MICHAEL MOORE Loves Clark, Urges Him To Run

[DoveTurnedHawk]

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

September 12, 2003

Dear General Wesley Clark,

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

And that person was you.

<...>

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

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

2. You are firmly pro-choice.

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

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

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

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

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

<...>

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php

:bounce:

DTH

[Pepperbelly]

1. oh my ...

this should give some of our more left brethern a bit of a pause in their Wesley bashing.

[Pastiche423]

2. Why?

It does not change my perception of clark one iota.

[Pepperbelly]

6. I didn't think that it would ...

It will just make it a little tougher for Mike to get cannonized with this horrible lapse of judgement from him.

:eyes:

After all, Clark sticking up for free speech HAS to be a PNAC conspiracy.

[regnaD kciN]

48. "Lapse of judgement"...?

It will just make it a little tougher for Mike to get cannonized with this horrible lapse of judgement from him.

If it is a lapse (and I simply don't know enough about Clark yet to say either way), it wouldn't be Mike's first. Does the phrase "Nader 2000" ring a bell?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. Where's The Love

-:)

[Clark Can WIN]

89. So happy to see

that you acknowledge the fact that you are indeed a Clark Basher.

[Julien Sorel]

5. Nothing is good enough for them.

Clark could shave his head and convert to Zen-Buddhism, but they'd still call him a fascist, a warmonger, a tool of the Illuminati, blah blah blah. When you're insane, you're insane.

Besides, Moore was being sarcastic; he actually hates Clark, and when he met him, he threw a creme pie in his face and called him 'babykiller.' There's a videotape of it somewhere that will be posted on z-net shortly. :/

[TSElliott]

7. Sarcasm

Must be an inside joke because I did not get it when I read his letter.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

8. BB's Joking

There was some clueless poster (I've forgotten who, specifically, and I can't research it as I'm almost positive I have that person on Ignore now) who claimed that Michael Moore was being sarcastic in connection with his earlier support of Clark as described in (I believe) a radio interview.

It was obvious to anyone with a clue that Moore was being completely sincere in his earlier support, as is even more obvious now.

DTH

[TSElliott]

14. Oh ok

cool, because I thought he may have been off his rocker.

[Donna Zen]

13. Wow to the tenth power

Moore said it for me: I too never thought I'd thinking of a General in the White House.

[TSElliott]

3. As long as Clark is not running on a

third party ticket this is good news.

[Clark Can WIN]

90. No third party ticket for Clark

1. Strong and numerous rumors "leaked" to the press point strongly towards the Clintons assisting his efforts.

2. If he were running independently there would have been no reason or incentive for him to declare "I am proud to be a Democrat" or to take up the mantle of liberalism as he did on Bill Mahr.

[Lefty48197]

4. Sticking up for Mike when the PC crowd

thinks he should shut up. That's what a real leader does.

[neuvocat]

9. Not an endorsement

but awfully close.

[tjdee]

11. I just hope Wesley can live up to this.

It's reached the point of no return now, Clark almost has to run.
Moore's letter really puts it on the line for him, and I agree with where he's coming from.

A lot of pressure.

I just hope Clark doesn't disappoint. I see no reason why he would, but there is a tremendous amount of pressure on him at this point, such high expectations.

[Pepperbelly]

12. I predict that ...

the lefties are going to be absolutely amazed at how progressive Wesley really is. And the beauty is that Wesley CAN be far more progressive and still win and that is the advantage that Wesley's stars give him.

[Donna Zen]

15. Was it the Esquire article that said:

He will be wearing a business suit in the campaign and yet everyone will see the stars on his shoulders. Personally I'm way past the stars, but 'murika really pays little attention. 71% think Hussein behind 911, over half of them think bush doing a good-great job. I don't want this race to be about "who" but rather "what" and "how" however, that ain't gonna happen. So if I can get all 3 of those and a win, life on the planet would suddenly get much better.

[Oracle]

59. The lefties? The lefties? The lefties?

Man, wake up to true conviction!
Perhaps not your cup of tea.. but TRUE conviction! Don't sell it short...closer to the heart than you might think.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

80. If Clark is a progressive he'll win big

One can only hope.

