Wes Clark endorses James Webb in Virginia Senate race

[Adelante]

email from General Clark:

Yesterday, I was in Virginia to formally endorse Jim Webb, a good friend, true patriot, and fellow veteran who is challenging Republican George Allen for a seat in the U.S. Senate.

Today, I'm asking you to join me in pledging Jim our full support in this important race.

Please contribute to Jim's campaign today!

http://www.actblue.com/page/wespac

I first met Jim Webb back in 1982, when a West Point classmate of mine brought us together to discuss the idea of building a memorial for our Vietnam veterans on the National Mall. From our first meeting over two decades ago, and ever since, I've come to know Jim as a smart, tough, and principled patriot.

Like me, Jim Webb was drafted into politics. Thousands of Virginians, in search of a real leader to represent them in the Senate, created a grassroots movement to encourage him to jump into the race. On March 7th, Jim answered their call to serve our country once again -- and now he has just three months to introduce himself to Virginia Democrats before the June 13th primary.

I remember well your support of me when I was drafted into the Presidential race. To this very day, I'm humbled and gratified by your faith in me.

In 2003, your financial support allowed our campaign to hit the ground running. Now, I am asking you to do the same for Jim.

Contribute to Jim Webb's campaign today -- before the March 31st quarterly fundraising deadline!

http://www.actblue.com/page/wespac

Jim Webb is a real leader Virginians can count on. He will put the interests of the people of this great state first and will take his fight to the floor of the Senate. He won't back down from any challenge, and he will focus on the job he is elected to do.

Jim is a decorated Marine, winner of the Navy Cross, and former Secretary of the Navy. As a soldier, Jim was a legendary fighter. As a citizen, Jim has been a principled and persuasive leader. Now, as a Senate candidate, Jim is the only candidate with the experience and skills to broaden our party and win in November.

Contribute to Jim Webb's campaign today!

http://www.actblue.com/page/wespac

Jim opposed the Iraq War from the beginning. He understood that Iraq did not represent an imminent threat and knew that going to war in Iraq would cause us to lose our focus on the global war on terrorism.

We need Jim to fight to reshape our defense and foreign policy to better reflect the strategic priorities of the country, to rebuild national infrastructure and secure our borders, to work hard to bring true economic and social fairness to our society, and to restore the Constitutional role of the Congress as an equal partner, reining in the unbridled power of the Presidency.

We need Jim's voice of wisdom and reason in the United States Senate. But he needs our help to get there.

Please join me in pledging your full support for Jim Webb. Contribute $25, $50, $100, or whatever you can afford to his campaign now, before the March 31st deadline!

http://www.actblue.com/page/wespac

Sincerely,



Wes Clark

[Catchawave]

1. Thank you for posting this

Catching up on email now and this was a nice surprise :hi:

[Adelante]

2. I posted it in VA for you, CW nt

[Catchawave]

3. Thanks again ...! n/t

[Adelante]

4. Take a look at the front page

http://securingamerica.com/node

[Clarkie1]

5. Do you know if any other Democrats are running in this primary?

Clark made an endorsement in a nearby congressional district I disagree with, but I don't know much about the Democratic side of this race beyond the information about the endorsed candidate...sounds like a good guy.

Regarding the candidate endorsement I disagree with...Filson in CA-11, I hope that Clark does not send out an e-mail soliciting funds for this particular race before the primary. It would be a slap in the face. There are a lot of Clark supporters out here, and none of them that I know of support Filson. In fact, in 04' I and other Clark supporters actively campaigned for Filson's opponent in the primary, Jerry McNerney.

Back then McNerney was the only one running. I don't put much stock in fair-weather Dems like Filson.

If you want to help flip a district in 06' and elect a fighting Democrat, consider donating to this man:

www.jerrymcnerney.org

[Texas_Kat]

6. The other dem is Harris Miller

who is a Diebold lobbyist

[Clarkie1]

7. A Dem Diebold lobbyist? I did not know such creatures existed. Yuck. n/t

[fedupinBushcountry]

26. Please research before

you put down someone, just because a certain person endorsed someone else.

