Would you be happy with either Clark or Edwards as VP?

[Mattforclark]

[StephNW4Clark]

1. 1) Clark; 2) Edwards

[hlthe2b]

8. Agree.... While I like Edwards, the entire shape of this campaign & what

is currently occurring with Iraq and the entire Bush* foreign 'policy'
coming unglued, we need what Clark brings to the table as a VP candidate.

We need to keep Edwards in the Senate, where he would be incredibly useful in fighting off so many of the REPUG's attempts to dismantle our legal protections, health care system, worker protections, etc., etc., etc. .....

[Toronto Ron]

21. Edwards is retiring his Senate seat no matter what

But the good news is that Erskine Bowles looks very strong to hold the seat for the Dems.

[Padraig18]

2. I would be well pleased with either one.

:)

[Burma Jones]

3. I would be happy with a cardboard cutout of a duck

Just so long as it was a Democrat.

[freetobegay]

4. That poll is as bad as the ones the media puts out

to try to control the answer.

[Mattforclark]

5. I'm sorry

how could it be improved, in your considered opinion?

Thanks for any input.

:)

[freetobegay]

6. I would be happy with one but not the other

So I have no choice but not to vote because that does not fit with the two listed above.

[Mattforclark]

9. Oh, then to clarify

I would not be happy with either means that you wouldn't be happy with at least one of them, possibly two, not that you would be unhappy with both Kerry and Clark. I'll edit it.

[freetobegay]

16. Thanks for the clarification

I voted.

[troublemaker]

7. It should be...

Would you be happy with either?

Would you be unhappy with Clark but happy with Edwards?

Would you be unhappy with Edwards but happy with Clark?

Would you be unhappy with either?

[xultar]

12. That's the ticket! n/t

[StephNW4Clark]

10. Let's see the Repugs spin this.

STATEMENT OF
GENERAL (RETIRED) WESLEY K. CLARK
U.S. ARMY


BEFORE THE
HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES


SEPTEMBER 26, 2002


Force should not be used until the personnel and organizations to be involved in post-conflict Iraq are identified and readied to assume their responsibilities. This includes requirements for humanitarian assistance, police and judicial capabilities, emergency medical and reconstruction assistance, and preparations for a transitional governing body and eventual elections, perhaps including a new constitution. Ideally, international and multinational organizations will participate in the readying of such post-conflict operations, including the UN, NATO, and other regional and Islamic organizations.

Force should be used as the last resort; after all diplomatic means have been exhausted, unless information indicates that further delay would present an immediate risk to the assembled forces and organizations. This action should not be categorized as “preemptive.”

Once initiated, any military operation should aim for the most rapid accomplishment of its operational aims and prompt turnover to follow-on organizations and agencies.

If we proceed as outlined above, we may be able to minimize the disruption to the ongoing campaign against Al Qaeda, reduce the impact on friendly governments in the region, and even contribute to the resolution of other regional issues such as the Arab-Israeli conflict, Iranian efforts to develop nuclear capabilities, and Saudi funding for terrorism. But there are no guarantees. The war is unpredictable and could be difficult and costly.

And what is at risk in the aftermath is an open-ended American ground commitment in Iraq and an even deeper sense of humiliation in the Arab world, which could intensify our problems in the region and elsewhere.


http://www.house.gov/hasc/openingstatementsandpressreleases/107thcongress/02-09-26clark.html

[xultar]

14. R U kidding despite this most DUers still

called Clark a Republican and tore him to shreds on a daily basis while hhe was running.

[sundancekid]

11. Clark: yes; Edwards: no

Fixing the poll question stems as suggested in posts above would at least make the results intelligible ... otherwise, not so much.

[bigwillq]

13. Yes, I would be happy with either of those two fine

Americans.

[xultar]

15. Clark YES! Edwards NO!

[freetobegay]

17. Ditto!

[turiya]

18. Clark isn't ready for primetime

a lot of lifelong Dems would be furious.

[Sparkly]

20. I'm a lifelong Dem

and I think Edwards "isn't ready for primetime."

So much for generalizations.

[dogman]

19. Edwards only ahead of Lieberman.

I will vote for him if he is Kerry's choice. I feel he is the least qualified of all Democrats that I've heard mentioned. I still find his judgment that there is a link between 9-11 and the Iraq War to be unacceptable. He and Joe support this administration more than any Dem except Zell in relation to the Iraq War.

