Can someone explain something to me about Clark?

[Jackson4Gore]

Don't get me wrong, I like Clark as a person. I thought he would be a good candidate last year, but wasn't that successful. Frankly, he didn't impress many folks during the campaign. Yes, he is a five star general and should be honored for that...but why do people here like him so well. The guy admitted he voted for Nixon, Ford, Reagan (Twice), and Bush 41. It just seems odd to me that some folks here who bash mods like Bayh, Lieberman, ect. support Wes. I just don't see what is special about Clark. I have a candidate for 08 and would support Clark and work for him if he became the nominee, but I want to know what makes him unique to you guys.

Thanks!

[cidliz2004]

1. You have over 1000 posts and you are asking about Clark?

How could you be on this board and not know about the countless attributes of Clark? You either are joking or you are being saracastic. There is so much written on this board about Clark that it amazes me that you could even ask this question.

[tokenlib]

2. Wes isn't the moderate type you infer...

Wes Clark is rather progressive, even liberal on the environment, tax policy, and other issues. From his military career, he knows what is necessary to defend America, and he knows what is not necessary. The best way I can put it to you... is that Dennis Kucinich has spoken many times about the bloated, out-of-control nature of the defense budget--as President, Wes Clark would be the best democrat to deal with the issue.

[Tom Rinaldo]

3. I invite you to drop by the DU Clark Supporters Group

Look around, there are a lot of informative threads about Clark. Two of my favorites are a collection of original Draft Clark letters written by a wide variety of people from all across the country, and another is a listing of favorite Clark quotes, but there is so much more, important links, personal experiences, etc. etc.

You will have to scroll through several pages to find some of the important threads, the group has been pretty active. I'm going off to bed, maybe I'll run into you there later.

Here is the link to the group: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=235

[ThorsHammer]

4. He's also "electable"

A lot of people, myself included, like him for his military and Southern backgrounds, is well spoken, and does not have a voting record to be used against him. It might just be me, but he seems like the type of man who would stand up against the neocon plans.

[FrenchieCat]

5. For the record....

Clark has four stars. No such thing as five stars any longer.

Clark did not vote for Bush 41. He voted for Clinton both times, Gore and now Kerry.

I am rather surprised that you would know so little about Clark....when he ran in the primaries.

I knew a lot about the other candidates....cause I had to choose one.

As a person of color, here's is one of the things I like about Clark (did you see Hotel Rwanda yet?):

Waiting for the General
By Elizabeth Drew
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/16795
Clark displeased the defense secretary, Bill Cohen, and General Hugh Shelton, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, by arguing strenuously that—contrary to Clinton's decision— the option of using ground troops in Kosovo should remain open. But the problem seems to have gone further back. Some top military leaders objected to the idea of the US military fighting a war for humanitarian reasons. Clark had also favored military action against the genocide in Rwanda.

http://www.crookedtimber.org/archives/001104.html
Clark was almost alone in pushing for a humanitarian intervention in Rwanda.

Pulitzer award winning Samantha Power for her book "A Problem from Hell" : America and the Age of Genocide
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/006054164...
endorsed Wes Clark http://www.kiddingonthesquare.com/2003/12/redeeming_wes...
The following excerpts from Power's book give the details. The narrative surrounding the quotes was written by another person commenting on the book. Note especially Power's last comment below on Clark's pariah status in Washington:

General Clark is one of the heroes of Samantha Power's book. She introduces him on the second page of her chapter on Rwanda and describes his distress on learning about the genocide there and not being able to contact anyone in the Pentagon who really knew anything about it and/or about the Hutu and Tutsi.

She writes, "He frantically telephoned around the Pentagon for insight into the ethnic dimension of events in Rwanda. Unfortunately, Rwanda had never been of more than marginal concern to Washington's most influential planners" (p. 330) .

He advocated multinational action of some kind to stop the genocide. "Lieutenant General Wesley Clark looked to the White House for leadership. 'The Pentagon is always going to be the last to want to intervene,' he says. 'It is up to the civilians to tell us they want to do something and we'll figure out how to do it.' But with no powerful personalities or high-ranking officials arguing forcefully for meaningful action, midlevel Pentagon officials held sway, vetoing or stalling on hesitant proposals put forward by midlevel State Department and NSC officials" (p. 373).

