I've been under Howard Dean's spell from the outset

[CatWoman]

but Clark is moving in fast. Real fast.

Help me make up my mind here.

[ClarkGraham2004]

1. Learn to think for yourself.

It's time for new American Leadership.


Great tax policy

Great economic plan

Great plan for Iraq

Great plan for AMERICA


www.clark04.com

A true leader, and true patriot.

[CatWoman]

5. I just turned 47. I've been thinking for myself for quite some time.

but sometime you need a little help, you know?

*paging Miss Manners*

[ClarkGraham2004]

12. I think it's important that WE ALL think rationally

about this whole thing.

Clark has the intagibles we need next November.

He's my guy.


www.clark04.com

peace out

[slinkerwink]

19. hey man----your saying "think rationally" is inferring that catwoman isn't

thinking rationally because she said she supports Dean. Please make a better case for your candidate than this.

[ClarkGraham2004]

hey man, no I'm not.

Why anyone would need convincing by a message board is beyond me, but whatever tickles your pickle.



www.clark04.com

[CatWoman]

31. actually, "convince me" is DU speak

but then regardless, slang or not, it still didn't warrant your rude and insulting response.

maybe you should think before shooting your mouth, er, keyboard off.

[ClarkGraham2004]

45. I wholeheartedly apologize.

Sorry for my abruptness. It was rude.


I support Clark for his wide range of views that can be found at his website.


www.clark04.com

[xultar]

58. Thanks for apologizing to Catwoman! n/t

[bearfartinthewoods]

114. maybe it's the reference to being under a spell? n/t

[GreenArrow]

98. Catwoman herself said she was under Dean's "spell"

Being under a *spell* in and of itself implies not thinking rationally.

[slinkerwink]

20. hey man----your saying "think rationally" is inferring that catwoman isn't

thinking rationally because she said she supports Dean. Please make a better case for your candidate than this.

[xultar]

25. Don't let rude people turn you away cat woman,

I'm a mother of 4 cats as well, Coco, Velcro, Sydney, and Thor.

Plus my Chihuahua Onyx.

I'll tell you why I support Clark later.

Turra

[redqueen]

42. Chihuahuas rock! - and Clark is great too :-)

Clark has spoken out against the genocide in Rwanda. That has set him apart from many in my book. Many, many, many people fail to see how our country ignores real problems and only goes around 'solving' the ones where there are material resources to exploit.

[xultar]

60. YES!!!! That is why I support Clark, he wanted to send troops to

Rwanda. When I read that in Franken's book I was blown away!

That is why I support him!!!!!

YEA YEA YEA!!!

[Clark Can WIN]

75. I have three kitties

And I think we all tend to bust fuses in here sometimes. I'm currently working on mine.:pals:

[creativelcro]

97. CatWoman rocks!

I've been considering Clark, but I'll stick with Dean in the end. First, I just don't trust military men in charge of civilians. Second, at this point I do believe Clark is not a real democrat.

[bowens43]

8. and a true republican.

[Jack_Dawson]

14. Dude take it EASY!

That was uncalled for. And very ungentlemanly. The General would be appalled.

[ClarkGraham2004]

18. no

that would be this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=85526#85565

[xultar]

34. You couldn't possibly be a real Clark supporter with a response

to a post like this. Clark is a wonderful man. He commands respect and he gives respect. He makes everone feel important. I don't think he'd appreciate you responding in his behalf in this manner.

Please apologize to Catwoman and tell her why you support General Clark.

If I was undecided and was greeted like this by a Clark supporter there is no way Clark would get my support.

Represent Clark with Dignity and treat everyone with respect.

Turra

[DoveTurnedHawk]

40. Dude, What's With the 'Tude?

Are you sure you're really a Clark supporter? If so, then why try to chase away someone who's politely asking for reasons to support Clark?

DTH

[ClarkGraham2004]

48. I apoligised

quit piling on me.

[RetroLounge]

94. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm......

It's time for new American Leadership.

Great tax policy

Great economic plan

Great plan for Iraq

Great plan for AMERICA

All ending up with Project for a New American Century...

[lazarus]

2. Hey, Cat

I started with Dean, moved to Clark. But I still like Dean as well. Either way, I'm ABB.

But why do you have to make up your mind fast? I don't think your state's primary is for a while, is it? Take your time, let the campaigns grow and develop. Committing too soon could be a mistake.

[goobergunch]

7. Georgia, right? That's March 2 (n/t)

[CatWoman]

10. I'm just so nervous!!!!!!!

:hi: Laz!!!!!

you're right -- there's time.

but I do want to get behind someone, cause I have energy to burn.

I'm all about devoting what I can to the cause.

[xultar]

36. Hey Cat I'm in GA as well! n/t

[CatWoman]

44. Stone Mountain here!!!

and it's supposed to snow tonite :scared:

[xultar]

64. Suwanee here! I can see the big rock from 85 south bound..

SNOW!!!!
I'm sick as a DAWG with a sinus infection, strep, and other crap!

[AP]

3. If I had to chose between Clark and Dean, Clark's the obvious choice.

Anger isn't going to win, obviously. Furthermore, I have serious anxieties about whether Dean's all that liberal on issues I care about: middle class opportunity and race. Finally, biography. There's no way Dean's biography is going to compare and contrast well to Bush's. Biography really matters.

However, both these candidates are just the "reaction-to-Bush" candidates.

There's still a better choice.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

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

[slinkerwink]

9. I do not appreciate the reference to Hitler. Please edit your post.

[Lone Pawn]

23. I won't edit it because...

Hitler was not the Devil. Hitler is not pure evil incarnate. He was an evil, dangerous man, but you cannot deny that he had charisma. It was not a dark, mysterious evil that drew an entire nation to commit mass atrocity. It was Hitler's sheer charisma and ability to use propaganda. Realize that Hitler had great talent--he couldn't have done anything at all if he had none.

Bush is as talented as Hitler when it comes to propaganda. Dean is almost as talented as Hitler when it comes to charisma. You can't deny it. Dean's a firebrand.

I don't mean to compare the three men in any matter but ability to influence the public. Not in evil, not in policy, not in effect, not in support.

[Clark Can WIN]

79. Has anybody ever told you

That you're kind of a scary dude?

Hitler? I don't know where that goes over well but generally you'll not get a good reaction here.

[Lone Pawn]

It doesn't go over well anywhere.

That's obvious. Still, I should hope we should be able to compare a facet of one man's personality with a facet of another's without comparing anything else between the two. All I said was that both men are naturally attractive, and both have similar speaking styles. I said nothing else, and took pains to let others know I meant nothing else.

[Clark Can WIN]

102. I realize that, but I was wondering if there were not any other orator

you could use for the illustration? William Jennings Bryan, Winston Churchill, Martin Luther King, Kennedy, Ronald Reagan?

I say this for two reasons. The obligatory associations and I don't think Dean has the ability to ignite NATIONAL level fervor.

[Crunchy Frog]

104. Please pkjun

you are not doing a good job of representing our candidate. We are doing General Clark a great disservice if we are not the best ambassadors that we can be to his campaign.:(

[slinkerwink]

6. for instance, you should read the comments in the Dean blog

they're very inspiring, and then there are the wonderful reports of people going to iowa and new hampshire to canvass for Dean because they've never felt motivated to help a presidential candidate out until Dean came along.

Besides, Dean is still in the lead in many state polls as shown on the front page here. Dean's withstanding the attacks very well and this helps him later in the general election. However, if Clark is attacked because he opted into the federal matching funds system, he can't raise anymore than $45 million dollars and the primaries will sap a lot of his money away so he can't counter Bush's advertising machine for three months since the deadline for having a $45 million cap is July 1st. This is political hata-kiri. It puzzles me why he would opt in when faced with this, and it's why I cannot get behind Clark in the primaries.