Harris Miller
From his interview in ComputerWorld:
As the president of the ITAA, which includes electronic voting systems vendors among its members, you said in the past that you opposed verifiable paper trails for such systems. For many people in the country, this is a very important issue because of accuracy issues in several recent elections. What is your stand on this issue as a candidate? I did oppose verifiable paper trails until about a year and a half ago. I was hearing from local registrars, including in Virginia, that they didn't want the additional burden for administration and maintenance that the paper trails would produce with printers and other equipment. But voters want it. It has more voter confidence. My argument at the time was that if is smart enough to take over a machine and register someone's vote internally for the wrong candidate, that they're also smart enough to make it look like the paper trail properly says who you voted for. People could get a false sense of security.

I am in Virginia and I will be supporting Harris Miller, Webb has a lot more to answer to, not just Kerry.

[incapsulated]

28. Sure, now that he is running, he has changed his tune

“We oppose the idea of a voter-verified paper trail,” says Harris Miller, president of the trade group Information Technology Association of America. Introducing paper into the mix, he says, defeats the improved efficiency and reliability e-voting promises. “There was never a golden age when paper ballots were accurately counted,” Miller says.

Link

Huh, I would prefer someone with a bit more conviction than that. He has every motivation to make excuses for this now that he want's democrats to vote for him, he knows that this is a problem with them. If this "IT expert" couldn't see the problem then, I don't have any use for him now.

[fedupinBushcountry]

33. Well

you don't have a vote in Virginia, I do, and I will vote for someone who backs Dems all the time not when it is convenient.

[incapsulated]

34. He also only supports verified voting when "it's convenient"

And that effects everyone, no? Support who you like, it's your race. That's democracy.

[fedupinBushcountry]

36. So I guess

you will only read into it what you want. Thats fine, and yes I will be voting.

But if you question his convenience, you must also question Webb and why he supported Allen for both Governor and Senator, no?

Have you been protesting at all? Did you protesat the Vietnam war, I did. But it seems like Webb is stuck on the side of the Swifties. Sorry, but I will not vote for a hawk.


http://www.tpmcafe.com/node/28351

...
As the arguments for invading Iraq gained momentum during 2002, it was very difficult for Democratic leaders to question the direction the Administration and its congressional allies were taking the country. First, the 9/11 attacks had created a climate of fear. Second, the Administration was controlling the debate, and in many instances the raw intelligence needed to conduct a proper debate, both in the media and in the Congress. Third, Democrats themselves were vulnerable to attack if they questioned the propriety of yielding certain powers to the President to conduct the war. This vulnerability was accentuated by the Party?s association with anti-Vietnam War protesters and the many votes against the first Gulf War.

[karynnj]

8. Harris Miller is running as well

He is a long time Democrat (as opposed to backed Allen, a very conservative Republican in 2000 and publicly backed no one in 2004.) Miller's background is that he is in IT and has headed one of the industry groups involved in such things as standards. (So, he has been a lobbyist) He is endorsed by Warner. It might be really good to have someone in the Senate who really understands IT - In 2002, when an industry magazine picked the dozen legislators most technically competent, the only Senator who made the list was John Kerry. Kerry is smart and has obviously worked to understand technology, but that is not his background. If he is the most competent - the Senate could probably use someone with that background.

[Adelante]

9. I agree an IT person in Congress is needed, that's a good point

However, I think we can find candidates who don't advocate against verified voting, or I hope so.

[karynnj]

10. I don't know if he did -

I see the comments up-thread that he was a lobbyist for Diebold. I read that he heads an industry organization. I also know Warner has endorsed him. The question would be what if anything he did for Diebold specificly.

[BootinUp]

12. you don't want to know.

I mean you might not want to know, its going to be very unpopular.

http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2006/1/6/23532/17147

[CarolNYC]

16. So, he opposes the idea of a vote-verified paper trail...sheesh!

Now someone with an opinion like that is someone I'd have a hard time supporting....God, this verified voting issue is SO important...and he opposes it....hmmmm....

[karynnj]

21. Actually if true - I do want to know

I wasn't being disengenuous when I said I didn't know anything but the upthread post (that he was a Diebold lobbyist.) I do think he needs to answer this. I also think there are major things Webb needs to answer - in terms of what he would vote for or against. (The beliefs as stated are apple pie and motherhood.

[MH1]

37. As I understand, Miller was a lobbyist for an IT industry organization,

of which Diebold is a member. That doesn't sound quite as inflammatory as "lobbyist for Diebold" though.

I know a couple strong advocates of election integrity - one a Democratic Party person, one whose party I don't know but I assume to be Democrat - who have a lot of experience with voting machines and will run down the reasons why VVPAT is not the panacea some think it is.

