flight suit in the service of their country.

General Clark, last night I finally got to meet you in person. I would like to share with others what I said to you privately: You may be the person who can defeat George W. Bush in next year's election.

This is not an endorsement. For me, it's too early for that. I have liked Howard Dean (in spite of his flawed positions in support of some capital punishment, his grade "A" rating from the NRA, and his opposition to cutting the Pentagon budget). And Dennis Kucinich is so committed to all the right stuff. We need candidates in this race who will say the things that need to be said, to push the pathetically lame Democratic Party into have a backbone -- or get out of the way and let us have a REAL second party on the ballot.

But right now, for the sake and survival of our very country, we need someone who is going to get The Job done, period. And that job, no matter whom I speak to across America -- be they leftie Green or conservative Democrat, and even many disgusted Republicans -- EVERYONE is of one mind as to what that job is:

Bush Must Go.

This is war, General, and it's Bush & Co.'s war on us. It's their war on the middle class, the poor, the environment, their war on women and their war against anyone around the world who doesn't accept total American domination. Yes, it's a war -- and we, the people, need a general to beat back those who have abused our Constitution and our basic sense of decency.

The General vs. the Texas Air National Guard deserter! I want to see that debate, and I know who the winner is going to be.

The other night, when you were on Bill Maher's show, he began by reading to you a quote from Howard Dean where he (Dean) tried to run away from the word "liberal." Maher said to you, so, General, do you want to run away from that word? Without missing a beat, you said "No!" and you reminded everyone that America was founded as a "liberal democracy." The audience went wild with applause.

That is what we have needed for a long time on our side -- guts. I am sure there are things you and I don't see eye to eye on, but now is the time for all good people from the far left to the middle of the road to bury the damn hatchet and get together behind someone who is not only good on the issues but can beat George W. Bush. And where I come from in the Midwest, General, I know you are the kind of candidate that the average American will vote for.

Michael Moore likes a general? I never thought I'd write these words. But desperate times call for desperate measures. I want to know more about you. I want your voice heard. I would like to see you in these debates. Then let the chips fall where they may -- and we'll all have a better idea of what to do. If you sit it out, then I think we all know what we are left with.

I am asking everyone I know to send an email to you now to encourage you to run, even if they aren't sure they would vote for you. (Wesley Clark's email address is: mailto:[e-mail]). None of us truly know how we will vote five months from now or a year from now. But we do know that this race needs a jolt -- and Bush needs to know that there is one person he won't be able to Dukakisize.

Take the plunge, General Clark. At the very least, the nation needs to hear what you know about what was really behind this invasion of Iraq and your fresh ideas of how we can live in a more peaceful world. Yes, your country needs you to perform one more act of brave service -- to help defeat an enemy from within, at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, an address that used to belong to "we, the people."

Yours,

Michael Moore
Lottery # 275, U.S. military draft, 1972
Conscientious Objector applicant
mailto:[e-mail]

http://www.michaelmoore.com

[VermontDem2004]

30. Good for Clark

It wasn't exactly like he stood up for Moore, Aaron Brown asked him what his thoughts were on MM. Who knows how the other candidates would've answered that question when asked.

[giantrobot_2000]

43. Hmm...

Michael Moore sure thinks Clark stood up for him. Doesn't he say "one person stuck his neck out and came to my defense on national television."

[VermontDem2004]

47. I am not denying he did

My point was Clark didn't go extra lengths to defend Moore and other Candidates and Democrats weren't scared to defend Moore. It just stated Aaron Brown asked him a question about MM, I am unsure how the other candidates would answer if asked the question.

[giantrobot_2000]

56. Ha

"My point was Clark didn't go extra lengths"

By being the "only one" (according to Moore himself) who said anything he went to lengths. Dean said nothing.

[VermontDem2004]

60. Dean was not employed by CNN at the time

So he was not asked the question by Aaron Brown, what if Aaron Brown never asked what he thought about MM? Do you think Clark would've defended Moore on his own. Who knows what Dean would've said, but it probaly would've been around the same.

[giantrobot_2000]

65. Yes

" Do you think Clark would've defended Moore on his own"

Yes. Moore said Clark "didn't hesistate" when asked at all.

