NEWSWEEK: Wesley Clark Lobbied Bush Administration for Contract for Acxiom

[stickdog]

What happens to Clark's vaunted chances against Bush when Clark runs out of money and the media starts giving him the same treatment it's been giving Dean for the last month?

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040118/nysu014a_1.html

NEW YORK, Jan. 18 /PRNewswire/ -- As an Arkansas businessman, Wesley Clark lobbied Vice President Dick Cheney, Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, aides to FBI Director Robert Mueller and his former chief deputy commander in Europe on behalf of a company eager to get post-9/11 security work, Newsweek reports in the current issue. The aim: to get a contract for Acxiom, a Little Rock firm whose "data mining" techniques are useful in tracking terrorists.

The lobbying -- for which Clark was paid about $400,000 -- must have helped: Acxiom got a contract. Everything was aboveboard and disclosed, says Chris Lehane, who does opposition research for Clark. But Clark's eagerness to do a deal was ironic, given his more recent criticism of the Bush administration's handling of security, report Chief Political Correspondent Howard Fineman and Investigative Correspondent Michael Isikoff in the January 26 issue of Newsweek (on newsstands Monday, January 19). And the Howard Dean campaign, furious at weeks of attacks on their own candidate, took the occasion to fire at will. "Clark portrays himself as an outsider when he's really just another Washington insider," says Dean spokesman Jay Carson. "It turns out that this guy was a registered lobbyist long before he was a registered Democrat."

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

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

[creativelcro]

4. ouchy...

[bearfartinthewoods]

5. oh ywah...like they can't find newsweek on their own

sure.....

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

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

[Lobo_13]

44. So hire a behind the scenes gremlin

to take potshots and lob grenades at the other candidates.

Then you can say you're above the fray, when you're really down in the mud with the rest.

[Rowdyboy]

2. And your point is?

[stickdog]

6. My point is ...

what happens to Clark's vaunted chances against Bush when Clark runs out of money and the media starts giving him the same treatment it's been giving Dean for the last month?

[windansea]

10. hopefully Clark won't engage in a gaffe fest

Like Dean did

[stickdog]

14. He already has.

Wesley Clark: "We were trying to make America safe. That's what lobbyists mostly do."

http://www.sptimes.com/2004/01/18/Columns/He_skipped_Iowa__but_.shtml

On domestic issues, Clark sometimes comes across as a piece of wet clay being molded by Democratic interest groups. For example, he recently told the Concord (N.H.) Monitor that he opposed any restrictions on abortion right up until the last day of a pregnancy - the most radical position any Democratic presidential contender has ever taken on abortion. He supports civil unions and gay marriage and gun control. He says he would not apply any litmus test to judicial nominees but adds that he would appoint only judges who support abortion rights. And in defending his work as a registered lobbyist after retiring from the military, Clark told a town meeting in New Hampshire: "We were trying to make America safe. That's what lobbyists mostly do."

[Lobo_13]

17. I'm glad I'm not the only one

that thinks his positions sound a bit too much like it was created by a focus group or unnamed committee.

[Tinoire]

40. For months we had endless polls

started by new Clark supporters with under 100 posts polling people at DU, the whole thing was rather... transparent.


Hehe, we skewed them ;)

[hellhathnofury]

92. Clark's stuff is so Madison Avenue that you have to wash it off.

Meet the DLC!

[LuminousX]

110. Manipulating appearances is Clark's forte

http://www.counterpunch.org/clark.html

And remember... "Mary, help!" -- why does he need someone's help to tell him what his own opinion regarding the IWR is?

[bearfartinthewoods]

140. what is the "mary help" thing. i see it referenced but i don't know what

it's about?

[drfemoe]

141. It was what Clark said on the airplane

during his first press conference after he announced his candidacy. They asked him if he would have voted for IWR. He said "yes", "probably", then "Mary!", calling on the adviser who was traveling with him to answer the question.

[bowens43]

143. Clark's positions are so unrealistic that they're laughable.

Does the man have a clue as to how the government functions? It doesn't appear so. I think the good general thinks that he will giving orders from the oval office and that those orders will become law. Perhaps the good general should sit in on a high school civics course.

[lastliberalintexas]

161. Sounds a lot like President Truman's

description of Eisenhower. ;-)

[windansea]

23. Dean leads Clark in gaffes by a 5/1 ratio

and that's being charitable

[Lobo_13]

27. So far

But Dean has also been getting 10 times the attention.

[windansea]

29. agree on that n/t

[stickdog]

31. Please produce all of Dean's supposed gaffes.

It's nothing more than a well worn meme. Anybody is susceptible to "Gotcha" political reporting.

[windansea]

50. working on it..will post new thread n/t

[stickdog]

53. Good. I have Clark's ready.

Just like the major media does.

[lurk_no_more]

57. Care to share?

I'd like to use it in a comparison once windansea starts his new thread.

Thanks.


And then there were none!
” JAFO”

[stickdog]

66. It appears to be against the rules. (nt)

[lurk_no_more]

69. Oh yeah!

.....Right!


And then there were none!
” JAFO”

[drfemoe]

103. nobody beats B***

on gaffes OR outright lies and misleading statements. NOBODY.

ex: He has WMDs. ... We found WMDs. ... No one ever said he had WMDs. ...

[Eloriel]

98. Took the words right outta my mouth

And don't forget his guarantee that if he's president there won't BE any more terrorist attacks.

Or his support for abortion right up to the moment of birth.

Or he would have -- no, wait, he wouldn't have -- voted for IWR.

Or Dean absolutely did offer him the VP slot, but when finally pinned down he admitted, in something of a whine I might add, "Well, it was as close as you could come to an offer...." (which means it was a mere hypotehteical discussion with absolutely no teeth which should never have been revealed anyway).

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

155. Haven't heard this before.

"Well, it was as close as you could come to an offer...."


Got a link to it? :D

[Hawkeye-X]

99. Don't forget about Clarks IT gaffe

You know, the one about letting the software jobs stay in India.

From the November 24th debate if noone believes me.

I can't understand why IT would support Clark. I wouldn't and I'm in the IT field.

[CivilRightsNow]

111. SIRVA SIRVA SIRVA

Clark sits on the board at SIRVA. I know some of you are getting sick of me saying it.

But he makes much money by shipping those jobs off to India, or bringing H1b and L1 visa workers here.

http://www.sirva.com/

SIRVA aint just a global trucking company, if you know what I mean.

[mikehiggins]

105. Oh, thanks. I had forgotten that editorial

the SPTimes is my local paper down here in Clearwater and I was really pissed off at that piece of work.

Clark's position on abortion is the official position of the Democratic Party. Aren't you aware of that?

Clark will not nominate any judge whose previous record demonstrates he or she intends to rewrite the Constitution to abolish abortion vis a vis revisiting Roe v Wade. What exactly is your problem with that?

Civil rights for homosexuals is anathema to you? Are you at all aware of the positions taken by the Democratic Party?

Gun control? Clark calls for the enforcement of existing gun laws, and the continuation of the ban on assault weapons. He opposes the destruction of gun purchase records after 24 hours, as was just proposed by Att'y General Ashcroft. What is your problem with that?

He considered his work as a lobbyist as trying to make America safe. Is there something wrong with that? Are all lobbyists driven by greed and self-interest? What about the Sierra Club? The American Cancer Society? NOW? The AFL-CIO? The NAACP? All sorts of others. Are they all bad guys?

I'm glad you posted your little zinger because it is time somebody started calling you folks on a simple question. If YOU don't support the liberal positions of the Democratic Party, what "part of the Democratic Party" do you really represent?