[xkenx]

22. Wes Clark for VP

Why General Clark is the best choice for VP:

Polls show Kerry ahead of W on domestic issues, behind on national security. Overall a dead heat. W may creep up domestically as economy improves, so Kerry needs to siphon away some of W's support on security. This election WILL be about national security and terrorism because W will make it that way, and look at the headlines from Iraq dominating the news. Bush has already put Kerry on the defensive questioning Senate votes and the "ribbon-throwing" incident. All Bush has to do is neutralize Kerry on war/terror, and he keeps his lead. Kerry can co-opt the national security theme on Bush.
Enter Wes Clark: Clark can stand up and say, "Vietnam was a disaster, but I stayed in the military afterwards to build the great all-volunteer Army we have today. Sen. Kerry said "Send me to Vietnam" and served with great courage and honor in that war. Sen Kerry criticized that war afterwards, and I consider that dissent an act of patriotism, for he had the nation's best interests at heart. Sen. Kerry backed up that service by serving his country for these many years in the Senate, including not forgetting Vietnam as he worked with Sen.McCain for years to retrieve our POW's. I am proud to stand with Sen. Kerry, a man I consider to be one of the great patriots of our time". (As he wraps himself in the flag and talks about winning the only war NATO ever fought, this man who is one of the most decorated military heroes in U.S. history). This man can bring in military and ex-military votes which NO other VP candidate can do,and he is"squeaky-clean.

There are many other areas where Clark complements Kerry:

1.Ability to step into the Presidency if necessary. Clark has a career of military and diplomatic leadership unparalled. He has earned the respect of European leaders and understands the Arab world. NO ONE has Clark's credentials to help repair our alliances around the world and gracefully resolve the Iraq problem. Plus, something that many people do not realize, as one of our major military commanders, Clark had the "domestic affairs" responsibilities similar to those of mayors and governors. He was responsible for the everyday lives (schools, healthcare, safety, career advancement, etc.) of those under his command, numbering hundreds of thousands at times

2.Clark brings a "common man" background, someone who grew up poor, earned an appointment to West Point where he finished 1st in his class,became a decorated war hero--someone with the brains, talent, and drive to go into the business world and make lots of money--who instead chose to serve his country for another 30 years or so. If this man isn't a true American hero, I don't know who is.

3. Agreement on issues: Kerry and Clark are very closely in agreementon Foreign Affairs / Homeland Security issues as well as on Free Trade, and most domestic issues.

4. Campaigning against Bush: Clark has demonstrated, both during his campaign and since endorsing Kerry, that he is both loyal to Kerry and is a tireless campaigner against Bush. Clark has "fire in his belly" on defeating Bush. Clark can take on Bush/Cheney on all issues, especially those
where Bush would like to think he is strongest.
5. Helping to win Electoral Votes - Clark should help to win all the Swing States that Al Gore just missed winning and retain the Blue States that Bush would like to have. Most candidates are mentioned because they might win one state for Kerry, Clark could help in ALL of the above swing states. This is because he is an Arkansas Southerner who also proved to be popular in the Southwest and among Hispanics and American Indians. In fact, with General Clark's military background and "All American" image he has more popularity than most democrats such as John Kerry in all parts of the country where Republicans tend to be popular. With his Military Supreme Commander status, if he could get just 10% of military families to vote Democratic (who would otherwise vote Republican) this could change the outcome in a number of states. Although Wes is now a very progressive Democrat, his past background makes people feel secure. His comfort with Religion also helps. Both Kerry and Clark have a long history of using guns (despite being pro gun control.)

6. Taking on Dick Cheney: There will be a VP debate. Only Clark can face Cheney and cite Pentagon "inside information" about how Cheney decided from the beginning to go to war with Iraq. On all military related issues, Clark will be more believable than Cheney to millions of swing voters.

