Need some help regarding Clark

[graelent]

I was wondering if someone could give me a bullet point overview of why Clark should be President.

I have 2

- General of US Army and Commander of NATO Forces in Kosovo
- Rhodes Scholor.


For full disclosure, I am a Dean supporter, but am interested to know what so many others see in him that I just do not. (Although he would be a fantastic VP choice)

[KittyWampus]

1. High Q Rating

Good Hair
Nice Smile
Firm Handshake ( I have that on good authority)

He mentioned Kabbalists...
Returning Buffalo to the Great Plains


Cutting the Pentagon Budget
Returning Media Regulations to Pre-Reagan levels.

[bowens43]

3. yes, these are important

Good Hair
Nice Smile
Firm Handshake

What have we come to as nation when we consider these to be qualifications for a good president?

[ibegurpard]

7. ROFL!

Sometimes my mouth drops open at some of the stuff I read on here.

[KittyWampus]

39. Ah, So That Clark Has Mentioned Cutting Pentagon Funding

makes your mouth drop open???

Or did you fail to read that...

or, in this day and age, are you REALLY going to try and say that coming across well on tv doesn't matter.ooking

[lurk_no_more]

44. don't be embarrassed

Clark has that effect on a lot of people, it's called awe!



Just food for thought from….”JAFO”

[mikehiggins]

14. What have we come to

when "what should be" matters more than "what is"?

If a nice smile, a firm handshake and good hair will beat George Bush then that's what our candidate should be.

Unless you think four more years of Bush is better than lowering your standards.

[KittyWampus]

38. Bowens- I Put Those First 3 Attributes There ESPECIALLY FOR YOU

and DU'ers like you.

Yes, they are true and matter somewhat... but you failed to see the other attributes I listed below...

You proved a point I was trying to make in the most EXEMPLARY way!

Thanks.

[dobak]

47. yes

LOOKS

JFK won because of it

It helped Clinton

It killed Dukakis (unibrow)

It hurt Gore (too uptight looking - robotic)

---

In today's TV saturated world, looks play a part. That is not good, but it is the truth.

[bowens43]

2. Seems to me

your number one disqualifies him. We have a civilian government. There is no place in it for a general, retired or otherwise.

[LiberalBushFan]

4. disqualifies?

You could argue that it's not very useful perhaps (I disagree), but how can you say it disqualifies him? Can you name the first US President?

[IndianaGreen]

20. I believe he was General George Washington

who as President warned the nation about "foreign entanglements" in his Farewell Address.

[Donna Zen]

46. Generals are well known for hating war.

It is always the chickenhawks who cause the most problems.

[mikehiggins]

6. disqualifies?

Golly, I was checking the Constitution and didn't notice that part. Where does it say that?

[Democrats unite]

8. They should have told that to...

Washington, Grant, Eisenhower. But really what was Gearge Washington thinking?

[graelent]

10. Washington and Eisenhower, fine

But should we really be holding up Grant as a good President?

[wyldwolf]

13. Shows a basic lack of understanding of our government structure

[graelent]

24. Hmmmm

OK, I don't understand your response.

While I completely disagree that being a General automatically discounts you from being a President, I don't see how it displays a lack of understanding of our governmental structure.

The Military and Government are two totally different animals, for nessisary reasons.

Our Military is based on a rigid heirarchy and an absolute respect for the orders given to you. As it should be because that saves lives in battles.

Our Political structure is based on manuvering a vast web of checks and balances, compromise and the ability to exchange your support for some legislation for someone else's support of your legislation.

These two things require a totally different outlook and approach.

So, what about the governmental structure does he not understand.

[wyldwolf]

41. Simple...

He said:

We have a civilian government. There is no place in it for a general, retired or otherwise.

Clark is retired - which now makes him a civilian.

By his standards, though, (Clark being former military so he doesn't belong in the governemnt), anyone with prior military experience shouldn't be there, right?

The statement, There is no place in it (government) for a general, retired or otherwise shows a lack of understanding.