I happen to disagree with them - but not entirely. They are absolutely right that a) VVPAT alone is not enough and b) election integrity can theoretically be assured without paper, and c) paper can be screwed with too. However, I believe VVPAT does have some advantages over the alternatives, and I support it.

I'm not going to go into a long justification of those three points (cuz i gotta go to bed sometime) but I point this out to show that reasonable people who have expertise, integrity, and an interest in accurate elections, can also hold the belief that VVPAT is not the best way to go.

Combine that with the fact that Miller would have been just doing his job in lobbying for what the industry org (his employer) wanted him to, I don't think him lobbying against VVPAT is necessarily something that should disqualify him. Particularly if he has expressed open-mindedness to what his potential new employers (the people of VA) would want.

Just my .02. I don't want to sound like I'm shilling for Miller - I don't know much about him. I just think it's only fair to clarify this issue a bit.

[MH1]

11. I am disappointed in Clark - he should pressure Webb to apologize for '04

February 18, 2004, an editorial authored by James Webb appeared in USA Today - a widely read national newspaper.

In that editorial, Webb trashed John Kerry and mischaracterized Kerry's 1971 testimony just like the Swift Liars did a few months later.

This is not a matter of a difference of opinion. It was an outright lie about what Kerry said, at a pivotal moment of history, and as such feeds the distorted national narrative that has damaged Dems for years and will continue to damage Dems as long as people like Webb and the Swift Liars perpetuate the lie.

See my post here for details:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2541543&mesg_id=2541835

It would show a lot of character for Webb to admit his mistake and apologize. Will he?

And for those who might claim this should be "past history" - no. It is a dark stain on Webb's integrity, and it will be there forever unless he acts to remove it.

[Adelante]

13. I agree, actually

Webb should apologize to Kerry.

I think he's made efforts:

New York Times 1/18/06
http://www.jameswebb.com/articles/nytimes/purpleheartbreakers.htm

During the 2000 primary season, John McCain's life-defining experiences as a prisoner of war in Vietnam were diminished through whispers that he was too scarred by those years to handle the emotional burdens of the presidency. The wide admiration that Senator Max Cleland gained from building a career despite losing three limbs in Vietnam brought on the smug non sequitur from critics that he had been injured in an accident and not by enemy fire. John Kerry's voluntary combat duty was systematically diminished by the well-financed Swift Boat Veterans for Truth in a highly successful effort to insulate a president who avoided having to go to war.

And now comes Jack Murtha. The administration tried a number of times to derail the congressman's criticism of the Iraq war, including a largely ineffective effort to get senior military officials to publicly rebuke him (Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, was the only one to do the administration's bidding there).

Now the Cybercast News Service, a supposedly independent organization with deep ties to the Republican Party, has dusted off the Swift Boat Veterans playbook, questioning whether Mr. Murtha deserved his two Purple Hearts. The article also implied that Mr. Murtha did not deserve the Bronze Star he received, and that the combat-distinguishing "V" on it was questionable. It then called on Mr. Murtha to open up his military records.

Cybercast News Service is run by David Thibault, who formerly worked as the senior producer for "Rising Tide," the televised weekly news magazine produced by the Republican National Committee. One of the authors of the Murtha article was Marc Morano, a long-time writer and producer for Rush Limbaugh.

But he should pick up the phone and call Kerry. The Senator is a big man and I am sure they can work together.

[MH1]

17. I saw that, but

I think the part about Kerry is rather muted. Considering that one of the Liars' most effective ads was the one that repeated what Webb himself had written... well, I need to see a little more than an oblique reference to "Kerry's voluntary service".

I appreciate your civil response though. :thumbsup:

[karynnj]

25. Also the article listed the awards (in detail) of Kerrey,

Clealand and Murtha. Kerry gets "voluntary service", when he is in fact a highly decorated veteran. He could hardly leave Kerry out of a story decrying "swiftboating" as the slime thrown at Kerry is what created the term. He said as little positive as he possibly could. (other than leaving out "voluntary")

So, no, I really don't take this as anything other than a political move that blasts what happened to Kerry and others to make a political point for himself. Also, it is the first thing to my knowledge that aligns him with Democrats. Very convienient when he runs as a Democrat a month later. (I know he was against Iraq - but so was Scowcroft and others)

[Adelante]

