I'm warming up to Clark as VP

[dansolo]

I will admit that my hesitance was solely because of his connection with the Clintons. I would still love to see Brian Schweitzer as Obama's VP, but barring that, I would much prefer Clark over Bayh or Biden.

[Dinger]

1. Glad To Hear It!

He won't disappoint:)




:patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot:

[darius15]

2. Clark is definitely the best choice in the remaining field

Although my first choice was Warner until he took himself out.

[DarthDem]

3. Let's "Get Down to Brass Tacks"

I love the guy's personality. I really do. I think he's awesome.

But what does he bring electorally? We tried the "nominate a veteran" approach last time out and it didn't work.

[darius15]

6. Obama doesn't need any electoral help

he has plenty of options. But,now that you mention it, Clark could bring Arkansas into play.

[bunkerbuster1]

7. I don't think a VP choice should be picked in the hopes of "picking up" this or that vote...

Here's what a Veep's gotta do:

1) get along with the President
2) work his/her ass off to get the President elected
3) not make anyone think about NOT voting for the President, who would've otherwise.

Daz it.

[eshfemme]

35. Totally agree. I think that Clark actually fits that criteria.

He's a total non-politician, which can be both an asset and flaw since he will be struck with easily swiftboated syndrome but is very obviously an honest and earnest man.

[Dinger]

8. Electorally:

Southerner
Southwest U.S. (Per 2004 Campaign)
Bipartisan appeal
Could win many Clinton voters/supporters
From Chicago
Appealing to independent voters
Etc.

P.S. I'm sure I forgot some.




:patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot:

[Donna Zen]

10. What do any of them bring?

Reading Raising Kaine and other VA commentators, I take it that Kaine is not widely loved. He may or may not help in that state. Warner is very popular. Kaine seems nice, but he also appears to be less than the job.

Delaware comes without Biden, and Biden softens Obama's message of change and judgment about the war. I have a few differences with Biden such as his relationship with credit card companies, but that's the way it goes. He could do it well although I don't find his foreign policy positions at all useful.

Bayh drives me wild and I can't believe that anyone is actually discussing him.

[DarthDem]

17. Agreed on Bayh

Maybe Kaine moves Virginia electorally. But I think Richardson helps with CO and Hillary with OH. Not sure why "CO is gone" with Hillary, either, as someone else opined.

[earthlover]

13. What does he bring electorally?

He will help in EVERY STATE! It cannot be over-emphasized that Obama's biggest weakness is foreign policy experience. Clark shores him up on that score big time.

McCain is hoping that in spite of the fact he has supported Bush's Blunder in Iraq and sang the tune "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb bomb Iran...", he will get elected because AMericans want to cling to an experienced hand in foreign policy, especially now.

Comparing Clark to Kerry is meaningless. Nothing to detract from Kerry, but Clark's military experience dwarfs Kerry's. Clark is the most decorated officer since Eisenhower, for crying out loud! Kerry got swift boated, and got tongue-tied in his response. Clark would be very difficult to swift boat. And Clark does not take shit from anyone! He can speak his mind. Nobody supported Kerry or put in any more hours than Clark did. In my view, Clark should be the presidential candidate, since he is more liberal than Obama and more electable. But, beings as how Obama is the nominee, he couldn't pick a better VP than Clark in my opinion.

[wmbrew0206]

27. Clark was not that heavily decorated and there are a lot more officer more decorated than he is

Clark's highest combat award was a Silver Star and he was two Bronze Stars.

During roughly the same period there are many other military members who have been awarded higher and more awards for valor and bravery than Clark.

[cliffordu]

32. BAD POST NEVERMIND

Sorry. My bad.