[mkregel]

16. I never engaged in Wesley bashing

I just never thought he'd run. Personally I'd love to see Dean/Clark, but would love to see Clark/Dean as well...or Clark/Anyonebutbush.

...or Dean/Anyonebutbush...

Shit...just get that monkeybitchmutherfuckingdisgracetoaflightsuitmambypambysatanstool out of office NOW!

[wndycty]

17. Happy Happy Joy Joy

:kick:

[11cents]

18. Wow

Now, frankly, I've long regarded Moore as something of a jerk, but the bit about Clark defending his right to dissent on CNN was quite moving. Good on ya, MM.

BTW, last night on Joey Scar's show Clark said that when he was in Vietnam he was fighting for the men beside him, but he was also fighting for the people at home who were demonstrating against the war. He politely reamed Al Haig for saying that we shouldn't dissent during time of war, and added that if dissenters had been heeded before the Iraq war began, we'd be in better shape.

[spooky3]

19. I appreciate MM's listing of WC's positions

it's helpful to have some substance to review.
And thanks, Dove..., for posting it.

[chookie]

26. Clark said that?

>>He politely reamed Al Haig for saying that we shouldn't dissent during time of war, and added that if dissenters had been heeded before the Iraq war began, we'd be in better shape.
<<

What a guy.

Now -- this is what a REAL man is like. Hearing intelligent, courageous statements after all the lying blither blather of His Chimperial Highness is certainly a reason to rejoice.

It's going to take more than winning back the White House at this CRITICAL time; it's also going to require the Reich mindset to be seen to be defeated in the public eye. We MUST expose them for what they are, what their agenda is! Otherwise, they will go back to sabotaging whatever initiatives the Democratic president puts forth. Clark is one of the magnificent men who does this. God bless him. I love him.

I think we have a number of excellent candidates running -- I enthusiastically support a number of them, and respect them all. I'm wild about General Clark too!

It would be tremendous to have General Clark at the helm.

Whoever your candidate is -- always keep your eye on the prize -- what its going to be like to have a high caliber man back in the White House after this terrible time our country has been dragged into!

[Oracle]

20. I received this same e-mail from MM...

However, I thought Moore was supporting Dennis Kucinich, as am I.

I actually send Wesley Clark $20.00 about two month's ago via his web site.

I hope Clark runs.

My presidential choices...

1) Dennis Kucinich

2) Wesley Clark

3) Fred Dean (ex 49er pass rusher.)
Just kidding, Howard Dean

[Pastiche423]

22. Fred Dean!

A key member of Dwight Hicks and his Hot Licks!

Now I remember where the chant, Dean, Dean, Dean in my mind came from.

[Oracle]

25. Dan Hicks.and his Hot Licks, from SF...saw them at the Fillmore...

I think Dean was there for two Super Bowls 82 and 84...maybe Fred wouldn't be such a bad choice?

[Pastiche423]

29. Is that where it came from?

Dwight Hicks was a defensive back during the 81-82 season. He along w/Ronnie Lott, Fred Dean, Earl Cooper (Coo, Coo, Coo), Eric Wright and Nehemiah (could he run or what?) were the hot nightlife boys in the city then.

You stirred some fun memories.

Yep, Dean got at least two Super Bowl rings.

But if you're thinking about recruiting someone from that time, I'd say, let's pull Hacksaw Reynolds off of his island. lol

Sorry, din't mean to hijack the thread. Carry on...

[Oracle]

30. As much as I love "Hacksaw" I would guess...

he's a republican.

[11cents]

41. Dwight Hicks, sadly is a Republican

The GOP wanted him to run against Ellen Tauscher for Congress.

[Oracle]

46. Hopefully, not probable, he learned a thing or two from...

J.C Watts, as the token republican black face.

[knight_of_the_star]

83. I sent him money too

I was kind of leery about donating to him until he released his video saying he will be announcing in approximately one week. That convinced me completely.

[PopSixSquish]

21. Good for Michael

He can certainly write like a house on fire. And I loved his repetition of Clark's quote “If you are the type of person who likes assault weapons, there is a place for you -- the United States Army. We have them.”