[elfin]

5. More

- Foreign Affairs pragmatic experience - negotiating etc.
- Dealing with housing/education/medical concerns while leading huge numbers of military, which can translate to non-military
- Demonstrated leadership in turning around bad situations whether a base or a war.
-Actually already known and RESPECTED overseas
-A demeanor that takes no shit, but does not alienate
-Can speak eloquently AND intelligently about complex issues in terms people can understand (his years of teaching experience show here)
-Projects an "aura" that says "You'll be safer with me in the White House"
-Understands that recovery means JOBS - especially investing in and promoting those in new energy developments
-Truly understands and supports the positive benefits of Affirmative Action, having seen it work in the military
-Easy on the eyes and the ears - important in this visual culture

[graelent]

9. I don't know much about the military

but How did Clark deal with housing/medical/education concerns. Do those normal fall under the perveu of the Commander of the Army?

[Indiana_Dem]

15. i was just researching what you are asking....

I've been looking on his website, I think it's clark04.com. He has so much on that website about his plan that I think I could take days. He doesn't talk in detail because his plan is definitely very detailed!!! lol Alot of it sounds pretty good. Must have some good people helping him.

[Gloria]

21. Yes, in fact, he just said in the rerun of his NH event this am, that

he was responsible for 44,000 children and was involved in everything from curriculum to the Parent-teacher organizations. He tried to get Head Start in Europe. He was responsible for housing, etc. He fought for money. In short, he was in the thick of the nitty gritty of people's lives.

[robbedvoter]

29. yes. schools curriculums and potholes on the road - all in his care

Posted here earlier:

I've read there are people who don't think that Clark's experience is as valuable as Dean's experience as governor of 600,000 in Vermont. But in addition to being Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, Clark was also the Commander-in-Chief of our European Command at the same time. I've looked up the numbers, and this means that he was in charge of more than 200,000 members of army families.
It is interesting to consider the differences between being a governor and a commander. Being a governor certainly introduces you to working with a legislature, though I've gotten the impression that Dean's relationship with Democrats in his legislature wasn't that good, since he was to the right of them. I understand that Clark worked with the national branches -- Congress and the Supreme Court -- asking Congress for additional money for the families in his charge and asking the Supreme Court to support affirmative action. Interestingly, to the left of what those institutions seemed inclined to do. As commander, Clark's interests weren't in how many votes he could get from his people, of course. From what I can gather, he seems to have been interested in improving things for them, nevertheless, and from what he has said, as commander he had to concern himself with all of the needs of his people on what sounds like a very personal basis. Issues like spousal abuse, medical concerns, education for the kids.... Maybe it's just me, but I imagine the feeling toward those in his charge as being protective and more hands-on from top to bottom, than would be the case when you're a governor thinking about re-election and when so much of your attention has to be taken up with the politics of involvement with a state legislature. And I think it's human nature when more than one person is in charge -- as is the case in any of our states, where the governor, state legislature, federal government, and local governments are all responsible for governing -- that no one feels as personally responsible and people fall through the cracks.
Just some thoughts....
The URLs for the info are as follows:
...62,000 active component troops and 3,000 reserve component troops in 19 brigade equivalents, supported by 11,000 civilians and 11,000 local national employees; with 100,000 family members and 4,000 retirees. This structure equates to a Total Army population of 199,000 (of which 180K are in Germany, 8K Italy, 6K BENELUX, 5K elsewhere). http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/eucom.htm
This one gives the number of troops in Europe during Clark's administration.
http://www.fas.org/man/nato/news/2000/e20000104scope.htm

[Clark Can WIN]

34. This is from a 1998 report to congress

Gen. Wesley K. Clark

Commander in Chief, USA
U.S. European Command

INTRODUCTION
"Our strategy for enhancing US security recognizes that we face diverse threats requiring integrated approaches to defend the nation, shape the environment, respond to crises and prepare for an uncertain future."


A National Security Strategy for a New Century

The White House

October 1998


<snip>
RESOURCE PRIORITIES - AN INVESTMENT IN THE FUTURE

Quality of Life

"The judgement, creativity, and fortitude of our people will remain the key to success in future joint operations."

Joint Vision 2010

Our most precious resource is the service member and his or her family. Quality of life (QOL) is one of my very top theater priorities, as it is inextricably linked to readiness, retention, the reinforcement of service core values, healthy family life, high morale and mission accomplishment.

The quality of our housing, medical care, schools, religious services, public facilities, services and recreation activities define the American standard of living. The expectation of the DoD family, serving across the vast USEUCOM Theater, is no different.

Our goal is to ensure all USEUCOM forces enjoy the optimum achievable standard of living; comparable to that of the society they are pledged to defend and that of their DoD counterparts stateside.