[VermontDem2004]

66. Still doesn't prove to me he would go out on his own and defend Moore

Here is my point, I am glad Clark said those things when asked but I don't like how you bash other candidates for not speaking out in favor of Moore when Clark was simply asked about the issue, who knows what the other candidates would of said if they were asked. It has nothing to do with who was scared and who wasn't, it has to do with who was asked to comment about the issue and who wasn't.

[ima_sinnic]

82. what an ignorant thing to say!!

wake up, "Democrat"

you think only people with a "string-pulling Daddy" got a medical deferment?

You didn't get the word that Democrats are trying to pull together into a unified team?

a-hole fake Democrat.

[SahaleArm]

13. Dean's net worth is well over a couple million.

Maybe compared to Kerry he's pauper, otherwise he's rich.

[Pastiche423]

15. This photograph?

Ah yes, exchanging hats w/an indicted war criminal.

[giantrobot_2000]

17. No doubt

No doubt upon hearing about this, you did a little reading of your own. Read "Winning Modern Wars" to get a little background on this photograph (which Clark has publicly said was a mistake and has apologized for).

[Pastiche423]

23. No thank you

I don't like war stories.

[giantrobot_2000]

36. It's not a war story

His book is about policy changes that have to be made. He talks about the importance of displomacy first, war as an absolute last resort. Read the book if you're really are open minded, I think you'll be surprised.

[drfemoe]

62. surprised that he never

refers to dead soldiers or civilians as "people"... but with military euphamisms?

The passage to illustrate this has been posted on DU.
You might want to read it.

[deminflorida]

77. Of Course Now Aside from Supporting Gay Marriages,

It comes out that Dean actually worked for Planned Parent Hood. What if if comes out next the he acutally performed abortions? Would you still think is was electable?

Let me tell you something it is common practice to exchage hats between people in the military, it's done everyday.

This kind of bullshit is doing nothing for your candidate but causing hatred. That's right outright hatred for him. And when his ass falls, which is highly possible, don't start crying sweetie.

[DrWeird]

12. Oh Jesus Fucking Christ.

Like West fucking Point is some kind of inner-city alternative school for disadvantaged kids.

[SahaleArm]

14. Yale is Ivy which to many implies aristocracy

Huge difference between Yale (Private) and West Point (Public School).

[giantrobot_2000]

16. Ha

Yeah, Clark was working his ass off while Dean was busy not being involved in the Vietnam war protests during his time at Yale. Clark didn't go to an elite prep school. Like Dean.

Think the Republicans will attack Dean with the "limosine liberal" line? Think they can attack Clark at all?

[DrWeird]

19. You're saying avoiding Vietnam was a bad thing?

At least Dean didn't go off and kill a bunch of foreigners who never did anything to him.

[giantrobot_2000]

22. Choice

Do you think Clark had any choice in the matter? His was the first class that was sent headlong into the mess. Dean was skiing on the slopes.

[OrAnarch]

41. choice? Hell yes!

Put down you gun, go home, and goto canada!

Or, realize it later and apologize...


Or, realize it, then or later, and continue your contribution to the American manifestation of global corporate greed (the military). BINGO!

[ima_sinnic]

87. oh boo hoo, a-hole

like EVERYbody who got a legitimate medical deferment from a war should now be excoriated. Is that too big a word for your little pea brain? It means condemned by judgmental, truth-distorting idiots who do no service at all to their candidates. I was starting to like Clark more and more but so far this morning all the posts I've read by his supporters lead me to believe that to support Clark is to lose my ability to unite with the Democrats in taking back the country from Bush; to support Clark is to put myself on a pedestal of judging the Dean supporters as "whores" and blinded kool-aid drinkers. Screw your candidate, I'm now sending Dean some more money.

Dumbass, the Democrats should be uniting and fucking shitheads like you and your pals are doing the Democrats and the country as a whole a great disservice. So stuff it up your already crowded bunghole.

[OrAnarch]

37. Absolutely...

Clark's life work consists of killing or contributing directly to a force which kills innocent foreigners...it is in fact his main campaign issue, something he has never expressed remorse over. He spent his whole life working so people like the owners of Halliburton can make a buck on desctruction. Sickening.