32. I haven't read everything he's written

I just remembered this piece tonight, so maybe some research will turn up other stuff. I just think that whole generation of vets is still so conflicted and emotionally raw. My husband was VVAW and I was a war protester, but I wasn't in it, and those of us who weren't can't really judge the depths of the pain on all sides. At this stage, I try to give the benefit of the doubt more than I used to do. I'm not talking about swiftboaters here, but vets who have an honest disagreement with what were my views of that war. My own brother, for instance. Wes Clark, for instance. On a lesser level, there are a lot of wounds left from 2004, deep ones, that I've worked hard to scar over so that we can work together to bring the country to where it needs to be. That's not an easy thing for me, so I can imagine what it must be like for John Kerry, like a million times harder, and for all of his supporters. I'm not sure, frankly, that I could be forgiving had what happened to Kerry happened to Clark, I admit that. Still, I believe Kerry has great courage and if there is a better chance for a blue seat for Virginia with Webb than with Miller, Kerry will be realistic about it. I also think that Webb will have to go to Kerry and make whatever amends there needs to be made. I do believe Webb has a better shot to bring that seat in. We'll see if I'm right or not. I am genuinely sorry you're upset, all of you, and I would be, too, in your place.

[MH1]

35. Thanks for understanding.

I do want to bring up one point though. I certainly don't know Kerry's stance on this, but I think it would be really hard for him to endorse Webb before the primary, and maybe even after. Because it isn't just about him. In that editorial, Webb also denigrated the VVAW. So for Kerry to support Webb without a full retraction from Webb, could be seen as a slap to those who worked with him in VVAW.

Either way though, if Webb does become the Senator from VA, I have no doubt that Kerry will do everything he can to work with him amicably and professionally. My concern is that Webb may not return the courtesy. Someone posted recently that Webb refused to even shake hands with Kerry. I don't know if that was recently - in context it seemed that it was - but if so, it does not bode well. Sigh.

[Tom Rinaldo]

14. Webb seems to have an acidic edge, but I think he was much harder on Bush

in that same piece. Webb hasn't always said the kindest things about Clark in the past either. The guy says what is on his mind, like it or not. I would much rather Webb apologized to Kerry also. I am one of those Democrats back during the Viet Nam War who actually had my faith in the military restored by Viet Vets Against the War. They helped me understand that soldiers have a job they have to do, but they don't pack up their morality and leave it in a locker while they do so, and soldiers shouldn't be blamed for the policy mistakes of their civilian leadership either. I don't think Webb ever understood that Viet Vets Against the War played that role also.

But Webb has been hard on to Bush's crap, and he hasn't been an apologist for electronic paperless voting in the past either. That alone is reason enough for me to back Webb over his primary opponent.

[Adelante]

15. I wonder if Webb and Kerry have talked, Tom

Or is Kerry backing Harris Miller? I haven't heard it, if he is.

My computer is about to crash. Bye.

[MH1]

18. I get Kerry's emails, and so far I have not seen an endorsement

in this race.

I expect he won't endorse before the primary in this case. I wouldn't expect him to endorse Webb, and if he endorses Miller, it might be taken as just being because of Webb's attacks on Kerry in 2004.

But then, I've been wrong before. We'll see.

[MH1]

19. Thanks, I appreciate your insights.

My big problem though is that Webb made a really false statement aobut Kerry's testimony. Did he write that editorial without re-reading Kerry's testimony to verify his assertions? It just doesn't make sense to me that he could have written it except with a clouded memory, and at that he didn't do due diligence on something that was going to be printed nationwide. Also the fact that it is that very distortion of the anti-war movement and Kerry's testimony, that has a lot to do with the vilification of the anti-war left since Vietnam. In other words, this was no small thing to write about, and getting it so wrong, is something Webb needs to face up to.

[incapsulated]

22. I doubt he will ever apologize...

Webb is one of those Vietnam vets who focus their anger about the war on Kerry and his activities after he came back. He will never forgive him, if he is true to type. Generally, I steer clear of that sort of Vet vs. Vet thing, I don't mean the swift-boating garbage, just those who are angry at Kerry about his anti-war stuff.

Webb went way over the line dragging it into the election, though, and I fully understand how Kerry supporters feel about him, as a Democrat I am hardly thrilled, either. I am as hardcore a supporter of Clark's as they come, donating lots of money and hundreds of hours of volunteering for him, but even when some Clarkies were really upset with Kerry choosing someone other than Wes for VP, I said I would vote for Kerry if he bitch-slapped Wes in public and I meant it. That election was too important. You should also know that Webb as written shitty things about Clark, as well. Clark is obviously willing to let it go, so I will too, although I don't like him. But Miller really isn't any alternative, the guy has a LOT of baggage, and it ain't just lobbying for Diebold (although now he is running he has changed his tune). He has also given lots of money to republicans and has other issues. Edit: He hasn't given money to repukes, sorry, but he does have issues.