Our most important 1998 QOL strategy objective was to analyze and quantify the impact QOL has on readiness. We took "expert testimony" from installation commanders and senior enlisted advisors from across the theater. Their conclusions were identical: quality of life is critical to personnel readiness and retention. They are not satisfied with the quality of the programs in this AOR. With the exception of Equal Opportunity and the Chaplaincy programs, none of the other 23 total program areas evaluated compares favorably with its CONUS counterpart. Family housing and barracks, pay and retirement, health care and dependent education were consistently identified as lagging the farthest behind. We must do better in compensating service members and families whose well-being is constantly taxed through repetitive deployments and the stress of family separations. USAREUR soldiers, for example, are often deployed two to three times during a normal overseas tour. Nonetheless, USAREUR continues to enjoy record retention rates. Our analysis tells us that these rates correlate directly to our mission focus while emphasizing soldier and family programs.

Overseas troops, civilian employees and families often rely solely on DoD-provided programs for support because they do not have the same off-base alternatives as their CONUS counterparts. Dependent education is a prime example. Today over half of USEUCOM service members have families with children in school. The DoD education system is the 27th largest US public school system, with 160 schools serving 78,000 students. USEUCOM provides logistical support for 118 of these schools and 50,000 students. Funding new programs such as all-day kindergarten and improved student-to-teacher ratios are extremely important to USEUCOM QOL. Your support for this funding is crucial.

Individuals responding to a recent theater-wide survey targeting dependent-education issues identified dependent education as the most important of eight QOL support-program areas. Our children deserve a world-class school system with curriculum and programs to match the best. This is the standard our military personnel and their families expect and deserve.

Athletics, music, art and associated after school activities are as critical as the core academic subjects of math, science, history and English.

Many schools do not offer vocational programs. They have been forced to choose between college preparatory or vocational offerings, because their budget cannot support both. We must take aggressive action to expand vocational, technical and school-to-work programs.

Additionally, I believe in the importance of linking Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) programs to the National Education Goals and Presidential Initiatives. We must work toward establishing an 18:1 student-teacher ratio for grades 4-12. We also need to push for program-based staffing. More counselors, technical support and special-needs teachers to match curriculum requirements not school size. I would also like to see theater-level School Boards that would participate in all DoDEA related activities.

The health and well being of our active duty and family members is increasingly important as we face an increased military operations tempo with decreases in recruitment and retention. We have an increasing responsibility to provide a world-class health and dental plan, with uniformity of medical and dental benefits and standardized processes for beneficiaries as they move throughout the world.

The $50M funding received via FY99 Emergency Supplemental Appropriation for Morale, Welfare and Recreation, and Personnel Support for contingency deployments was greatly appreciated and will improve the QOL for all those deployed. Additionally, I fully support the pay and retention issues addressed by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the service component leaders. Improvement to QOL issues, in the long run, will serve to improve every CINC's manning concerns.

Housing

Last year Congress supported all but one of our FY99 Military Construction and Family Housing projects. I am grateful for your support, as are the troops and their families who benefit from these projects. The challenge of eliminating and renovating large numbers of inadequate housing is still a huge obstacle we attack on a daily basis. Those of you who have visited our theater know that more than one-half of our family housing and barracks fall far short of the DoD standards. Barracks constructed by the German Army in the 1930's have only received minor improvements and necessary maintenance and repair. Quarters built during the Marshall Plan era still have original kitchens, baths and utility systems.

Our Service Components have used a "worst first" strategy to upgrade our housing inventory. Current Defense guidance requires elimination of gang latrines by 2008 and elimination of inadequate housing by 2010. All services are on track to meet these goals. However, many of our service members will retire before their quarters are brought up to those standards.


The top-line increases reflected in the FY00 budget provided significant additional resources for Real Property Maintenance (RPM). However, remaining shortfalls in RPM accounts may further exacerbate the inadequate state of our housing. After must-fund requirements (fire protection, utility and trash removal bills, contracts and civilian pay) are met, there are precious few dollars left to do much more than emergency housing repairs. Commanders are making every effort to stretch their limited budgets, but our need is greater than the resources available.


Congress should remain committed to fixing housing in this theater.

[mikehiggins]

11. He can win

The reason many people support Wes Clark is that they beleive he can beat George Bush, and none of the other Democratic candidates has much of a chance of doing that.