Dean gives me hope. Every time I hear Dean speak, and his supporters speak to me, I get inspired to get out there and canvass for him! Giving up Dean, to me, is giving up hope. The first time I heard Dean, I stood up in my room and cheered. Think of 2 million Americans standing up in their living rooms and cheering when they hear Dean as the nominee, and then donating $100 afterwards. That's why I cannot abandon Dean now because he's getting very good momentum, and besides, there are good news coming our way....;-)

If you're undecided, I suggest you should keep quiet about it ;-) A lot of people look up to you here, and I'd wait until everything shakes it out which would be nomination time.

[Bucky]

101. Wait a minute!!

Slinkerwink wrote:
If you're undecided, I suggest you should keep quiet about it ;-) A lot of people look up to you here, and I'd wait until everything shakes it out which would be nomination time.

Slink, I look up to a lot of Dean people. You are one of them. Luminous X is a real class act around here too. I can respect someone and still disagree with them about their choice of candidate. One thing a good role model does (and I agree that Catwoman is certainly one) is to show it's okay to rethink basic assumptions as well as short term decisions... to model cool rational thinking before the community that they're a part of.

I don't think Catwoman needs to hush up just because she's reconsidering her candidate. If anything, the board of late could use a respected voice not pretending to have all the answers down pat.

I've defended several Dean people in several posts over the past couple of days when Clark supporters said certain critical threads directed at Clark weren't fair. A well reasoned, passionate argument against any candidate can still be fair, even when it hurts my feelings or exposes my candidates weaknesses. I know enlightened Dean supporters feel the same way.

However, if Clark is attacked(,) because he opted into the federal matching funds system, he can't raise anymore than $45 million dollars and the primaries will sap a lot of his money away(,) so he can't counter Bush's advertising machine for three months since the deadline for having a $45 million cap is July 1st. This is political hata-kiri. It puzzles me why he would opt in when faced with this, and it's why I cannot get behind Clark in the primaries.

I know you must have other reasons as well for not getting behind Clark and I very much appreciate you saying "in the primaries". But I want you to understand that Clark is taking this route for a principled reason. He said back in September when he entered that public funding was something that Democrats support; that it's something we think helps to control the influence of moneyed special interests in the electoral process; and that he was committed to sticking up for what Democrats think is important.

At that time Dean was also saying he would stay with the public matching funds and I know he went thru a personal journey before opting out of the system. It's less than a character flaw to stand up for the system. I have very serious concerns that Dean's decision may have a hugely inflationary impact on the cost of electioneering. We can disagree on this matter, but I can't see it as a voting issue.

Besides that, I've seen Clark do jiu jitsu on a number of issues in which an interrogator thought he had a gotcha on Clark and Clark turned the question around to his advantage while making the other guy look foolish. His appearances with Fox heads spring to mind. I know that he has the ability to turn Bush's zillions into a powerful voting issue. And in the end it's strong arguments and persuaded votes that will win the day, not dollars. There's really only so much PR a buck can buy and Bush is on the cusp of finding exactly where that ceiling is.

[Jack_Dawson]

11. Cat Woman

From a fellow cat-lover, I would have to say Clark on this one. If you have any doubts, watch his movie.

www.clark04.com/americanson

Good luck w/ your decision.

[CatWoman]

17. Thanks, Jack!!

will do!!!!

:hi:

[slinkerwink]

27. there's also a biographical ad on Dean

http://38.117.149.175/interface/wmPlayer.asp?path=mms://38.117.149.175/elements/ddddeea3-aa54-4a90-bd69-d01cbfbccda9/ad_bio_256k.wmv

[cthrumatrix]

13. You are smart enough to see through the desperation to bring down Dean

For me...I ask "why and where is this coming from"? Everyday on DU we talk about how important it is to take back the media and to bring down this bush cabal. I think we are seeing it in action against a guy they clearly do not want to face.

Clark is a good man. My concerns are his sudden "democratic candidacy" and he has never held public office. The debate of this as importance could go either way...but I often think of who we are really up against and it's tough knowing who really will uphold the "dreams of the DU posters".

I think Dr. Dean has the intelligence to proceed ...and the ability to adapt to what changes need to be made when facing the rove quivers. Obviously...Gore and bradley must see the same thing.

[funky_bug]

21. Sudden Democrat?

That's not a concern of mine. He voted for Clinton twice, and he voted for Gore. In his home state, voters are not required to name a party affiliation upon registering to vote. In fact, only a small majority of registered voters in Arkansas are affiliated with the Dems or the Pukes. The largest percentage are Independant, as Clark was up until a few months ago. Yes, I said he registered a few months ago... but his voting record shows he's supported Dems for a long time.

[cthrumatrix]

28. do you remember how he could make up his mind if he was going to register

as a dem/rep.?

To me that seems very odd and I thought "who is he talking with for counsel"...if he was a democrat...say it day one.

[funky_bug]

38. I don't

I'll admit I don't remember that. I entered the Clark camp after that point. Please give details...

It seems still a no-brainer to me. Can a republican run a successful campain as a democrat? I don't think so, but it's been awhile since my civics class. Party affiliation is fine as far as that goes. I'm not voting for Wes because he's this or that: I like his style, I like his guts, and I like his turnaround plan for America.

[cthrumatrix]

81. when the war was the rage...and the dems had "dean mantra"...out of

nowhere the thought came thought that the Dems needed a "general" who could take shrub to task...and this was always a topic asked of clark this whole time...but he wasn't a democrat...and he had to think about registering as a dem or running as a repug.

[funky_bug]

92. Well correct me if I'm wrong

But he couldn't run against the incumbant within his party. If I'm wrong, I beg you to educate me. (Not being sarcastic... I checked with the hubby and he wasn't 100% sure I was right on the run-as-a-puke-against-the-puke thing)

Either way, I won't call him a new democrat. I'll call him an old independant with a 12 year record of voting democrat.

Thanks for the info!

[bearfartinthewoods]

93. we have nothing but his word that he voted for clinton

i prefer a verifiable history as a dem and a liberal. Edwards.

[funky_bug]

95. You know what?

I love Edwards too. He's my #2 guy to be quite frank with you. As a matter of fact, since I've capped out on Clark, my money is now going toward Edwards.

And from what I've seen of Clark, I'm happy to take his word for it.

[lazarus]

113. also

We have nothing but his word that he voted for Reagan. Now why would he admit that if he thought it was shameful?

[babzilla]

110. what do you mean by couldn't run?

anyone can run against Bush, even a republican. The RNC wouldn't get behind them of course.

Could a republican run practically in this election? No.
Legally? Yes.

[lurk_no_more]

99. I don't remember Clark

wanting to register Republican, it was either undecided or Dem.

However I do remember dean flip-flopping on every principle he's claimed to have had, as well as some no one knew he had.


And then there were none!
” JAFO”

[LiberalBushFan]

15. Don't get mad.

Get even!

That's why I choose Clark.

[Southsideirish]

16. Errr...Howard has a 3 legged cat!!!

One leg amputated due to cancer.
Plus, he is a wonderful, "real" person who, imho, has integrity and is the only one of the bunch who can get this country back on track.

[CatWoman]

boy, the stuff you learn around here!!

:D

[wyldwolf]

22. Madonna's influence!

Get into the groove, Catwoman!

When Clark wins, it will be a Holiday!

Right now, Bush is pushing us over the Borderline!

Clark's candidacy is Like A Prayer - even though as an elected official, he's Like A Virgin.

If you haven't noticed, he's Burning Up the polls in NH.

So Open Your Heart, Catwoman! Clark is in Vogue!

[CatWoman]

39. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

most.............original................post..........ever!!!! :D

[Rowdyboy]

24. I feel more connected to this guy from Arkansas

than the one from Vermont on a basic level.. Clark seeks like someone that I would really like-he comes across as a straight up guy. I also like Dean, but Clark justs gets to me on a personal level.

Dean has said a lot of things that are gonna come back to haunt him. The Osama remark, the Rebel flag, the tax cut mess, closed records...its all gonna add up. I know Clark has many faults and lots of shit is gonna be raised, but he knows how to fight back. Dean gets in your face and attacks...Clark smiles and pats you onthe back while he calls you Satan's spawn. Who do you LIKE nore?