I may have to borrow that sometime.

[Kahuna]

23. Damn! Mike is parroting me almost word for word.

Hi Mike! :hi: At least give kahuna some props..

Okay... Maybe it's just that great minds think alike. This is war damnit! That's what I've been saying. The hell with all that other dumb stuff. Bottom line. Bush must go!

[Terwilliger]

24. So does everyone who agrees with Moore's sentiments here...

agree with what he did at the Oscars?

[Oracle]

27. Absolutely,

It needed to be said on a world forum, about Bush's deeds! No?

[Terwilliger]

32. I dont think the people who support Clark

think much of Moore's actions at the Osacrs. I had to fight them at the time, so why would they cahnge now :shrug:

[Dookus]

33. I stood up and cheered....

MM at the Oscars.

And I'm a HUGE Clark supporter. I don't see the disconnect at all.

[Terwilliger]

34. really?

you think Clark will say Bush stole the election, call for Bush's impeachment, or anything resembling that?

[Clark Can WIN]

82. You are not understanding the logical seperation

of supporting the actions that MM took in voicing his opinions and lock-step agreement with everything MM says. Exactly how or why that would or even should transefer to Clark I have no idea. There's a tremendous difference between supporting someones right to speak out vs. agreeing with every word they say.

[Pepperbelly]

65. but ..

it waws Clark who Moore ackowleges defended him publicly and on national television.

[union_maid]

28. I didn't have a problem with what he did at the Oscars

I had a HUGE problem with what he did about Nader and always will to some degree, but this goes a long way toward making me feel a lot better about him. I realize that's not going make or break his day, but I'm happy about it.

The whole thing about awards shows clamping down on political statements didn't sit too well with me. It's not really a free speech issue. They have the right to script their shows any way they like, but hell, the only time those shows were any fun to watch was when Marlon Brando was sending Native Americans to make statements, and when we were on the edge of our seats when Jane Fonda won, wondering, would she or wouldn't she. (She didn't, for those who are under 50.) Since those days ended, they haven't been worth watching.

[Terwilliger]

31. oh blah blah blah

its like "Oh, I love Bill Clinton...no, he's a Democrat, I dont care what he does wrong"

[diplomats]

35. I have no idea what you're talking about

???

[Terwilliger]

37. Its not hard to understand

union_maid there thinks Michael Moore is a great guy INASMUCH as she agrees with him...then he's an idiot.

Wonderful compartmentalization, don't you think?

[spooky3]

43. I didn't.

If it's ok for him to use the awards show as a bully pulpit, then it's ok for the neocons. Is everyone happy to hear them pontificate during their acceptance speeches? Better to just make it off limits to everyone.

But this is a tiny matter relative to the other problems we are trying to address.

[Terwilliger]

45. yes, so you reject Moore's "endorsement" of Clark?

ok...thanks for clearing that up

[spooky3]

64. ?????

Putting your opinion on your own website is appropriate. People go there presumably to read it. Using an awards show to express your political views (when that is not why you were selected and that is not why the audience came) opens the door for all others to do the same.

[Ardee]

69. excuse me but....

Moore was there BECAUSE of his opinions and the way he expressed them on video.With our nation facing so many crisis points both domestic and foreign it is important that every opportunity to speak out is utilized...

Ive never criticised Clark though I have stated that I didnt know whether he was a democrat or republican and I wished he'd either enter the race or withdraw publically. After reading Moore's commentary and after recalling that the last general in the WH didnt do such an awful job Id love to hear more about him.But not from Clark supporters from Clark himself, after he enters the race.

It is worth noting that some of the first posts were sort of silly, condemning posters for bashing Clark here when noone had done so....if a basher posts in the forest and noone hears him does his bashing make a point?

[Sterling]

78. Exactly

It's not like he won an award for "American Pie 2". He was awarded for a movie based on his political beliefs. I did not see any reason for him to pretend otherwise.

I think I like Clark from what I see. I just wish he wouldn quit playing around and get in or out of the race.

I think he or Dean could beat Bush. Together they would be unstopable.

