Does Clark's poverty -- Dean's Park Ave background influence your vote?

[MIMStigator]

Clark has a background like Clinton's but Dean's is like *'s. Clark's bio video spends alotof time on his roots. Will this matter in the general election?

[Jim Sagle]

1. If Clark wins the primary, it will.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

63. I trust Clark more than I do Dean, that's for sure

Lots of people on DU may feel differently, since Clark is military. But I trust a regular working class American who make it to the top through hard work and intelligence before I will some silver spoon trust-funded Yalie yuppie like Dean, any day.

Dean's newest cause is allowing his prep school friend to drive snowmobiles in our parks? What crap.

It's not my only issue, but I can relate to Clark on TV more that I can Dean, that's for sure.

Clark reminds me of my Dad's slightly nerdy but super-genius best friend. Dean reminds me of the asshole boss in Dilbert comics.

[XanaDUer]

2. No...

Although I have a place in my heart also for Dennis K because of his poor background.


:)

[stickdog]

3. Does Clark's recent 1.6 million lobbyist payday vs, Dean's obvious

nonchalant attitude concerning materialism influence your vote?

[IranianDemocrat]

5. Link?

I just guess evidence isn't needed when bashing clark constantly.

[RetroLounge]

8. Like the links provided in the original post?

eom

[HFishbine]

16. Here's part of it

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7380-2003Sep26?language=printer

[maddezmom]

18. they both have about the same in the bank

Doesn't matter to me when they got it, some are born with it and some work for it. It's called life.

[stickdog]

42. Well,. that's what all the pimps say.

Please tell us how much of Dean's money is inherited.

[SahaleArm]

50. Probably very little as his mother is alive

Of course when he was bouncing around between undergrad and med-school it didn't hurt to be from wealth:).

[SahaleArm]

51. Dean has more set aside - On the order of $5-million

Clark's net worth is between $3 million and $3.5.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-clark13dec13,1,2211218.story

[SahaleArm]

53. Wrong - Most of it came from paid speeches - Link

For 2001, Clark's earnings from writing, speeches and sitting on boards of directors amounted to $421,955. Last year, that figure was $971,885.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-clark13dec13,1,2211218.story

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

64. it's easy to be "nonchalant" about "materialism" when you're filthy rich

It's easy to be "nonchalant" about "materialism" when you're filthy rich like Dean.

If I were Clark, spending my life earing a pretty middle class salary, I'd cash in when I could too. Dean's family money allows him his self-righteousness, and he can keep it. bobo

[stickdog]

74. No, it isn't.

If it were, the world would be a far better place.

[Clark Can WIN]

70. Clarks LIFETIME nonchalant attitude concerning materialism

when he could have abandoned the service for a whole boatlaod of money is more impressive to me. His years of service to his country rather than skipping out and making excuses is more impressive to me. (Dodge if you want, but stand behind that decision, don't WAFFLE) Clarks perseverence in the face of adversity is more impressive to me. Clarks intense brilliance and genuine idealism and compassion are more impressive to me.

This is a freaking long list that could go on, but you get the idea.

[stickdog]

73. Clark killed people in Vietnam and Kosovo!

If anybody deserves to cash in his influence using the Pentagon/contractor revolving door it's him!

[SahaleArm]

75. Lookout - It's the attack of the killer electric bikes n/t

[stickdog]

80. Look out, it's the privacy attack of the counterproductive, indefensible

CAPPS II no fly list -- brought to you by Clark & Axciom.