There's also the hero thing. I'm a guy and I can be impressed by things like getting blown away in the line of duty.

He's smart, he's southern, they can't touch him on the military angle,and I agree with most all of his policies. Plus, I really believe he has the best chance of anyone of beating the Bushes.

Take your time, sweet. You'll do what's right, whatever you do. They're both good candidates, I just happen to think Clark is noticeably better.

As always, I remain, your (somewhat) Rowdyboy

[LuminousX]

26. My Case for Dean

His Political History
Political Experience:
Governor, State of Vermont, 1991-2002
Lieutenant Governor, State of Vermont, 1986-1991
Vermont House of Representatives, Assistant Minority Leader, 1985-1986
Vermont House of Representatives, 1983-1986
Jimmy Carter Re-Election Campaign, Volunteer, 1980.

Organizations:
Democratic Governors' Association, Executive Committee, 1997-present
Democratic Governors' Association, Chair, 1997
National Governors' Association, Chair, 1994-1995
National Education Goals Panel, former Member
National Governors' Association Task Force on Health Care, former Co-Chair.

Caucuses/Non-Legislative Committees:
Member, National Governor's Association's Executive Committee
Past Chair, National Governor's Association.

His Positions

"They say race, I'm going to say jobs," he told supporters crowded into a school gym in Hampstead. "They say guns, I say education. They say gay marriage, I say health care. We have to run a campaign based on what everyone has in common. This fight is on jobs, education and welfare."
By BILL STRAUB Scripps Howard News Service January 07, 2004

Abortion:
As a physician, I am outraged that President Bush has decided that he is qualified to practice medicine. There is no such thing in the medical literature as "partial birth abortion." But there are times when doctors are called upon to perform a late term abortion to save a woman's life or protect her health. Today President Bush made it a crime for a doctor to perform such medically necessary procedures when a woman's health is at stake.

Healthcare:
I have two advantages -on health care-. First of all, I'm a governor and we've actually done a lot of this in Vermont, and second of all, I'm a doctor. costs a little less than half of the Bush tax cut. First, everybody under 25 gets Medicaid if they want it. It worked well for us in our state. It's not expensive. Second, give prescription benefits for every senior. That makes Medicare into a pretty decent policy. Third, between 25 and 65, subsidize small businesses, don't give the tax credits to the big corporations, subsidize individuals who need help buying health insurance, and then help individuals who work for companies that don't do it. The cost is half of the Bush tax cut. It'll pass because most of the interest groups that oppose the Clinton plan will support it, and it's affordable. And it will pass now, and it covers everybody.

We ought not to be the last industrialized country in the world to guarantee Health Insurance to all our citizens. As a doctor, I understand the fear facing families without health insurance. As a Governor, I am proud that virtually every child under 18 and more than 90% of adults in Vermont are eligible for health coverage. But as a country, the US can do better on this front. To help finance this effort, we must repeal the President's tax cuts-which have thrown America back into the huge deficits of the 1980s-and balance the federal budget. We cannot build crucial social programs without a solid financial foundation. Guaranteeing coverage to all Americans will involve a mix of state and federal programs, as well as the existing private sector.

Guaranteeing coverage to all Americans will involve a mix of state, federal, and private programs:
1. States should be required to guarantee coverage for all children under age 23. In return, the federal government should assume responsibility for drug and acute medical care for Americans over age 65.
2. Older Americans deserve a pharmacy benefit under Medicare (an unaffordable impossibility under Bush's current fiscal policies). This would cost $450 billion over 10 years, a little more than 1/4 of the value of Bush's tax cut. With a pharmaceutical package, Medicare becomes a decent insurance program.
3. Finally, to cover those between the ages of 23 and 65, we should use the present employer-based system with refundable tax credits and federal subsidies to cover low- and moderate-income Americans who lack insurance.
This plan is affordable and simple, relying on three existing systems-one for children, one for seniors, and one for those in between-which all Americans understand

Terrorism:
" Handling Information Needs"
Many of the operational, programmatic, and funding activities associated with terrorism consequence management preparedness are classified because of national security. Thus, the sharing of critical information is hampered. State governments must be viewed as strong partners in the US' national security efforts, particularly as related to terrorism.

" Managing Consequences"
Managing the short- and long-term consequences of terrorism is among the responsibilities of state and local government supplemented by the resources of the federal government, coordinated by FEMA.
" Supporting Public-Private Cooperation.
Terrorism preparedness efforts should be inclusive of key private sector entities such as defining the appropriate roles and responsibilities for public and private health and medical communities.

" Clarifying the Role of the National Guard"
The role of the National Guard in terrorism response activities is to support federal, state, and local response agencies with equipment, facilities, and personnel. Any assignment of responsibility should enhance the nation's terrorism consequence management capability and provide for the contingency of the National Guard being called to assist active and reserve components in dealing with a major military conflict.

" Federal Responsibility"
Governors recognize the need to coordinate programs among federal agencies to address domestic terrorism and appreciate the efforts of the National Domestic Preparedness Office. However, they encourage greater clarification of the currently fragmented structure of federal responsibilities and support increased cooperation among federal agencies to better enable states to plan for domestic terrorism responses. Governors urge appropriate funding, maximum coordination of program components, and coordinated service delivery within states and localities.

Education:
The President's education bill is the second largest non-funded mandate (after special education) in the history of federal education legislation. It is the largest reduction of local school board decision-making power in history. This new federal law will result in the identification-or mis-identification-of between 30% and 65% of all community schools (depending on your state) as failing. The enormous cost of coming into federal compliance will fall on local property taxpayers. In Vermont, we may forego federal education funds altogether because in the long run this law threatens to make our schools worse rather than better! Vermont, like many other states, already has a strong testing and accountability program. By the President's own measure, Vermont's students collective rank sixth in the country. Now our system is at risk because of a new federally dictated definition of quality.

Strongly supported by education conservatives, Bush's No Child Left Behind Act won bipartisan approval in 2001. Now that the law is being phased in, educators are arguing that they cannot meet its ambitious goals without adequate federal funding. The legislation permitted spending up to $26.4 billion this year to help the nation's 16,000 school districts comply. But in the face of growing deficits, Congress appropriated $22 billion. Some Democrats are joining in the push for more federal funding to carry out the law's requirements. Gov. Howard Dean calls the education measure the "every school board left behind" act. "It's not going to accomplish anything except raising local property taxes," he says. Dean as well as some school officials refers to the gap in federal support as a "non-funded mandate" - buzzwords that Republicans used for decades when Democrats ruled Capitol Hill and passed laws without adequately compensating states for having to carry them out.

Gay Rights:
In 1999, in Baker v. State of Vermont, the state high court held that same-sex couples were entitled to the same legal benefits and protections enjoyed by heterosexual married couples. In 2000, Dean signed a bill legalizing so-called civil unions in VT He did so without any public ceremony, which angered the gay community. However, during his 2000 reelection campaign, Dean never budged on his support for the civil-union bill even in the face of a withering assault from the Republican candidate.