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.

She details 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."

"Yet in Washington Clark was a pariah. In July 1999 he was curtly informed that he would be replaced as supreme allied commander for Europe. This forced his retirement and ended thirty-four years of distinguished service. Favoring humanitarian intervention had never been a great career move."


Samantha Power's comments on Wesley Clark at the December 17, 2003, press conference in Concord, New Hampshire after the General's testimony at the Hague .

"Good afternoon. It's a real honor for me to be here with General Clark, and with Edita Tahiri. My name is Samantha Power. I spent about seven years looking into American responses to genocide in the twentieth century, and discovered something that may not surprise you but that did surprise me, which was that until 1999 the United States had actually never intervened to prevent genocide in our nation's history. Successive American presidents had done an absolutely terrific job pledging never again, and remembering the holocaust, but ultimately when genocide confronted them, they weighed the costs and the benefits of intervention, and they decided that the risks of getting involved were actually far greater than the other non-costs from the standpoint of the American public, of staying uninvolved or being bystanders. That changed in the mid-1990s, and it changed in large measure because General Clark rose through the ranks of the American military.

The mark of leadership is not to standup when everybody is standing, but rather to actually stand up when no one else is standing. And it was Pentagon reluctance to intervene in Rwanda, and in Bosnia, that actually made it much, much easier for political leaders to turn away. When the estimates started coming out of the Pentagon that were much more constructive, and proactive, and creative, one of the many deterrents to intervention melted away. And so I think, again, in discussing briefly the General's testimony, it's important to remember why he was able to testify at the Hague, and he testified because he decided to own something that was politically very, very unfashionable at the time."

http://www.kiddingonthesquare.com/2004/01/the_subtle_ar...

[FrenchieCat]

6. Also, I liked his stance on the confederate flag...

"The Confederate flag flies in the face of our most deeply-held American values - diversity, equality and inclusion. I believe that the only flag we should fly is the one that brings us together - the stars and stripes - and that the Confederate flag should never, ever be flown on public buildings."

Democrats should all condemn the Confederate Flag.

http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/local/7166307...
http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/politics/7732...
http://www.abcnews4.com/news/stories/1103/108751.html
http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1507782

Standing when everyone else is sitting, risking your own career for your beliefs, and being willing to speak out on issues that are not "popular" is what I am talking about.

The fact that Wes Clark helped write the Amicus Brief supporting Affirmative Action in the U of Michigan case; wrote OP-eds, which appeared in Major publications in support of having all Democrats "condemm" the Confederate Flag; named African-Americans to top spots in his campaign (Rangel, Andrew Young and Jamaal--his spokesperson, as well as others); promoted Black officers consistently in great numbers during his 35 years of service as an officer; and did speak of the "stolen" 2000 election elsewhere other than Black churches or Black venues; was the only high ranking officer who made major noise about what was happening in Rwanda at the time that it was happening; and wrote extensively on subjects such as Aid relief and recently Darfur ..... are all powerful acts of combined consistency in support of Black people (not just African Americans but Black people worldwide) and issues that affect them directly.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/2...
Clark discusses women's rights, affirmative action
MANCHESTER, N.H. (AP) — The head of the federal Commission on Civil Rights and several other prominent women endorsed retired general and presidential hopeful Wesley Clark on Sunday as he restated his support for affirmative action and women's rights.
http://www.texasforclark.com/affirmative.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2004-07...
Out of time in Darfur By Wesley Clark and John Prendergast
For the past year, the international community has shamefully acquiesced to the crimes against humanity occurring daily in the Sudanese province of Darfur.

Jesse Jackson Sr. praises Clark's AIDS plan
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2003/12/3/182120/311
Bush approach to AIDS fight wastes time, money
December 2, 2003
BY JESSE JACKSON
As Printed in the Chicago SunTime
Democrats and many Republicans have called for a larger effort. Ironically, it took a general -- Gen. Wesley Clark -- to put forth a truly bold program. Clark would double Bush's commitment and build upon World Health Organization programs rather than spurn them.