A. Either he realizes he is a pawn in the sickening game, in which case, he has never displayed remorse or apologized for his actions

B. He doesn't realize this, and cannot grasp progressive, liberal issues. (Why elect a man whos that simple?)

C. He realizes and is perhaps far more than a simple pawn.


Take your pick...Id rather vote for Holy Joe, and that says tons.

[giantrobot_2000]

49. How old are you?

I see you're down with "anarchy." How old are you?

Clark HATES Halliburton. He NEVER wants to let Halliburton dictate who we go to war with. Do you understand that military men don't like to get their asses shot off so some rich people can be richer?

[OrAnarch]

57. Im old enough to stand firmly on this issue....

A good 24 years old with an education from an extreme conservative southern elitest private school which calls to the flag of racism daily. That hardley disqualifies my thoughts, as Ive spent years battling people far more right and pro-military than Clark supporters.


"Do you understand that military men don't like to get their asses shot off so some rich people can be richer?"

Well, they should also not like doing such because they have to take innocent lives...but not sure that occurs to them. In essence, thats what all war is about, the rich getting richer. So then, WTF did Clark provide material support to such a cause, and WTF doesn't he regret it now. Why does he brag about this? Why?



Will someone from the Clark campaign please let me know why he spent his life enabling people like Bush to kill!?!?



And yes, I am down with progressive anarchy (not regressive), a social structure in which men can rule themselves by applying logic and philosophy in a best guess utilitarian fashion to their actions. Being pragmatic, a study of liberalism shows me that it will best prepare us for progression to that state in which we can learn self-governance, so in the meantime, I am opting for socialism till we can get our shit together. Kill me for not being a Clarkie...hell, Clark would.

[DrWeird]

58. Mmm, yes.

I'm sure he voted for Reagan because he felt Grenada was a serious threat to US security.

[VermontDem2004]

29. Dean wasn't working his ass off?

I don't draw a line between someone who went to Vietnam and who didn't, I don't care one of the best President's of this century actually did dodge the draft.


Think the Republicans will attack Dean with the "limosine liberal" line? Think they can attack Clark at all?
Give me a fucking break, Republicans will attack any dem for anything.

[SahaleArm]

33. Clinton was getting his masters from Oxford and protesting against Vietnam

He wasn't skiing in Aspen

[VermontDem2004]

42. Don't understand the comparison

Dean was getting a BA from Yale and a MD from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine. So what if Dean was skiing in Aspen in his own time, I would like to go skiing in Aspen someday.

[SahaleArm]

51. It was a response to your implication about Clinton

I don't care one of the best President's of this century actually did dodge the draft.

Clinton was a conscientious objector who protested Vietnam while completing his masters at Oxford. For Dean there was a big gap between Yale and Med School where he was afforded the oppurtunity to goof around and try out different things; nothing wrong with that per se.

[VermontDem2004]

53. Guess we didn't understand each other

My point to him was I didn't care that Dean got a deferment and didn't go to Vietnam because someone named Bill Clinton actually did dodge the draft became one of the best President's of the 20th Century.

[SahaleArm]

59. Personally I don't care one way or another - it's the past but...

How much of an issue will this be given that we are at war? How much leverage does Dean have to expose Chimp as AWOL? A solid VP choice might negate these issues.

[giantrobot_2000]

40. You don't care

"I don't care one of the best President's of this century actually did dodge the draft."

Do you think middle America cares? Because those people in the swing states are the people who are going to elect the president. Think strategically.

Clark's a liberal, more liberal than Dean. Read his policy papers http://www.clark04.com

[VermontDem2004]

45. No

Otherwise Middle America wouldn't of elected Clinton twice, Bush went awol, middle america doesn't seem to care. I like Clark and I like his positions. But Dean is closer to my views then Wes Clark.

[slinkerwink]

48. Clinton dodged the draft-----he ended up getting elected

[SahaleArm]

55. Too simplistic a view - I've linked Clinton's draft letter

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/draftletter.html

[slinkerwink]

70. Dean got a medical deferment----that's more of a legitimate reason

than an educational deferment is.

