How about Wes Clark for VP?

[Nancy Waterman]

He was a Hillary supporter so there is a healing aspect to this. He has incredible executive experience in the military and lots of foreign policy credential because of it (strategic allied commander, iirc?)

[robinlynne]

1. Great idea!!!!!!!! I nominate John Edwards for attorney general!

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. He's on my short list n/t

[Clark2008]

3. Best choice for several reasons.

Bringing in Hillary supporters is one thing, but here are others:

* White, Southerner military guy: offsets McCain's war hero status in a heartbeat, especially since Clark was shot, but not captured, and RETURNED to Vietnam after he healed.
* He's not currently serving as an elected officials so this helps in two ways:
1. We're not losing a Dem senator, governor or representative.
2. He fits perfectly as a "Change" agent alongside Obama - Clark's an outsider.
* He testified in front of Congress that going to war in Iraq was stupid and that we should finish what we started in Afghanistan.
* He's handsome. I know that should be irrelevent, but it isn't.
* He's highly respected as a foreign policy expert, having been NATO Allied Supreme Commander and having written peace accords and treaties. He also was reponsible for the Northern Iraqi No-Fly Zone and knows the Middle East quite well.
* He's beloved by both Muslims (for Kosovo) and Jews (he's half Jewish).
* His troops loved him and stumped for him - my husband being one of said troops.

I think he's perfect, but I'm biased.

[Nancy Waterman]

11. Thank you for summing that up so well

McCain's biggest critique of Obama is the military/foreign policy experience. Clark negates it totally.

[awoke_in_2003]

21. As you point out, he is a great choice.

But I have a question, was his mother or father jewish? As I understand it, he is only considered jewish (by fellow jews) if it was his mother that was jewish.

[JustinL]

34. his biological father was Jewish

Clark's paternal great-grandfather was a Belarusian Jew who immigrated to the United States in response to the Pale of Settlement and anti-Semitic violence from Russian pogroms. Clark's father, Benjamin J. Kanne, graduated from the Chicago-Kent College of Law and served in the U.S. Naval Reserve as an ensign during World War I, although he was never assigned to a combat mission. Kanne, living in Chicago, Illinois, became involved with ward politics in the 1920s as a prosecutor and served in local offices. He went on to serve as a delegate to the 1932 Democratic National Convention that nominated Franklin D. Roosevelt as the party's presidential candidate (though his name does not appear on the published roll of convention delegates).

Kanne came from the Kohen family line, and Clark's son has characterized his grandparents' marriage, between Jewish Benjamin and Methodist Veneta Kanne, as "about as multicultural as you could've gotten in 1944."

Clark was born Wesley Kanne in Chicago on December 23, 1944. His father Benjamin died on December 6, 1948, following which his mother then moved the family to Little Rock, Arkansas. This move was made for a variety of reasons, including escaping the greater cost of living in a large city such as Chicago, the support Veneta's family in Arkansas could provide, and her feeling of being an outsider to the remaining Kanne family as she did not share their religion. Once in Little Rock, Veneta married Viktor Clark, whom she met while working as a secretary for a local bank. Viktor raised Wesley as his son, and officially adopted him on Wesley's 16th birthday. Wesley's name was changed to Wesley Kanne Clark. Viktor Clark's name actually replaced that of Wesley's biological father on his birth certificate, something Wesley would later say that he wished they had not done. Veneta raised Wesley without telling him of his Jewish ancestry to protect him from the anti-Semitic activities of the Ku Klux Klan occurring in the South at the time. Although his mother was Methodist, Clark chose a Baptist church after moving to Little Rock and continued attending it throughout his childhood.

wikipedia

[awoke_in_2003]

38. Thanks. nt

[JackRiddler]

4. No war criminals please. Thanks.

[Clark2008]

7. Considering he's not one, I guess we'll be OK.

(And don't drag out that tired old, inaccurate crap from 2004 - it was debunked, thoroughly).

