if we run a Kerry/Clark ticket, we'll never have to mention AWOL

[OneBlueSky]

because there will be one humungous, glaring, indisputable fact that will permeate the campaign even if it's not mentioned on a daily basis: when it came to serving their country in combat, our guys went, theirs didn't . . .

I'm also comfortable with two decorated veterans on the ticket because, contrary to what some may believe, military folks are among the LEAST likely to involve us in war, particularly stupid wars . . . these guys have seen the horror of war, they've seen their buddies shipped home in body bags, and they know from personal experience that war must be the LAST resort, not the first option . . . the people who get us involved in stupid wars are the chickenhawks, who have never seen combat, never watched their friends die, and never seen the devastation that war inflicts on the civilians and the country where the war is taking place . . . the current crop of chickenshits is a prime example of this principle . . . many voters -- particularly those to the right of most of us here (the ones we have to attract) -- generally are favorably disposed to candidates who answered when they were called, as opposed to those who used family connections to get cushy national guard assignments (Bush) or who "had other priorities" (Cheney) . . .

for the first time in my memory, we can beat the Repubs on their own turf, and badly . . . I know there's some bad feelings between Kerry and Clark, but they should look past that to create the ticket that the Repubs will have the most trouble attacking on patriotic grounds . . . because with a Kerry/Clark ticket, the bottom line is:

we went, they didn't! . . .

[Rowdyboy]

1. 100% know where you're coming from

Hope Kerry and Clark do too! It would be an awesome ticket

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

2. I still want to see the AWOL issue squeezed some more

Bush's back is against the wall on this issue. He lied and there is no way out of it now. This issue has the Repubs squirming, and I LIKE Repubs squirming. :D

I say don't let up on the AWOL issue while we've got 'em by the short hairs.

[OneBlueSky]

3. it won't get dropped . . . we just have to let others keep it alive . . .

it appears that (for reasons unknown to me) the press has FINALLY latched on to this issue . . . now that they have, it's going to be difficult (if not impossible) for them to let it go with no resolution . . so they'll keep pursuing it, and there are other outfits and individuals who can help them . . . the candidates will never have to mention it, putting them above the fray in (dare I say it) a presidential manner . . .

all I said was we wouldn't have to mention it . . . never said it would go away . . . it won't . . .

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

4. I see what you're getting at now

Let someone else do the dirty work while Kerry and Clark stay above the fray. Bush/Cheney/Rove have been getting that kind of help since day one.

[theorist]

8. Don't forget the other scandals:

-Judicial Memos (hacking/stealing)
-9/11 Commission (secrecy)
-Plame/Wilson affair (treason)
-Raping the environment (irresponsible leadership)

What are the other big ones?

[loyalsister]

5. One is enough

The military teaches very distinct thinking habits. We don't need two in the WH. Particularly when they're both running on macho heroism.

[Columbia]

6. They'd never run together either

[theorist]

7. It would be great, but it's going to be Hillary.

I hope I'm wrong, but after thinking and calculating the political aspirations of DNC members, I believe it'll be a Kerry/Clinton ticket.

[OneBlueSky]

9. that would NOT be a good move . . .

the last thing we need this year is a polarizing figure like Hillary on the ticket . . .

[WiseMen]

10. I Believe Clark is on Kerry's Short List.

The issue is not at all any bad feelings during the campaign. The issue is whether campaigning gaffes or supposed gaffes may have
damaged Clark or turned him off politics.

[bowens43]

11. I think you over the estimate the value of military

experience to the presidential race. It should be obvious by Clark's poor showing in the primary that his career was at best irrelevant , at worst a detriment. There is no reason to add a weak candidate to a what should be a strong ticket. Clark should get a cabinet position but he shouldn't be on the ticket.