I still reserve judgement on both of them though. It is important to maintain objectivity I believe. I thought Clinton (both of them) would be the remedy for what is wrong with our country, look how wrong that turned out to be.

[spooky3]

79. I'll agree to disagree with you.

[Oracle]

52. Besides Rah Rah

What else can be said? they have no foundation.
Moore was correct! it needed to be said, if not there, where? It was a true opportunity...one with any conviction doesn't ask...when...

[Clark Can WIN]

81. People are always using the oscars

To talk up their particular cause or issue. I completely agree with his sentiments. If they do not want unpopular issues presented at the mic they should just simply ban ALL soapboxing at the Oscars.

[David Zephyr]

36. Michael Moore Has Chosen a Democrat This Time!

And a good one at that.

Here's a toast to all the Clark supporters from a Dean supporter.

:toast:

[Terwilliger]

38. this time, David?

so, if he picked Nader before, what he says is suspect?

[Oracle]

39. Ha-Ha...

Exactlly!

[11cents]

40. Wrong before, yet right now. Hard to get your mind around this?

It's also possible to think someone's annoying in general, but right on target about particular things. Like Oscar speeches and presidential endorsements. It's even possible to think someone's an all-around jackass and yet acknowledge that he's done something classy on a given occasion.

Sorry if you lose sleep considering these astonishing facts.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

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

[Terwilliger]

44. I'm sorry that you're so unable to understand

If Joe Schmo liked Ralph Nader in 2000, but now he likes someone you like, what makes his opinion on that second matter more correct?

You should probably tend to discredit Moore entirely rather than lend credence to the idea that he may have been right to support Nader in 2000

[Oracle]

50. Because if Joe Schmo thinks the way I do...now he's correct.

and now we can all accept him here on this forum...no need for descent.

Let's all think alike for the common good and to defeat George Bush.

This is NOT a democracy, why, did you think it might be?

You don't need my help by any means...TW, but I just can't help it.

[union_maid]

53. I think you've got it backwards

I don't look to Moore or anyone else to decide who to support. I can figure that out for myself. I don't really care who he supports in the primaries, but his willingness to look at a viable candidate and his apparent realization that beating Bush is a very important goal this time around is welcome, given that he's a very public figure. Plus, it seems to indicate that his support of Nader, and the resultant aid to the Bush campaign might actually be a result of political naivete rather than a cold indifference to those who would suffer the most under this administration. If he recognizes how bad Bush is now, then maybe he really didn't the first time around, even if many of us did.

[Oracle]

56. You truely believe the Greens DIDN"T see the evils of George Bush..

"If he recognizes how bad Bush is now, then maybe he really didn't the first time around, even if many of us did.'

Is this a backhanded compliment..

You question the sincerity of the Green party? Please, please…

[Terwilliger]

72. many of you....except Democrats

who thought it was ok to fuck around while George Bush crept up in contention. Yeah, Nader was right.

[dsc]

66. The same principal

that permits me to mark problem one on a test wrong if it says 2-2=1 and the second one right if it says 3-2=1. Once wrong doesn't mean always wrong or else grading would be very easy indeed.

[Terwilliger]

71. Michael Moore is a test?

maybe Moore was 3-2=1 when he supported Nader. You, as the Democrat teacher, interpret it as 2-2=1 and you're wrong.

So, if you think Moore is ok to support Clark, then you must give him the credit for being right about everything else, because I'm pretty sure he hasn't gone back and lamented over his choices in 2000.

[dsc]

75. sp people are either always right or always wrong?

BTW I think Moore is being a hypocrite in endorsing Clark and was waiting for an article to quote before I posted. If you look down thread you will see a post about Moore's realtime opinion of Kosovo. Given that he is more than a little hypocritical to be supporing Clark now. That doesn't make your utterly stupid point right though.

[Terwilliger]

77. shit, you're not dumb

but you seem to want to say that everybody who doesn't agree with you is wrong...Michael Moore has enough "sense" to support Clark, but not enoough when he supported Nader? You make him out to be a a Coke machine...not a man.

Moore is acting very weird here, and it's not something I understand, but you'll notice he doesn't actually endorse Clark

[dsc]

87. I will give you that it is odd

for the reason I site below.