[EOTE]

13. Whaaaaa? Wes Clark stopped genocide without losing a single American soldier.

There are tens of thousands of ethnic Albanians alive today because of this man. I think he'd be an excellent choice for VP. I'm disappointed he didn't run for President this time around.

[JackRiddler]

27. Bullshit.

There are thousands of Yugoslavians dead today because of NATO's war in violation of its own charter, including many Kosovars killed by the bombing and escalation of the conflict caused by NATO.

The Yugoslavian government attempted to suppress a rebel movement armed out of Albania with the goal of ethnically cleansing Serbs from a region in which they had 800-year roots.

About 2,000 people were killed in the civil conflict - then NATO stepped in with its ultimatums and actions, producing on the order of 10,000 deaths and hundreds of thousands of refugees (who fled their homes when the NATO bombing started), to the tune of false reports about "genocide" that you, apparently, haven't bothered to correct.

Now, years later the province has been ethnically cleansed not only of Serbs but of Roma/Sinti and even a small population of Jews - thanks to NATO.

Fine, Clark followed orders in all this - until his insane attempt to engage the Russians at the Pristina Airport, which British Gen. Michael Jackson disobeyed, saying, "I'm not going to let you start World War Three."

[EOTE]

29. No, not bullshit.

To say that genocide wasn't occuring is to be blind to the atrocities that occured under Milosovic. Clark helped to end that genocide and he did it without losing one American soldier. I could really care less about the deaths of those who perpetrated genocide.

[JackRiddler]

35. "The deaths of those who perpetrated genocide."

NIS, Yugoslavia (Reuters) - A woman lies dead beside a bag of carrots Friday after a NATO daylight air raid near a market over the town of Nis south of Belgrade. Two residential areas and a hospital were hit by what appears to be cluster bombs killing 15 people, injuring scores with shrapnel and destroying some 30 homes.
Photo by Desmond Boylan

[EOTE]

42. And what are you trying to prove here?

Yes, it's a shame that innocents die. However, you'll find that in ANY war. That's a strawman of the most hideous kind. The question is was the intervention worth it. Without a doubt it was. Tell me this. Are there any wars within U.S. history that you did support? That's an honest question. Please name one war that you do support.

[JackRiddler]

43. How negative, these people who never like any war, ruining the party...

You're the one who, 10 years later, once again presents the dehumanizing lies about the "genocidal" Serbs. This was used by Clark and his fellow commanders of that war to justify the killing of this woman and thousands of others. It is used by you, however, merely so that an interchangeable general of that war who could never win more than 10 percent of a primary vote on his own can be helped undeservedly to become the vice-president. Because generals are such strong and brave and patriotic and essentially good people who "serve their country" and provide such an important counter-balance when the top of the ticket is a black man who might be perceived as an actual progressive.

No, the intervention was not "worth it," it was murder in violation of the NATO and UN charters, and your saying it was "worth it" indicates only that you haven't read a thing about the Kosovo intervention except what you repeat from the Western pro-war press.

What does it mean to "support" war? Certainly, if another nation attacks, yours should defend itself. That happened in World War II. The US didn't start that conflict, however, the Axis Powers did. So the question of "support" for World War II is relevant only from their perspective. I wouldn't have supported the German blitzkrieg or the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. I would have, of course, supported the US defense against the fascist coalition and signed up.

There, happy now? Because, you know, it's just soooooo doctrinaire and unpatriotic and holier-than-thou, these people who can't find at least one pointless mass slaughter launched for moronic reasons by power-mad national elites to support.

[JackRiddler]

45. By the way, here's how Milosevic justified his original action against the KLA.

"Yes, it's a shame that innocents die. However, you'll find that in ANY police action to suppress anarchy. That's a strawman of the most hideous kind. The question is was the intervention worth it. Without a doubt it was."