Economy/Taxes:
DEAN -to Graham-: I got into this race because I wanted a balanced budget, and I wanted to have a party that stood up to President Bush, because I think that's the only way we can beat him. You and Senator Hollings and I have something in common. We all are former governors; we've all balanced budgets. Fritz Hollings had an amendment a couple of weeks ago that would have zeroed out the president's tax cuts. You voted for that amendment. Senators Edwards, Kerry, and Lieberman –instead- voted for an amendment that would add $350 billion of additional tax cuts. Why'd you make that choice?
GRAHAM: I made that choice because I think it's reckless and irresponsible at a time of rising deficits, at a time that we're at war with uncertain cost of completing war and then completing the occupation and renewal of Iraq to be talking about cutting $1.2 trillion from the federal budget. And that was what Senator Hollings's amendment eliminated.
Source: Democratic Debate May 3, 2003

President Bush and the GOP have essentially taken money out of the Social Security Trust Fund and used it to finance tax cuts that hurt most Americans. The bulk of those tax cuts went to those in the top 2% of income earners. Left behind are middle class and working people who are paying for their tiny tax cuts by losing their jobs and their health insurance. The tax cuts (with some exceptions in the estate and retirement areas) should be repealed. Otherwise it is irresponsible to discuss a Medicare pharmacy benefit, money for education, better roads and rail systems, or stronger environmental protection. Those all cost money. Ask most Americans if they would rather have a tax cut or better health coverage, roads and bridges, and schools for their children, they will choose the latter. They also understand-despite hollow Republican promises-that we cannot do both. The budget must be balanced; we must build the Social Security Trust Fund; and we must invest in Health and Education once again.
Source: Campaign web site, DeanForAmerica.com, "On the Issues" Nov 30, 2002

Race
In the mid-sixties, Yale, like other élite universities, had begun to commit itself to progressive admissions policies based upon merit and a quest for ethnic diversity rather than Wasp hegemony. This was a shift that Dean, the son and grandson of Yale alumni, figured he might as well make the most of. Obliging an explicit request from Dean, the housing-placement office assigned him two African-American roommates. One was Ralph Dawson, a sheet-metal worker’s son who is today a labor lawyer in New York City.

“Unless you operated from a stereotypic understanding of the Yale white boy as rich, you wouldn’t know that about Howard,” Dawson, who graduated from an all-black public high school in Charleston, South Carolina, told me. “When it came to race—and I don’t know whether this was a function of intent or just came naturally—Howard was not patronizing in any way. He was willing to confront in discussion what a lot of white students weren’t. He would hold his ground. He would respect that I knew forty-two million times more about being black than he did. But that didn’t mean he couldn’t hold a view on something relating to civil rights that would be as valid as mine. There were lots of well-meaning people at Yale who wanted you to understand that they understood your plight; you’d get into a conversation and they would yield too soon, so we didn’t get the full benefit of the exchange. Howard very much thought he was capable of working an issue through. He was inquisitive. And when he came to a conclusion he would be as strong as anybody else. I don’t think he’s stubborn. He’s a guy who’s always been comfortable in his own skin. That’s something you still see in him today, and it gets him into some degree of controversy.”

Dawson was referring, with tactful obliqueness, to the emblem of the Dean style, his vaunted “unscriptedness”—which, by his own reckoning, constitutes both his Achilles heel and his appeal.
Source: New Yorker 1/5/2004

His Organization
Internet
Dean campaign manager Joe Trippi told the Washington Post, “We set out to be the greatest grass-roots campaign of the modern era.” And so far, that is exactly what they’ve done.

In creating this online operation, Teachout employed some rather unconventional methods. She turned to Internet dating software, specifically the Web site Friendster, to help Dean supporters across the country find and connect with other supporters, organize local events, and get together to convince others to vote for Dean. Teachout told MSNBC, “social software is far better for organizing than it is for dating.”

Bridging Internet and Real World
But for Teachout, a 31-year-old lawyer in black high-top sneakers, the campaign is not about the Internet. Online tools are a way to get people to act -- to meet in the physical world, to put up flyers and posters, write letters and checks, speak to other people face to face. And ultimately, to get out and vote. "The Internet is moving from information technology to organizing technology," she says, sitting in a windowless conference room at the campaign's offices. "I e-mail you that I like Dean, maybe you'll tell your wife. If I tell you face to face, you'll tell everyone."

Real World
On Wednesday, the last meet-up day before the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary, almost 170,000 supporters expressed intent to attend one of the gatherings slated for up to 604 cities worldwide. A significant number are planning trips to Iowa or New Hampshire to volunteer in Dean's behalf.

"They have not been involved in politics before," Dean said during a recent swing through southern New Hampshire, including a stop in Hampstead. "Twenty-five percent of the people making donations to the campaign are under 30 years old. That's unprecedented. We're going to bring in 3 (million) to 4 million new people who haven't voted before. We're giving them a reason to vote."
By BILL STRAUB Scripps Howard News Service January 07, 2004

[Lone Pawn]

32. If you're going to just copy-paste...

Do us a favor and give us the link instead. It streamlines the thread.

[LuminousX]

41. Fine

My Case for Dean

But I suggest you just put me on ignore. I like to create long posts.

Sorry to disrupt the attention span.

[Lone Pawn]

46. Well, Jeez, NOW you give us the link

What I meant to say was give links INSTEAD of copy-pastes. But I appreciate the effort :)

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

116. I like not having to open another window

[adamrsilva]

29. You can vote for

1. a guy who will bring back the true spirit of the Democratic Party

2. a guy who might be more electable, but will bring the same old, same old of the Democratic Party

[Lone Pawn]

37. So you mean to say...

1. A guy you agree with but will not get elected, giving us 4 more years of bush.

2. A guy you don't totally agree with, but will get elected, giving us 4 to 8 years of a Democratic president.

It doesn't matter how wonderful the candidate is if he can't get into office. You might as well vote Nader.

[CatWoman]

50. see -- that's where I'm so messed up

:-(

[w4rma]

83. IMHO, Dean is the more "electable" one. Has he not changed the debate?

Has he not been able to change the focus of the debate to bring it onto Democratic turf instead of fighting on Republican turf?

IMHO, Clark is riding Dean's coattails right now. Without Dean to set the agenda, how would Clark do in the general election?

And you already seem to agree that Dean's platform is a better one than Clark's.

[Crunchy Frog]

105. Catwoman

I don't at all thing that Clark represents a same old same old establishment Dem. I think this is more or a spin that some people are putting on his campaign. I would urge you to really take a look at his positions, and come to your own conclusions.

Actually he is such a party outsider, that I think he could shake the party out of its doldrums in a way that no one else could. That's just my opinion.

[Upfront]

30. With Clark

You may be electing a big money stoge. I know Dean is for breaking the strangle hold big money has on our party and our country. Think!

[funky_bug]

52. And Clark just announced

His plan to take the big money from the big money corps and give it back to the people. Doesn't sound like he's "for" big money to me... he's just for GIVING it to me.

[mikewriter]

33. CAT choose Dean

If Quentin Tarantino were responding he may say---there are Dean people or there's Clark people. I don't think there's too many people who are undecided about who they want to support concerning Clark or Dean, you either want one or the other. I've been pro-Dean since 2002 when I heard he was considering running for Pres. I followed some of his term as gov. and liked what I read and heard from him. But CATwoman, go with your heart. Only you can decide who you want running our country. That is the gift of democracy.

[slinkerwink]

51. welcome to DU!!!!!!!!!

:hi: Great post also!

[nini]

35. I want them both.....

what a ticket that would be!

[DoveTurnedHawk]

43. CW, Here's a LOOOOOOONG Thread With Many Great Answers

Both pro-Clark and pro-Dean.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=81944

Enjoy! :-)

DTH

[Clark4VotingRights]

47. Forgive me for cutting and pasting what I wrote in a similar thread

CatWoman. But I feel strongly that Clark is the best choice,
and wanted to share my reasons. As Rod Serling would say:
Submitted for your approval:

1-Money is one of Clark's many strengths.

First he's shown he can raise it. Lots and fast.
I think he’s demonstrated it to a pretty dazzling degree in fact.
Of course he doesn't have as much accumulated as Dean...yet. He's been in the
race just over 3 months! But when people see him and hear him, the money flows.
He’s that impressive.

I feel certain that there are tons of rich Dem celebrities that will gladly donate to Clark.
He’s been meeting with them all along. Great people like Steven Spielberg.

And he probably has the option of declining federal matching funds for the GE, just like Dean and Bush did. He’s not a fool. If the playing field is completely off balance because of Bush’s bucks, he’ll level it. He knows he’s in the battle of his life; he won’t go in unarmed. He is most definitely not a fool.

2-We can't win without the south. Clark has the best southern strategy.

It's part of the reason he spent time there instead of Iowa.
He appeals to some crucial demographics: African Americans and white men.