[SahaleArm]

81. Attack of the conspiricy theorists...

http://library.ardemgaz.com/ArchiveSearch.asp?SearchWords=Acxiom&inField=Headline&SortBy=DateDesc&DocsPerPage=20&eventStartDate=09%2F24%2F2003&eventStopDate=09%2F24%2F2003&go=+Execute+Search+

Acxiom’s stake in terror war under fire
Arkansas Democrat-Gazette September 24, 2003 JAKE BLEED

Little Rock’s Acxiom Corp. has spent most of the two years since the attacks of Sept. 11 looking for government contracts to help fight the war on terror. It has found the contracts. Now it has a fight on its hands. The data-management company is involved in a growing dispute over the release of information on millions of airline passengers to a Defense Department contractor last year.
Acxiom sold that contractor demographic data on roughly 2 million airline passengers — about 40 percent of those involved — as part of its role in the war on terror.

As a result it now faces criticism from a Washington, D. C., privacy rights group, the Electronic Privacy Information Center.

That group filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission on Monday, claiming that Acxiom and JetBlue Airways Corp. violated privacy policies that both companies publicize online, and thus violated federal laws against deceptive trade practices.

JetBlue became the target of an investigation by the Department of Homeland Security on Monday for its role in releasing the information. Lawsuits filed in Salt Lake City and Los Angeles against the airline seek class-action status, Bloomberg News reported Tuesday. "They made a lot of assurances to the public about how information — personal information — would be handled," said Marcia Hofmann, a spokesman for the privacy rights group, "when in fact, as far as I knew, there is no evidence that no one was being told that this information had been sold."

Airline security is an area Acxiom had hoped to work in since as early as February 2002, according to lobbying reports filed with the U.S. House of Representatives.

Wesley Clark, an Acxiom board member and now a presidential front-runner for the Democratic Party, had lobbied for the company, according to those reports, in the areas of "information transfers, airline security and homeland security issues."

Clark was not involved in the contract addressed in the group’s complaint and no longer lobbies for Acxiom, company spokesman Dale Ingram said.

Calls to Clark’s campaign staff were not returned Tuesday.

Privacy is a touchy subject at Acxiom, which says it handles information on "a vast majority of U.S. households" for both itself and its clients, Ingram said.

In the past, the company has claimed to have information on 96 percent of U.S. households. "Building trust is central to our business, to our clients and our consumers," Ingram said. "We are very interested in setting the record straight."

Privacy is also a major issue at the FTC, which in recent years has gone after several major corporations — including Microsoft Corp., Gap Inc., and Eli Lilly and Co. — after suspecting them of making false statements about consumer privacy policies. "Privacy is hugely important," said Jessica Rich, an assistant director at the FTC. "Its profile is just as high as ever."

According to the Electronic Privacy Information Center’s complaint, a defense contractor in Huntsville, Ala., Torch Concepts Inc., received information on 5 million JetBlue passengers in September 2002 as part of an airline security project.

The contractor had hoped to develop a system using demographic data to identify potential terrorists among airline passengers, a task it described as finding "a needle in a haystack without knowing what the needle looks like," according to a presentation Torch Concepts gave on the project to a defense industry association in February.

JetBlue’s information was insufficient to create an accurate model, however, according to that presentation, and in October 2002, Torch Concepts purchased demographic information on 40 percent of those passengers from Acxiom.

That information included passengers’ sexes, whether they owned their homes and how long they’d lived there, incomes, number of children, Social Security numbers, occupations, and number of vehicles, according to Torch Concept’s presentation.

Acxiom’s information allowed Torch Concepts to "develop an acceptable database," according to the contractor’s presentation, and conclude that "known airline terrorists appear readily distinguishable from the normal JetBlue passenger patterns."

Torch Concepts had claimed it needed the additional information for a project to improve "military base security," not airline passenger screening, according to an Acxiom statement issued Tuesday.

Torch Concepts did not return phone calls Tuesday.

The privacy rights group’s complaint quotes Acxiom’s privacy policy, which states that the company "believes individuals should have access to information a company has about them," that notices should be provided that "explain the collection, use and distribution" of personal information, and that "most importantly, individuals should have the choice to opt out of the use of their data."

The complaint states, "There is no evidence that Acxiom provided notice to or obtained the consent of any passengers whose personal information was sold to Torch Concepts."