[GiovanniC]

86. This Is Bad News For

All of the people who voted for Bush but now regret it and want to vote Democrat in 2004. They were wrong in 2000... by your logic, they are now wrong forever.

[Terwilliger]

88. by your logic, Ralph Nader was right

is that what you're saying?

[DisgustedTX]

47. And Moore likes KUCINICH!

"And Dennis Kucinich is so committed to all the right stuff."

I would love to see Moore "endorse" Kucinich. How many have purchased "Stupid White Men"?

[jiacinto]

49. Interesting

Moore likes someone from the military. I will reserve judgment in regard to Moore to see if he returns to his 2000 like behavior next year.

[Oracle]

51. What "behavior " might that be?

[KFC]

54. Advocating Nader, for starts

Sure didn't help Gore in Florida.

[Oracle]

57. Nor did Gore!

[Terwilliger]

60. myth

http://prorev.com/greenpages.htm#2004

This fits in well with the liberal myth that Gore lost the 2001 election because of Ralph Nader. In fact, Gore lost the election because he was a poor candidate, ran a bad campaign, and failed to separate himself morally from Clinton. Further, not only the Democratic Party, but the liberals within it, made it absolutely clear over eight years that they had no interest in, nor would respond to, the sort of politics espoused by Greens.

A study by the Review of national and Florida polls during the 2000 election indicates that Ralph Nader's influence on the final results was minimal to non-existent. The Review tested the widely held Democratic assumption that Nader caused Gore's loss by checking changes in poll results. Presumably, if Nader was actually responsible for Gore's troubles, his tallies would change inversely to those of Gore: if Gore did better, Nader would do worse and vice versa. In fact, the only time any correlation could be found was when the changes were so small - 1 or 2 percentage points - that they were statistically insignificant. On the other hand when, in September of 2000, Gore's average poll result went up 7.5 points over August, Nader's only declined by 1 point. Similarly, in November, Gore's average poll tally declined 5.7 points but Nader's only went up 0.8 points. In the close Florida race, there were similar results: statistically insignificant correlation when the Gore tally changed by only one or two points, but dramatic non-correlation when the change was bigger.

During almost all of 2000, Bush led Gore with the major exception of a month-long period following the Democratic convention. During this high point for Gore, Nader was pulling a running average of 2-4% in the polls. While it is true that during October, Nader began pulling a running average of 6% at a time when Gore was fading, Gore continued to lose ground even as Nader's support dropped to its final 3%. In other words, despite the help of defectors from Nader, Gore did worse.

Further, as Michael Eisencher reported in Z Magazine, 20% of all Democratic voters, 12% of all self-identified liberal voters, 39% of all women voters, 44% of all seniors, one-third of all voters earning under $20,000 per year and 42% of those earning $20-30,000 annually, and 31% of all voting union members cast their ballots for Bush. In other words, Bush did better among these traditional liberal constituencies than did Nader.

[Ardee]

92. Common sense and fact quail before emotional nonsense

Terwilliger, you and I know that Nader didnt cost Gore the election, as apparently do at least one or two political thinkers. But I believe that you also know that nothing you post, no link you point to, no amount of logic or reason will sway these folks from pointing fingers and uttering their chosen mantra,"it wasnt my fault it was Ralphies fault, he makes me do bad things, it isnt my candidates fault it isnt my party's fault"....blah,blah,blah....

Most children grow up and accept responsibility, as they accept the fact that sometimes things dont turn out the way they want them too, real world stuff.Most reasonable and responsible and, most importantly, successful adults gain the ability to look inward for reasons for failures, for ways they can do better next time out.

If these people were as loyal to their party as they think they are, if they cared for their party as much as they claim they do,they might roll up their sleeves and do the hard work of analyzing why that party has failed to win in two elections now, and the stolen '00 race should NEVER,EVER have been close enough to steal,and take steps to ensure that the same mistakes arent made in yet another election.

But, sadly for the Democratic Party and for the nation as well, not to say the whole damn world, these grown up children prefer to maintain the schoolyard mentality of blaming any any and every outside factor as it is just so much easier than internal criticism.......We are not to blame it was that damned Nader guy, yeah thats the ticket.....