[Spazito]

36. I am sure they have the international honors as well...

Lets start with his US honors:

Joint Meritorious Unit Award

Defense Distinguished Service Medal (with 4 Oak Leaf Clusters)

Distinguished Service Medal (with Oak Leaf Cluster)

Silver Star Medal

Legion of Merit (with 3 Oak Leaf Clusters)

Bronze Star

The Purple Heart

Meritorious Service Medal (with Oak Leaf Cluster)

Army Commendation Medal
(with Oak Leaf Cluster)

Kosovo Campaign Medal

Joint Chiefs of Staff Identification Badge

National Defense Service Medal (with Service Star)

Army Staff Identification Badge

Vietnam Service Medal (with 3 Service Stars)

Combat Infantry Badge

Parachutist Badge

The Ranger Tab

The Army Service Ribbon


International Honors:


ALBANIA
The Skanderbeg Medal

ARGENTINA
Order of Merit

BELGIUM
The Grand Cordon of the Order of Leopold

BULGARIA
Order of the Madara Horseman, First Class with Swords

CANADA
The Meritorious Service Cross

CROATIA
Grade of Prince Branimir with Ribbon and Star

CZECH REPUBLIC
Cross of Merit of the Minister of Defense First Class

ENGLAND
Honorary Knight Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire

ESTONIA
Order of the Cross of the Eagle

FRANCE
Commander of the Legion of Honor

GERMANY
Grand Cross of the Order of Merit

HUNGARY
Order of Merit of the Hungarian Republic

ITALY
Grand Officer of the Order of Merit

LITHUANIA
First Class Order of Lithuanian Grand Duke Gediminas

LUXEMBOURG
Grand Officer of the Order of Merit of the Grand Duchy

MOROCCO
Grand Cordon of the Ouissam Alaoui

NETHERLANDS
Knight Grand Cross in the Order of Orange-Nassau, with Swords

POLAND
The Commander's Cross with Star of the Order of Merit

PORTUGAL
Grand Cross of the Medal of Military Merit

SLOVAKIA
Commemorative Medal of the Minister of Defence of the Slovak Republic First Class

SLOVENIA
Commander's Cross, The Silver Order of Freedom

SPAIN
Grand Medal of Military Merit (White Band)

VIETNAM
Republic of Vietnam Combat Medal

Oh, and along with these he also has a Masters Degree in Politics, Philosophy and Economics.

[wmbrew0206]

41. I didn't say Clark wasn't decorated, just not as decorated as previous poster stated.

I was correcting the posters above who claimed "Clark was the most decorated soldier since Eisenhower"

Clark has a lot of awards, but not as enough to be considered "...the most decorated soldier since Eisenhower".

Also, in term of awards, personal combat awards are the most important. Clark has a Silver Star and two Bronze Stars. That is very good, but not more than anyone else.

David Hackworth is probably the most decorated solider since WWII, with two Distinguish Service Crosses, five Silver Stars and over five Bronze Stars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hackworth#Military_decorations

FYI, International Awards don't mean much.

[Spazito]

47. Actually, given the current state of the US reputation...

I would suggest the opposite re International Awards. Wesley Clark already has the respect in many countries that will be sorely needed when Obama wins. Trust in the US will not come easy at all and someone like Clark who is already trusted would go a long way in trying to change the current, and well-earned, imo, hostile attitude toward the US.

Combat medals are the least of what is "important" in this case, it is the totality of the package. He has combat medals, he has International Awards AND he has 3 Masters. The whole package.

[wmbrew0206]

53. Wrong. When running for political office IN the US, personal comabt awards is what matters.

Americans understand Silver and Bronze Star, Navy Crosses, and Medals of Honor. They mihgt know what a Victorian Cross from Britian means.

American's couldn't care less about any awards given from countries you listed.

If you want to prove those medals are important, go back and see if those are medals that every EUCOM commander recieved. If every EUCOM commander recieved them, then the medals are a formality, if not, then it is important.

Either way, Joe Sixpack knows what a Silver Star is, he doesn't know what a Grade of Prince Branimir with Ribbon and Star from Croatia is. Which one do you think carries more weight with him?

[WinkyDink]

57. I take it you would never vote for a woman?

[wmbrew0206]

61. Where did you get that?

[wmbrew0206]

44. Just out of curiousity, do know what those medals you listed mean or what they are awarded for?

[Spazito]

49. The medals and their meaning are to be found on Clark's site....

you would do well to peruse it, you might find yourself not quite so dismissive of the man. Here are the links explaining what each of those medals are:

US medals:

http://securingamerica.com/taxonomy/term/81

International Awards:

http://securingamerica.com/taxonomy/term/82

[wmbrew0206]

52. I know what they mean. I asked if you know what they mean.

[Spazito]

54. Yes, do you know what having a Masters Degree in Politics, Philosophy and Economics means?

I can read and did so, yes, I know what they mean and I get the point you are trying hard to make, you see them as merely for "show" if they are not COMBAT medals. I disagree.