[stickdog]

130. So, the Democratic party officially states that life begins whenever

the mother decides it begins? Even after birth?

Clark said he WON'T have a any litmus tests for his judges.

Did anybody mention homosexual rights or gun control?

Clark said, "We were trying to make America safe. That's what lobbyists mostly do."

Do you agree that the primary function of lobbyists is to keep America safe? Is that why some, like Clark, are paid so well?

[mikehiggins]

156. People looking for a fight usually can find one

but not here, and not today, at least not with me.

Tonight begins the end of the bullshit that has been flying around here for months. I expect that at the end of the process Wes Clark will be the nominee and his critics can either join in or go away.

Either way, no problem.

Me, I'm going away again and write some more postcards.

Ciao for niao

[mot78]

15. 527's

Moveon.org, Soros. We're prepared. Besides, Dean's leading in the money primary, and he's been bombarded with attacks...that seem to be working if you look at Kerry and Edwards.

[stickdog]

19. Of course it's working. But it will work even better on the completely

untested and unvetted Clark.

[Hawkeye-X]

101. 527's for Clark..

Like the Club for Growth org that Clark is guilty by association??

Or that he still was a registered lobbyist when he declared his candidacy?

Boy, the media will have a field day once Clark runs out of cash. I also bet that Clark will miss his $2M goal by about 300,000 seeing its moving slow as molasses.

[lurk_no_more]

54. And you predict Clark will run out of money why?

I don't see that happening just yet, however in the off chance it does, I predict that by that time Clark will have deflected any criticism brought up by doing what he has done so far, answerer truthfully and honestly and let the voters decide. That is of course if the media by then doesn't recognize his ability to take out bush.

He'll be fine, but thanks for your concern! :hi:



And then there were none!
” JAFO”

[bearfartinthewoods]

7. the point is...nevermind

if i have to point out the problem with running a lobbist for president, welll...it seems a little pointless.

there are some things we should just know are wrong.

[KittyWampus]

11. Well, Discuss The FACTS Rather Than Trying To Dangle A Boogieman

Clark is open about what he did EXACTLY at Axciom.

Nothing remotely illegal or unethical about it.

[bearfartinthewoods]

36. legal...yes but we disagree on the ethics

the revolving door between the military, lobbying, corporate boards and elective office. the cheney model to riches and power. if it isn't unethical, then just what is our promblem with halliburton/cheney?

[Lobo_13]

42. Apparently

it's not what you do, but who you are that matters.

If this was Dean/Edwards/Kerry etc, these same folks would be beating it dead.

[KittyWampus]

51. Clark Was Working With Different Branch Of Government

NOT the Pentagon where he worked. He pitched stuff to the Treasury I believe.

Further, how exactly are Corporations working on projects dealing with National Security SUPPOSED to interact with the Administration?

Would you also summarily reject people who represent Unions and Environmental Groups having anything to do with Government?

[bearfartinthewoods]

73. was he wearing his uniform? did they call him 'general'

please tell me his previous position has nothing to do with his ability to contact cheney, and o'neil? then we can discuss the sale of a bridge in brooklyn.

[Justice]

72. No, Let's Look At That Statement

Clark's spent nearly three decades working in the US armed services. His experience after retiring amounts to a blink of an eye. Please don't refer to him as a lobbyist has if he hasn't done anything else with his life.

That would be like referring to Dean as a professional politican and forgetting to mention that he is a doctor.

[bearfartinthewoods]

76. was lobbying the first gig he took on retirement?

or was it being a war expert on CNN?

[Jerseycoa]

129. He retired in June 2000; announced 9/17/2003

Author: Waging Modern War: Bosnia, Kosovo, and the Future of Combat (2001)

Stephens Group Inc., director of merchant banking, 3/2001-2/2003

Registered Consultant/Lobbyist - 1/2/2002-5/6/2002

Axciom (Information Processing) - 12/2001-10/8/03

Entrust (Internet Security) - 1/2002-10/8/03

Author: Waging Modern War: Iraq, Terrorism and the American Empire (2003)

Leadership for America (non-profit) (2003)

CNN, Senior Military Analyst, 2/2003-6/2003

Wesley K. Clark & Associates, 3/2003-

WaveCrest Laboratories, Chairman (alternative energy engine)- 4/2003-10/8/2003



Kerry's website has a note:

"...Clark Colleague at Acxiom Corp, where he was a lobbyist for several years."

However, the only lobbying registration I found online was for 1/2/2002-5/6/2002:

(|1 and |2 seem to be duplicates)

http://sopr.senate.gov/cgi-win/opr_gifviewer.exe?/2002/01/000/460/000460254|1

http://sopr.senate.gov/cgi-win/opr_gifviewer.exe?/2002/01/000/460/000460254|2

http://sopr.senate.gov/cgi-win/opr_gifviewer.exe?/2002/01/000/555/000555220|3


He also sat on various boards, including Messer-Griesheim, North American Van Lines - (Sirva), and Time Domain Inc.

I pulled this together to answer threads like this. I hope it helps, but it's all I've got, so Google anything else, please.

[hellhathnofury]

93. Well he obviously didn't learn much in the services because he went

right to work lobbying for an eye in the sky BushCo group. It's the truth and it hurts, I know.

Gov. Dean MD. 9 years as a doctor, 11 as a politician.

[mikehiggins]

107. How about someone who lobbied for NOW or GLBT issues?

Should we cast them into the outer darkness?

[HFishbine]

122. The important distinction

is that Clark lobbyied for a program that tramples our civil liberties.

[wyldwolf]

3. So?

?

[KittyWampus]

8. Hmm, Newsweek Tries To Make Clark's Lobbying A Boogieman

and praises Dean in the same title and piece...

Pretty funny actually.

Wesley Clark Lobbied Bush Administration for Contract for Arkansas Firm to Get Security Work

Profile Of Dean At Prep School Reveals Independent, Earnest Roots 'He Didn't Suffer Fools,' Says Football Coach

[Rose Siding]

9. These Democrats don't care, sd

They *want* a corporate lobbyist in the WH. Clark said that lobbyists make us safer. And don't we all want to be safer post 911?

[KittyWampus]

13. Are You Aware Of The Hart Rudman Report?

Or Gore's Report on Airline Safety?

Do you think that Name Recognition is sufficient in screening airline passengers?

[stickdog]

16. CAPPS II makes airlines safer for

terrorists.

[KittyWampus]

25. Wesley Clark Had NOTHING To Do With CAPPS -NOTHING

and I KNOW that this has been brought to DU'ers attention numerous times.

It is hard to understand why it is continually brought up though.

Oh, Guilt By Association.

[stickdog]

30. Come on.

Newsweek:

As an Arkansas businessman, Wesley Clark lobbied Vice President Dick Cheney, Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, aides to FBI Director Robert Mueller and his former chief deputy commander in Europe on behalf of a company eager to get post-9/11 security work, Newsweek reports in the current issue. The aim: to get a contract for Acxiom, a Little Rock firm whose "data mining" techniques are useful in tracking terrorists.

The lobbying -- for which Clark was paid about $400,000 -- must have helped: Acxiom got a contract.

What do you think they are talking about here? Is there another Big Brother data mining operation in the works that we don't know about?

[KittyWampus]

38. Again, Clark Had Nothing To Do With CAPPS. FACT.

why post the same material again?

[stickdog]

39. Why attempt to deny the accuracy of a major media report using nothing

more than your opinion stated strongly?