He sees this as a centerpiece of what he calls a ''preventive engagement policy'' to make America a source of hope in the world. Perhaps it takes a general, knowing the scope and the limits of our military strength, to deal aggressively with a disease of mass destruction.

http://clark04.com/speeches/033 /
the sad fact is that we have not overcome. When black Americans are twice as likely to be out of a job, twice as likely to live in poverty, and a third less likely to have health care - then we have not overcome.

When hundreds of thousands of black men sit behind bars and millions never finish school - then we have not overcome.

When our President has the audacity to visit the grave of Dr. King one day, then dishonor his memory the next by appointing an anti-civil rights, anti-voting rights, anti-justice, anti-American judge -then we have not overcome.

And when a political party can suppress the vote and steal a presidential election - when a man can sit in the White House when the only vote he's won took place in the U.S. Supreme Court - then my friends, we still have not overcome.

Today, 140 years after President Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation, 40 years after Congress passed the Voting Rights Act, one person, one vote is still not a reality in America.

We saw it in the election of 2000, and right here in South Carolina in 2002, when African Americans were turned away from the polls, purged from the rolls, and intimidated when they showed up to vote.

Today, all too often, it's one person one vote if you live in the right county. And if you vote at the right machine. And if your name is on the right list. And if your skin is the right color.

Well, last I checked, there was no "if" in the 15th Amendment. Last I checked, one person one vote wasn't just a slogan - it was the highest law of this land. And I'm not going to rest until every single American can cast their vote and make their voice heard.

Because I grew up in Little Rock Arkansas - and I have a duty to ensure that those nine brave boys and girls from my hometown didn't face down a mob for nothing.

Because I spent 34 years in the United States military fighting for our freedoms, and I'm not going to stop now.

Because in my heart, I'm not a politician, I'm a soldier. I'm a proud product of the most integrated institution in America. That's why I've always believed in equal opportunity and affirmative action.

For three decades, I served side by side with brave men and women of all races, creeds and religions under one flag - the American Flag. We fought for that flag. I gave my blood and buried my men under that flag.

And let me tell you, no Charles Pickering or John Ashcroft or George W. Bush is going to take that flag away from us. No Tom DeLay or Dick Cheney or Trent Lott is going to take us down the sad, hate-filled path back to that other flag over there.

Half a century ago, Dr. Martin Luther King led us in a great struggle to redeem the promise of our Constitution for all our people - to create a nation where all of us are truly judged not "by the color of skin, but by the content of character."

And today, it's up to us to continue his work.

AND....
http://clark04.com/speeches/024 /
In 2003, the African-American unemployment rate is 10.2 % -- nearly double the national average.

In 2003, 7 million African Americans don't have health insurance. The rate of African Americans without health insurance is a third higher than the national average.

In 2003, nearly a quarter of African Americans live in poverty -- twice the national average. And nearly 1 in 3 black children live in poverty - that's five million children.

And in 2003, as far as we've come, African Americans are still too often robbed of their most basic civil right: the right to vote.

That's what I want to talk about today.

In March 1965, now Congressman John Lewis led the famous voting rights march from Selma to Montgomery, right over the Edmund Pettus Bridge.

On Bloody Sunday, hundreds of peaceful marchers were attacked by police, and many lost their lives.

But their sacrifice brought Lyndon Johnson the support he needed to sign the Voting Rights Act.

That Spring, addressing a Joint Session of Congress, Johnson stated for all the world to hear, that it wasn't just African Americans, but all Americans, "who must overcome the crippling legacy of bigotry and injustice." And he promised the nation that "we shall overcome."

The sad truth is - we haven't.

In the year 2003, we are far from the fundamental ideal of "one person, one vote."

In America, your vote is your voice. That's what our democracy was built on. And our nation can't move forward if we silence the voices of any of our citizens.

We all know what happened in the 2000 election, when the only vote that George W. Bush won was the one that took place in the chambers of the United States Supreme Court.

It was an election marred by broken voting machines, outdated technology, and hanging chads.

It was an election where blacks and other minorities were disproportionately turned away from the polls, purged from the voting rolls, and intimidated when they showed up to vote.

And in the end, when it came to counting up the votes, the ballots cast by African Americans and other minorities were disproportionately undercounted. The victims of this debacle were people like Lavonna Lewis.

On Election Day 2000, Lavonna, an African American woman and first-time time voter, was told by a poll worker that the poll was closed.