Combat medals say little about a person, imo. International honors, being appointed SACEUR, being a Rhodes Scholar and earning a Masters in Politics Philosophy and Economics says a hell of a lot more about a person than what COMBAT medals one has.

Edited to add:

If the need to have a VP with a chest full of COMBAT medals was the priority then, there are others who would fill that very NARROW slot. I see nothing that indicates the number of COMBAT medals is big on anyone's list including Obama's.

[wmbrew0206]

56. I asked if you what they mean because they were given as a end of tour awards for SAEUR

If you understand what they mean and how you get them, then you can see that they aren't that important. Every SACEUR get those medals or similar ones from those countries. They go with the appointment to SACEUR.

I stated that Clark is not the most decorated soilder since Eisenhower. I stand by that.

Also, if being appointted SACEUR is important, is being "reitred early" AKA military speak for fired, also important?

This is why Clark is not viable as a VP and why he is not being vetted. For what ever reason, Clark was relieved while he was commanding EUCOM and retired. I think it was because he tick Cohen and Shelton off by going straight to Clinton, and they retaliated by relieving him. Either way, being relieved of a combatant command is a politcal career killer.

Clark would be great a SecState or another cabinet member, he is just not viable as a VP choice.

[Spazito]

59. Yeah, Hugh Shelton, the POS repub, is a great one to trust re

the "firing", as you put it. The firing was political therefore is not a negative, imo. I do agree this was retaliation by Shelton and Cohen toward Clinton and that has already been dealt with during Clark's run for the nomination.

I am curious as to who you would prefer to see as VP? Not Clark obviously, then who?

[wmbrew0206]

62. It was not dealt with in '04

The difference between an "issue" in the democratic primary and a general election is a very big difference. If Clark is in fact not being vetted, you would have to assume that it is because of the EUCOM issue.

I think Gen. Tony Zinni brings everything to the ticket that Clark does without Clark's baggage from EUCOM.

[Spazito]

64. What are Zinni's strong points?

What would he bring to the ticket that Clark would not. You and I have to disagree about your assumption the EUCOM issue is a "political career killer", so, putting that aside what does Zinni offer that Clark does not. I am genuinely interested and have been very impressed with General Zinni when I have heard him speak so my question is not an attempted gotcha.

[wmbrew0206]

66. Here is a primer on Gen. Zinni

Zinni was CC of CentCom from 1996-2000.

He was against the Iraq War

He was a special envoy to the ME Peace Process for Bush. He left after a very nasty falling out.

Degree in Economics from Villinova.

From PA, so he locks down a potential swing state.

He is also a Washington Outsider, who has worked for two differ nt administrations (republican and democrat), who has the executive experience and foreign affairs credentials that Obama needs.

[Spazito]

67. Impressive, I very much like the man for sure...

I don't see where he out-qualifies Clark but nor is he under-qualified either. I have read him and have nothing negative to say about him at all.

Thanks for your response, it is much appreciated. All in all, none of us have a clue who it will be and I give kudos to the Obama campaign for keeping it that way.

Either man, Clark or Zinni would be great in the VP position it seems. Zinni could serve Secretary of Defense, right? His ten year limitation is up? I know Clark cannot unless an exception is made to the 10 year rule.

[wmbrew0206]

70. Nope, Zinni and Clark both retired the same year

[Spazito]

72. Damn, too bad, he would have been a great asset to Obama were he eligible n/t

[wmbrew0206]

65. Also, I wouldn't call a decorated SF officer who becamse CJCS a "POS"

If you disagree with him about Clark, fine. I don't think that is enough for you to insult his 30+ years of service to the country.

[Spazito]

68. Given what Shelton did, smear Clark during 2004 and then refuse to

back it up earns him the POS title, that and his "work" with Cohen to use Clark to stab Clinton. You know, those who serve CAN be pieces of shit too, serving does NOT give one a license to shit on people and get a pass for it. Just like being a POW does NOT qualify one to be President of ANYTHING never mind of the United States. McCain is a POS too, imo.