[EOTE]

47. Tens of thousands would have died. That cannot be disputed.

And what would have our evil intentions have been by intervening? What American interests did we promote by stopping that genocide? Just what did we have to gain other than stopping the slaughter of thousands and thousands of innocent people? Those on the far right were against it because we had nothing to gain financially by it, but they said it was because Clinton used it as a distraction from Lewinsky. I've never figured out why those on the far left were against it, I guess mad men need to be able to get their genocide on, even if we can stop it with relatively little loss of life. Any comparisons to Iraq are absolutely laughable. Won't somebody think of the insane war criminals?

[JackRiddler]

48. Hmmm...

I've never figured out why those on the far left were against it,

Probably because you immunized yourself against reading a word they wrote.

[EOTE]

54. You're right. I forgot we were the pro-genocide party.

Stupid me, I thought we didn't like ethnic cleansing. I'll have to check my liberal handbook again. Screw you, rest of the world!

[JackRiddler]

56. So, all I have to do to start a war wherever is to yell "genocide" and wait

for the Pavlovian response to a trigger word?

[EOTE]

59. No, but recognizing genocide when you see it helps.

Here's a link in case you need a refresher. Of course, the Hague criminal war crimes tribunal agrees with me as well. But what the hell do those goofballs know?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide

[JackRiddler]

64. Milosevic was convicted of nothing.

[EOTE]

67. ROFL, because he died during the proceedings.

He had been charged with crimes against humanity, violating the laws or customs of war, grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and genocide. Of course, I'm sure he would have just brushed those charges off if he managed to live through them. You're reaching man, you're really reaching. But go on and defend your man Slobodan, I'm sure dead tyrants everywhere appreciate your support.

[JackRiddler]

69. If Clark had been in the dock alongside Milosevic, that would have reflected the reality better. nt

[EOTE]

71. Only... not at all. Milosevic was a war criminal and Clark was a man who helped put him away.

I know in your mind that makes him just as bad. But to rational people, he's a hero. Go on tearing a good man down if it makes you feel better, I'm through with you.

[Djinn]

36. right

so Bush is equally absolved because Saddam was a brutal mass murderer?

If ANY American President faced the terrorism of the KLA (oooh scary Muslims who kidnap, torture and kill to further a goal of an Islamic separatist state) then their response would make Milosevic look like a bunny hugging pacifist.

The "action" in the former Yugoslavia was an act of aggression against a state which posed ZERO threat to the US.

That you believe the official story, and justify US aggression just because no Americans died and it is told by people on "your" side of politics is why much of the rest of the word views the US Presidential election a matter of supreme indifference.

Democrats are just as happy as Republicans to justify the murder of foreigners.

It's amazing that people posting here will beat their chests over torture under Bush but are happy to stump for a man who claims WHINSEC never advocated torture (funny their training manuals do just that)

[EOTE]

41. I believe in the greater good.

No one can argue that the Iraq war was for the greater good. Not only was it not in our best interests, but over a million innocent Iraqis have died. Yes, in every war there are innocents who die and that is a great shame. However, our intervention of Kosovo saved tens of thousands of lives, if not even more. To me it was a no brainer. If you can stop a mass genocide with relatively little force, you do it. I would consider it to be much like Darfur today. Although you probably would't argue for intervention in Darfur either, it would be the humanitarian thing to do. We'd be able to stop the deaths of many with the deaths of a few. I want a president who would be willing to go against your demographic in order to save tens of thousands of people. To say that I'd justify the murder of foreigners is SICK and WRONG. As in any war, people die, however, to argue that it wasn't worth it is BULLSHIT. No one can successfully argue that a genocide wasn't stopped. How many millions of people died in WWII? Was that not worth it because people died? Sorry you're incapable of seeing the greater good.

[JackRiddler]

44. Really now?

Sounds to me more like you believe the bullshit of the side you identify with doesn't stink.

And God save the Africans from your "humanitarian intervention."

[EOTE]

46. So I guess you'd prefer the slaughter in Darfur continues.

You're a brave and compassionate man.