[SahaleArm]

74. Whether one is more legitimate than the other is opinion...

What isn't is that the 2004 race and 1992 race are two different beasts. Dean will need to be better prepared to answer these questions than he has been in the past.

[giantrobot_2000]

79. Bad back

Yeah, apparently Howard had a bad back but it wasn't bad enough for him to hit the slopes that winter in his resort.

[OrAnarch]

68. Can't we teach middle America instead of pandering?

"Do you think middle America cares? "

Do I give a fuck what they think? Should most leftist start calling the Vietnam war a great American triumph in which we defended democracy from the horrible evils of Communism? Should most leftist proclaim Saddam Hussien had WMDs and gliders poised at America? Should most lefists agree with all right-wing talking points in order to win "middle america"?


If they do not know by now, we should teach them the vietnam war was wrong, and it was wrong to kill innocent humans living in foreign countries, and it was noble to stand up for what you believed in, put yourself out on a line, and fight against that system.


Clark is campaiging, IMO, down to the ignorant spellbound by Fox. Solution which is easier...provide an alternative to the right-wing and teach these people to come up to us.



I don't want a military leader. I want someone who believes in the progression of the human race and will stand up in the face of a military draft and do their patriotic duty to humanity, not America.

[drfemoe]

52. wishful thinking?

Think they can attack Clark at all?

guaran-damn-tee it .. He gets plenty of criticism from dems, so what makes him immune to repups?

[Dookus]

18. actually....

Admission to West Point is pretty much accomplishment-based. Many people from the poorer segments of society make it in.

[DrWeird]

21. So does Yale.

nt

[giantrobot_2000]

25. In the 1960s when Dean went?

YALE was a diverse school in the 1960s when DEAN went? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL! Yale was the whitest place this side of a Klan rally.

Tell me, why does Dean appear to not appeal to blacks. latinos and Asians very much? Only white people?

He's strickly upper crust from a tiny, lily white state.

[DrWeird]

32. Yes, the armed forces were a model of diversity in the 60s.

Particularly in the front lines.

[giantrobot_2000]

46. Front line

You're right, it was very diverse on the front lines, where Clark was.

[VermontDem2004]

50. This is just a thought

Not a flame bash or anything, I could care less either way. But I don't think Clark was in the front lines considering the fact he graduated at the top of the class, it was usually people with high school diplomas on the front lines.

[giantrobot_2000]

61. Clark one the front lines

He receieved a Purple Heart and a Silver Star after he was shot four times in the leg by a machine-gun during an ambush. Badly injured and defying recommendations that he be airlifted to a hospital immediately, he stayed and ordered a counterattack and got his men out of there. He was awarded for bravery in the field. He was on the front lines. He was a infantry commander in the field.

[Dookus]

28. Well.....

a mediocre student like George W. Bush got into Yale. Do you think he could've gotten into West Point?

[DrWeird]

35. Wouldn't put it past him.

They let him in the national guard, and they let him fly around in a jet, and then they let him desert, and then they let him in the white house.

[drfemoe]

34. and Oxford too

... the 'common man' persona is a very weak rationalization.

[SahaleArm]

39. Rhodes scholar is merit based - You can get those when you finish 1st...

in your class at schools like West Point, Georgetown, or Yale.

[giantrobot_2000]

64. I have an idea

"the 'common man' persona is a very weak rationalization."

The "man who pulled himself up by his bootstraps" is a very good personalization of Clark. So is the "noted scholar" and "war hero."