[wmbrew0206]

69. Please see Post #31 in this thread for a more in depth response, here is the cliff notes

I think you end up doing to Shelton what you accuse Shelton of doing to Clark, when you refer to him as a "POS"

Yes, those who serve can also be POS, however most POS don't make it all the way up to CJCS.

[Spazito]

71. I read #31 when you posted, your first point is the one I would repeat to you...

we have a difference of opinion. You are entitled to yours as am I to mine. Making it to CJCS often means you only need to know who's ass to kiss and when to kiss it, imo.

There are very honorable 4 star Generals like General Tony McPeak and then there are ones like Shelton. I'll take McPeak over Shelton in a NY minute.

Edited to add: It is clear, you like Shelton, I do not. I like Clark, you do not. I think I will have to agree to disagree and leave it at that. I have genuinely appreciated the back and forth, though, and I thank you for that.

[wmbrew0206]

73. I'll leave it at this. I like Clark a lot. I just don't think he is viable as a VP.

In the words of Vince Vaughan - "good talk"

[Lucinda]

37. I think you and I have big differences in our definitions of "heavily decorated"

http://securingamerica.com/taxonomy/term/76

[wmbrew0206]

43. Go reread my post. I didn't say Clark wasn't heavily decoracted, just he was not the "most heavily

decorated since Eisenhower."

[WinkyDink]

58. Well, Audie Murphy is dead.

[Tom Rinaldo]

18. That's because Kerry was tagged as an anti war protester

from the Viet Nam war days, which many older vets still have misgivings about. Not all vets are the same, just like not all non vets are the same. Clark was career miltary, he too is a decorated war hero but he also ran and won a war for N.A.T.O. Plus he isn't tagged as a North East liberal the way that Kerry was.

[DarthDem]

22. You're Right

It doesn't take anything to sell me on the concept that he's a GOOD choice - - but is he the BEST?

[bunkerbuster1]

4. I've always been fine with it--my only concern

...was the manner in which he'd campaigned in 2004; he just didn't seem to generate much excitement as a candidate.

I assume he's learned more than a few presentation tricks since then, and he's always been rock-solid as a TeeVee interview, so he'd be a fine hired gun.

And that's all I care about. A guy who helps Obama win, who is a credible successor as President to the public. Clark would be fine by me.

[Dinger]

9. If Memory Serves Me Correctly, He Out-raised Howard Dean

for a quarter (not sure which one). I think I read about it at opensecrets.org.

[bunkerbuster1]

23. I read that as "he out-raised Howard Dean

by a quarter."

Well, I thought it was funny. But I'm tired.

[Dinger]

24. LOL

I'll try and find a link, but I'm lazy now. Well, here goes nothing . . .

[Dinger]

25. LOL

I'll try and find a link, but I'm lazy now. Well, here goes nothing . . .

[Avalux]

11. Clark has come a looong way since then.

He travels the country fundraising for local dem candidates. Check out his schedule here:

http://securingamerica.com/taxonomy/term/14

He'd be great.

[windbreeze]

34. Trust me

where ever that man went, people got to hear him speak, and meet him, there was excitement..I believe he raised in excess of $22 million in the last quarter of 03, which was NO shabby accomplishment, for being someone people were unfamiliar with..he actually outraised some of the other better known candidates...wb

[LSparkle]

5. I like Clark but he's still an unknown commodity to many voters ...

We already have a presidential candidate who's only been on
the national stage for 4 years, and Clark has never been in
elected office. I think we need someone with more experience
and a familiar face -- like Joe Biden. He's been in D.C.
10 YEARS LONGER than Bomb Bomb and the American public is
familiar with him. Clark is a no-brainer for a Cabinet
post, though!

[dansolo]

19. That is the problem with Biden

Biden is the definition of a Washington insider. The American public is familiar with him, and considering his lack of support in the primaries, they aren't that impressed.

[TwilightGardener]

12. Why didn't Clark ever run for a lesser office first--just to gain elective and legislative

experience? Congress, Senate, Governor, Mayor...that's one of his chief drawbacks, IMO. He seems to want to zoom straight to the top without paying his political dues.

[earthlover]

15. Excuse me...I thought we wanted CHANGE!!!!

The old way of thinking, the dinosaur way of thinking, is that if you aren't part of the old fashioned establishment, if you hadn't paid your dues, you don't get ahead.