[JackRiddler]

49. Not at all. The US and China should end their proxy oil war immediately

and stop supplying either side with arms or support.

They could also put together a joint development-aid package in the form of grants (not loans), conditional on cessation of hostilities and representative government.

Otherwise, no, it's clear that an invasion would not help the situation there.

[EOTE]

53. Give me a break. The U.S. is not supplying African warlords.

And what arms would we be supplying them with? The machetes that they're using to hack people up with? You can't be serious.

[JackRiddler]

55. "Machetes"

Such a thoroughgoing knowledge you show.

I can imagine you in the 1980s telling us the Contras were a spontaneous uprising independent of any outside action.

[EOTE]

58. Yes, machetes. And some very small arms, but mostly machetes.

Care to show me all these massive arms we're supplying them with?

[JackRiddler]

63. No warlords in 2008 without assault rifles, RPGs, ammo, vehicles...

This stuff comes from an international market, not made in Africa.

[EOTE]

66. You said we were supplying them with arms, where's your proof?

Just so you know, the total value of the weapons that are being used in Darfur is equivalent to about 5 minutes of spending in Iraq. Even with the Iraq war going on, it would be an easy and relatively bloodless intervention to stop the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocents. Now, what arms are the U.S. providing African warlords? You didn't say that the international market was providing weapons, you said the U.S. were. That was outrageously stupid. You won't admit that you're wrong, you'll just change the subject.

[JackRiddler]

68. You said there's an ongoing genocide and US military can "stop" it, where's yours?

Early CIA Involvement in Darfur Has Gone Unreported

by Jay Janson

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=4574

---

Darfur: CIA accused of weapons smuggling

afrol News, 27 July - Sudan is now blaming the United States’ Central Intelligence Agency(CIA), accusing the body of fuelling conflicts in troubled southern region of Darfur. Sudanese Interior Minister, Zubair Bashir Taha, spilled the beans by accusing CIA for smuggling weapons into the region.

http://www.afrol.com/articles/26241

(Why should I believe Sudan? Why should I believe the US, either?)

---

But the picture is very complex - different interests are competing, but you can be certain that US boots on the ground are never there and have never been deployed anywhere solely for "humanitarian reasons."

here's CIA and MI-6 saying it's not a genocide:

http://www.mathaba.net/0_index.shtml?x=381796

---

Various programs on "Darfurism" by Keith Harmon Snow

http://allthingspass.com/journalism.php?catid=24#

[EOTE]

70. You're hopeless. Go on believing the U.S. is perpetrating these atrocities.

And then going on to say that nothing should be done to stop them. You're beyond hope if you think that a military intervention couldn't put a stop to this with little ill effects.

[EOTE]

72. And it's quite hilarious. First you accuse the CIA of funding the Warlords...

then you cite them through dubious links saying that Darfur isn't undergoing genocide. I'd strongly suggest getting help.

[JackRiddler]

79. Your inability to read or understand nuance isn't my mental problem.

[MNBrewer]

62. guess that rules out anyone who voted for the Iraq War Resolution.

[JackRiddler]

82. An excellent initial litmus test for integrity and/or not being a SUCKER.

[tomg]

5. Definitely a top contender. nt

[RethugAssKicker]

6. Excellent choice.... as long as he is loyal to Obama.

[ShortnFiery]

76. Clark will be loyal to the Clintonian DLC, not Obama. Even when her campaign was essentially OVER

Clark kept talking like "Lanny Davis" on MSNBC. :eyes:

[cloudythescribbler]

8. Where did Wesley Clark stand on the Iraq War Resolution back in 2002, just out of curiosity?

Did he, as a military expert, STRONGLY advocate against going into this war?