As she turned to leave, that same poll worker allowed a white man to walk in and get in line to vote.

Sadly, Lavonna was just one of thousands of minorities who were shut out of the voting booth.

This is not what those four little girls gave their lives for.

And in many ways, the response to the election was as much of an injustice as the election itself.

After what happened in Florida, there was a whole lot of hand-wringing, but no real change.

People called for investigations, for election reform, for a complete overhaul of the voting system in America.

What did they get?

No serious investigation.

No election reform.

Nothing but a congressional bill that fewer than half the states have enforced.

The result is that today, it's only one person one vote if you live in the right county.

And if you vote at the right machine.

And if your name happens to be on the rolls.



AND....
General Wesley Clark Op-Ed for Detroit Free Press
General (ret.) Wesley K. Clark
October 22, 2003
As Appeared in The Op-Ed section of the Detroit Free Press
http://clark04.com/articles/010 /
...In the University of Michigan affirmative action case this year, I joined military and political leaders in an amicus brief...
There is one thing the opponents of affirmative action have never wanted to admit: it works. I know this first-hand from my thirty-four years in the United States military. Affirmative action was essential to creating the diverse officer corps we need to defend our country. Throughout my career, I have seen the benefits of seeking out qualified minority candidates for leadership positions - and I am a beneficiary of their leadership.

My commitment to affirmative action is based on my belief in all that unites mankind. But I am also committed to affirmative action because it works. Our president, on the other hand, seems unable to pull himself away from his right wing advisors long enough to examine the facts. The Bush Administration argued against affirmative action in the Michigan case. And they've done everything possible to undermine diversity, not promote it.

Conservatives say they are opposed to affirmative action "on principle." They invoke "quotas" to scare people into thinking they will lose their place at the table. But this is a pessimistic view of America's future. If we make room for everybody, there will be more room for everybody. An integrated America, where each and every American is treated with the same dignity and respect, is a better America for everyone. Until that day arrives, every day the thousand small and not-so-small judgments, discriminations, and insults that some Americans must endure is an affront to us and all we stand for. And we are not going to remedy these injustices by ignoring them.

Georgia Mayors Support Clark
Little Rock - Today, Wes Clark's presidential campaign received the support of Mayor Floyd Griffin of Milledgeville, who joined General Clark in Savannah, and Mayor Jack Ellis of Macon.
http://clark04.com/press/release/147 /

Wes Clark Welcomes Aboard Mayor Michael Coleman As Ohio State Chair
Little Rock - Today, Wes Clark proudly announced that Columbus Mayor Michael Coleman is joining the Clark campaign as a Senior Advisor and the Ohio State Chair:
http://clark04.com/press/release/140 /

Young And Rangel To Serve As First Two Co-Chairs Of Clark's National Campaign Steering Committee
Little Rock - Today in Columbia, SC, the Clark campaign announced that Ambassador Andrew Young and Representative Charles Rangel will serve as the first two Co-Chairs of Wes Clark's National Campaign Steering Committee. The committee will provide guidance on major issues involving both policy and strategy and will help organize other leaders throughout the country.
http://clark04.com/press/release/138 /

Clark Turnaround Plan to Lift Two Million Children Out of Poverty
New York - Today, in Harlem, Wes Clark was joined by Congressman Charlie Rangel as he announced the fourth part of his Turnaround Plan for America. Clark pledged to lift two million children out of poverty by 2008.

"There is no issue more important than our children's future," Clark said. "And there is no issue where the Bush White House's failure of leadership is more evident."
http://clark04.com/press/release/121 /

Wes Clark's Statement on DC Voting Rights and Home Rule
"It is fundamentally unfair that the citizens of our nation's capital have no vote in Congress. Equal and meaningful representation is what inspired our fight for national independence. Taxation without representation was unacceptable to Americans two hundred years ago. It is just as unacceptable today.
http://clark04.com/press/release/110 /

Also read his many policies and plans for urban renewal, child care, etc, etc, etc...

Native Americans and Hispanics also supported Wes clark in "droves". The Native American Times endorsed him, and many Hispanic leaders did as well.

You should read up on Wes Clark.... He is quite amazing!