[Tinoire]

49. "Privacy Villain of the Week: Gen. Wesley Clark & Acxiom"

More information has come to light in the JetBlue/CAPPS II incident regarding the role of data broker Acxiom and its rainmaker-slash-board-member (and now-presidential candidate) Gen. Wesley Clark.

You may recall that the incident involved a strange cross-pollination of executive agency functions as a U.S. Army contractor, Torch Concepts, tested a program purportedly intended for the Transportation Security Administration, an agency of the Department of Homeland Security. That program is CAPPS II, the air-travel customer profiling system set to go online early next year, assigning every American who travels by commercial airliner a color-code based on a purported threat level generated by computer algorithms.

<snip>

Acxiom's sale of that data would seem to violate its privacy policy, as outlined in the complaint filed with the Federal Trade Commission by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC):

"Acxiom displays a US Privacy Policy on its website providing in pertinent part:

'Acxiom respects the privacy of every individual about whom we have information. Acxiom and our associates (employees) pledge to conduct our business according to these principles:

"Notice, Access and Choice -- Acxiom recognizes that individuals should be informed about how information about them is used and have choices about the dissemination of that information . . .

"'Acxiom displays on its website Access, Notice, and Choice provisions providing in pertinent part:

"'Notices should be provided that explain the collection, use and distribution of personally identifiable information. Most importantly, individuals should have the choice to opt out of the use of their data in marketing campaigns if they so desire. Similarly, Acxiom believes individuals should have access to information a company has about them that will be used for commercial reference purposes. Acxiom conforms to all legal and self-regulatory guidelines for providing an individual with notice, access and choice . . . . Acxiom does not provide any information, whether public or non-public, to individuals. Acxiom also does not allow our clients to make any non-public information available to an individual. Acxiom does allow our clients to make only public record and publicly available information available to individuals in the form of commonly used and accepted real estate research tools and public listing searches via the Internet. . . .'

"There is no evidence that Acxiom provided notice to or obtained the consent of any passengers whose personal information was sold to Torch Concepts for the purposes of the study. . . .

"Acxiom's sale of personal information to Torch Concepts violated its US privacy policy and Notice, Access, Choice provisions, and constitutes an unfair and deceptive trade practice in or affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a)."

Now, how did Acxiom get this contract? Look toward a story buried on page A9 of the Saturday Sept. 27 Washington Post, where it is reported that Gen. Wesley Clark, who became a member of Acxiom's board after his retirement, went hard to work trying to increase the value of his share of stock in the firm by meeting "on the company's behalf with officials at the Department of Justice, the CIA, the Department of Transportation, the Transportation Security Administration and Lockheed Martin Corp., the defense contractor that is heading up CAPPS II."

That article also reported that back in January 2002, when TSA was still a part of the Department of Transportation, "In a meeting at the in January 2002, according to participants, Clark described a system that would combine personal data from Acxiom with information about the reservations and seating records of every U.S. airline passenger."

http://www.nccprivacy.org/handv/031006villain.htm


The Privacy Villain of the Week and Privacy Hero of the Month are projects of the National Consumer Coalition's Privacy Group.

[dd123]

64. Clark helped Acxiom win a contract to consult on CAPPSII

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7380-2003Sep26?language=printer

Clark declined repeated requests in recent weeks to discuss the lobbying and his thoughts on information policy. After announcing his presidential ambitions, Clark quit working as a consultant for Acxiom but maintained his seat on the company's board.

As a consultant, he helped the company win a government contract worth an undisclosed amount to provide data and consulting services to the CAPPS II program. CAPPS II is the second-generation computer-assisted passenger screening system, a network that Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta once described as "the foundation" on which all other, far more public aviation security measures depend.

[HFishbine]

123. Nothing, huh?

According to lobbying records on file, Clark lobbied the Commerce Department and the Department of Homeland Security on issues of "Information transfers, airline security and Homeland security."

[Jerseycoa]

147. Do you have a link to that, HFishbine?

I didn't find it when I searched and I would like to add it to my collection. Thank you.

[lurk_no_more]

68. I think he's one hell of a salesman

if he could sell Acxiom instead of Haliburton to Cheney, and get $400,000 for himself?


And then there were none!
” JAFO”

[bearfartinthewoods]

142. the village voice says 800,000

Federal disclosure records show that Clark lobbied directly on "information transfers, airline security, and homeland security issues" for Acxiom. The company was pushing the by now notorious CAPPS II, a creepy program designed to profile all airline passengers. Clark, who reportedly got $800,000 in fees for his work, lobbied the Justice Department, CIA, and Department of Transportation. According to The Arkansas Democrat Gazette, he met personally with Vice President Dick Cheney.

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0403/nh4.php

[Hawkeye-X]

102. Three famous names

Which neither of them are lobbyists when they wrote these key piece of data and information to protect the United States. Clark was a registered lobbyist when he declared his candidacy.

Caveat emptor.

Hawkeye-X

[bearfartinthewoods]

47. that line made me want to barf

and some people in THIS party are so blinded by a uniform that they cannot see this? i wish people could buy a clue and understand the security the nation craves comes from a man, not a resume.

[dd123]

60. Yup. Lobbyists are good for this country.

I feel so much safer knowing that there so many ex-generals, ex-politicians, children of politicians and other connected folks lobbying our government.

Thank you lobbyists!

[Lobo_13]

12. But

Clark was making the country safer, and that's what lobbyists mostly do.

I gotta go with BFITW on this one. This guy is going to be painted as a craven opportunist if wins the nom.

[in_cog_ni_to]

18. This is OLD news.

Everyone knows about it. Clark has opened ALL of his records to the public. They are in Manchester, NH. Go ahead and look for yourselves. They're all there for the reading. Everyone knows he worked for Acxiom. Tom Daschle's WIFE is a lobbyist for crying out loud....and he's still in the Senate. This is a non-issue.

<snipClark isn't just talking the talk - he's walking the walk. Today, he opened his records -- military records, tax returns that cover the period since he left the military, financial records and voting registration documents to the public.

The documents will be available at the Sheraton Four Points hotel in Manchester. They will be posted at www.clark04.com as soon as they are scanned.

"This is just another way for the people of New Hampshire to get to know me and to know that I mean what I say when I call for openness," Clark said.<snip>

http://clark04.com/press/release/185/

[stickdog]

22. And what about Dean's 4 year old comments on the Iowa Caucuses?

Unfortunately, it's not "old news" if Newsweek is printing it for the first time.

[in_cog_ni_to]

52. "I" and many others

had never seen the CANADIAN TV show where Dean's remarks were made. Big difference. Newsweek is printing this OLD news so they can bash Clark. Why else? It's old news and nothing will come of it.

If they really care about what Clark has done, they will go to Manchester to look at ALL of his open records. Of course, they can't do that with the Dean SEALED Vermont records, can they?

[stickdog]

55. Are you saying that EVERYBODY has already heard about Clark's

$400,000 Big Brother lobbying exploits?

Because otherwise, I don't understand what distinction you're trying to make here.

[in_cog_ni_to]

59. Yes,

That's exactly what I'm saying. It's a known fact. It's been written about before. This is nothing new. You knew about it, didn't you? It's been talked about on CNN, MSNBC, ect... It's old news. Sorry to burst your bubble.

[drfemoe]

144. A lot of folks

haven't heard about it yet. Primaries are just starting today.

Besides, do you think the repukes are gonna care if it's "old news" if Clark makes it to the GE? No Way.