[leftofcool]

9. I think against

[ShortnFiery]

74. But later he stated that he would have voted "yea" ... he swings back and forth like a pendulum.

I don't trust him. Not at all ... :nuke:

[Clark2008]

10. Against

A complete transcript (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/clark.perle.testimony.pdf) provided by Joshua Marshall on his Talking Points Memo blog shows that Clark made many statements indicating that his support for a war was at best conditional on a number of factors he can legitimately argue the President did not fulfill. Perhaps most notably, Clark said that a "congressional resolution need not, at this point, authorize the use of force," backing up his assertions that he opposed the resolution authorizing force that was passed by Congress. He then conditioned using force on any number of factors, as this quote indicates: "If the efforts to resolve the problem by using the United Nations fail, either initially or ultimately, then we need to form the broadest possible coalition including our NATO allies and the North Atlantic Council if we're going to have to bring forces to bear."

http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2004_01_11_archive.html

[dysfunctional press]

12. he's my TOP TOP choice for the job.

i just wish that he wasn't quite as cozy with dlc side of the party.

[phillysuse]

14. Yes Wes - Some other similarities

1. Both have the Chicago connection - Wes was born in Chicago; Obama came into his own in Chicago
2. Both were raised by single mothers in their early school years with maternal grandparents - Barack's Dad left when he was two; Wes's Dad died when he was 4 and 1/2
3. Both fathers came from outside Christianity - Wes's father was born Jewish; Obama's Muslim.
4. Both turned to sports in school - Wes to swimming; Barack to basketball
5. Both are authors who wrote their own books.
6. Both are scary smart
7. Both will change our image in the world - Barack through his international background and Wes through his work as NATO Saceur
8. Both represent overtures to the Muslim world - Barack with his Muslim name and background and Wes who saved 4 million Kosovar Albanian Muslims from ethnic cleansing by Milosevic.
9. Both married beautiful tough articulate strong women - Michelle and Gertrude Clark
10. Photogenic ticket and for all ages - Clark will draw in women over 60 while Barack's charms are appreciated best by the younger set.

[awoke_in_2003]

22. Anyone know his official state of residence?

The pres and vp cannot reside in the same state (of course cheney got around that by changing his). Oh, and you do need to modify one point- Clark will appeal to more than the over 60 women. Hell, even I have a bit of a man crush on him :)

[Spazito]

30. He and his wife live in Little Rock, Arkansas I believe n/t

[awoke_in_2003]

39. Great. Hope Barack considers him

although John Edwards or Bill Richardson would work, too.

[JDPriestly]

15. I'm all for it!

[rocktivity]

16. After sobering up from celebrating the '06 election victories,

My first order of business was creating this:



:rofl:
rocknation

[Lex]

17. "The requested URL /adbanners/clarkObama.jpg does not exist."

[rocktivity]

18. My bad--should be working now.

:headbang:
rocknation

[rocktivity]

19. Randi Rhodes says Obama's so much taller they won't look good together

:evilgrin:
rocknation

[truebrit71]

25. I've met Obama...he isn't that tall....

...and Clark isn't short...

[maui9002]

28. Obama 6'1"; Clark 5'10"

Not a huge difference, though Clark is shorter. I've been in fairly small gatherings with both men. Obama is a "rock star"; almost everyone in the room wanted his or her picture with him, and for the most part, Senator Obama obliged. Clark is not as charismatic, particularly as a public speaker, but in the session I was in, which had less than 50 people in a conference, he displayed considerable gravitas; when he spoke, people listened. I think the VP choice for Obama will be a difficult one; there are so many ways he can go, and while I'm biased, I think they're are far more capable Democratic candidates for VP than the Republicans have: Clark, Webb, Schweitzer (my personal favorite), Richardson, Clinton, Edwards, Sebelius, Biden, Warner, and a few more.

[Ilsa]

20. I think Wes Clark could bring over anyone who was

worried about the security issues. He'd also make an excellent Sec of State. He's brilliant, comes from the south, and has a gret academic record to go with his military career. He's also attractive, and like it or not, it makes a subconscious, if not conscious, difference.