[ZootSuitGringo]

7. Wow, I didn't know some of these things about Gen. Clark!

What about the original poster. Was this a hit and run? Why he is not participating in the thread he started. Looks like FrenchieCat did a lot of his work for him.

Well, I read it, and I am the better informed for it. So it did serve a purpose.

Thanks.

[dogman]

8. He voted for Repubs then, they vote in support of Repubs now.

He is unique because he is honest, how else would you know he voted for Repubs in the past? He is special because he is a leader who would like to see this country led in the traditional Dem domestic policies with a strong foreign policy that would lead the world by example, not military might.

[Kinkistyle]

9. As if, if you voted repub in the past you are forever condemned.

No matter what you believe in and profess publicly and out in the open at the moment, having voted for Reagan or Republican in the past automatically condemns you from being a good Democrat. I guess we can start tossing thousands of Democrats (including me) out of the party now? :eyes:

[CWebster]

10. Clark would make an exceptional Senator

He is a natural--dignified & intelligent.

Some have suggested that Dean is wasting his potential as Chair, but I disagree. If you think of the party as an ailing patient, then Dean is like the physician who makes a diagnosis and administers the cure. He is straight, inclusive and enthusiastic - and most of all, I get the impression that, although he seems to love being in politics, he is driven for the right reasons as opposed to ambition or ego.

I have been watching-listening to the Senate on C-Span lately and I really feel this is the arena in which Clark could use his talent and skill most effectively. It would be good for the South to have him represent them.

[Donna Zen]

11. Arkansas has 2 Democratic senators

...Clark has campaigned for both of them.

And besides:

Let me begin at the beginning of my decision making; a process that started several years ago. I knew then and I still believe that Democrats must get the weak on foreign policy meme off the table. Yes, they tried with Kerry, although from get go I knew, and you must have known, that all of the antiwar history was out there--just waiting. Once Kerry was the nominee, I had hoped that somehow that could be neutralized; it was not to be. In fact, I would pose that this last election cycle has only made it worse.

Brand identification:

Naomi Klein recently did an interview discussing “Brand identification.” It was not the first time I had seen issue come up with its partner of “framing.” Out here in a rural red county, I can testify that the beast is alive and well. Most of my neighbors vote red, not because they agree with republican policies--hell, they either don’t know what those policies are or don’t care--they vote because what the republicans symbolize: NASCAR, country music, etc. To disagree with a republican policy is to attack these voters personally.

So how do we change our brand identification? Main Stream Media is not going to help; not because they are controlled by the republican party, but because they are the republican party. Any non-winger that is permitted on the MSM is merely a token. So how?

It will not be easy, but I suggest that we start with a man whose first name is General. Oh_ and grew up poor and brilliant in a red state without any political baggage. Your alternative is to fight the unwinnable, rehabilitate an image that is so ingrained that it would take every campaign contribution just to supply the brain bleach, and invent credentials that will fall short and fail the sniff test. Why would anyone want to chose that route?

Funny thing about “brand identification” it is alive and well on the left too. Many people who would be the first to tell you how open-minded they are, will tell that they won’t vote for a general. I have a confession to make; I had that bridge to cross too. I looked, I read, I made phone calls, I wrote to friends who know Clark, I followed every wacky lead to smears that I found on dozens of internet boards...I am now absolutely amazed by this incredible man. And he doesn’t lie. Imagine.

http://www.alternet.org/story/21099

Clark’s biggest hurdle has always been winning the nomination, not the general election.

Recently I was reading an interview with Frances Piven, a Green--I think, and she made a very good point: that without a Democrat in the White House, we cannot advance any progressive or liberal policies. Two million people could surround that WH everyday 24/7 and it will make no difference because bush doesn’t have to listen to people who don’t support him, and won’t. A Democrat would look out of the Oval Office and see his pissed off base. And if you want to go to the Pentagon for pork, you going to need to send a general. Ditto on DU, SOA, and ending the war. By the time 2008 rolls around, the only money available for demestic programs will be closely secreted pork in the Pentagon. Without available funds, any Democratic running will not have the latitude needed to propose solution to America's problems. That has always been part of the rightwing thinking of the "starve the beast" philosophy: back the Democrats into a position where only tax-increases can fuel campaign promises, and you have a GOP presidency for our lifetimes. Only someone with the trust granted by a four-star resume can assure the populous that we can both scour the Pentagon pork and be safe, can run on the platform we need to win. Only Nixon could go to China...and that is reality not some meme.