Acxiom denies it violated its own policies. In a statement issued Tuesday, it said its policy states that it provides personal information to "government agencies for the purposes of verifying information, employment screening and assisting law enforcement."

Ingram said: "Data is a critical element in making our country safer. In this case we believe the data was being used to protect the men and women on military bases who are helping protect us."

[stickdog]

82. I'm not talking about the JetBlue scandal. I'm talking about the CAPPS II

scandal. Are you saying Clark had nothing to do with lobbying for Axciom to get a piece of CAPPS II?

[SahaleArm]

83. I have no idea - He probably sat on his duff and collected..

paychecks like every other board member on the planet. The 4-stars adds to the companies cache and helps give legitimacy and contacts. He was on the board or working with 6 different companies at the same time. Most of his time was spent with Wavecrest and giving paid speeches.

[Padraig18]

4. Nope.

I was as poor growing up as Gen. Clark, but I don't make 'sympathy votes' for candidates any more than I made pity f***s for trolls, when I was still dating.

[MIMStigator]

6. Not a sympathy vote but thinking he can relate to the ordinary man

whether someone understands the problems of the ordinary working man is usually a big issue.

[Padraig18]

11. I don't think his having been poor gives him unique insight into that.

None of the Kennedys were poor, and Sen. Kerry's not poor, etc., yet they all have insight into and sympathy for the problems of ordinary people.

[RetroLounge]

13. are you saying that 4 star Generals who spend

34 years of honorable service to our country in the military are ordinary? How about Doctors?

Come on. Face it. No one that runs for President is ordinary, or even really remembers what that means.

After 20 years in congress or the senate, how is one even in the same neighborhood as ordinary?

DK is probably the closest, and maybe Sharpton. The others? Vague memories.

"My Daddy was a mill worker..."

So f*cking what?

[RetroLounge]

7. Oh, yeah, nothing worse than a Democrat

who came from a successful and wealthy family. Can't have anything like that. Lets leave the money to the Repugs only.

And those Damn Kennedys, with their money.

In other words, it matters not one iota.

But if this is the reach you need to compare Dean to bush*, as pathetic as it is, please proceed. We all need the laugh.

Oh, by the way, Clark, Dean and Bush* are all one Syllable, so I guess that makes Clark, Dean AND Bush all the same.

Hmmm. Cheney, Kerry, Edwards, Gephardt. 2 Syllables all.

Will this (shallow bullshit) influence your vote?

[MIMStigator]

9. an easy life of wealth makes it harder to relate to ordinary american

That's the point

[Padraig18]

20. Do I have to become Black, to relate to the problems Blacks have?

No, and that's precisely the direction your 'argument' suggests...

[MIMStigator]

23. No but it helps

eom

[Padraig18]

24. No, it doesn't. n/t

[FrenchieCat]

35. I'm black....

Biracial actually.....although I've experienced some discrimination...because I am fair complexeted I don't get the same type of discrimination as some of my brothers and sisters...

White people, for the most part, have no clue when it comes to black folks and what they deal with everyday.

They can't imagine having to sit your 5 year old down and explain why the little white girl that would'nt hold her hand did that....

then have to explain much of American history.....while making sure that you are telling it in a way where she won't get some kinda of inferiority complex......

Not white folks, for the most part have not clue....But they like to think that they do. After all that a superior trait...to be able to feel everyone's pain.....

It's not good to overestimate abilities....better to be humble.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

41. I beg to differ. Very few whites can completely understand.....

I didn't until I started working in human resources and saw the bias - and until I moved to Chicago.

[RetroLounge]

25. and by what Metrics do you measure the ability to relate?

thought so...

[imhotep]

10. don't exaggerate

Clark has never been in poverty.

[Donna Zen]

55. Huh?

That's a little off the charts isn't it?

Try being raised by a widowed mother who worked as a secretary and living with her parents. Seven years of getting by. And later, wasn't much better.

