Sorry, but all this fawning over "the General" is disturbing as hell

[Stevendsmith]

How do you Clark supporters get around the fact that the guy was praising the Bush team at a Republican fundraiser less than two years ago?

What was your own position on Bush two years ago? I'm guessing it was full-throated opposition.

We knew what Bush was all about long before he stole the election. Why didn't Clark?

And spare me the "We can't be asking for ideological purity" stuff.

I am not asking for ideological purity. I am asking for a candidate with solid and longheld liberal values--not a recent lobbyist for the defense industry that had face-to-face business meetings with Dick-friggin-Cheney within the past three years.

You're going to tell me that's not cause for concern?

[KittyWampus]

1. Oops, I Thought You Meant The General Who Endorsed Dean

:D

Not really.

[HumanPatriot]

2. he bombs metal stuff

hes gotta be cool! ease up. boom boom goes democracy.

[salinen]

3. Yup. It's troubling to say the least.

But if he does win the nom I'm going to back him regardless. Maybe a tiger can change stripes.

[skjpm]

6. A general who was a lifelong Democrat

would be one thing. But Clark is a party interloper, IMHO.

[progressivebydesign]

4. I hear ya..

I feel the same way. It's just kinda freaky to see some Democrats swooning over Clark right now. I just don't see it. I'm always wary of last minute conversions when you want so badly to be President, but know you can't run in your own party. I checked him out, I considered him.. but I'd never have chosen him for my candidate. Too much republican baggage and connections. His lobbyist past is enough to scare me off. I'm not really into people who have made a career in the biz of killing people.

[CWebster]

5. Move along

nothing to see here....


Haven't you noticed? And please halt and desist from pissing on mastubatory fantasies of the General. ;-)

[KittyWampus]

12. Pissing On Mastubatory Fantasies

now that's saying a real mouthfull... but I'm not sure what it all means.

[West Coast Democrat]

7. I'm sorry, but what fawning are you referring to?

I haven't noticed any.

[KissMyAsscroft]

8. Yep...my sentiments on Clark exactly..

not to mention his taking a paycheck from CNN for play by play on a war he supposedly opposed.

Silence is implied consent, and now he does a 180? I'm not buying it.

[veganwitch]

9. the same people blast kucinich...

for having a pro-life voting record.

[KittyWampus]

14. THAT Is Largely Untrue And Likely Totally Unfounded

How many Clark supporters have honestly done that?

Do you really believe that?

[maddezmom]

18. maybe some, but not all

DK presented his views well at the debate, he made a change and realizes it now. No problem from me.

[Hoppin_Mad]

10. These issues disturb many of us - and the SOA as well -eom

[CTLawGuy]

11. Clark supporters

are so afraid of losing to bush that they'll support anyone from the south who wears a uniform.

Dean supporters are eager to beat George Bush. He's the one we want to face!

[KaraokeKarlton]

13. I agree. It's such a shame to see the level of fear by Democrats

It's so bad that some would support someone with such questionable a background with absolutely NO Democratic political record whatsoever just to try to compete with some foolish flight suit photo op stunt. It's no wonder Democrats have been losing, they keep letting Republicans run where their perceived strengths are. If you try to compete with an incumbent's strong points you lose every time. You have to go after where they are weak and show you're better. That's how you win.

[HumanPatriot]

15. Well, hes the perfect candidate in Bush's America,

with the anthem playing and the flags waving, and us sending young boys off to war, he appeals to the masses. Of course they are swooning over him.


Unforts, I don't want my decisions influenced by government sponsored media propaganda, subconsciously or otherwise.


Unforts, I don't want to live in Bush's America, wether he or a "democrat" is elected.


I want to change America.

[ryharrin]

16. I don't have a real problem with him.

I'd vote for him in the general election and all, but I don't understand the obsession with him. He's a general. Fine, I don't like the military too much, but i can see how it could help him in the election. Ok, so next- what, you're saying there's absolutely nothing else to him? He only just recently became a democrat and started voting that way? Why is this guy better than the other 8 candidates again?

[Don Claybrook]

17. I agree with your position

I try not to do too much responding to straight attack threads about another candidate, but as it turns out, these are exactly my reservations with Clark. As another poster said, if he's nominated, I'll vote for him. I'll vote because the alternative is Bush and because I hope he changes his stripes. But the lobbying, the non-party affiliation, and the militarism (covers several specific issues and is used for lack of a better term) are all big warning signs to me.

I have been impressed with some of the things Clark has said, but I've been negatively impressed about other things Clark has been.

[Dookus]

19. hm

[Padraig18]

21. Come on, Dookus.

Why is it that everyone's 'concerns' about Dean or Kerry, e.g., are perfectly 'legitimate', but any concern about General clark is dismissed as 'this old shit again'? Rather a double standard, isn't it?

[BootinUp]

20. The infamous speech

How much of it did you read? He was delivering a expert opinion on foreign policy, something he is qualified to do. Unfortunately it fell on deaf ears.

Basically, the only way this is unacceptable behavior is if any politician ever was a consultant hired by the other side, we should ostracize them. Reality check?

[mmonk]

22. Interesting how supporting

is called swooning. I guess it comes down to whether you believe what his positions are or not. If you don't believe what he says his agenda is, then I guess you just won't. Mischaracterizing his positions though is cheap. Taking issue with his positions point by point would gain you more respect than saying his positions resemble the current administration's, but offering no substance other than what opposition people tell you his positions are while his real positions contrast with what you who oppose him say. Its that plain and simple. We aren't going crazy over or swooning over him more than any of you over your candidates. And many of you are guilty of overlooking your own candidates weaknesses as you claim we do.

[Moderator]

23. Locking....

1. If you start a thread in the General Discussion forum, you must present your opinion in a manner that is not inflammatory, which respects differences in opinion, and which is likely to lead to respectful discussion rather than flaming. Some examples of things which should generally be avoided are: unnecessarily hot rhetoric, nicknames for prominent Democrats or their supporters, broad-brush statements about groups of people, single-sentence "drive-by" thread topics, etc.

Thanks,

DU Moderator