[in_cog_ni_to]

157. Fact is...

who gives a shit that the man finally got a job after 34 years in the military, is finally making more than $50,000 a year and lobbied for Acxiom? No one is going to care. The ONLY people who care are...anti-war, anti-Clark and anti-everything America does people. I am as Liberal as one can be and I don't give a HOOT about this. I won't be the only one. Trust me....this is a non-issue.

ALL of Clark's records are open to the public in NH. If anyone is interested, all they have to do is go there and read. Unlike Governor Dean who refuses to open his SEALED Vermont records.

[Leilani]

56. At least Clark's records are open..

You all can agree or disagree on Clark's jobs, connections, fees, etc., but the point is : his records are open. He obviously feels he has nothing to hide. If you feel his work as a lobbyist should disqualify him from your consideration, I can understand that. But at least you can make an informed decision.

However, a good portion of Howard Dean's records are sealed. Now maybe there is nothing in them that I would find objectionable, but the point is I can't make an informed decision. I am expected to just take for granted that everything is A OK. Well, I want the chance to make up my own mind, just as you are free to do about Wes Clark.

[bearfartinthewoods]

79. old news........getting new attention,,,before it's too late

[seventhson]

80. Yes WE knew about it. But the mainstream media is SLOW....

and this is the heart of the military industrial complex.

I am glad that this is actually coming out nationally and globally.

Those who support Clark are suporting a general who justifies depleted uranium against civilians as well as the School of the Americas.

Itr is consistent that he would support axciom spying on US and contracts for HUGE military contractors.

It IS public info. But most folks just haven't been paying attention.

I cannot stand Clark for these reasons.

[bearfartinthewoods]

138. the village voice kicks in........ calls it 'creepy'

Clark's role as a lobbyist for a company seeking a War on Terror contract with the Department of Homeland Security continues to raise questions. Records show that Acxiom, a company that was seeking homeland security contracts, agreed to pay Clark hundreds of thousands of dollars for his help in persuading the government to buy the company's wares. Clark was a registered lobbyist while he served as a military analyst on CNN, and was still a lobbyist when he declared his candidacy on September 17, 2003.

After he quit the military (or was sacked—no one seems to agree on what actually happened), Clark worked as a consultant for Stephens, Inc., an Arkansas investment firm. Then he thought about running for governor of Arkansas, then for Tim Hutchinson's Senate seat, and finally for president.

Federal disclosure records show that Clark lobbied directly on "information transfers, airline security, and homeland security issues" for Acxiom. The company was pushing the by now notorious CAPPS II, a creepy program designed to profile all airline passengers. Clark, who reportedly got $800,000 in fees for his work, lobbied the Justice Department, CIA, and Department of Transportation. According to The Arkansas Democrat Gazette, he met personally with Vice President Dick Cheney.

The Washington Post reported in January 2002 that Clark attended a meeting at the Department of Transportation, at which he described "a system that would combine personal data from Acxiom with information about the reservations and seating records of every U.S. airline passenger" to detect "subtle signs of terrorist intentions."

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0403/nh4.php

[HFishbine]

124. Another one misses the point

It's not just that Clark was a lobbyists. For all the repugnant feelings that may arouse, the killer is that he was lobbying for an unprecedented program of survallience on American citizens.

[KoKo]

20. The "MIC" at work again. Hire "retired General" lobby the Govt. and

Voila! You make more than even the average CEO and come off looking like a hero! Wow, I wish my father-in-law had known about this when he retired in the 70's. He could have "hooked up" big time. Not as big as Wes and the rest of today's Generals, but he could have done some "lower grade work" for the Gubmit!

[KittyWampus]

28. Clark Was Not Lobbying For Weapons Nor Making Huge Amounts

Facts are pesky things.

[salin]

35. frankly... I would consider $400,000 a "Huge Amount"

not taking issue on the story (I don't seem to think that lobbying is in and of itself an evil thing - but I do think that what one lobby's about is a valid discussion point.... )... just taking issue with characterizing nearly half a million dollars as not "Huge Amounts".

[in_cog_ni_to]

58. People begrudge the man some freaking money

after he has spent 34 years making next to NOTHING? He and his family have had to live on a pittance from what he earned in the military and we all know it's NOT enough to live the high life. He made some money and people are complaining about it? $400,000 is a lot of money, but he also had lived on military wages his entire adult life.

[KoKo]

77. Tinoire and others have shown Wes made several Million with his ties and

it wasn't only Acxiom. In three years he made more than most of us would have in a lifetime. These facts with links have been posted all over DU for months. I should start bookmarking them.

It's what makes me question Clark. All that money in three short years and now he runs for President? His General's pension wasn't enough for him? He needed to use his "influence" to pedal "start up software companies" to the Pentagon? Using his "insider influence."

Hey...he's in the Bush mode. "Insider influence is everything!"

[KoKo]

84. Yep, Dick Cheney, Henry Kissinger, G. Gordon Liddy, did the same!

And, you don't need the long name of others who all reaped millions off the spoils of Government "Service" and "War Profits."

Hey....and little Martha get's the ax......this is all so honest.

And what about the whole Bush II Admin. feeding off Poppy after taking their Corporate Jobs because they had INFLUENCE?

What about Condi with that "Supertanker" named after her. Let's hope it was "double hulled" in case of an "accidental spill" unlike the "Exxon Valdese" which has polluted until this very day. I still don't buy gas from Exxon stations because of this.

But, look at these people! What have they ever done to BUILD A BUSINESS FROM THE GROUND UP?

[in_cog_ni_to]

119. Who? Clark?

The man served in the Military for 34 years! That is most of his adult life! WHY is HE being lumped in with Bush, Cheney, Condi, G.Gordon Liddy, Henry Kissinger and the rest of that cabal??? He served this country out of a sense of duty and I think that deserves respect, even from the anti-military/anti-war...... hate everything America does, crowd. He lived on SHIT for all those years and you begrudge the man a damn job when he finally retires? Clark rebuilt a car, all by himself because he and Gert didn't have enough money to buy another one BECAUSE HE WAS SERVING IN THE ARMY NOT MAKING ANY DAMN MONEY! Do NOT LUMP Clark into that group of dispicable human beings. :grr:

[salin]

88. All I challenged was the descriptor

of $400,000 as not "a huge amount of money". To most people it is.

It doesn't factor into my final decision of candidate to support or not (currently undecided and still looking at Clark.)

[KittyWampus]

21. Wesley Clark's Own Words

CLARK: “Well, I am proud of the fact that I was able to make money. And I didn’t ever sell a weapon. What I did mostly, I wrote two books, and I gave speeches just like this. And that’s where I made most of my money. But I also learned business methodology and I learned how to read balance sheets and I learned how corporate executives work.

“I was on a lot of corporate boards. And for one of the corporations I signed a lobbyist agreement, and that was the corporation dealing with homeland security. And what I did for them, I helped them. I helped government understand what the private sector could do to make America safe. And I am very proud that I did that, none of my ideas were picked up by this government. I am not surprised by that at all. But I did do my effort. I think after 9-11 every American wanted to do what they could to help, and this company called me up. I had previously turned down an opportunity to work with them and be on their board. They said ‘we really need you.’

“And after three months of helping them for nothing, I said ‘Okay, if you really want to pay me I’ll take it.’ But…um…there is a legitimate function out there, don’t be misled by the labeling. Government has to, people who work in government are working hard hours, and they don’t know everything they need to know, and somebody has to be out there to bridge the gap.