[VermontDem2004]

20. sigh

Do we want to elect someone who's lived a life of priviledge, someone who's never known what it's like to go to public schools, to not be extraordinarily wealthy all his life?{/i] I don't care Someone who grew up on 5th Avenue in Manhattan? Someone like Dean? Sure, why not? Some of our best Presidents were relatively well off their entire life. I want to elect someone who went to public schools, like me. I want to elect someone who's proven that he didn't make his career to get wealthy and who wasn't in it for the money.You have to make a living but how do you know Dean wanting to be a doctor was all about money? I want someone with smarts,Me too what certainly appears to be a basically an un-fucking-assailable record (especially against Bush). Bottom line is I want someone who will make the right choices for the future of our country.Me too which is why Dean is the man

I want the only man who was truly called by the people of this country to run for office. Which is why I am supporting Dean and whoever the democratic nomination for President.

want a leader who's shown that he has principles, someone who has said that "dissent is a part of American discourse." I want someone who stood up for Michael Moore when not one other Democrat dared.You can find other candidates who have done that as well as other democrats(R. Bird to name one), but I don't recall Clark doing alot of standing up when he was the military anaylyst on CNN shortly before and during the early parts of the war. I want to elect a man(why not a woman?) who thinks that people have First Amendment rights, someone who not only wants to protect free speech but exercises them every day of his life.That pretty much covers every candidate I want someone who reads books and newspapers carefully,Don't really know who does that but all of the candidates are really aware of what is going on. I want an intellectual (as if anyone who's lived through Bush doesn't want someone with a brain). I want someone who understands that a clean environment lets us all live better lives. I want someone with a clear plan for jobs, someone who wants to close the corporate loopholes and make companies that make profit in America pay their fair share of taxes. I want someone who knew the Iraq war was a mistake and saw the mess unfold before his very eyes. But he was powerless. This is the one man who can prevent another Iraq from ever happening again.


Don't really feel like commenting on the rest but Dean/Kucinich/Clark/Braun/Sharpton/Kerry pretty much cover the rest.

I want a man who can and will appeal to every American, in other words, a man who can beat Bush.Me too which is why I am supporting Governor Howard Dean for President.

[OrAnarch]

26. "dissent is a part of American discourse."

He knew it, but what was his dissent while he contributed to the American miliary machine for the last 40 years. Shame on him.

[giantrobot_2000]

31. Please explain

Please explain what you mean. I don't understand how Clark's career in the military means he's against free speech. Military men and women are citizens, too, they want their First Amendment rights, too.

Surely you're not accusing men and women in the military as being scornful of free speech.

[OrAnarch]

44. Not at all...

Im saying if he recognized such, why didn't he show dissent and quit (or protest) the military when they were slaughtering innocent humans living in Laos and Vietnam? Furthermore, why did he continue contributing to a military that works in the intrests of only the elite, not America, while it spreads global death and destruction.


If Clark is going to make his military experience such an issue in his campaign, I sure as hell am going to take him up on it. This isn't something to brag about at all or be proud of. We are not all brainwashed by the right afterall.


We are all thinking beings and can choose, oh yes, not to kill. Crazy concept. He chose to continue, and furthermore, to contribute to the power which causes global turmoil. He is somewhere between an accomplice and a pawn, but guilty to some extent, and should most definately be remorseful.

[giantrobot_2000]

54. Reponse

I'm not going to respond to the first paragraph because it's a loaded question and a smear.

Americans want a patriot. Someone who followed his duties.

Clark didn't make the decision to start the war in Vietnam. The politicians did. Clark, along with hundreds of thousands of other men, followed through on their duties. You can blame the soldiers for the politicians' mistakes.

You should read Clark's thought on Vietnam. He loved his men but didn't like the war.

[OrAnarch]

63. He should of made the decision to quit fighting

period. Its not a smear....you know as well as I about the military and the people who pull the strings, the elite and their motives...no war can be just in such a system.


The people want a patriot? first off, don't you tell us what we want, nor what we need. Secondly, it takes a lot more than following orders to be a patriot (thats a nationalist). Sometimes it takes standing up for what you beleive in. Either he had no balls, or he believed in the death he contributed to.

[giantrobot_2000]

67. Interesting

"Sometimes it takes standing up for what you beleive in. Either he had no balls, or he believed in the death he contributed to."

That's a very interesting take. It's almost a black and white take. You actually said "either/or." Food for thought. Do you accuse Bush of seeing things as being black or white, either/or?

[OrAnarch]

69. Answer the question....

You think you can just try to dub it as invalid and escape it, but itll never go away. WTF did he continue to contribute material support to American hegemony? Why has he not apologized for his actions? Why does he campaign on this embarrassing issue? Why did he spend his whole life enabling people like bush to kill, estroy, and pluder nations? If you can provide satisfactory answers, maybe Id vote if hes on a VP ticket...maybe.