We aren't putting Clark forward as the salvation of the Democratic party, or an inspirational leader who will lead America into the new milleniusm and spreade truth, light and justice over all the peoples of earth.

We think he can beat George Bush and we cannot see why any of the other candidates will inspire enough independents and disgruntled conservatives and moderate Republicans to vote for them to overcome the naturaly advantage an incumbent President in time of "war" (fictional or otherwise) brings with him to the debate.

We are not looking for a savior, or a "Father of our Nation"; we are not looking for a Daddy or a God-King. We are looking for a chance to save this country from four more years of Bush and we think we have found that chance in Wesley Clark.

How much more plain and simple can it be?

[ibegurpard]

12. I DON'T think he can win.

plain and simple.

[mikehiggins]

23. Well and good

Isn't that more to the point than "he was in Waco" or "Shelton says he has no integrity" or whatever?

I don't give a rat's ass if Dean seals all his records and his laundry list, sold Vermont to the Inuit or eats small children for breakfast. I don't beleive he can win a race against George BUsh.

We'll start to get the answers in 1000 hours or so, but let me say in passing that I'd rather deal with people like you who are candid and straight forward than a million Dean supporters who start their posts with "I have an honest question about Wes Clark".

We all have our reasons for our beleifs. By this point, everyone of them has been trampled to death all over the DU and dozens of other discussion boards.

We'll all know the answer soon enough.

[graelent]

25. Not sure if that was directed at me

but I really did, as a Dean supporter, have some honest questions about Clark.

[mikehiggins]

32. Well then, obviously it was NOT directed at you. QED eom

[graelent]

16. That makes sense

although I disagree Clark is our only shot.

But couldn't Clark fall into the the same problem as the Democrats in 2002? If we want a warrior, why not just re-elect Bush?

[mikehiggins]

30. Oh, well its because we aren't looking for a warrior

we're looking to oust George Bush. It just seems to us that someone with an actual military background (as well as a first rate academic background AND a winning personality AND etc.) has a better chance of winning than a regular politician. Independents and conservatives and moderate Republicans have seen our "regular" politicians for years and years and years (and Dean, by the way, is just a variation on the theme) and they don't vote for them.

Clark is an acceptable alternative to a truly odious President who has betrayed the expectations of ALL segments of the population. He can rely on as much of the Democratic "base" as any of our candidates, he can make inroads into the heretofore almost universally GOP military vote and he can attract numbers of people who simply will not vote for a Kerry or Lieberman or Gephardt or Dean.

The numbers, therefore, after a hard fought and vicious campaign, have a much better chance of coming up in Clark's favor than in any of the other candidates.

I'd also suggest in passing that considering Bush a "warrior" is patently rediculous. He used his Daddy's connections to avoid serving in Viet Nam, failed to prevent the al Queda attack on the Trade Center and has bungled both the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions. Like all of his kind his involvement with war is based on his willingness to send other peoples children to fight one.

[BootinUp]

17. I'll give the ones important to me

I could post a list of his accomplishments and qualifications but you can go here if that is what you are looking for: http://clark04.com/about/
http://clark04.com/records/

These are the important points for me:

He will return Integrity to the White House

He will effect change in the way campaigns are run and politics are debated because of the example he is setting

He will run a progressive administration you really should read his issues papers on Healthcare, Jobs, Education, there are over 20 of them. (modeled in many ways on the success of the Clinton years). His Healthcare plan has been studied and a paper written by a 3rd party and a comparison to other candidates plans.

He will re-build relationships with our Allies

He is up to the challenge of beating Bush (I estimate better than 50% chance of winning)

He will restore Americas image that has been tarnished the last 3 years.

[ibegurpard]

19. He will "return integrity to the White House"?

Yeah, where have I heard THAT one before? Sorry, but this is all fluff to me. A poster above you made a more convincing argument.

[BootinUp]

26. Fluff?

Hey its my opinion which I expressed, but are you trying to say these things are not important?

I believe that if long time Dean supporters listened a little to Clark (not just debates, but maybe the townhall meetings) many of them would see he is not in this for love of politics, he is in it because he loves America and is concerned with what is happening to it. I have no doubts about the opinions expressed that you call fluff.

[Egnever]

37. I try to watch him as often as I can

But every time I have been able to catch him so far all I have heard him talk about is the military. I am just not interested even a little bit in more military. In fact I am sick of military.