Yes, they were poor, sorry to shatter your image.

[IndianaGreen]

12. Nixon was born into a very poor Quaker family.

As President, Nixon screwed the poor and bombed and killed hundreds of thousands, including some Americans during the Pinochet coup in Chile.

And your point was?

[RetroLounge]

14. We all know his point.

eom

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

71. and JFK was born into wealth, and did the same thing

JFK cut taxes for rich people, while Nixon passed environmental laws. JFK never meet a Wall Street executive that he didn't love, while Nixon pissed them off with price controls. All things being equal, I'll take a regular American any day. Rich people already have too much power.

JFK murdered just as many Vietnamese as Nixon did. He started the war for God's sake. Nixon was a crook - so was JFK.

When Clark starts wars (and he will) at least he will have fought in one. When Dean starts wars (and he will) he'll go skiing again.

[roguevalley]

15. No. I can relate to either. I don't mind a wealthy person with a social

conscience. The Kennedys wrote the book on principled
public service. I can relate to Clark's poverty. This
is my experience but I am drawn to him for his brains,
his decency, his integrity and honor and his sense of
duty.

Dean draws me for the same reasons too but he is number
two to my man Wes.

[AWD]

17. I'm more concerned....

...with his political background than his birthright.

I mean, you're born poor, you can't help it. But you vote Repuke and raise money for them, that's a choice.

[Jerseycoa]

19. Not an issue for me

I don't see it being one for the nation, either. JFK, rich. LBJ, not rich. Nixon, poor. Bush I, rich. Bush II, rich. FDR, rich. TR, rich. Clinton, poor.

[sfecap]

21. Yes.

I don't vote for republicans. Rich or poor.

[ibegurpard]

22. Poop

That's the first time I've used it...been saving it up for the most appropriate thread.

[FrenchieCat]

36. Poop means...

poop = Please Offer Only Praise

[ibegurpard]

38. Cute but you didn't come up with that one yourself.

n/t

[maddezmom]

26. no

I've got lots of great liberal pals that grew up on Park Ave, in Grosse Pointe and Main Line in PA. It's not where you grew up but how you were raised.

[TopesJunkie]

27. No.

[clarknyc]

28. No.

It doesn't.

Besides, Dean's background is only superficially like Bush's. You can't help it if you're born rich or poor. What counts is what you do with it as an adult. That's where the Dean and Bush parallels end. That's the part that I care about.

[Myra]

29. It can influence my choice of candidates

I really don't know that much about Dean and Clark's background
growing up. But I am very tired of money deciding such things
as who fights in wars, and who can become president.
It's a cancer in America.

[mikehiggins]

30. This stuff just gets lamer and lamer as we go along.

I hear Clark likes boxers and Dean wears jockey shorts. Will that affect your vote?

We have an election coming up in less than 1000 hours. Let's go work on that. There's no one here that we're going to convince and, anyway, we aren't going to win the election by dominating DU.

Why not just call a moritorium on all this stuff until March or April. Then we can explain to everybody just how Clark got the nomination. That'll be a lot more fun than this anyway.

[PassingFair]

31. Dean is the right man at the right time.

I would have preferred a railsplitter, but I'll take the "earthly prince". He has shown a preference for humanity over profit. History will marvel at the timing.

[FrenchieCat]

37. Right man at the right time....

to lose?

oh, xcuse me...poop!

[CMT]

32. No

I'll take Dean with his Park Ave. background (though, of course not as wealthy as FDR or JFK were) over Clark and his Republican past.

[TexasSissy]

33. Yes. It distinguishes him from the privileged Bush family.

It also points out that he made it on his own merit. Bush Baby failed in his oil business, even though he had all the $$$ in the world from Papa Bush to make it work.

[killbotfactory]

34. No.

I don't hold the family a person is born into against them.