[Name removed]

72. Deleted message

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

[VermontDem2004]

75. Nice move to change the subject

Do you realize that American voters don't know what the fuck you're talking about? No one uses that kind of language except the far left and Marxists. This is why Dean appears almost exclusively to middle class white college students. You can spout off about contributing "material support" to the "American hegemony" all you want but people won't listen to you because you sound like a white, middle class college kid.

[SahaleArm]

76. it's a rhetorical question that assumes the military

operates outside the scope of civilian authority, and each individual within the miltary can act unilaterily. It's attempting guilt by association but nothing more substantial.

[OrAnarch]

80. this is simple...

1. Thinking humans can act unilaterally

2. Each soldier in the military is a thinking human

Conclusion: All humans in the military can act unilaterally...



When you join they do not castrate your brain, dont you know?


Anyone, at anytime, can put their rifle down, and leave.




A gun, which cannot think on its own, is reprimanded further by the left for contributing towards death than a thinking human. something is wrong with that.

[SahaleArm]

84. Yes everyone wants 20 years for a court marshal

This is a silly argument because the military is voluntary and works based on orders, top-down from the commander-in-chief, not unilaterily. If you don't like those restrictions don't join. Yes the Geneva convention prohibits certain behavior but painting the miltary with a broad brush doesn't accomplish much.

Why not just admit you hate the military and end this pointless discussion...

[OrAnarch]

88. Try this...

Why not admit that Clark's lifetime contribution has further enabled people like Bush to spread suffering and destruction accross the globe?

"military is voluntary" YES!

So why did he volunteer to a service in which he killed and contributed towards killing, when he could act unilaterally as a human (not soldier)?



BTW, are you exonerating all Nazis with your orders bullshit, and any other soldier who at least fought for a less than noble cause?



And yes, I hate the military. Guess thats what happens when raised by a low-income man who pulled what little strings he could for a medical defirment, in order to raise his voice at home and contribute to the end of the massive deaths overseas (A true patriot).

[SahaleArm]

93. Claiming ignorance won't win you any support.

I specifically mention Geneva convention rules which preclude much of the behavior you abhor, other than killing in battle. I can appreciate your stance but not your willingness to generalize the military.

[OrAnarch]

99. This is a joke...

The "Geneva convention" rules apply in a military setting, while I am contextually talking about humans and human interactions. Killing other humans and aiding others in killing and worse may not be a Geneva violation, but it sure as hell is a violation of humanity, especially in the name in which it was done for.


Just because all things are military to Clark and you doesn't mean all people are soldiers and think as little as one.

[OrAnarch]

78. Does it matter what they know?

They know what we teach them, and either we can teach them a little about what war really is, or we can set up a cloned republican party and put a "democrat" sign on the door. Damn...70% of people thought the war in Iraq was cool and justified...is that the exact crowd Clark is after? No thank you. Id rather find someone who can reach out, diminish that crowd, and rebuild a new one with informed Americans...someone who can truly improve our nation and people rather than pander to right-wing ideaology.



But please, go ahead, address my questions...why, after asking for a few days straight, will no Clark supporter directly answer my questions, which are more than valid?



Sorry for sounding like that white middle-class college kid Im basically everything but. Forgive me for educating myself with dem big werds. I need to turn back on ta Fox and lern a little something bout that one militery guy named Clark, who isa patriot cause he killed tons of colored people. Yeeehaw. republic...erm democrats in 04. Yaaaaah

[SahaleArm]

86. What's there to answer? You're working with a faulty premise

You are assuming that the civilian leadership, through Democratic and Republican administrations, bears no responsibility for direction of US foreign policy, only the military. The blame lies directly on the shoulders of the civilian leadership under the president and his cabinets, not the miltary.

[OrAnarch]

90. Bullshit....

I am not letting anyone off the hook.....


I hold the administrations responsible in a broader and much more serious context for the entire war, but the people pulling the triggers aren't to be forgotton. The individals still must bear the responsibility for what they did, wether it be killing, helping, raping, pillaging, feeding, destroying, etc.