7. Raising funds for Kerry: This is very important to Kerry since Bush has raised so much money. It was Wes Clark who raised almost $9 million in January alone, pre-matching funds. This was about 2 million more than his closest rival. In the 5 months of his campaign, he raised about as much as Dean. While Dean started the Internet dominance, Clark continued it with equal success and still has the best web site and Blog Community around. Since Dean isn't suitable as Kerry's VP, Clark is the best choice to attract the "outsider" type people who support Dean. Clark was often the 2nd choice among Dean supporters and their 1st choice for VP under Dean. In summary, with Clark as VP choice, there would be BY FAR the largest fundraising boost to the Kerry campaign as well as a likely union with Howard Dean and his supporters. Lets also remember that Clark was the most popular with the wealthy and powerful Hollywood crowd.

8. Mutual respect: Since Kerry and his VP choice will probably be together for months, getting along with mutual respect is very important. They have to be able to share each other's secrets. As was demonstrated in Wisconsin, their mutual respect for each other's careers is apparent.

9. Kerry and Clark already have a name for their ticket that no one else can claim, "Two Patriots, one mission." This alone will be worth millions in free advertising. Undecided voters are easily swayed by these powerful slogans.

10. Appeal to the Church going Americans and Patriotism-Wes Clark has a background that includes several faiths. He is the "most comfortable" of all the major VP contenders with "God" and "American Patriotism". The Flag really means something to him. This is why he is a danger to Republicans in all parts of the country. He still is Karl Rove's worst Nightmare.

11. Is VP the best position for Clark? Some would say that Clark should be saved for Secretary of State or National Security Adviser. However, if we waited, it is very possible that Kerry would lose a close election. Additionally, as VP, as long as Kerry respects Clark, he could be used as a 2nd Secretary of State, Defense and Homeland Security. As shown by Cheney, a VP can be very powerful when they are strong and respected in National Security issues.

Please, for the good of the country, select Wes Clark.

[xkenx]

23. The Essence of Wes Clark

This is from Clark '04 Weblog By cris

If you are lucky, once in your lifetime a truly exceptional person will cross your path. I met and know such a person: General Wesley Clark. For three years, I had the privilege of working for General Clark when he served as Supreme Allied Commander-Europe. I can attest to the fact that he is a general's general and a soldier's general.

I first met General Clark in June 1998 on a special assignment in Maastricht, Belgium, in support of General Hugh Shelton. I was immediately struck by two things. First, although General Clark wore the uniform of a four star General, he spoke as though he were a polished diplomat. He seemed comfortable in both worlds - as a General and as a spokesman for NATO.

The second thing I noticed was the way he treated his subordinates. He treated everyone equally, regardless of their rank, and he listened - really listened - to what people had to say. And the General's security detail clearly loved working for him. This is not common; most security guys don't get to know their principals on a personal basis.

A year later, I got a call from my assignment officer. He told me I could either work at the Pentagon for the Secretary of Defense, or I could work for General Clark. After my memorable first encounter with him, there was no question what I would do. I said that I wanted to work for General Clark.

In the weeks before I arrived at SHAPE (Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe), I thought that I would be the "token Hispanic." When I arrived, I quickly found out that I was mistaken. I had never seen so many minorities working in any high-powered setting. I learned that it was because General Clark values diversity and wants to give everyone a chance.

And from the moment I arrived, General Clark and his wife did everything they could to make me feel welcome. My first assignment was to take the General to his quarters and then to a dinner engagement with NATO officials. After the event, the first thing General Clark asked me was whether I had gotten anything to eat. To most four-star generals, security is an instrument. With General Clark, it was a different story. He always treated his staff like family.

During the war in Kosovo, I saw how deeply compassionate General Clark is. He worried about the pilots who were out on night missions, and he would not go to sleep until he knew the last pilot had bedded down. Instead, he would work in his study, going over the latest intelligence reports and providing updates to the alliance and officials back in Washington. When he finally went to bed, it was only for two hours, and more often than not, he would be awakened by calls. His instruction to me before going to bed was: "Cris, push every call through." No rest for the General.

In fact, I don't think anyone in the U.S. armed forces worked harder than the General. His superiors in Washington, DC knew this. They would often preface their calls by saying, "Don't wake General Clark." All of us who worked for him were amazed by his constant upbeat tempo and energy. We wanted to do everything possible to take care of him because he was doing so much for America and NATO.

And no matter how pressing a situation became, General Clark always stayed calm. I recall when an F-117 went down - the only plane to go down during the entire campaign. In contrast to other officers I knew who would explode in tense moments, General Clark remained calm and efficiently took the necessary steps.