[jiacinto]

55. Advocating and campaigning for the Green Party

nt

[Oracle]

58. How does one reply, except to submit...

http://www.ericblumrich.com/gta.html

Turn it up LOUD!

[Sancho Panza]

67. a question

I do not recall Moore ever saying anything denigrating about members of the armed forces. I realize you do not like him because of Nader and Florida and such, but how is that related to his opinions on military personnel?

I have seen his movies and read his books - even saw most episodes of TV Nation, and countless interviews on news programs. I never once heard Moore say anything that could be construed as disrespectful of people serving in uniform.

I am quite positive that Moore wants what is best for the United States members of the armed services: Bring them home safely, and let peace prevail.

[VolcanoJen]

61. Joe Conason has relatively new info in yesterday's Salon

I haven't seen this reported anywhere else yet, so...

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2003/09/12/clark/

(subscription or ad-viewing required)

Excerpt:

Wesley Clark will reach a decision about whether to run for president over the coming weekend, according to a source who has been in close touch with him. When I asked for an educated guess as to whether the retired general's answer will be affirmative, that same source -- who has known him for more than a decade -- rated the probability of yes at "90 percent."

That is only one source, however reliable. But others who have observed Clark lately say that he seems to be preparing rigorously for the next Democratic candidates' debate on Sept. 25, focusing his studies on economic and domestic issues. And even insiders who are not so sanguine about a Clark candidacy agree that what they are hearing indicates he will run.

Clark has quietly approached top Democratic operatives in key primary states. One of New York's very best has agreed to run his campaign in a state whose primary often turns out to be critical. (No doubt that operative and others in New York City were pleased to discover that Clark's wife Gertrude is an Irish-American from Brooklyn.)

[tameszu]

62. Clearly sarcasm

Ater all, there's no way anyone interested in peace and practical politics might actually look beyond labels and bad Internet sources, right?

Michael Moore might not always play it straight, but the reason I like him is because he plays to win. And Moore knows Clark is a winner and liberal enough to make America a whole lot better than it is now. Liberal enough to be proud to say he's a liberal. Liberal enough to have kept a good chunk of his liberal beliefs in a decidedly non-liberal environment. So why not give up a futile and frankly immoral (precise because it is futile, and knowingly taking futile action to satisfy your irrational syumbolic attachments in the face of real suffering can only be described as wrong) politics of personal purity and look in an open-minded fashion at someone who is both liberal and a potential winner?

[phegger]

63. whoa...

calling someone immoral because they have a different political perspective seems a bit strong....there has been so much waffling and so much compromise that I can understand how some folks just refuse to compromise (in their view) any more

...while I think that's admirable in principle, in politics, unfortunately, more often than not it's just setting yourself up for failure

I don't think we can afford to fail this time

[shrike]

68. When Clinton supported Clark earlier this week, everyone flamed the

guy. "I'll never support Clark if Clinton supports him." How quickly things change.

[tjdee]

70. If Clinton AND Moore can get behind Clark, that should say something.

I wasn't one of those people who blah blahed about Bill Clinton--I like him.

But I think it says a lot that Bill Clinton, who apparently to some DUers is GOP-lite (gee, you have to wonder why all these "GOP-lite" guys aren't just Republicans, why they bother to even call themselves Democrats :eyes: ), and Michael Moore, who is VERY liberal, both could unite behind a Clark candidacy. Therefore unifying the party. Um, that's a good thing.

[shrike]

73. Oh, I'm not dissing Clinton -- or Clark or Moore

Just commenting on the irony of it all. That anti-Clinton Clark thread was mighty nasty, but today ...

I've heard Clark, I've read some of his views, and so far I'm impressed. If he can unify the party then he may be exactly what we need.

[tjdee]

76. Oh yes,

I knew you were just commenting on the irony, and not deriding either guy....I just decided to expand on that, LOL.