I seriously doubt if that attitude is change I can believe in....

[TwilightGardener]

16. My guess is that Obama would like someone with well-honed political and policy-making

skills. Role of VP since Gore and Cheney is to arm-twist your agenda through Congress. It helps if you're used to drafting legislation and maneuvering it (past your political enemies) through either a state legislature or through Congress.

[Donna Zen]

21. A thought:

Wes Clark was J5, the Joint chiefs seat of policy and planning. In 04 in the abbreviated time that he spent in the race, he created plans that would be used by candidates in down ticket races. His planning is always complete, detailed and meticulous.

It is so curious that people are uniformed about what a four star general does. They run schools, hospitals, housing and infrastructure on a large scale. At the same time they work the congress to get what they need. Zinni speaks Arabic, Clark speaks Russian, German and Spanish. There are certainly generals who don't impress me, but when they do, the are well-rounded and amazing people. I really don't care if they've been running around to fundraisers most of their lives.

[TwilightGardener]

51. Yeah, I'm somewhat familiar with what high-ranking officers do in the military.

It's good background experience, but not much different than high-level corporate management. Politicians do more than go to fundraisers. They get elected by voters--that is no small feat, to convince enough people to vote for you. And the experience of creating legislation, jostling with opponents, balancing your constituency's needs with your own beliefs, keeping your voters happy enough with your work to get re-elected--that's important experience, and every damn one of our candidates this year has had it on some level. Hillary got elected (to the Senate), Biden, Richardson, Kucinich, Dodd, and yes, Obama. And the much-maligned Evan Bayh manages to get re-elected over and over. Political skills are every bit as important as resume.

[KaryninMiami]

14. I'm more then warmed to the idea-- I'm fired up about it. Clark is a great choice!

Obama needs a bulldog who will be relentless at fighting back- and someone that has more military credibility then McCain-- Clark gives him both. Plus, he has the potential to move more of the Hillary supporters over - they trust him.

[WA98296]

63. I agree, I don't think there is a better choice. Hope he does it!

[Independent_Voice]

20. I've liked Clark since first being introduced to him in 2004

I think he'd be way more trustworthy and upstanding of a vice-president than Kaine, Bayh, or Clinton would. And let's face it: Biden is too much of a loose cannon (although I believe Biden would, overall, do a good job in the actual office).

Clark is one of the better choices Obama has at his fingertips.

[gulliver]

26. Anyone have better name and face recognition now?

Clark has been on the tube constantly for years now, including Fox "News" Channel. I think he is becoming a familiar face to people.

[wmbrew0206]

28. Clark won't make it through the vetting process.

The first rule of a VP choice is "Do no harm"

Clark's "retirement" from EUCOM and the comment his boss, Gen Hugh Shelton, made about him during his Presidential run are political kryptonite.

I have a lot of respect for Wes Clark and think he had an amazing military career. Unfortunately, they issues surrounding his retirement at too hot and possibly politically damaging to make it through the vetting process.

[Dinger]

29. hugh shelton THINKS he's a "mover and shaker"

He has REFUSED to explain his unsubstantiated smear. He should go crawl back under the rock he came from. Guy's an asshole.

[wmbrew0206]

31. Dinger, you and I have talked about this before and we have different perspectives

Hugh Shelton has a LOT of respect from the military community just as Wes Clark does.

The difference is that Hugh Shelton was Wes Clark's boss. Shelton and SecDef Cohen decided to "retire" Wes Clark early from EUCOM.

Like we talked about in an earlier thread, Shelton probably had Clark "retired" early because Clark went outside of the chain of command and went straight to Clinton on some issue. Whether Clark was right or wrong, he ticked off his superiors. Shelton probably retaliated against Clark by having his command at EUCOM cut short.

I disagree that Shelton think he is a "mover and a shaker" because no one has heard from Shelton since he made those comments about Clark. Shelton had a very good career in the Army, just as good or better than Clark, and has stayed out of politics, with the exception of that quote about Clark, since his retirement.

As I have said before, Shelton probably made that comment believing that it would not get out. When the comment did get out, Shelton was in a bind. He probably believed what he said, but realized that he had made the mistake of letting a personal issue between two four star generals get into the public, a cardinal sin in the military world. Shelton was not going to take the comment back, but he didn't want to make his mistake worse by trying to explain it, so he just refused to say anything about it afterward.