He's the *only* major white guy Dem to consistently speak out about the strategic
disenfranchisement of our black citizens to steal elections. He's the only major white guy Dem to blast the racist criminal justice system, that targets young poor black men to disproportionate degree, labels them as "felons," and robs them of their right to vote (traditionally Democratic, hmmmm). He’s fighting for that right, and not taking that demographic for granted. And he has greats like Charlie Rangel and Andrew Young on board as campaign co-chairs.

And this is where is military background will help immensely.
The military is one of the most integrated institutions in the US.
A lot of the black voters here on DU, and that I talk to (doing voter registration) cite this as a huge plus.

And, southern good ol’ boy white guys? I think they’ll prefer a four star general to any of the Yankees. Dean would have to find a strong southerner to run with. Clark is a strong southerner. That's a huge advantage.

3-He’ll get the traditionally Republican military vote.

Um, just might help there to have a four star general who is speaking out on their behalf, who is appalled at Bush’s misuse and abuse of them. Sending them to be killed for no reason. Not arming them properly. Not giving them adequate pay. Slashing veteran’s benefits.

Who could address those issues better than General Clark? He truly deeply cares about our soldiers. It shows.

4-He has experience caring for the needs of every military family under his command, and his progressive domestic platform.

I won't repeat his entire presidential platform. You can read his policies here:
http://clark04.com/issues/

But he’s proposed the most *progressive* tax plan of any candidate.
He's intensely focused on jobs, education, and training.

5-He has the military/soldier credentials, and the diplomatic credentials.

Clark is a diplomat first and foremost.
He respects our soldiers…his soldiers (unlike Bush), and will put them in harms way, only as a last resort.

He negotiated the Dayton Peace Accords.
I’m thinking that after four years of Bush flipping the bird to the world, it would be good to have an experienced diplomat reaching out to other nations. Clark can do that better than anyone.

6-He has the military/soldier credentials, and the humanitarian credentials.

He fought possibly the only war US history that was waged for humanitarian reasons.
Clark shamed Clinton into stopping "ethnic cleansing" in Kosovo.

Samantha Power, the founding executive director of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy (1998-2002), and the Pulitzer prize-winning author of A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide (Basic Books, 2002).

General Clark is one of the heroes of Samantha Power's book.

According to Power, General Clark was already passionate about humanitarian concerns, especially genocide, before his appointment as Supreme Allied Commander of NATO forces in Europe. When genocide began to occur in the Balkans, he was determined to stop it.

She describes his efforts in behalf of the Dayton Peace Accords and his brilliant command of NATO forces in Kosovo. Her chapter on Kosovo ends, "The man who probably contributed more than any other individual to Milosvevic's battlefield defeat was General Wesley Clark. The NATO bombing campaign succeeded in removing brutal Serb police units from Kosovo, in ensuring the return on 1.3 million Kosovo Albanians, and in securing for Albanians the right of self-governance.”

So in an era where the US has no moral authority thanks to the BFEE, here is a man with immense moral authority.

7-General Clark has immense moral authority and significant foreign policy experience.

Supreme Allied Commander of NATO forces in Europe…’Nuff said.

8-He has presidential demeanor and looks. It matters.

He’s friggen impressive. He’s brilliant yet personable, tough and compassionate. Handsome as hell, physically fit as hell. Hey, it matters. His appearance gets people’s attention, and his eloquence and brilliance seals the deal.

9-BushCo has manipulated us into needing a “wartime” president.

Whether we like it or not, we’re stuck. BushCo created the need for "wartime" leadership, which he can't provide. He's given us: War in Afghanistan (for the Caspian pipeline, but still war), war in Iraq (for oil, but still war), war on "terra,"...war war war.
And the Pugs will claim the Dems are weak on national defense.
You know, wimps.

How will they make that claim stick if the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, a four star General is our nominee?

Picture a debate between Bush (the rich boy who got out of Vietnam by having his daddy get him a slot in the national guard, then went AWOL...from the friggen national guard!) and Clark. Clark will serve him his ass on a platter.

Did you see Clark's interviews with the standard media whores a few
weeks back: Russert, Mathews,...everyone on Faux News?
He ate them for lunch. They never knew what him 'em.
But he did it with poise and dignity, with a professional presidential demeanor.

Now when they interview him they're downright differential.
They practically roll over to get their bellies rubbed.
They've learned that he will fight back. Unlike the traditional spineless Dem.

Picture a debate between Bush and General Clark…

I rest my case.

[graelent]

62. A Rebuttal

1. Clark does not have a money advantage. He has elected to accept public financing which puts him at a severe disadvantage going up against Bush. Only a candidate who has opted out of the public financing program will be able to compete dolor for dollor with Bush.

2. I am sorry but we will lose the South anyway. Gore was from the South. Just because he is from the South does not make him more electable. Dean's Gun stance takes away the largest criticism middle and lower income Southern voters have of Democratic candidates.

3. There is no evidence showing that Clark will get the Military vote. In fact, there are many reports that say Clark was not well liked in Military circles. Een if those reports are false, a blanket statement saying Clark will bring over Military voters with no proof to show otherwise is ridiculous.

4, 5, 6 & 7. yes, Clark has great military and diplomatic credentials. What he does not have are any domestic credentials or experience in public office.

8. Clark looks no more or less "presidential" than any other nominee. His performace in the debates so far shows me Bush will have a much easier time defending himself against Clark than against Dean.

9. True. Bush manipulated the public into thinking we need a "wartime" president. And Clark is plaing into that manipulation.

[dfong63]

82. great rebuttal

[cthrumatrix]

90. good points....well said

[graelent]

49. I choose Dean and here is why

1. Dean has experience dealing with and negotiating with a legislative body. Whomever wins the Presidency will have to push his legislation through a Republican Congress. Clark has no experience dealing with Congressional Legislation. His leadership is based on the military, which is a very top-down organization, whereas Congressional politics is about compromise and give and take.

2. Clark is a mediocre at best campaigner and debater. His stump speech is lackluster. His debate appearances and interviews have been less than stellar, largely because he rarely answers a direct question with a direct answer. His policies are good, in fact he and Dean's policies are extremely close to each other in most respects. But Dean has the ability to sell those policies to the nation, Clark, at least so far, does not. And sadly, the selling of the policies will be more important than the policies themselves to gaining American votes.

3. Dean was right about the War in Iraq and said so long before it was politically viable to do so. In fact, it was Dean that made questioning the war a viable platform to begin with. Yes, other nominees opposed the war, but none as loudly and to such a large audience as Dean.

4. Lots of people say Dean is unelectable vs Bush. This is a ridiculous statement. Dean is closer to Bush than Clark in most polls looking at a head-to-head match up. I am not saying Clark is unelectable vs Bush. I am only saying that this line of attack on Dean is false.

5. He signed Civil Unions into law. This is a big deal for me.

And there are many more, but best I don't write a novel.

[Sophree]

53. What concerns me most lately about Dean

Not the gaffes themselves, but the effect they seem to be having on him- Having to backtrack, explain- made to second-guess himself. Whoever the candidate is, s/he'd better be damn sure of who they are if they want to overcome the Rove character assassination.

The pandering to the South/Religious vote, etc. Ugh. He should stop trying to be something he's not. He's never going to get the extreme fundies. The other religious-folk would be satisfied with knowing that he is a person of faith and leave it at that. His instincts about leaving it out of the discussion (except in a peripheral manner) were correct. This is what I mean- he's already second-guessing himself and negating the whole not-really-a-politician-politician thing.

Besides, it's transparent and condescending.

Between the 2, Clark is obviously a much better choice- as a candidate and a President. He's my second choice.

[FrenchieCat]

54. I believe in

and recommend Clark. I believe that he has the best chance against Bush....and that's what I want...is to see Bush out of office...period!

The only way that can be done is to put our strongest and best against the monkey.

Bush may have zillions of dollars, the bully pulpit and the media....but he is not a great candidate....

So since we do not have zillions of dollars, the bully pulpit nor the media....we need our best candidate...

Don't forget those 5 Democratic Senate seat in the south....we can't just throw our hands up in the air and act like we just don't care.

The worse thing that could happen would be to have Dean as a nominee and end up with Bush in the White House for 4 more years...and not even a way to inact fillibusters....now that would be HELL!