[dsc]

74. This was Moore's opinion of Kosovo in real time

http://www.commondreams.org/kosovo/views/mmoore.htm

What a sad, pathetic man Bill Clinton is. Though many have criticized him for dodging the draft, I actually admired the fact that he refused to go and kill Vietnamese. Not all of us from the working class had that luxury, and tens of thousands of our brothers died for absolutely no damn reason. For this "anti-war" President to order such a misguided, ruthless -- and, yes, cowardly -- attack from the air is a disappointment of massive proportions.

end of quote

Given Moore's inability to endorse Gore over that gun case out of Michigan (the one where a little kid shot another one)I find it incredible he is talking so nicely about the person who carried out the above attack.

[Ardee]

93. Thanks for that link

I challenge everyone to read those eloquent, if dated, words and ask if you reach the same conclusion as dsc.........

...more of those words:

So here's my solution:

Stop the bombing immediately.
Get the Russians, whom the Serbs trust, in there to be the peacekeepers and help resolved the situation.No American or NATO forces on Kosovo soil. Russia can do this in spite of the wanker in charge, Mr. Yeltsin. The Serbs will let them in. Let's get them on board instead of alienating the Russians even further.
Let the Orthodox Church play a major role in bringing about the peace. The Serbs are mostly Orthodox and a strong move by its Patriarch could do a lot to ending all the bloodshed.
Look, I'm not an expert on any of this. I'm mostly busy getting my show on the air each week. But as I sign my 1040 today, I must admit that I am partly responsible, as an American citizen who pays his taxes, for this war and I must encourage whoever I can to join me in demanding an end to this now.

Last fall, many of us participated in an incredible act of protest by throwing a bunch of right-wingers out of Congress. We believed that they were trying to overturn an election on the basis of someone's private sexual life and his lies about it. We won, and the Republicans are now chopped liver. Good riddance.

Now, it is time for all of us to stop Clinton and his disgusting, hypocritical fellow democrats who support him in this war. It is amazing to watch all these "liberal" congress members line up behind the President. In a way, I'm glad it's happening, if only to show the American people there is little difference between the Democrats and the usually war-loving Republicans. Aren't you getting a kick watching the Pat Buchanans and the Henry Hydes sounding like pacifists! These politicians can change stripes at the drop of a hat (or bomb) because, ultimately, they are the same animal, participants in a one-party system that tries to fool the people by going by two names ("Democrat" and "Republican").

Please call or write your member of Congress, send a letter to the editor, let the Democrats know we have had it with the whole lot of them. This is OUR country, not theirs and the corporate interests they really represent. It's time to start taking it back.

Each cruise missile that is launched could have built a dozen schools or hired another hundred teachers or provided health care to a thousand people. Those millions of dollars could have been spent saving lives and educating children. Every night, Clinton isn't just bombing Yugoslavia, he's bombing you.

Yours, Michael Moore

[e-mail]

http://www.michaelmoore.com

http://www.theawfultruth.com

[Wonk]

84. kick (there's a dupe)

[tedzbear]

85. This is no coincidence...

Yesterday I was complaining on DU that Dean seemed to be waffling on the Iraq issue. Also, some of his platform is not quite liberal enough for me. Now here is Mr. Moore suggesting that a general might be the better man!
Wow. I pray Clark will run, if only to keep Dean honest. I might even switch from Dean if he does...

:kick:

[Julien Sorel]

91. As someone who started out neutral on Dean,

then started liking him, but now finds himself a little south of neutrality, I have to ask: when has Dean ever been 'honest' that Clark's candidacy could somehow keep him there? It's a gross cheapshot, I'll be the first to admit, but there's some accuracy in it as well. I'm finding myself disgusted by all the front-runners except Lieberman at this point, specifically because they all lack the ability to demonstrate some simple integrity. At least Lieberman is sticking to his guns. Sure, he's an ass, but he's an ass with backbone. I haven't seen that from the other two leading candidates, and the game is getting on.

Whatever Dean says during the primaries, he is what he is: a Democrat on the right of the party. There's nothing wrong with that -- he isn't like Zell Miller or anything, and it will help in a general election -- but this pretense that Dean is somehow liberal, which his supporters (like Dean himself) alternately adopt and deride, is tiresome.