Your comments, in trying to clear Wes Clark of a perceived "smear", smeared Hugh Shelton. You call him "an asshole" and and say "He should go crawl back under the rock he came from." You are in fact doing to Hugh Shelton, what you think Hugh Shelton did to Wes Clark.

Unfortunately, the burden of proof is not on Hugh Shelton's side because he was Wes Clark's superior during the period that Shelton commented on. Since Shelton was Clark's boss, his evaluation of Clark's performance is a up to him. The only legit way to criticize Shelton's evaluation of Clark is to prove that Shelton was either unfit to make an evaluation or was bias against Clark. Either way, that requires calling Shelton's record, one that got a Special Forces officer appointed to the CJCS post (the highest in the military), into question.

The reason that I doubt Clark will be Obama's VP is that Wes Clark Jr has stated that Obama's vetting committee has not requested any info from Clark. This could be for several reasons:
1. The vetting committee decided that they didn't want a VP candidate with issues from his military service.
2. The vetting committee looked into the issues surrounding Clark's retirement and decided that he was not a viable candidate.
2. The Clinton's have quietly told the vetting committee that Clark's retirement issues would cause more harm than good as a VP candidate.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

30. DLC DLC DLC DLC DLC DLC

I thought we were supposed to hate the DLC?


Did I miss the memo?


By the way, I'd love for Clark to be VP.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our third quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[davidpdx]

38. I would be fine with it as well

Did anyone see Micheal Moore's six things that could cost us the election. It's interesting that Moore specifically says we shouldn't nominate someone like Clark.

[Satyagrahi]

39. Wes Clark Jr: "He is simply not being considered."

Wes Clark Jr: "my father hasn't even been asked to speak at the convention, let alone had any conversations with the Obama campaign regarding the VP slot. He is simply not being considered."

by WesClarkJr on Fri Aug 15, 2008 at 09:21:59 PM PDT
http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2008/8/15/193737/216/425#c425

:-(

[davidpdx]

40. No offense

But do we have any proof that this is indeed Wes Clark's son?

[DCBob]

42. or that he would even know since..

much of the process is hidden especially if its the real guy.

[Satyagrahi]

45. Yes.

Proof:

Wes Clark Jr. is taking a stand!!!
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/12555

Had Enough?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/3/154627/3818

[DCBob]

48. Yet the KOS folks appear to be even more pro-Clark VP than DU.

Why is that??

[Honeycombe8]

46. Clark? I supported Clark for Prez in 2004, but get real. His nat'l political life is over.

He's just NOT a politician. End of story. Finiti. Caput. It's over. National politics is for the big boys (or women)...those who have primed their political skills at a lower level for years.

I love Clark as a person. I would love him to be Sec of Defense. But he will NEVER be the VP this time. Maybe he could be NEXT time, if he were to become a member of the 2008 cabinet, so he can hone some political skills.

Remember the misstatements he recently made in response to a Bob Schaeffer question? He didn't say anything wrong...nothing that didn't need to be said...and the poor choice of words were those of Scaeffer, not Clark. But his inexperience in phrasing his answer to use Schaeffer's words led to a soundbite that was played repeatedly for over a week, causing Clark to go on more shows to explain himself. This wouldn't have happened to an experienced politician. If he were VP, we could expect more of the same.

Question is...do you want win? First and foremost, Obama needs a VP who "goes forth and DOES NO HARM."

[Spazito]

50. Hmmm, I didn't read Clark's response to Schaeffer as a...

"misstep" at all. It brought out the very important question as to why would having been a POW qualify one to be President. Who better to bring that issue to the public than a 4 star General and former SACEUR. I see it as "taking the hit" for the Democrats and deliberately doing so.

[Honeycombe8]

74. I guess you missed the point? Clark was daggered all over the media for the wording...

It wasn't the message, per se. It was the very bad phraseology he used. That phraseology was Schaeffer's. But you wouldn't have known that from the clips. The clip shown for a week nonstop was Clark saying something like...."I don't think being shot down and held as a prisoner of war qualifies you to be President of the United States." A true enough thought, IMO. It needed to be said. But disrespectful phraseology that many in the public took offense to. In reality, this is how it went, though (or something like it):

Schaeffer: So you don't think McCain's veteran status qualifies him to be President? Well, was Obama ever shot down and held as a prisoner of war?