So let's not go for the "REMAKE AMERICA" BULLSHIT....

Let's just go for KICK BUSH'S ASS......

i.e., we must get our priorities in order......

This election is about beating Bush.....nothing else! Anyone that thinks otherwise will be in for a rude awakening!

[Printer70]

55. Only one question to consider

Do you want to offer voters a clear choice to the far-right agenda or a faint echo?

If the former, go with Dean. If the latter, go with Clark.

[FrenchieCat]

70. Isn't it

Howard Dean that keeps talking about how he's going to stir back to the center for the General election? Doesn't that mean he feels like he has to moderate himself in order to win a general election?

Plus, Dean can not fix that great big gaping hole in his resume called "lack of foreign policy experience". I'll be damn if Bush is going to stand next to Dean and look like he's the Foreign policy czar! That will be hard for me to take!

[Printer70]

91. I've not heard that

...going back to the center. His progressive agenda on health care and rejoining the international community will do fine in mainstream America. With all the "foreign policy experience" Bush has, he has allowed 9/11 and initiated an unrelated war in Iraq, which we still don't know the purpose of. I can do without that kind of experience. We need a fresh start, someone who's not indoctrinated in the way of the Pentagon, to chart a new path where America acts in concert with its allies. Dean can do that.

[BeyondGeography]

56. Dean's a harder sell in the GE

Yeah, we've heard it all before, but Dean's favorable/unfavorable ratings compared with Clark in the latest USA Today poll tell a difficult story. This is a Jan. 7 poll, after all the media coverage Dean got in December as the front-runner post-Gore while Clark's candidiacy was still under the radar screen.

Rate the candidate favorably:

Dean 28%
Clark 37%

Rate the candidate unfavorably:

Dean 39%
Clark 27%

If you're truly undecided, I would wait and see what these numbers look like in a month as Clark gets a lot more exposure.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0107dems-poll070.html

[graelent]

68. If we are talking polling data

The latest CNN/Time Poll find Dean fares better against Bush than Clark.

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm">Found here

Bush 51%
Dean 46%

Bush 53%
Clark 43%

[BeyondGeography]

89. At this point in the game

having higher unfavorables than Bush (39% vs. 35%) is pretty disturbing for a guy who only relatively recently appeared on the scene.

Lieberman finished only 52%-46% down in the same poll. All name recognition at this point. Dean's been all over the airwaves and they know Lieberman from 2000. Clark's been under the radar.

Like I said, it will be interesting to see where things are a month from now. There's no rush for a true undecided to make a selection now unless he/she is in a primary state.

[DancingBear]

57. Wesley Clark

(this was my response to a Skinner post asking the same type of question)


Emotions are wonderful things. They can take you to heights unknown, yet drop you to depths undreamed, without warning. In politics, they can make you stand in the cold until you extremities scream, or they can make you cry until your eyes refuse to give another drop. Political love is the cruelest of animals, for it can often cover your eyes and ask why you can't see. To paraphrase an old song - "Love can make you happy, or love can rob you blind."

We sit now on the threshold of one of the most important elections I have seen in my 50 years on this earth. The direction of this nation lies in the balance - not for four years, but for twenty, or thirty. Where will we go, and who can take us there?

I look at America not in anger, but with respect. Am I angry - oh, yes, as Mary would say to Rhoda, oh yes. I want my America back, but with the caveat that must come with the respect that I hold her in. I know that many feel as I do, yet many do not. My anger is felt full throttle by some, yet not by others. Others look for hope clothed in strength, for courage wrapped in liberty, and for honesty wrapped in honor.

My America bleeds today, not just from the left, but from the middle, from the right, and from the not sure. It looks for someone who can heal the wounds, and that man, without question, is Wesley Clark.

As our country hangs in the balance, look at the soon-to-be Senate candidates in the south, and ask about coat tails. Ask the minority leader in SD, fighting for his political life, about coat tails. Ask the House members up for re-election who they would feel more comfortable behind. It is the lady or the tiger, for politics is business.

This can not be a decision made of emotion, for that will not win the day. One must look across the entire political landscape and ask without reservation who can and will reach out to all. When I think of Clark, I think of someone who can reach those who are leaning in the Carolinas, and who are leaning in New Mexico. He can reach those in uniform in Newport News, and those on John Deeres in Oklahoma. These at one time were our people, and we need them back. For the sake of womens rights, for the sake of environmental preservation, for the sake of what makes us who we are, we need them back.

With Wes Clark, we'll get them.

[Sophree]

63. That's the other thing

Concern for my extremely divided nation. Dean would never be able to bring the country together again like I know Wes Clark (Or my 1st choice, Edwards) would be able to.

They push us, we push back, they push back harder, etc. We're tired of it already! Dean would continue this polarization, if not make it worse. That's my other concern.

[ozone_man]

59. You need to get together with Skinner.

He is going through the same crisis. ;)

My own philosophy is to vote your heart. Dean is my candidate and is able to reach me. He's been my Governor for many years and I, like many Vermonters, feel he is a principled man with a lot of common sense, able to stand up for what is right. He did it with civil unions and health care in Vermont, he will do it for education and health care at the national level. He has been outspoken against the Iraq war at a time that it was not politically safe to do so, but was the right thing to do. He knows how to balance a budget and how to make tough choices. These are some of the issues that are important to me.

[Duder]

61. Dean's your man

He has a three legged cat named Katie.

:)

[Lone Pawn]

65. Clark's your man

He's just more handsome

:)

[Duder]

67. Clark will cheat on her

Go with the sexy doctor.

:)

[KittyWampus]

66. Catwoman, Were You In The Armed Services?

Do you think Clark could draw the military vote?

I don't think Junior would be all that popular... maybe with hardcore types... but the reserves and those who know they haven't been treated properly?

Clark seems to have been held in high regard by those under his command and most of his peers.

Perhaps he could give the GOP a run for their "military vote".

This would be in addition to his other pros.

[wyldwolf]

69. I think I heard once that she was...

...though I could be wrong.

That admission on DU lately could cause her to be flamed, though. Military. BAAAAD!

[KittyWampus]

77. If Someone Flamed Catwoman... They'd Probably Rue The Day

:)

[KaraokeKarlton]

71. Do you want someone who has proven they can win elections

Or someone who has never won an election in all their life? Bottom line is this...Clark doesn't have a political record to look at to make sure he's actually going to do the kinds of things he says he is. On top of that, this election is more than a battle of Clark's 4 stars and Bush's flight suit. Clark has nothing but a military record. The only way to beat Bush is to pummel him where he's weak and offer something better. Dean is the one to do it.

[arewethereyet]

72. I hope you can see that Clark's aura is as fragile as Dean's

You may want to consider other options.

The poll numbers are going to be useless pretty soon as real people start making their actual feelings known.

I suggest taking a fresh look all around.

I have to point out that Edwards has been consistant and clear throughout his campaign regarding his platform and staying on the topic of talking about his vision and not that of anyone else.

But you've been around the block if a few less times tham I have, you'll figure it out.

[Clark Can WIN]

73. Not having read any of the ugly things undoubtably written above this line

Let me tell you what I think you should do. If I read this thread first I'm afraid I'll be in a bad mood. Who knows, maybe when I go back I'll be pleasantly suprised.:shrug:

First, if you have not already seen it please take the time to view "An American Son". It's a very informative and pretty moving account of Wesley Clarks life. http://clark04.com/americanson/

Look at the policy papers on each candidates website again. Sit down with yourself and make a list on paper. Write down each of the things that you like, and dislike about each candidate. Write down what you think the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate are.

When it's all done you should go with the candidate you really believe can win us the White House and you believe in the most.

Good Luck to You, We'd be honored to have you on board.

[Dookus]

74. hey Catwoman...

Molly supports Clark - what better endorsement do you need?

[Jerseycoa]

76. I hope you will read Skinner's thread through

I'm sorry to copy and paste, but I have to go out.


There's been so much said so eloquently, it's hard to find something to add to the discussion. But there is one thing I've been thinking about since Clark's tax reform plan was released on Monday.