It may be unfair to clark because his whole life centers arround the military but if he wants to catch my vote I dont want to hear military out of his mouth unless someone asks him specifically about the military.

Till he stops with the GI joe crap I will never seriously consider him.

Papers and whatnot of stances are great but I dont buy into them until i can watch the person actually speak about them without reading from a sheet. Till then I write it off as something he was told to say.

May or may not be fair but thats my personal test for candidates and so far clark hasnt passed. He is awsome on the military questions though.

[Clark Can WIN]

42. The problem is everybody asks him about the military so much

he rarely gets to talk a much as he would like about other issues. And of course at the debates, all of them, they've acted like he's STILL IN the military or something. Frustrating. But I'm sure if you make an effort you'll get to hear him speak about them more.

[ibegurpard]

40. That's valid

We all arrive at our decisions differently. Sorry for offending you.

[IndianaGreen]

18. Try this for size...

Wes Clark has attacked Bush relentlessly for his his reckless foreign policy and for abandoning nearly 60 years of American participation in collective security with our allies in order to prevent aggressor states from attacking other countries.

Wes Clark has chastized the Bush regime for jeopardizing American security by pursuing a Bush family vendetta against Saddam than to try to seek out the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks on America.

Wes Clark, IMHO, could become another George Marshall--one of the greatest statesmen this country has ever produced.

[robbedvoter]

22. Watch this movie - says it better than words:

http://www.clark04.com/americanson/
and his words:

"Next year, when we're up against George W. Bush, one thing's for certain: He'll spend his days and nights challenging our patriotism. He'll question our national security credentials. And he's already run ads doing that. He'll question whether we'll be able to fix the mess he's created in Iraq. And whether we'll be able to root out al Qaeda and bring bin Laden to justice.
But let me tell you what will happen if he tries to do that to me: I'll put my 34 years of defending the United States up against his three years of failed policies any day." 

[Tatiana]

27. He's got some intriguing ideas on health care.

-Wants every American to have the same great health care benefits our Congressmen (and women) do by extending their healthcare plan to every American. This will allow a greater emphasis to be placed on preventative care.

-Will bring back Fairness Doctrine

-Supports paper-verified balloting

[Auntie Bush]

28. No help with your Question

I wish I had time to answer your question...(It is such a long list) but I have too much to do now. Please pose this question again after the holidays and you will get lists of answers. In the meantime you can find all the help you need on his website.

To sum him all up in a nutshell...he has gravitas!

[robbedvoter]

31. Visit this link:

http://clark04.com/issues/
You'll find briefs on every conceivable issue

[graelent]

33. I have been to www.clark04.com/issues...

And read every position paper (and there are a lot of them), and I have read Dean's as well (quite a few of those too), and I like Dean's more.

[catherineD]

35. that's legit, but....

if the odds of Dean winning over Bush are 10-1 against, and the odds of Clark winning over Bush are 2-1 in favor, it is worth considering electability seriously. Because the results of your preference of Dean's policy positions may lead you to a situation of 4 more years of Bush's policy positions. Are you sure that the differences between Clark and Dean are that great? Or do you rate Dean's odds much better than I do? I see Clark positioning himself to run in the general election, by winning African-American voters while at the same time not implying that he's going to take back the country from Republicans, so that he is more likely to win Independents and some Republicans. He is also, of course, more likely to win military votes and southern votes, which can swing states in the electoral college.

I'm also not sure I believe all of Dean's position papers, because of his record in Vermont as a moderate Democrat who fought against the liberal Democrats in his state. I suspect he would be to the right of Clinton should he be so lucky as to ever occupy office.

[Jerseycoa]

36. What is it

You like more?

[andym]

43. Because he best neutralizes some of Bush's advantages

And because he seems to be a man of his word and moderately liberal to boot.

See this thread for my analysis.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4654

[kerry-is-my-prez]

45. Has a masters in Economics and was an Econ. Professor

I like that he is for the Kyoto Treaty and for the Univ. of Mich Affirmative Action Plan.

[KT2000]

48. I really want this man to be president

What Clark brings to the table: intelligence; historical and global understanding; a desire to solve problems for the common good; a desire to bring the country together; charisma and leadership abilities to just do it;

I believe he strikes the right tone to bring this country back together and embrace the values of our constitution.