Clark: I don't think being shot down and held as a prisoner of war qualifies you to be President of the United States.

You can see how harmless Clark's answer is, when you see Schaeffer's question. But a more experienced politician would've avoided using the insensitive, gotcha words that Schaeffer was lobbing to the inexperienced Clark. He fell for it.

Proof of the pudding....Clark went on several political shows to explain himself, and he hasn't been seen since. He will not be speaking for the Dem. candidate any longer. He will not be V.P.

[w4rma]

55. General Clark should definitely be in a leadership position somehow. VP would be nice but it appears

he's not in consideration. I would have liked to see it be Sen. Edwards, but it appears to be Gov. Kaine who is likely going to get it (whom I like quite a bit, also).

[Avalux]

75. We don't know who is in consideration.

Any info we get is either from bloggers or journalists....how would they know?

Think about this -

The VP selection will be sent out to Obama's supporters via text message - we will be the first to know. It's a fantastic way to tell us little people we're important. If word gets out before they send the text, then the whole things goes up in smoke.

The Obama campaign must keep the VP pick a secret. They would not tell Clark's staff, bloggers, journalists - even Wes Clark Jr.

[MasonJar]

60. Another important point is that Wes Clark graduated first in his class

at West Point and MCCAin graduated 4th from the bottom at the Naval Academy. MCCain really is a second Bush, isn't he? Both got degrees because of dad and granddad. Clark is truly brilliant, and he is well-spoken and reasoned in his thinking. I hope he is Obama's choice. How could it not be when the others do not measure up and also already have important dem positions that we could lose?

[Dinger]

76. We're Gonna Have To Take It In The Ass

just like 2004. Disgusting. I wonder how much longer I have left here.

[Iwillnevergiveup]

77. Wesley Clark

wasn't invited to the convention and isn't participating. If I recall, the Obama campaign dissed Clark's comments about McCain's POW experience.

[ravishane]

78. Honestly,

I don't want any ex-generals on the ticket. Personal preference. I don't trust warmongers. Imagine that.

[CitizenPatriot]

79. read up on Clark

because he is not a war-mongerer. He has been on record many times saying force should be the LAST resort. he's been honored for his diplomacy many times over. He has seen the horror of war and it turned him into someone who believes in the value of diplomacy first.

Here's an article by Clark in WaPo Jan of 07 entitled: The Smart Surge: Diplomacy

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/07/AR2007010700980.html

[ravishane]

80. thanks for the article

You would think someone aware of the horror of war would BE OUT OF THE MILITARY before he became a general!

Jesus.

Anyway, early in this piece he says that there "were never enough troops in Iraq." YES, it is true that Wes Clark, Joe Biden, etc. would have conducted this war better . . . but that, to me, is simply saying that they had a more effective way of waging a vastly immoral war.

It IS a fact that the "more effective way of waging the war" is a key to winning in November because the majority of Americans like American militarism. I just don't want that, personally. I understand the electoral benefit (although a focus on this could just highlight whatever bullshit "weakness" Obama has on the issue and McCain can go after him and ignore the Veep).

Clark is on point about diplomacy, of course, but which Dem Veep possible choice ISN'T?

[CitizenPatriot]

81. I see your point

I have various issues with them, though I'll obviously settle for whomever Obama picks and I'm sure he will make the right choice (now there's some confidence in a leader I haven't had in a long time).

Clark is very liberal on issues that matter to me. And he's proven himself, throughout his career, to have a backbone, stand up to his own bosses when he thought they were wrong, and he literally glows with integrity. He and Obama together are like a complete change.

So, I hear what you're saying and respect your opinion...I'll look into the others some more, but rankly I found either I didn't like their policy stances or they seemed like business as usual or they just didn't seem to have the backbone. Clark has backbone and that's what has gotten him into some trouble. I frankly couldn't give a hoot what the far right or msm thinks of him -- if we pandered to those people we'd never get anywhere. the time for that crap is over. I can't believe people (not you) even bring up msm opinion of Clark. Of course they don't like him! He has courage to stand up to their agenda! this means we should at the very least wonder what they are afraid of and take notice.