You are ridiculous to suggest that all soldiers are to be exonerated of the crimes against humanity due to their leaders. They can think for their own damn selves. Period.


Is a gang member to be let off the hook because he was told to kill?
Should Charlies hookers be let free?
Do Saddam's soldiers get a pass in your book?
Do Nazi soldiers have no responsibility for thier actions, or even the foot soldiers?
Lee Malvo only a Pawn?


bullshit....


Just because people are stirred to the cause sound of nationalism, with hatred and furvor in their blood, to finally have a purpose to kill for (to fill that empty void), does not mean they are not responsible if they are not the authors of the motive.

[SahaleArm]

92. No I've never said Geneva convention rules don't apply but...

you are blurring the lines between those rules and 'US Hegemony'. Was Wes Clark involved in Vietnam, of course but much of your rhetoric smacks of generalization. Not all soldiers were involved in raping and pillaging which is what you seem to imply. Can you offer something more about Wes Clark specifically other than cheap rhetoric?

[VermontDem2004]

94. I'm jumping in here

I am sure the poster you are replying to knows not all soldiers were involved in raping and pillaging and is not implying it. The point I got from him/her is that the soldier bears responsibility for his/her actions and not their leaders. The individals still must bear the responsibility for what they did, wether it be killing, helping, raping, pillaging, feeding, destroying, etc.
You are ridiculous to suggest that all soldiers are to be exonerated of the crimes against humanity due to their leaders.

[SahaleArm]

96. Of course - he's just playing possum

Does every soldier in war take the blame, provided they didn't violate Geneva convention rules, for what the civilian authority directed them to do? I don't agree with this premise as it negates reality of how the miltary operates within the larger context of nation-states.

[OrAnarch]

104. Your off and here is why...

"negates reality of how the miltary operates within the larger context of nation-states"


Im talkign about humans, and when humans wililngly kill other humans, while in the military or any other organization, they are still humans. And hence, he should bear responsibility for every life he has taken while killing humans in some foreign war when he was not part of a defending entity.

[giantrobot_2000]

97. Raping and pillaging

Hmm, so now you're accusing Clark of "raping and pillaging," like a pirate. Well, he's not a pirate, he's a four-star General, first in his class at West Point, a Rhodes Scholar who majored in philosophy, history and economics. The former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, someone with experience in working with our European allies.

Clark is golden.

[VermontDem2004]

100. How the hell did you spin my words?

I said nothing about Clark was raping and pillaging. I was merely pointing out that Anarch's point was that soldiers should be responsible for their actions whatever the reason.

[SahaleArm]

102. Of course he was implying something much broader in scope

That soldiers are responsible for their leaders actions - that they must change US foreign policy from within the miltary.

[VermontDem2004]

105. I still think you missed his or her point

The point that poster was making(I think) was that soldiers are responsible for their OWN actions, if they kill they are responsible, if they rape they are responsible, etc.

[SahaleArm]

108. No that's not his/her point - Follow the forked thread below *nm*

[VermontDem2004]

109. I did

And I believe it is, maybe Anarch can simply tell me otherwise because that was the message I got.

[OrAnarch]

112. Maybe thats the problem here...

You and I can catch a simple message, but they seemingly cannot imagine a soldier would have to bare responsibility for their actions if its their cherished Wes Clark.

[OrAnarch]

107. Just a thought on the side...

If the leaders had no willing soldiers to command to invade foreign countries, maybe they wouldn't be able to!



I am saying that right along with the leaders, the soldiers must also bare their part of the responsonsibility when killing innocent people in unjust wars.

[OrAnarch]

95. Allright

While in Vietnam, an unjust war of the elitest, Wes Clark literally pulled a trigger and killed multiple Vietnam Humans in a foreign invasion. Furthermore, he made contributions during that war, and since, which enabled others to kill humans in unjust wars. From direct contributions all the way to administration, Wes Clark's actions have further enabled the American military to spread death and destruction.