I don't think anyone else could have done what the General did at NATO. For anyone who thinks that was a small accomplishment, just get nineteen friends together for dinner and try to pick a restaurant as a group. General Clark took nineteen countries and built consensus through dialogue. He gave Milosevic a chance, and then took action only as a last resort.

General Clark is an extraordinary leader. People trusted him because they knew that he was honest and a straight shooter. And there was no mincing words with him. He always wanted to hear the truth. You didn't put things off. He wanted to know what had gone wrong so that he could make corrections and get back on the right track.

But most of all, General Clark is loyal -- loyal to his country and to the United States Army, the organization that brought him up from West Point cadet to Supreme Allied Commander. I have worked around a lot of generals, and I can say that the Boss is one of the best I've ever worked with. He cared deeply about the soldiers he led, treated all of us who worked for him with the highest respect, and served his country with dedication, courage and honor.

From the right front seat

Cris Hernandez Jr, Chief Warrant Officer (Ret)

Former Personal Security Officer to the Supreme Allied Commander, Europe

Casa Grande, AZ


WES CLARK FOR VP

[xkenx]

24. MORE ESSENCE OF WES CLARK

General made believer of wary aide
Thursday, November 27, 2003

By ANNMARIE TIMMINS
Monitor staff

As a junior Navy officer, Eric Massa had no choice the first time he went to work for Gen. Wesley Clark in 1996, as Clark's assistant in Panama. The Navy set up the interview, and Massa hoped to mangle it with blunt honesty.

"I didn't want the job, and I told him so," said Massa. "I was afraid of working for a pompous moron, of which there are several wearing stars. I had worked for senior officers who didn't care about people, and I didn't want to do that again."

It turned out Massa and Clark had something in common there, and Massa spent the next four years attached to Clark, first in Panama and then in Europe, during Clark's stint as supreme allied commander in Europe.

When Massa left Clark in 1999 it was under protest and only because Massa had been diagnosed with advanced cancer. Now, years later, Massa - recovered and retired from the Navy - is working for Clark's army again, this time as a campaign staffer trying to get Clark elected to the White House.

Massa wasn't looking for the job this time, either. Clark asked

him to come on board after learning a month ago that Massa had "involuntarily resigned" from his government job at the urging of Republican bosses. They were upset that Massa had visited Clark at a Democratic campaign event.

"They said I was a political liability and that if I liked Wes Clark so much I should go work for him," Massa said. A lifelong Republican, Massa just re-registered as a Democrat. Massa is the son of a Navy man, and as such grew up outside America and with a respect for the military. The family came to the United States when Massa was 16, and after graduating from high school in Louisiana, Massa attended the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md.

In all, Massa spent 25 years in the Navy, 16 of them on sea duty. In the mid-1990s, Massa's commanding officer told him it was time to decide how he wanted to fulfill his joint duty, a requirement for officers to spend part of their service with another branch of the military.

When Massa said he wanted to do something out of the ordinary, he was told an Army general by the name of Wes Clark was looking for a Navy aide. All he knew about Clark was that he had stars on his Army uniform, and that didn't carry much weight with Massa.

Their 50-minute interview, however, convinced Massa to withhold judgment.

"He had questions I didn't expect from a military man," Massa said. "He asked me if I was familiar with Greek literature, if I read Homer, what I thought about the Illiad.

"And the last 20 minutes were devoted to people questions," Massa said. "He asked me what I would do if a young soldier came to me and told me his wife had died. Or a homosexual soldier told me he was being harassed. His whole thing was treating people with dignity and respect."

Three hours later, Massa was on a plane with Clark to Panama, where Clark was commander in chief of the U.S. Southern Command. Massa described his job as Clark's executive assistant and deputy chief of staff.

Once there, Massa asked Clark what the Homer question was about. Massa remembers the answer: "He said he was looking for someone who was well-rounded enough to talk about issues beyond military terms."

For about 13 months, Massa shadowed Clark, keeping notes of his meetings and drafting follow-up letters to the people Clark had met. Massa said Clark forbade his staff to begin any of his correspondence with "I" because Clark wanted the emphasis on the recipient, not himself.