Edit again: I don't know who he gave money to, now, honestly, lol.

[BootinUp]

23. just to clarify

your issue is that Webb didn't put Kerry's testimony in the context of the Winter Soldier Investigation and so it appears that it was Kerry's direct testimony of what he saw in nam and not repeating the testimony of others. Correct?

Anyways I think that this should be cleared up by Webb. And I hope that will happen. The bigger picture here though is that Webb cannot nor could he have stopped the Swift boaters from using this against Kerry. The inaccurate use of testimony has been lurking around in the military circles for a long time. Some officers will probably never come to terms with Kerry because of feelings that go back to those days. I don't know that the distinction is seen by these officers as making any difference they just don't see that.

[MH1]

31. Close.

Paragraphs 3 -5 of the USA Today editorial are completely wrong and offensive, in my opinion. I singled out the aspect of taking Kerry's comments out of context - falsely mischaracterizing what Kerry said, in a very harmful way - only because on that question, there is no wiggle room to claim ambiguity or opinion. A high schooler could read Kerry's testimony, and if they read the whole thing reasonably attentively, they would not come away with anything like what Webb wrote.

Webb's statements that

- "Kerry deserves condemnation..."
- "With those words, ..."
- "No matter how he spins it today ..."

are exceptionally offensive. However of course, for the most part, they express only Webb's "opinion" - which he generously shared with the whole nation during the 2004 presidential campaign.

As for the Swift Liars, they could have done what they did anyway. But how can you say they didn't draw inspiration from Webb, whose attack they later used? They didn't even come together until April-May. How do we know Webb's remarks didn't provide the spark?

Since you mention bigger picture. To me, the bigger picture is that we as a nation, and particularly as liberals, have allowed the history of the Vietnam War and the anti-war movement to be grossly distorted by people like Webb (and many much worse than him of course). That distortion has really hurt our party, so it is hard to see why we would readily welcome people who have worked hard to perpetuate it.

All that said, I have posted elsewhere that I just want Webb to admit that he was wrong and attempt to reconcile with Kerry. Kerry is a big man and I am sure he would welcome it. If Webb does that, I will drop my objections about this issue. But if Webb can't even see and admit that he was wrong - at least on the obvious, verfiable point of misstating Kerry's testimony - then to me he is displaying a seriously flawed character and doesn't belong in the Senate. Despite what has been posted here about Miller, I would consider the character issue to be extremely serious and would probably support Miller over Webb based on it.

[wisteria]

20. I can't believe Clark is supporting this guy. I think he is trouble.

and could win a seat only to turn around a become a Republican once he is elected. I don't trust him at all. I am extremely disapointed in Clark's decision to do this.

[Donna Zen]

24. If someone would lie about Clark being a republican

...would they lie about anything else? What do you think?

Wes Clark worked with Webb when they raised the money to build the Vietnam Memorial; for the survivors of that debacle that might have been the bonding experience.

Webb blogged at Kos today; he didn't sound at all like a conservative nothing. Also, he was definately against this war...that's big with me; knowing in advance what bush was up to shows good judgement.

I can't vote in VA, I just want a winning ticket. Webb appeals to VA, that is the important thing.

[Clarkie1]

27. Is the other candidate better in your opinion? n/t

[WildEyedLiberal]

29. I don't like Webb either

I respect Wes Clark a ton, but I just think Webb has a LOT to answer for. MH1 and karynnj have detailed most of my concerns with Webb - his attitude about Vietnam is pretty damn near as Republican as you can get, and the man endorsed ALLEN in 2000, six years before running against him? That smells fishy to me.

I mean no disrespect to Wes Clark and I am sure he thinks, with Webb's military credentials, that he will be a stronger candidate in Virginia, which may well be true. But too much stinks about Webb for me to support. Not that I live in Virginia, so it doesn't really matter, but whatever.

[IndianaGreen]

30. Everything Clark said about Jim Webb was true!

Webb was a fantastic Secretary of the Navy, and he is appalled about the threat that the Bush regime poses to our Republic.

[wiley]

38. Thank You!

Webb is the right stuff! He will not disappoint.