I am not saying wes Clark broke Geneva conventions. I am saying he killed innocent vietemnese and aided others in similar acts (feeding a man before he goes out and kils someone is aiding). They were innocent, like the Iraqis, because it was their country and our invasion, done by the elite for money and power. We shouldn't of been there..while there, the soldiers had no moral highground at anytime, and only orders that they did not have to follow (since they are thinking humans).


That is what he did....he dedicated his life to contributing towards a military organization that the rich use as a tool to destroy and kill, and such aid makes him responsible for the result of the force he contributed to. Such direct killings make him sresponsible to a much greater extent.



Why is he proud of this? Why has he not apologized? Why does he campaign on this? Why has he not shown remorse for making it easier for people like bush to kill foriegners?


Does he realize that his contributions result in unjust death? (if not, isn't there a sharper tool in the shed for this position?) If he does, why hasn't he publically stated an apology...why did he continue past Vietnam? etc..its endless...This is a really embarrassing aspect for Clark.

[SahaleArm]

98. If you look at post #96 above I disagree with this premise.

Do you feel intervening in Kosovo was unjust or that avoiding Haiti was justified?

[OrAnarch]

101. Then you are an idiot.

You cannot disagree with the fact that Clark killed people in Vietnam and that he further helped others do similar actions.


To do that is to ignore FACTS....turn on Fox, count to ten, and itll all go away.

[SahaleArm]

106. Responsible for US foreign policy in Vietnam? No

You can drop the false pretenses and say what you mean. You want the miltary to change foreign policy from the bottom up, something that I don't agree with. You can only do this from the top down - the buck stops at the presidents feet not the soldiers. You can't win an argument by shouting louder than the person you are trying to convince.

[OrAnarch]

111. No. I want to soldiers to put down their guns and go home...

Or feel some remorse later when they realize theyve fought a rich man's war and killed innocent because of it.


Soldier or not, it doesn't take away a humans individual ability to think. Period. And they can always choose not to kill innocent people in unjust wars.

[burning bush]

38. I Love a Man in a Uniform

To have ambitions was my ambition
But I had nothing to show for my dreams
Time with my girl I spent it well
(you must be joking, oh man you must be joking)

The good life was so elusive
Handouts, they got me down
I had to regain my confidence
So I got into camouflage

The girls they love to see you shoot
(bang bang you're dead)
I love a man in a uniform


Gang of Four
Songs of the Free /1982

[w13rd0]

71. shees...

...I prefer that someone at least work up to a dialogue before becoming a self-righteous shrew. Be thankful your candidate doesn't employ tactics like yours, else he'd earn the instant "click" you're now getting.

<click>

[drfemoe]

73. un-fucking-assailable record

did you happen to glance at the rules for posting in GD?
No offense to you. It happens sometimes.

[ima_sinnic]

81. If you are typical of the truth-distorting people who called Clark

into service, I'll stick with my candidate.

Your 1st paragraph is so full of distortions, misrepresentations, and purposeful lies I feel sure that anything less would just pass through that empty space between your ears.

[giantrobot_2000]

83. Please

Please, if they're so glaring, point them out to me.

[ima_sinnic]

89. excuse me, but this thread is full of objections to the contrary

and I refuse to give you any more fodder for your spin machine. One small example: your purposeful and hateful spin on Dean's legitimate medical deferment--MORON.

[Name removed]

91. Deleted message

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

[ima_sinnic]

103. as you know very well, people with flat feet got medical deferments

. . . so I suppose they should have gone straight to their sick beds and not moved a finger for the rest of their lives, right?

oh, and by the way, if you think a war criminal who got fired from the military can't be spun by your friends in the Republican party, think again (or try to).

sour grapes much?

[giantrobot_2000]

110. You

"if you think a war criminal who got fired from the military can't be spun by your friends in the Republican party"

Don't you dare accuse me of being a Republican. I have worked more for the Democratic party and liberal causes than you have in your entire life.

Please point me in the direction of your proof that Wes Clark is a war criminal, like the one he sent to the Hague.

[Nile]

85. A ordinary commom man can not get elected anymore.

You have to have tons of money and hang out with the right gang.

[Moderator]

113. I am locking this.

It is inflammatory.



DU Moderator