“Somebody has to be able to knock on the door and go in. I took this company in to see the Secretary of the Treasury, Paul O’Neill because I used to work for Paul O’Neill when I was a White House fellow. And I said ‘Mr. Secretary, this company can help us track terrorist financing. And we need to get them involved.’ And he listened to it, and he said ‘You’re right.’ Of course nothing was ever done about it. But that’s what I did, and I’m proud I did that because I tried to help our country. Help you and everybody else in the country be safe. So…that’s what it’s all about and…and it’s not a defense, it’s an offense. Every American should try to help their country and that’s what I’m doing.”

[stickdog]

26. "Okay, if you really want to pay me I’ll take it."

Clark's takes on his lobbying past are truly becoming a gaffe riot.

[KoKo]

34. The point is: It's "peddling influence." How did Clark get on those

Boards? Why would anyone want to listen to him unless he'd been a General. And, this is what's going on all over Corporate America. Folks with "insider influence" serving on sometimes as much as 10 Boards where they have "insider info" about each company. Then they all are in cahoots when "mergers and aquistions" take place.

Hey....I've spent my whole life involved in what goes on in the "Corporate World." I'm not clueless....also know what goes on in those little "start up" companies...and the shenanigans with the "Venture Capitalists."

Hey, buddy, it all comes down to "Who you Know" and "You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours."

If you think what's been going on is Great for America then that's fine.
But, don't make Clark out as some "unsuspecting do-gooder" who just happened to fall into the Corporatists hands. He's clever and his influence was in "demand." Just like Cheney with Halliburton.

As I said....if this doesn't bother you, then fine. But it DOES bother many of us here on DU. AND......this isn't the way it used to be before the Lobbists got ahold of the Congress and the White House.

Yes, there have always been the "Influence Peddlers" but today there are "armies" (a pun) of them peddling back and forth. Some of us feel it's time to stop this.

[KittyWampus]

71. Clark Worked In The PENTAGON

he pitched sales in the Treasury I believe.

By the way, are you protesting Unions and Environmental Groups presenting information to the Government as well?

[KoKo]

75. Sorry, didn't understand your post, "cryingshame." What are you asking

me about "environmental Groups," etc? Do you mean that Environmental Groups and Unions who have "memberships" are in the same league with any retired Government Official or former General with access to influence a President and his cabinet?

I give to Environmental Groups..but I'm not in a Union. But, where is the comparison to Unions giving to support Candidates, and Clark pushing an "Internet Start Up Security Company" in front of the Pentagon. What if their was a competitor who couldn't pay Clark? What if the competitor's company was better than Acxiom? Acxiom obviously had enought money to bring in Wes. But what if "Security.com" didn't have that kind of money but had really great software.

One could say that Wes was astute enough that he threw his lobbyist support behind Acxiom because it had the best software for the job. And that he's enough of a computer whiz that he knows this. But, what if, like many others in his generation (including Dean) he doesn't ever use a computer but hires people to do his e-mails, etc.

In that case, Clark wouldn't have the "technical expertise" to know whether Acxiom was any better than maybe 20 other companies who could have won that contract.

That's my point. :shrug:

[KittyWampus]

96. You Have A Problem With Lobbyists Working With Government "KoKo"?

Then you should have a problem with the Sierra Club meeting with them as well.

[Rose Siding]

106. That makes no sense

Do you really not see the difference in the public good and the good of a pharma corp or a peddlar of IT?

[HFishbine]

125. Clark

pitched a program that violates constitutional freedoms to the Commerce Department and the Department of Homeland Security (geez, get you facts straight). Show me the unions or environmental groups engaging in the same threat to our civil liberties and I will be just as critical as I am of Clark.

[Tinoire]

63. What's your point?

Nixon's own words = "I am not a crook" :shrug:

What is your point? That everyone should remain blind and take an ex-General Lobbyist to the CIA and Homeland Security, who registered as a Democrat after declaring himself a Democatric candidate, at his word?

A guy who went to the World Economic Forum in Davos with Powell to campaign for the war in Jan 03 and now tells us he was against the war?

We should all gullibly take this guy who has praised the most dangerous neo-con at his word and entrust him with the Presidency of the United States? And as a Democrat?

In the words of the the anti-war military hero & author Stan Goff:

Watch Wesley Clark, the CNN military star, whose reputation in the Army was that of an inveterate ass kisser. He harbors presidential pretensions, and he's smooth as a baby's butt. Watch how the worry lines now come right through the pancake makeup.

http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/2003_03.html

====

Posting this here as reference:

Wesley Clark at Davos, Switzerland

26 January 2003
Is The WEF Playing Host To "Secret Oil Meeting" To Carve Up The Iraqi Black Gold Cake?
Davos, Switzerland: As helicopters continue to bring Chief Executives and world leaders into the Swiss alpine resort of Davos for this year's meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF), Friends of the Earth has been reliably informed by WEF participants that a "secret" meeting of top oil executives is scheduled to take place here this weekend. Friends of the Earth International - the world's largest grassroots environmental network - has today challenged the WEF to either deny that such a meeting is taking place, or to come clean on which companies and governments are taking part and what is being discussed.
US Secretary of State Colin Powell is addressing the WEF today amidst evident concern amongst many WEF business leaders and protests across Switzerland. However, many WEF attendees in the oil industry are set to benefit from an Iraq war.
A recent Deutsche Bank report indicated a potential conflict of interest amongst the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council over the commercial implications of war in Iraq. Baghdad Bazaar - Big Oil in Iraq was published last October but only came to light last week. It indicates that a regime change in Iraq would benefit US and UK oil companies while a peaceful resolution would benefit oil companies based in Russia, France and China:
<snip>
http://www.foei.org/media/2003/0126.html

===

Sunday, 26 January, 2003, 17:15 GMT
Powell fails to woo sceptics

Leading European figures say a speech by US Secretary of State Colin Powell warning that time is running out for Iraq to disarm has not persuaded them that a military strike is necessary.
<snip>
From the business community, Cem Kozlu, chairman of Turkish Airlines, said the message from Mr Powell was bleak.
"What Mr Powell said is that if there is evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq there will be war. And if there is no evidence, there will be war. That is bad news."

<snip>
Praise for Powell

But for the US, Wesley Clark, former Nato supreme allied commander for Europe, led the plaudits for Mr Powell's speech.
"He gave a very reasoned explanation of US policy," Mr Clark said. "It will help bring everyone together."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2696033.stm

====================================

Posted 07/02/2003
Titans of Davos: Cutting the Iraqi Oil Pile- Christopher Bollyln - The American Free Press
DAVOS, Switzerland—For 33 years, for one week every January, government leaders and the moguls of global business have convened here in this small ski town high in the Swiss Alps. While the mainstream media describes the World Economic Forum (WEF) as an event with a social focus, they know well that the real business of the conference is the private meetings of the global elite.

<snip>
On the final day of the conference, Wesley Clark, the former U.S. general who commanded the NATO campaign against Yugoslavia, explained how a U.S.-led assault against Iraq might develop. Clark attended the conference as managing director of the Stephens Group.

<snip>

The recently convicted currency speculator George Soros attended, along with the directors of Interpol, the European police force.

<snip>

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=492

===

Davos still in the surreal world

<snip>

Up in Davos, though, the military-industrial complex was no laughing matter. Alongside leading political figures from Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the UN security council countries, top executives from BP, Shell, TotalFinaElf, and Lukoil were in Davos. So was the architect of the first Gulf war, General Colin Powell, the US secretary of state. General Wesley Clark, the former Supreme Allied Commander for Nato in Europe, turned up as well, to give a presentation on "military scenarios for a possible confrontation with Iraq".
While this group gathered in Davos, Friends of the Earth handed out a leaked Deutsche Bank analysts' report, entitled Baghdad Bazaar: Big Oil in Iraq. This frightening document lays out how different oil companies and countries could benefit from the replacement of Saddam's regime, and speculates on how different oil companies might be involved in post-war control of the Iraqi state oil company.