The RW charge will be class-warfare, we know. Clark wants to take from the rich and give to the poor, just like Karl Marx! But it won't take, and the reason it won't take is Wes Clark has the gift of persuasion.

He often cites Ike's definition of leadership as persuading the other fellow to want to do what you want him to do. Clark's diplomatic skill will be used to good effect not only in foreign policy, but in domestic, as in asking millionaires to pay higher taxes. You watch, he will make it a matter of morality and patriotism: The country's broken, it has to be fixed, won't you join me in doing so? And they will say yes. They will say yes, because he will convince them it is in the national interest, and in their own, to heal the wounds and set right the inequities that have infected the system and turned our society into something unrecognizable, unbearable, and indefensible.

He can tell a roomful of worried Jews they have to be mindful of Palestinian rights. He can tell a white VFW crowd in New Hampshire they should be outraged the prisons are filled to bursting with young black men. He can tell all manner of people, well, what if it were your child who was gay? Wouldn't you want the best for your son or daughter? Wouldn't you want your child to have the same rights as every other American? I have no doubt he can convince the better off they should be thankful to help the suffering poor, working and middle classes.

I have no doubt he will win hearts and minds. I've seen him do it.

He has actually done it in the course of his campaign, as in the few examples I mention above. In his conversations along the trail, he uses discernment, comprehension, interpretation, and explanation, all in plain language, to convince the other fellow. He does it in a way that brings people to see the world outside their own experience, their own mindset, their own prejudice, their own fear. He does it in a dignified, elucidating way that freshens perspective, opens minds, and maybe can join the pieces of the fractured American polity.

As angry as he can be with the current state of the nation and the current administration, he is just that kindly and rational when he talks to voters about what will return dignity and fairness to American society. He does not talk down, he talks with; he does not yell unless it's appropriate; he does not back down from his beliefs. This is what a leader does. While I certainly do want a real commander in chief in the Oval Office in these times, I also want a leader who can convince the other fellow to do the right thing.

[robbedvoter]

78. I put this together when a friend asked:

1. His personality(+ mind)
http://robbedvoter.forclark.com/story/2004/1/1/103242/1317
2.His mind:
http://Blog.forclark.com/story/2003/11/22/204246/39
3. His heart
http://Blog.forclark.com/story/2003/11/28/81836/095
4.His courage/lack of arrogance
http://robbedvoter.forclark.com/story/2004/1/1/103743/4163
His views (one example - preemption)
http://Blog.forclark.com/story/2003/12/22/221958/58

5. His feistiness
http://Blog.forclark.com/story/2003/12/20/12545/873
6.And damn good looking too

[killbotfactory]

80. Dean didn't raise money for Repubs after they stole the 2000 election

Clark did.

[FrenchieCat]

86. Pluuuuueaze....

that is so yesterday....or better yet, so September 18th...the day Drugde dug that "tape" out....please know what the speech said.....
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004065

here is the full paragraph of contention:
------------------
You see, in the Cold War we were defensive. We were trying to protect our country from communism. Well guess what, it's over. Communism lost. Now we've got to go out there and finish the job and help people live the way they want to live. We've got to let them be all they can be. They want what we have. We've got some challenges ahead in that kind of strategy. We're going to be active, we're going to be forward engaged. But if you look around the world, there's a lot of work to be doneAnd I'm very glad we've got the great team in office: men like Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condolzeezza Rice, Paul O'Neill--people I know very well--our president, George W. Bush. We need them there, because we've got some tough challenges ahead in Europe.
----------------------
notice he says he is glad to have them in office for the challenges ahead in EUROPE!
in the next two paragraphs he further defines the european challenges:
-------------------------
We've got a NATO that's drifting right now. I don't know what's happened to it. But the situation in the Balkans where we've still got thousands of American troops, it's in trouble. It's going downhill on us as we're watching it. Our allies haven't quite picked up the load on that. But our allies say they're going to build a European security and defense program with a rival army to NATO. Well, I think it's a political imperative that they do more for defense, but I think we have to understand that that linkage between the United Sates and Europe, that bond on security, that's in our interest.

Look, in politics they told me--I don't know anything about politics now, I want to make that clear. But they told me--I read, do my reading in Time magazine and so forth. And they said in politics you've always got to protect your base. Well, for the United States, our base is Europe. We've got to be there, and we've got to be engaged in Europe. And that means we've got to take care of NATO, we've got to make sure the Europeans stay in it, and we've got to stay with the problem in the Balkans, even though we don't like it. We will get it resolved, and we'll help bring democracy and Westernization to those countries there.

[FrenchieCat]

87. He also said this...

more on the speech:
two paragraphs up from the maligned "praise" we find this:
------------------------
But we're also extremely vulnerable. Our economy--we're using three times--we've got three times as much foreign investment as we're investing--capital flow--as we're putting out there. They're investing here because they believe in us. We're using energy like it's going out of style. We're using five to eight times as much energy per capita as people in the rest of the world, twice as much as even the Europeans. We're vulnerable to security threats--everything from terrorism to the developing missiles that are--we know rogue states are developing to aim at us.
And so I think we have to have a new strategy, and we have to have a consensus on the strategy, and we have to have a bipartisan consensus, and politics has to stop in America at the water's edge. We've got to reach out, and we've got to find those people in the world and share our values and beliefs--and we've got to reinforce them. We've got to bring them here and let them experience the kind of life that we have. They've got to get an education here. They've got to be able to send their children here. They they've got to go home. And they've got to carry the burdens in their own lands, and to some extent we have to help them.
----------------------------
notice that in the first paragraph clark talks enviromentalism to a republican audience.
also note the warning about terrorism pre-9/11.
notice in the second paragraph he talks about bipartisanship, and reaching out to the world community. two traits that he shares spot on with his positions today.

[killbotfactory]

88. So he didn't speak at a republican fundraiser?

Or it's just "old news" so it doesn't matter?

[FrenchieCat]

107. Charismatic

Diplomatic leaders seem to be able to make their point and are not afraid of speaking their mind no matter where that is....

Please, he spoke at a Democratic fundraiser later that same year......

It's called non partisanship...and supports who he said he was....however, he did choose the Democratic party whether you like it or not.

And I am happy about that too......

I remember when many Democrats were hoping that Powell was a Democrat and might run for president.....no one really knew at the time...because HE WAS IN THE MILITARY....he has made it clear since and chose to be a lying Republican....

Wes chose to be an honest Democrat....

[JPJones]

84. Why I support Wes Clark

Personally, I am supporting Wesley Clark for these reasons:

1) Leadership - We are electing not only a President but also a
Commander-in-Chief. Wes Clark has the vision and experience to lead
our troops, to bring them home, and to repair America's reputation
around the world. Clark has also pledged to reduce the defense budget, who else good say that?

2) Intelligence - Clark, the Rhodes Scholar, impresses me with his
ability to speak extemporaneously. Certainly, he got off to a slow
start, but what was the date of the last Clark gaffe? (And the
skiing and VP comments were not really gaffes IMO)

3) Positive message - Wes knows what a failure Bush has been, but he
knows that a pessimistic outlook alienates many voters. Populism
and anger motivate some Democrats, especially when we are out of
power. But it just sounds like crazy talk to your average voter
(Nascar Dad, soccer mom, etc.). Remember, a majority of voters
actually LIKE George Bush. Wes is focused on the future, and this
will pay off in the general election.

4) Domestic policy - Wes Clark's domestic policies are rooted in
common sense. They are moderate and won't break the bank. He will
surely choose a VP who can work with Congress. However, isn't
working with a hostile Congress all about leadership? (See point 1)

5) That intangible quality - JFK had it, Clinton has it, Wes Clark
has it. It's the ability to inspire people and to give us hope for the future.

[RafterMan]

85. Instinct

Obviously, you've compared the two by policy, character, etc. and found they hang in the balance. Otherwise, you wouldn't be asking. If you're sure you have enough information about each to form a rational judgement (and are merely stuck on the reaching), just drop all of the details and forget the plan vs. plan stuff.