Considering recent events within the Democratic party, you should feel very positive knowing that Gore, a good man, is now in the cat-bird seat. I who voted for and supported Gore may disagree with you, but I do not mean to be disagreeable. As a liberal, I just want to throw off this rightwing yoke, and move to a progressive future. Clark is our best chance to make that move.

When Clark entered the race I thought that everyone would realize that we’d been granted one of life’s scant miracles: A four-star-brilliant-Rhodes Scholar-masters-in-economics-war-winning-anti-war-foreign-policy-expert-charismatic-down-home-liberal general.

How many of those do you think we’re going to get? How many are there?

[CWebster]

12. With your first sentence I disagree

On another thread I posted an editorial cartoon in my local paper this morning: The Deficit was represented by a Macy's parade balloon, to which "W" commented the usual crap about cutting spending, whereas the "Donkey" was saying "Lets just buy bigger clothes". Despite the reality, the manufactured belief was that the Democrats were irresponsible spenders, ignoring fiscal realities. The same is true on the "weak on defense" meme. Kerry based his entire campaign on offsetting that particular framework--and they crucified him--despite the reality of Bush being an AWOL chickenhawk.
Fundamentally we can not use their framework to measure strength or weakness, we have to turn it back on them and demonstrate that aggressive militarism is a failure not a strength. We can not compete with the Republicans in their appeal to people's worst inclinations, their ignorance, their racism, their association with militarism as patriotism. What will work for us is an economic populism that wages class war. The children of the poor make the sacrifices, they die in the wars that rich men start for oil, their benefits are slashed, their jobs are lost, their opportunity and security is removed. Play that footage of Bush addressing his "have more" base everywhere, while portraying the Democrat as the champion of the common man.

The Democrats lost when they became the party of the Yuppie and turned their back on the working class, Labor and minorities. It was a calculated strategy which served to isolate them, have them appear as isolated elitists, selfish, shallow and lacking conviction and sincerity.

The reason I see Clark as a natural Senator is because it seems appropriate to his style, which is exactly why Senators often don't make good populists. I do wish he would get his face out there though, he is a much better spokesman than Biden.

[cg]

13. Leadership

Who better than one who has the credentials and credibility of a 4-Star General to "demonstrate that aggressive militarism is a failure not a strength?"

"You will determine whether rage or reason guides the United States in the struggle to come. You will choose whether we are known for revenge or compassion. You will choose whether we, too, will kill in the name of God, or whether in His Name, we can find a higher civilization and a better means of settling our differences." - General Wesley Clark

[BootinUp]

14. great quote you pulled out there

thanks for that one. :)

[xkenx]

15. Even though

I had been a Clark supporter by the time he announced his candidacy, if I had to single out the defining or clinching moment which got me inspired like no one since Bobby Kennedy, it was Clark's town hall meeting in Heniker,NH right after the first Dem. candidates' debate in which he participated. I was amazed by his presence and his willingness to straightforwardly and knowledgeably answer any question, no matter how hostile or trivial. What really blew me away was his response to a question from a woman who had been in the armed forces for 25 years. She was visibly shaking and hostile, saying that she was a victim of abuse without any resolution, even though she went through the system in an attempt to have her abuser brought to justice. She asked Clark what he would do about that kind of situation if he were president. He looked her in the eye and apologized for the military because he was a commander in that military, even though, in his commands, nothing like that was tolerated but he could understand her frustration with the system. He said he is all about equal opportunity, non-descrimination, that if he were president, he would be working hard to make sure that all the military worked even harder toward those goals. He also sensed her discomfort and told her that he would be happy to speak with her privately, to learn more so that he might be able to help more in the future. He was so sincere and empathetic, the woman virtually dissolved by the end. I found out the next day that it was a rape that she was talking about and that Clark did spend 20 minutes with her privately after the town hall. It was at that point that I decided that I had to actively campaign for this man, that if he asked me to walk through walls in his support, I'd only have to ask, "When" and "How big a wall."
The video may still be in C-SPAN's archives. Search videos for Wesley Clark. The town hall is well over an hour; this particular woman is around 30-32 min mark.