<snip>

http://society.guardian.co.uk/societyguardian/story/0,7843,883944,00.html

====

Wednesday, January 29, 2003
Opposition is confident it can build a coalition after Saddam
Mark Landler The New York Times Wednesday, January 29, 2003

DAVOS, Switzerland After five days suffused by fear and anger over the American push for war in Iraq, Europeans and Arabs attending the World Economic Forum spent their last day here talking about life after a conflict that few want, but most now believe is inevitable.
As the debate subtly shifted Tuesday, eight prominent members of the Iraqi opposition arrived, with impeccable timing, to sketch out a vision of their country following the ouster of Saddam Hussein.

<snip>

Before their presentation, the Iraqis had listened raptly to a military briefing on Iraq given by General Wesley Clark, the former NATO commander, who is rumored to be pondering a bid for the presidency.

Davos is worlds away from the grange halls of Iowa, but some Americans here remarked that Clark's three-day blitz of the conference looked suspiciously like the dress rehearsal for a campaign.

He was host at a cocktail party for young people. He spoke at a breakfast for senior journalists. And he gave the briefing, complete with giant maps of Iraq and an electronic pointer, for an overflow audience of business executives and public officials. He requested that journalists not report his remarks, as they were based only on "informed speculation."

<snip>

Clark, who directed the air war in Kosovo, has also expressed doubts about invading Iraq without a United Nations mandate. But he said he came to Davos to rally the allies in support of a campaign.

"I've told all the Europeans: They need to get on the team," he said. "It's better to be inside the tent than outside."
<snip>
http://www.iht.com/articles/84929.html

===

Resolving Conflicts 2: From Prevention to Pre-emption
27.01.2003
Annual Meeting 2003

This session on resolving conflicts was one of the few at the Annual Meeting in Davos this year not to be dominated by the prospect of US and allied war with Iraq, noted moderator Joseph S. Nye Jr, Dean, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, USA. That did not make it any more optimistic than other discussions. The roundtable discussion brought together Wesley Clark, Managing Director, The Stephens Group, USA, Sergei Karaganov, Chairman of the Board, Council on Foreign and Defence Policy, Institute of Europe, Russian Federation, Itamar Rabinovich, President, Tel Aviv University, Israel, and Sundeep Waslekar, President, Strategic Foresight Group, India - all experts on flashpoints in their regions. And among the prospects being considered is action by the US against North Korea for building up its nuclear weapons programme in secret.

<snip>

General Clark, former NATO supreme commander, was asked whether it wasn’t inconsistent of the United States to attack Iraq for development of weapons of mass destruction while holding off against North Korea?

"There is no necessary requirement for consistency in pre-emption," he replied.

Doesn’t that tell North Korea that it has won this game of deterrence? "The military option cannot be taken off the table," Clark responded. But he also underlined that the US policy to North Korea is clear: "We don’t want the government to collapse. We don’t want South Koreans to adopt the North Koreans. We won’t want a war."
http://www.weforum.org/site/knowledgenavigator.nsf/Content/Resolving%20Conflicts%202:%20From%20Prevention%20to%20Pre-emption_2003?open&event_id=

===

An Iraqi opposition leader Hoshyar Zebani who met General Wesley Clark at the World Economic Forum in Davos has said that the US expects to remain in Iraq for 8 years post-invasion. ((remember Kucinich’s casual mention to Clark during one of the debates that Clark had worked on the plans for the occupation of Iraq))
http://216.239.57.104/search?q=cache:rNgU5fvc1kcJ:www.srcf.ucam.org/camsaw/Resources/2003/Moral_war_myth.doc+%22wesley+Clark%22++Davos+powell&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

==

But what he says, and the way he says it, doesn't always endear him to his audience -- especially when he's improvising. Last January, I saw Clark give a 45-minute presentation on how he thought the war in Iraq would unfold. As long as he was up there with his map and light pen, talking about JDAMs and phase lines and whatnot, he was magnificant. But when it came time to answer questions -- to talk with, instead of at, the audience -- Clark bombed.

Part of it was what he said, which was in essence: The U.S. is going to war, the president has made his decision, so you'd better just get used to it. This to a European audience, mind you, one heavily salted with Franco-Germans. Clark actually told them -- I swear I am not making this up -- that they had an obligation to support the war, because "that's the democratic process."

You can imagine how big that went over.
And it wasn't just what he said, it was how he said it. Intentional or not, Clark has that cocky, blunt American attitude that so often grates on the nerves of Europeans (and foreigners in general.) And he made no noticeable effort to tone it down. In fact, it looked to me like Clark irritated the crowd almost as much as Colin Powell, who also spoke at the conference. And that's saying something.

http://billmon.org/archives/000582.html

[Egnever]

118. Oh my

You do some amazing work Tin I have been at odds with you in the past but I have nothing but respect for your ability to find information.

[Tinoire]

145. We have?

Lol, I don't even remember! Keep on doing your great work.... You're a real peach Egnever and I like reading your posts. Thanks :)

[Cocoa]

24. I'm surprised the other candidates aren't talking about this

As far as I know, the only time it came up was ONE time when Edwards said something about it on Face the Nation.

Edwards has been talking a lot about lobbyists recently, I wonder if he's looking ahead to a showdown with Clark in SC?

btw, here's the first known reporting of this issue. :-)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=212190#221808

[Lobo_13]

32. They're all currently occupied

I'm sure you'll hear about it starting Tuesday morning.

[Leilani]

65. John Kerry has

He has called Clark a lobbyist & this week set out mailings in New Hampshire calling Clark a lobbyist & a Republican.

In fact I wouldn't be surprised if this story came from Kerry. The 2 campaigns have been arguing under the radar for some time. Kerry knows Clark & he are trying for votes from many of the same people, & since Clark moved up in NH, there have been many Clark leaks.

[Cocoa]

81. this story has been ou there a long time

the question for me isn't who tipped off the press, it's why they haven't pursued the story more than they have.

[HFishbine]

126. Kerry's talking about it

MANCHESTER, N.H. (Reuters) - A color brochure, mailed to New Hampshire voters this week by Democrat John Kerry's presidential campaign, set off a skirmish on Saturday between the staffs of the Massachusetts senator and rival White House hopeful Wesley Clark.
Clark's campaign officials in Little Rock, Arkansas, denounced the Kerry brochure in a conference call with reporters as an attack ad that portrays the retired general and former NATO commander as a Washington lobbyist and a Republican supporter.

Bill Buck, Clark's national press secretary, accused the Kerry campaign of pursuing a double-standard by emphasizing issue-ads in the race for Monday's Iowa caucuses but resorting to "negative" campaigning in New Hampshire's Jan. 27 primary.

"It's a daily practice of the Kerry campaign in New Hampshire ... while Sen. Kerry is sitting in Iowa crying about negative attacks," Buck said. Clark is not contesting Iowa.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=4152696

[Jerseycoa]

149. Kerry

Here is his press release.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0109c.html

[latebloomer]

33. Isn't anybody concerned about the civil liberties

and privacy issues related to Acxiom and its data mining business?? They're involved with CAPPS, who are color-coding people according to their level of "threat"-- and activists are starting to be singled out.

That Clark would be involved with this concerns me. Big time.

[in_cog_ni_to]

158. Are you a Clark supporter?

Just wondering.

[bain_sidhe]

41. Sigh. As posted NUMEROUS TIMES before

(edited: spelling & fixed link)

Clark lobbied for small companies, not MIC giants.