I'm much more interested in their personalities and how they acted as adults.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

39. FDR - wealthy, Nixon-poor; Kennedy - wealthy, Reagan-poor.

Hitler was extremely poor. Ghandi came from a well off family.

Lincoln was very poor. Jefferson very rich.

and, so on.

A silly comparison.

BTW - I came from an extremely poor background and have known extremely wealthy people. Neither condition guarantees either nobility or evil.

[AP]

69. Everybody loved a playboy in '60. Does everyone love a guy...

...who never had to be worried about losing his job or not having a future if he didn't work hard enough in 2000.

In that interview with Arlie Hochschild about Bush, she said that one way he gets working class voters to vote against their best interests is by appealing to white, undermployed men that white guys can still be failures, but if they boss their wives around and blame immigrants and the spotted owl for all their troubles, they can still come out on top.

Do we need to run a guy who also couldn't fail thanks to his privileges? Or do we need to run a guy who shows America that hard work is, in fact, the route to success?

[Tom Rinaldo]

40. Clark's modest background

It means more to me in a positive sense than Dean coming from priviledge does in a negative sense to me. RFK was filthy rich and I loved that man. I can give Dean a pass on that one if his domestic and social priorities are in the right place. Because Clark has not served in elected public office, it is reassuring to me to know that he can relate personally to the background of average Americans. Furthermore, given how obviously talented, focused, and down right brilliant Clark is, I appreciate that he didn't turn in his stripes at a much younger age and cash in big time. If you listen to him and his wife talk, it is obvious that opportunities to become very wealthy were frequently dangled in front of them throughout his military career. People attack Clark for making very good money for two years. Know that he could have done that for twenty or more years if personal wealth was a career goal.

[quaker bill]

43. No

Clark is richer than I am. 4 stars make a decent salary and he has done even better since retirement.

Growing up poor can build character, but does not necessarily do so. Growing up rich can shield you from life's lessons, but does not necessarily do so in any particular case.

Touting the conditions of one's childhood is a classic 'homefolks' propaganda ploy. Understand that I don't believe that there is anything wrong with propoganda per se. No presidential campaign would be complete without a compliment of good propoganda pieces. I just prefer to look past it to see the substance.

Clark is a good man and a strong candidate for president regardless of the conditions of his childhood. Dean is a good man and a strong candidate for president regardless of the conditions of his childhood. I support Dean now, but will be an enthusiastic supporter of Clark if he gets the nomination.

[WillyBrandt]

44. Perfectly Said

[mot78]

45. That irrelevant to me

Several of our greatest Presidents were wealthy...Washington, Jefferson, FDR, Kennedy. What I want to know is what they'll do for me.

[poskonig]

46. This doesn't matter.

No effect in the G.E. -- Bush comes from a wealthy background, and millions of hillbillies voted for him.

It doesn't effect my vote either; I think logically and not through ad hominems.

[robbedvoter]

47. Always loved Clinton more than Gore for this - but voted for both

It's not a deal breaking thing. But as Sharpton put it in a debate where CNN was ragging on Edwards' roots line ; "it's about giving people hope"

[Crunchy Frog]

48. No influence whatsoever. (nt)

[dajabr]

49. Since when is being a banker's stepson considered poverty?

What do they have in those vaults down in Arkansas, corn?

[Donna Zen]

56. The banker didn't do so well

There is much more to that story, including some problems that meant his mother had to work.

[dajabr]

57. This guy doesn't look "impoverished"

Classic car collection?

Seriously, I'd like some links to his saga of overcoming abject poverty...

[SahaleArm]

58. Abject poverty - Not sure where that came from?

He wasn't born into Park Avenue and the Hamptons either; more of a working class family. Working at a bank in the 50's-60's doesn't mean they owned the bank.

http://www.clark04.com/americanson

[dajabr]

59. Does Clark's poverty -- Dean's Park Ave background influence your vote?

Title of the topic above. So Clark growing up in poverty is hyperbole?