A show of support
When Clark was promoted to supreme allied commander in Europe in 1997, he asked Massa to stay on and be his advance man. Massa agreed and moved his wife and kids, who had been waiting for him back in San Diego, to Brussels, Belgium. After Clark arrived, Massa was again a close assistant and became one of Clark's main liaisons to Washington, D.C.

Massa had every intention of staying in Europe as Clark's assistant until he got sick in late 1999. He hadn't recovered from running a half-marathon but chalked it up to the flu. He blew off a doctor's appointment his wife had made for him, thinking he'd work it off.

On Nov. 9, 1999, Massa looked up from his desk to find Clark standing there. Clark told Massa that his wife had called worried about his health.

Clark had arranged another doctor's appointment for Massa, and when Massa protested, Clark gave him the only direct order Massa recalls receiving in four years. "I think we have lost the fundamental relationship between a four-star general and a Navy commander," Clark told him. "You will go to the doctor."

The doctor diagnosed Massa, who had never smoked, with advanced lung cancer and gave him four months to live. Clark cut through red tape to get Massa and his family back to the United States for treatment.

Just before Massa left, Clark convened the staff and tearfully awarded Massa the Legion of Merit medal for his work. Clark had received the same medal in the 1970s when he was a speech writer for the then-supreme allied commander.

It's one of the few times Massa saw Clark cry.

"Everyone thought that was goodbye, that I was dying," Massa said.

Back home in San Diego, doctors were more optimistic and diagnosed Massa with non-Hodgkins lymphoma, not lung cancer, and began aggressive treatment.

Unknown to Massa, Clark had a soldier tracking Massa's surgery. As soon as Massa came to in recovery, staff told him he had a call. It was Clark. At the time, he was overseeing the bombing of Kosovo.

A different kind of service
Massa retired about three years ago; he waited so that the last thing he did in uniform was attend Clark's retirement. Now he's living in a hotel in Manchester, trying to avoid a fast-food diet and bringing his family in from New York when he can.

He talks wistfully about the job he lost to get here. Massa was in Washington overseeing part of the Navy budget as a member of the House Armed Services Committee. His departure was reported by the press and has since become fodder for online political sites.

But he doesn't regret where it got him. On the trail, Massa is helping get Clark the veteran vote - and whatever else needs doing.

"If Wes Clark asked me to jump off the Brooklyn Bridge, I'd ask him if he wanted it done in the summer or the winter," Massa said.

[Donna Zen]

30. A different kind of general

Thank you for posting that story. I had read about the Massa firing by the repubs when Josh Marshall carried it on the blog. I had not seen this article before.

It always both amazed me and pissed me off during the stormiest of the DU "food fighting" threads that 1) Anyone who supported Clark was assumed to be some kind of closet "nut" republican warmonger rush-lover. 2) How many posters never took the time to understand Wesley Clark. Like Massa, they had a knee jerk reaction to the stars; unlike Massa, they clutched their own inner baggage and tied it into a greater burden with spew from the outer limits of the left and the right.

I did not vote in the poll.

Clark once said that it doesn't matter who gets the credit as long as the job gets done. The mission is to oust bush...Kerry will make the choices regarding the best way to complete that task. Let us hope he choses wisely.

Also, there is another Clark story that would seem to fit this thread. The WaPo once carried one of their slamming Clark pieces where the focus was on Clark's "sharp elbows." All of this according to some bullet-headed Pentagon brass; however, those same sources said: you always wanted him on your team, because he always made you look good.

So yes, I do want Kerry to pick Clark. I am not sure if Clark wants Kerry to pick Clark...Clark's mission is about get Kerry elected, not kudos for Clark. So this is less about Clark than it is about governing. I want the Democrats to both look good and do good in the White House. They best person to accomplish that mission for Kerry, for us--the team, and for rest of the planet, is Wesley Clark.

[Jai4WKC08]

39. Brava Donna!

[R3dD0g]

25. The important thing, the ultimate thing

is to get rid of * before this whole world becomes unlivable.

Clark, Edwards, Kucinich, et al are side issues, designed to get us fighting among ourselves.

If * isn't defeated on Nov 2, then the rest of this shit won't amount to a handful of beans, the entire world will become a shithole just like Texas.

[dae]

26. Most important thing is to win the WH, next is the Senate. I have

my favorite for VP but I'm working my rear off for those two goals and try not to worry about a choice I have no influence over.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

27. Fine with either one, just please don't let it be

Gephardt or Bayh!