(http://www.mail-archive.com/[e-mail]/msg109145.html)

A snip:

The path between the Pentagon and major defense contractors (whose board seats pay as much as $200,000 a year) is well trod -- Gen. John M. Shalikashvili, now retired, sits on the Boeing board, while another retired general, John Ralston, is on the Lockheed Martin board. Other wartime generals, like Colin L. Powell, H. Norman Schwarzkopf and Tommy R. Franks, have turned their fame into million-dollar book deals.

But General Clark was perhaps not in a position to cash in as readily, in part because as allied commander during the Kosovo war he was not as well known as the men who ran the first war in Iraq. Moreover, his potential as a lobbyist in the eyes of the defense industry could have been undercut by his publicized run-ins with the Pentagon -- although those close to General Clark said he was drawn more to working with small entrepreneurial companies.

(And, you might want to note, the John Ralston on the Lockheed Martin board is the one who Cohen and Shelton brought in to replace him as Surpreme Allied Commander in the "early retirement" flap.)

The article goes on to list some of the companies he lobbied for: WaveCrest, marketing electrical bicycles to special operations forces; Sirva, the Chicago-based parent of North American Van Lines, which moves military families; Messer Geiesheim, a German maker of industrial gas, partly owned by Goldman Sachs; and of course, the (in)famous Acxiom, which started out in Little Rock as a Democratic mailing-list company

As the article ALSO states:

After the 2001 terror attacks, Acxiom, which had never before had a federal contract, discovered its computers had personal data on 11 of the 19 hijackers and sought the government's attention.

General Clark telephoned federal officials for Acxiom on a pro bono basis. By December he had joined the Acxiom board.

"Wes started making phone calls to people in the upper reaches of government," said Jerry Jones, Acxiom's legal counsel, "and then they started calling us."

Cripes. I'm gonna put this in a macro so I don't have to keep copying old posts.

[stickdog]

43. Acxiom = Jackson Stephens

It's a small company like Arkansas is a small state.

[Renew Deal]

45. Wait, arkansas is a small state.

Have you taken a liking to Clark lately. I see you were very positive in the McGovern thread also.

[stickdog]

136. The McGovern endorsement was a coup. (nt)

[Cocoa]

46. Acxiom is the company I'm most concerned about

I don't see how your post would make me feel any better about his work there.

[bain_sidhe]

67. Did you go to the link?

I'm not sure what specifically bothers you about Axicom, but the section quoted below helped clear up one of the things that concerned me about it:

Acxiom recently came under fire after a subcontractor to JetBlue Airways bought some Acxiom data and used it in ways that JetBlue said violated its privacy policy. Mr. Jones said General Clark had had nothing to do with that incident.

The point being, Clark had nothing to do with the JetBlue problem, and Axicom didn't really either... it appears that the subcontractor mis-used the data it bought.

[Cocoa]

74. my concerns about Acxiom have nothing to do with JetBlue

and I don't think Clark or even Acxiom were involved in any wrongdoing.

My concerns are about what his involvement with this kind of company says about him, and whether that's the kind of person we need as a president.

I'm familiar with Acxiom through my own work at a market research company. I'm not a privacy nut, though I'm a member of the ACLU, and Acxiom stood out for me in the alarming amount of personal info they own, and how freely they share it. Not suggesting any illegality, that's just what my impression was of Acxiom.

[in_cog_ni_to]

62. It gets old, huh?

same old crud, different day.

[Clark4VotingRights]

48. Hey, fair game. Clark needs to be able to explain this. Thanks stickdog.

Get it out *now*.
For all candidates.

[gulliver]

61. Question about press releases like this one.

Does a press release mean anything other than someone decided to make a press release to Newsweek? In other words, what is there about this press release that deserves to carry Newsweek's authority. There is no byline, and it seems a bit biased. Is there a reason to think it came from Newsweek at all other than as a press release picked up by Newsweek.

[gulliver]

70. Chirp, chirp. Hellooo. Is this Newsweek or not?

It seems like it is just a press release carried by Newsweek. If so, it doesn't deserve to have Newsweek (in all caps) in its subject line. Or at least there needs to be some disclaimer about it.

[seventhson]

78. It is a NEWSWEEK press release!

Go to their main page and check on the press room. I found it there but it took a minute.

It is legitimate and truer than most people here seem to want to believe.


Dean said this week that before Clark was a registered Democratr he was a registered Lobbyist (for the military industrial complex)

[Rose Siding]

83. It's here- LINK

in this week's Newsweek at msnbc site-

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3990023/

[seventhson]

82. $400,000 for Clark's Lobbying to track us looking for "terrorists"

"NEW YORK, Jan. 18 /PRNewswire/ -- As an Arkansas businessman, Wesley Clark lobbied Vice President Dick Cheney, Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, aides to FBI Director Robert Mueller and his former chief deputy commander in Europe on behalf of a company eager to get post-9/11 security work, Newsweek reports in the current issue. The aim: to get a contract for Acxiom, a Little Rock firm whose "data mining" techniques are useful in tracking terrorists.

"The lobbying -- for which Clark was paid about $400,000 -- must have helped: Acxiom got a contract."

Why LOBBY when you can GRANT the contracts to your own friends.

This is exactly the type of government perfected by Cheney/Bush/Halliburton and Bechtel

[eileen_d]

85. What will Dean do when he himself is a "Washington Insider"?

Will he denounce himself daily?

The whole lobbyist issue is a yawner for me, but the insider/outsider crap is what really pushes my buttons. It's the most content-free rhetoric a candidate can use and, not surprisingly, Dean's campaign uses it over and over and over again.

[arewethereyet]

86. please tell me that this is not news to you guys

also that Clark is on record critizing ex-generals who went into Military Industrial Complex lobbying. Likes to have his cake and eat it too.

[Tim_in_HK]

87. Linky? n/t

[arewethereyet]

100. its not even the first time it was discussed on this board

do your own searches

[Foswia]

89. Headline: Clark was doing his job, he was paid for to lobby! (nt)

[hellhathnofury]

91. I was just following orders, honest.

[JNelson6563]

90. Wow! Quite a thread!

We have some serious research folks here. Glad some have stuck around.

Julie

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

95. I'm getting weepy and nostalgic.

Item 1. Acxiom

Item 2. Carter invitation.

:cry:

[Walt Starr]

94. This is PRECISELY why Clark TERRIFIES me

Put up Clark and the only thing that will save the country is a third party.

[w13rd0]

97. Bill McBride

...the sure thing that wasn't.

Impressive resume, veteran of armed forces, tenure in the private sector (though with this one, it's as a lobbyist for corporations that sought to profit from 'increased security' after S11), fuzzy policy positions written by the DLC. And no, I'm not going to just "trust McGovern", anymore so that we would expect the Clark supporters to just "trust: Gore, Harkin, Paul Simon, Jesse Jackson Jr., etc. etc. etc.". I'm not giving Clark a pass on important questions on the word of Madonna, McGovern and Moore.

[mikehiggins]

104. Thank heavens somebody finally uncovered this well hidden secret

Its clear that the Clark campaigns feverish attempts to keep America from finding out about his lobbying have finally failed to keep this deeply suppressed secret out of the public discourse! Even worse, he was actually paid American dollars (he couldn't take Euros because that would have underlined his part in the New World Order) for the work he did.

One can only marvel at the skill with which these intrepid and heroic reporters uncovered this scandal. Kudos to those who posted it here on DU for bringing such an important discovery to everyone's attention. You bring credit to your candidate and your party.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

108. Who claimed it was secret? Who said it was a scandal?

It's information. Period.