[SahaleArm]

60. Not a deciding factor for me but I do like to know...

the background of the candidates - How they got to where they are.

[arewethereyet]

65. well isn't this enlightening !

So Gep and Edwards are the ones from humble means. General Clark never struck me as having humble roots. Now I have a better understanding of why.

[SahaleArm]

72. That's a disingenuous comment...

His mother and step-father worked at a bank, they didn't own it. It's like claiming anyone who works at Walmart to be a Walton heir. And the picture of him next to a car, was it even his, did he fix it up (he repaired his own car in the army)? And how many people get rich by staying in the military? It's like me complaining about Edwards now that he's wealthy...

http://www.ospolitics.org/workpay/archives/2003/09/21/clark_fami.php

Tell me if this guy grew up on Park Avenue: http://www.clark04.com/americanson/

[ibegurpard]

76. Why are you letting yourself get drawn into this?

My support or non-support of Clark or Dean has nothing to do with whether they came from more or less well-to-do upbringings. This whole thread is just so useless which is why I used "poop" for the first time.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

52. It doesn't for me but.......

....it may matter in the election.

I favor Clark because he's articulate. He can stand up to tough questions without getting flustard (I love the way he handled tweety on Hardball). Plus his military background sets him way above Chickenhawk George.

[auburnblu]

54. I don't think its an issue

Dean has done a good job getting voters fired up, I don't think he'll have a problem. I think it could be an issue that might impact Kerry though.

[QC]

61. Being forced to choose between two aristocrats gets old, but

in the end I'll always go with the Democrat.

So yeah, a candidate's class plays a role, but it's not the only thing I consider important.

[arewethereyet]

62. yes and no

No to General Clark as it gets trumped by his military indoctrination.

Yes to Dr Dean's privilidged background as he has proven himself to not much understand the average American.

[Kool Kitty]

66. Not to me, it won't.

[Clark Can WIN]

67. I wouldn't be swayed entirely by one or the other.

but if I may say this........ Unbelievably, and to the nausea of everyone here Bush is going to run on the "straight talking, little bit bristlly but still loveable" guy from Texas who is fightin' the terrarists schtick.

This is what's coming and I think Clark is the best man to take him on.

[Toucano]

68. It helps me relate to him more.

But a lot of things about his personal story resonate with me.

Have any non-Clark supporters watched "American Son"?

[FubarFly]

77. Actually, yes!

At least as far as Dean is concerned. Dean lives modestly despite his Park Avenue roots. It's a strong testiment to the quality of his character.

Thanks for posting. :hi:

[bowens43]

78. No, Clark appears to me to be nothing but a scammer

rci or poor makes no difference.

[deminflorida]

79. No Dean's the Scammer, no different than Dick Cheney....

Dean and Cheney are both good at using the legal system to keep their cheap secrets sealed, away from the American public.

[bitchkitty]

84. No -

If Dean were the type of elitist frat boy that chimpie is, it would. It doesn't influence me in John Edwards' or Al Sharpton's cases either, other than to admire them for what they have achieved.

I support Dean over Clark because Clark fundraised for the chimp. He might as well have fundraised for Satan. I thought Nader scammed the Greens by running as their candidate. Clark wasn't a Democrat until he decided to run for the Democrats, and he's probably scamming them. I don't like the way Clark has come out saying that Dean asked him to be VP - but not actually saying it, just saying it was "dangled". If it was, it was obviously a private conversation, and it almost looks like Clark is bragging in an attempt to bolster his own stature - "Oh, Dean? Yea, he asked me to be his VP, but I turned him down." I think the candidates attacking Dean look tacky and desperate, because they're not accomplishing anything except to magnify their own shortcomings.

Supposedly the Clintons want Clark. I loved Clinton, but I want the Democratic Party back, and I don't share his desire to see Wesley Clark in the White House, or his optimism that it could happen.