[Auntie Bush]

28. I would only be HAPPY with Clark...but I would reluctantly be OK

with Edwards.

[AP]

29. Woudn't worry much with either; I'd worry less with Edwards.

[MontecitoDem]

31. Clark yes, Edwards no (but I'd still vote for Kerry of course)

Maybe I just don't know enough about him, but Edwards leaves me cold. As a lawyer myself, I've met a number of folks who come across like John Edwards and I've been disappointed. All flash, no substance?

32. BOB GRAHAM /nt

[Andromeda]

33. It has to be Edwards.

We need Wes Clark for Sec of State which I feel is one of the most important positions to have. A vice-president doesn't get in the public eye as much as the Sec of State. Just look how often Rummy is on the tube -- just about every day. Nobody ever sees Cheney because he only comes out of hiding to host fundraisers and bash Democrats.

Being Vice-Pres will give Edwards the kind of exposure and experience he needs (eight years) and he will be more than prepared to run for President. During the campaign I found that Edwards got stronger and stronger with each appearance and he did almost catch up with Kerry in the first few primaries.

Edwards would compliment Kerry and being a Southerner wouldn't hurt either and Wes Clark would be a superb Sec of State on the world stage.

[VOX]

34. Rummy is Sect'y of Defense, Colin Powell is SOS...

But your analysis is excellent and still applies.

[Andromeda]

48. Whoops, my error...

:7 You're right of course -- thanks for bringing this to my attention.

[Finch]

47. Ditto...

[DemExpat]

35. Thrilled with Clark, OK with Edwards

DemEx

[Awsi Dooger]

36. We need Edwards and those pep rally-type events

Edwards is our best orator other than Clinton or Cuomo, and it can't be underestimated how essential it is to have an energetic, upbeat VP candidate who can spread a positive message throughout the key states. Swing voters who have already stamped Bush as a mediocrity, or worse, simply need a reassuring shove in Kerry's direction.

Clarke has been terrific lately and would certainly matchup well vs. Cheney in the debate. But we can't be blind to the certainty more voters will choose regarding their daily lives than snapshots from Iraq, which means an economic and homeland message from the VP is much more vital than goofy doubleteaming on the military front.

[xultar]

We don't need a Peppy VeeP, GWB was a Pep Man @ Yale, we need

Wesley K. Clark, Statesman, Diplomat, Rhodes Scholar, Intelligent, REAL, and STRONG!

[DU GrovelBot]

37. ## Support Democratic Underground! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v2.0
==================
 
The time now is 8:51:53AM EDT, Thursday, May 13, 2004.
 
There are exactly...
3 days,
15 hours,
8 minutes, and
7 seconds left in our fund drive.
 
This website could not survive without your generosity. Member donations 
pay for more than 84% of the Democratic Underground budget. Don't let
GrovelBot become the next victim of the Bush economy. Bzzzt.
 
Please take a moment to donate to DU right now. Thank you for your support.
 
- An automated message from the DU GrovelBot

Click here to donate.

[Cuban_Liberal]

38. Very happy with Edwards, and OK with Clark. n/t

[Larkspur]

40. Bugs Bunny is my nominee

and then Daffy Duck

[rebellious woman]

41. Clark yes, Edwards, no

[leyton]

42. I'd prefer Clark AND Edwards.

At the same time.

Decisions, decisions...

[robbedvoter]

43. Clark yes, Edwards no. Little prejudice against warmongers.

"I would have started a war with Iraq"
Edwards on Tweety's show.

[AP]

46. He says that based on the intelligence they saw, he would

not change his vote.

He said that if there was a problem with the intelligence, they should know about it and said there should be an investigation.

What could be more sensible than that?

[Padraig18]

49. It's not about 'sensible'

It's about holding grudges and being vindictive.

[AP]

50. ...and spin.

[curse10]

44. thrilled with either

I really hope Kerry picks one of them.

[MoonRiver]

45. I want Kerry to win and will be HAPPY, HAPPY, HAPPY if he does so.

In terms of a Kerry/Clark v. Kerry/Edwards ticket, I'll be HAPPY if Clark is on it, but, happy, if Edwards is on it. Does that make sense?