Some are concerned with what Axciom represents. Some aren't. Some are concerned as to whether Carter issued an invitation to Dean. Some aren't. Some think both issues deserve further consideration. Some don't.

Ain't America beautiful?

[arewethereyet]

109. the fact that he did his job is not significant

he was being paid to pitch that company's products so the fact that he did means nothing.

What was shakey is his critisizing ex-generals for moving into lobbying roles for the military inductrial complex upon leaving the military when thats what he did himself. Glass houses and all.

[Rose Siding]

112. I have issues with the product he peddaled

I think the potential for gross abuse is intrinsic.

But the larger problem, with our entire political system in the craven corporate grip, and lobbyists playing such a nefarious part in the process, (I include Ms. Daschle!) the appearence of impropriety is inevitable.

I can't find any poll about the public's opinion on "corporate lobbyists", but if it isn't VERY low, I'll buy.

[arewethereyet]

114. I guess that means you'll love Edwards' position on this

he is vehemently against lobbyists and has been so for the start.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

116. Love it.

[HFishbine]

128. Edwards

Carfully says that he's never taken money from WASHINGTON lobbyists.

[arewethereyet]

133. he could benefit no other kind

State lobbyists try to influence state voting. HE does not vote in the NC legislature.

nice try

[HFishbine]

134. Wrong

Lobbyists with offices outside of Washington lobby for federal legislation.

[arewethereyet]

163. where MUST they register in order to do so ? try again

n/t

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

113. He wasn't selling bubblegum.

[LuminousX]

115. These aren't the droids you are looking for

[w13rd0]

117. Anyone here signed up for Gillespie's regular screeds...

...as a "GOP Team Leader"? I think they are funny as hell. But just letting you know, they are queuing up PLENTY on Clark. This carefully maintained illusion that he's somehow untouchable because he has no record of accomplishment is a cruel farce. Be prepared to fight back with more than dissmissive rhetoric, jingoism and personal insults.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

120. My suggestion as a reponse to Rove:

"Yawn."






Works every time! :D

[in_cog_ni_to]

121. That's probably where

all the anti-Clark DUers get all of their information. I don't mind fighting this crap coming from the GOP, it's expected, but from so called Democrats and progressives...it's sickening.

[stickdog]

132. Is there anything else in the munitions shed?

I truly concerned that Clark would be the ultimate sitting duck.

[bain_sidhe]

127. There's no point in responding to this anymore

It's turned into nothing but one long bash-session. All these so-called "questions" are nothing more than sly attempts to perpetuate a smear-meme. Anybody interested in actual *facts* has already had their questions answered. Anybody who continues to pretend that they "don't understand" or have "questions" is being dishonest.

I'm out of it. Clark did some lobbying work for small entrepreneurial companies. He made some money at it. If that bothers you, don't vote for him. Y'all make up your own minds... oh, wait, you already have.

[HFishbine]

131. Here's a question that hasn't been answered

General Clark, in your campaign rhetoric, you condemn portions fo the Patriot Act for violating civil liberties, yet you lobbied the federal government on behalf of Acxiom to help establish an unprecedented program of surveillance and scrutiny of US citizens that the ACLU and candidate Dennis Kucinich have condemned as unconstitutional, how do you reconcile your words with your actions? Which is the real General Clark?

[windansea]

148. here's another question that needs asking

Gov Dean...you have been endorsed by Al Gore...before 911 the Gore commission recommended programs like CAPPS and automated profiling systems...what is your position on this Gov Dean

Also Gov Dean...do you condemn Clark for lobbying on behalf of Axciom...a company that merely supplied such databases to goverment programs endorsed by the Gore commisssion

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=133473

[drfemoe]

135. small entrepreneurial companies?

pay $400,000 for lobbyists? Acxiom has actually reinvented itself several times under different names. But currently:

"Acxiom calls itself the premier source of addresses and phone numbers for telemarketers and mass mailers. But when it receives a list of names of people who want to get off its lists, the company considers the request to be junk mail and sends it back.

The Little Rock, Arkansas, company, which made $958 million in revenue last year from selling people's names, addresses and profiles, says it wants to hear personally from each individual who wants to opt out. That way, Acxiom can explain how fair its privacy policies are.
...
Acxiom, whose website claims its database of information on 176 million Americans is the most comprehensive available, collects information from public records, private companies, the Postal Service and product warranty cards, said Beth Givens, director of the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse.

The marketing company, which sells the information to government agencies, insurance firms and marketers, says it is a leader in consumer advocacy and defends its policy of declining submissions sent in by third parties. ..."

http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,61240,00.html

[seventhson]

137. Why this Axciom thing sucks. Didja ever see this type of thing?

If you believe you have received this email in error and want to remove your name from this list please send us your email address name address, phone number, work number, employer's name and address, spouse's or ex-spouses name and social securtity number, children's names and soc.sec. #'s, YOUR social security number, credit card numbers, bank and accoubtnumbers, doctor's name and release for info,, political affiliation, aliases you have used and nicknames, scars, religion, your prospective travel itinerary, where you want your remains shipped and mother's maiden name and we will remove you from our list.

For a Better Tommorrow!

See our privacy policy: to protect your privacy and in accordance with the President's executive orders. We will not share your info with anyone for any reason unless they pay us for it and we can make a huge profit or get a major homeland secutity contract with it.


For a Better Tommorrow! Your information and Privacy is IMPORTANT to us!

[drfemoe]

139. and we'll scan your eyeballs and brain just to make sure

your thoughts are pure ... Step right up for your implant, folks.

... the better to meet your marketing needs, my dear ...

[seventhson]

146. LOL

mark of the beast?

[stickdog]

162. Acxiom: Nearly one billion in revenue from their data mining database on

US citizens.

[Name removed]

150. Deleted message

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

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

151. Iow,

Sit down and shut up? :shrug:

You knew what you were gonna find when you opened the thread.

Care to share your feelings on the topic?

[ulysses]

153. one can only assume

that you've made similar posts regarding blm and Dean...:shrug:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

152. Anyone for a little "Military/Industrial" complex.

Added to the general's support for the SOA, my chances of voting for him in the GE should he be nominated are diminishing.

[seventhson]

154. I hate to say this about Clark, but...

Even I would have to vote for him over Shrub and THEN say my prayers and keep my fingers crossed in hopes that he means what he says.

Right now I have NO trust in him OR Kerry. But against Shrubya there is no comparison in the real danger to Democracy.

I guess better the devil we don't know rather than the one who is killing us and killing democracy globally.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

159. Not this time.

I may vote for Clark, with about a quart of Pepto-Bismol ready to hand. Kerry (Edwards, Gephardt, or Lieberman) voted for the slaughter. It's not just about who wouldn't be as bad as Cowbooties, but about the fact that they ignored the thousands of deaths they were giving their approval to. I voted against Nixon and Humphrety in '68. A pretty good case could be made that Humphrey would have been a far better president than Nixon, but he had strayed way to far off the reservation by backing the Vietnam catastrophe.

I voted Peace & Freedom then, and have never regretted it. I'll have no problem voting Green this time if any of the pro-war Democrat candidates appear on the ballot.

It's not so much about what the candidates stand for, it's about what I stand for.

[Snivi Yllom]

160. smelly smelly smelly

Media whorism...

BUT

If true this is cronyism and stinks for so many reasons.

[seventhson]

164. why is it?

"Media whorism..."

If its true.

The media has failed to alert us to this until now is the problem...

That is the "whorism"