Close your eyes and imagine all the challenges and opportunities you can see arising over the next eight years. Play through a scenario of what each would do as President during these critical periods. Work it until the actions you imagine them performing match your expectations of each as you've come to know them. Eventually, you will find yourself siding with one and against the other, and then you'll know what your choice is.

It's always possible to analyze your way into a corner. Since you've done the hard work of gathering information, it's safe to let your heart decide.

[democratreformed]

96. Mix two tsp dried bats wing with .....

Will that break the spell?

Just my attempt at humor.

[farmbo]

100. Two great candidates...One great campaign....Go with Dean.

Four words:

McCain-Feingold spending limits.

[Zomby Woof]

103. take it from your big brother

Drop Dean like yesterday's hot potato. You should know better! :spank:

Go with Clark over Dean if it must be between the 2. Obviously you know where my support goes, but DROP DEAN.

You will feel better about yourself in the morning.

Have I ever lied to my big sister??? :hi:

[Hawkeye-X]

109. well, Zomby - let me ask you a question

Where will your vote go if neither Clark or Kuinich is nominated, but Howard Dean.

Then what? Will you vote for him, and forgive him 4 years later after everything is back to normal pre-2000?

Hawkeye-X

[bain_sidhe]

106. Choose Clark!

Just because. :D

What, you want more? Ok, two reasons. First I have to say though, that "electability" is NOT an issue. They're both good candidates, and either of them could be elected. But I think Clark would have an *easier* time of it. I can't seriously see any of the Gore states bolting to bush* if Clark is the nominee, but I have real concerns about Michigan switching if Dean is. The metro areas will go for him, but virtually the entire rest of the state is either solid (as in RW) repub, or leans that way pretty heavily. Gore picked up enough suburbanites to take it. For instance, the place I live has a Repub U.S. Rep, and repub state sentors and reps - but it went for Gore in 2000. I don't think it will go for Dean, so Dean as the nominee could reverse that. Michigan has 17 electoral votes and that would be hard for Dean to make up.

With Clark as the nominee, he could win with all the Gore states, Arkansas and Louisana. Or with just Ohio - another one that *might* flip to Dem with Clark, but probably won't with Dean.

The second reason is personal. Since I think Dems are gonna win in 2004 (not that it won't be a struggle, it will, but I think we'll pull it off), I want CLARK to be my President. Dean would be "ok" as my President, but I would be *proud* to call Clark my President.

P.S. I also think Clark would do a better job as President, but I don't think Dean would do a *horrible* job. That distinction belongs to Bush*.

**edited for clarity**

[Crunchy Frog]

108. Hi CatWoman

I appreciate your having an open mind. Here is a recent thread that had a lot of really good answers to your question:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=80381

I too started out as a Dean supporter. By the time Clark announce, I was favorably disposed to him but remained uncommitted. His resume and military background, as well as his oposition to the Iraq invasion impressed me but did not seal the deal.

What really did it for me was simply watching his performance in town hall meetings, speeches, and especially his encounters with RW media shills. If you watch his interviews with people like Tweety, Timmy, and the people at Faux, he always hands them their asses on a platter, and refuses to be framed and bullied by them. They now act very intimidated by him, and he just keeps getting better with every encounter. This tells me that he will be able to do the same thing with Bush and Rove.

This link contains most of his television appearances. Watching them is really an eye opener. http://www.us4clark.com/mediaclips.html

If you end up deciding you still prefer Dean, don't worry, I won't hold it against you.:)

[WI_DEM]

111. you're the only one who can decide

Good Luck and I hope you find a candidate you can feel comfortable in supporting.

[maxr4clark]

112. I like Trinity, she reminds me of my friend's cat

...whose name was Pepperoni. :)

But seriously, I'm sure you have heard about foreign policy; let's talk about domestic policy. Clark's proposals have, in my opinion, been better than Dean's in two ways:

(1) Clark's proposals are generally more practical/cost effective, yet also more progressive or liberal than Dean's. For example, according to an independent evaluation, Clark's healthcare plan would cover more people who are currently uninsured than Dean's, and at a lower cost. Clark's tax plan is aimed solely at progressive redistribution of wealth, while Dean's tax plan is a tax hike and is not as progressive as Clark's.

(2) Clark's proposals are harder for the Republicans to attack in the campaign. Dean's tax plan, a tax increase, renders him vulnerable to a "tax and spend" label, which still carries a lot of weight with voters. Clark's tax plan, which is neither a tax increase nor a tax cut, does not support that kind of attack, but is a very progressive tax plan that is very traditionally Democratic in intent. Also, Clark is suggesting a cut in Defense spending, while Dean is suggesting increasing the Defense budget. Again, Dean comes off as "tax and spend", while Clark does not; even though Clark's proposal is more in line with traditional Democratic policy.

So overall, even on domestic policy, which is supposed to be Clark's weak point, I like his policy better than Dean's. You may like Dean's personality better than Clark's, that is a matter of taste; I like Clark's better. You may like Dean's history better than Clark's; that's a wash to me. But on the policies that they would enact as President, I find Clark to be far superior; far better for the campaign against Bush, and far more in line with my progressive values.

[Tatiana]

115. Well, everyone's pretty much articulated the reasons for Clark or Dean.

I'd just like to add that, in terms of one of the issues that concerns me, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, Clark filed a brief in support of affirmative action at the University of Michigan. He believes in affirmative action, he understands the history of denying minorities opportunities in the education and employment sector.

Also, in the military, Clark took on such taboo topics such as domestic violence. There are a lot more reasons why I support the man, and I won't fry your brain with them. Suffice to say, the man has a heart AND a brain.

Taught economics, Rhodes Scholar, international diplomatic experience, and oh yeah..... he speaks FOUR languages.

He's gonna make America look good again :)

[joefree1]

117. Small flip flops or one big one?

I'd like to think my thirty years of being a loyal Democrat counts for something. I cannot get not get over my doubts of Clark's recent conversion to the Democratic Party.

Dean is a thinking, growing, and yes sometimes controversial candidate. But he has passion and he has been with us for a long time.

Yes Dean has changed his mind as he matures as a loyal Democrat. But Clark is too new to our ranks. I will not give into the fear mongers that Clark is our only choice because he has the "war" experience.

When I listen to Dean I know where he's coming from.


Images from Dean Rocks the House of Blues, Hollywood
From wtmusic http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=919849
From Joefree1 http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=921300

[Lurking Dem]

118. Here is what I posted on Skinner's thread

in case you missed it:

I'm lacking some of the eloquence







I lack some of the eloquence of other posters on this thread so I'll do a "nutshell" approach.

When I hear Clark speak of his vision for America, I see the America I want for myself and my son. I see an America I can be proud of again. I see grandness.

Long before there were announced candidates, I spoke of the Democratic Party needing someone with an inspiring vision (on a Kennedy scale) to beat Bush. I think Clark has that vision. I think he is the only candidate who can beat Bush because of that vision.

The Republican meme that Democrats are militarily weak, lightweights on foreign policy, and unwilling to stand firm for any American ideology will be turned completely on its head by the election of General Clark. Forever.

Being firm and being a "warmonger" are not the same thing and I am sad to see there are people who don't grasp the difference. But the large majority of the voting public does. Wes Clark will lead us to victory.

[stickdog]

119. OK. Clark left the military to take a job with Jackson Stephens

(a charter member of the Repuke Club For Growth) and Acxiom (the indefensible terrorist enabling CAPPS II no-fly list). As a revolving door lobbyist, he earned well over a million dollars in one year. He even sold his lobbying services to Kissinger's firm.

Clark was then drafted by the DLC to stop Dean -- the candidate was has almost singlehandedly revitalized the Democratic Party with a new, energetic grassroots army.

With Dean, we get a new, revitalized Party and a leader who won't pull any punches when it comes to sizing up the crotch-stuffing Boy King. With Clark, we get a political cipher who has proven himself adept at taking orders and who is backed by the same old same old corpocrats who Bush-enabled the Democratic party completely out of power.