[sdfernando]

23. I like WES but I think he would be a better asset

as Secretary of State. I cite the foreign policy experience you mentioned.

[truebrit71]

24. White. Southern.Military. Male. Done.

:thumbup:

[maxsolomon]

26. been telling anyone who'd listen that he's the logical choice

my 68 year old reagan democrat mom would come back to the fold. clark is a regular on FOXNEWS, for chrissakes!

[KoKo]

31. A former Repug...Military Man as Obama's VP? First in line for President if

something happens to Obama? No way. I've never understood the adulation here for Wes Clark for President and now he's being pushed for VP.

Doesn't anyone remember Eisenhower's "Beware the "Military/Industrial Complex" statement? It's been posted here so often...for those who haven't seen it ...just do a Google and read the WHOLE STATEMENT.

I don't want any Military as VP EVER in our President or VP.... This isn't WWII where folks are looking at what Ike did and it's Military Hero Time. If I want a proported Military Hero ...I'd be for McSame. There's NO WAY I'd EVER VOTE for a DEM TICKET with a "Career Military" on that team.

I can't understand why so many DU'ers till think that Wes Clark is the "Second Coming."

WHY?

[Djinn]

37. because they're all for US imperialism as long as it's

under a Dem banner - see the cheering for the bombing of Yugoslavia which was cool because you managed to bomb residential areas (not to mention the wrong country) embassies and marketplaces & murder civilians without killing a single American. Yay American Supremacy

[ShortnFiery]

77. I can't either. Ret. USMC Gen, Anthony Zinni has much more respect from Civilian and Military alike

"I can't understand why so many DU'ers till think that Wes Clark is the "Second Coming." <---He's not the alpha and omega of retired Gen Officers. :(

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

32. Agreed

Best choice by far.

How long before some "Swift Nuts" show up to try and torpedo him?

[EOTE]

80. Self delete - dupe

[EOTE]

81. They're right on queue. Some people on the left will never support...

a military man. No matter that he's stopped genocide and done it in the least destructive way possible. Someone who promotes a humble American military policy. I guess because he was part of the military, he can't be a good Democrat. So sad. I think Clark would be a fantastic choice. I hope very strongly that Obama chooses him.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

84. Only a fool....

....would think that means McCain is a better choice, or not voting for either would lead to some sort of "change for the better", but I get your point.

[Hekate]

33. Excellent choice. nt

[KharmaTrain]

40. Put Wes In The Pentagon...

So many people are so anamoured with whose gonna be the Veep...my hopes is whomever is selected will have a very uneventful role. We've had enough of the power eminating from the OVP...and that the next VP will once again resume the role of "ceremonial"...doing the funerals, ribbon cuttings and heading up task forces and other projects as directed by the President...not the other way around. Thus why waste talents of many good people in the VP role...fortunately we have many great people within the party who could be best used in helping clean up the messes this country has fallen into under 8 years of the booosh regime.

Wes could either serve at the Penatgon or as Secretary of State...his NATO experience and strong international reputation could go a long way in restoring connections and contacts this country will need if we're to get out of Iraq whole and quickly.

WHile the corporate media loves the Veepstakes...it means very little for the election. If a person doesn't like the head of the ticket, there's not a VEEP or endorsement that will sway them. If there's any value to this role during the election, it's to play yin to the president's yang...bad cop at times, heat taker at others...strictly another PR surrogate. If there's any benefit, it's small...for example, I could see Obama picking a Claire McKaskill...women points and hopefully she can help carry Missouri...but I don't see much more beyond that...or that any other candidate brings much more to the table.

[JackRiddler]

50. And then send the Pentagon to the Hague.

[ThomWV]

85. I don't think he can serve at Defense

I believe there is a Prohibition against retired Generals becoming the Secretary of Defense, at least I've seen it posted here.

[Diclotican]

51. Nancy Waterman

Nancy Waterman

I think a Duo of Obama and Clark as President and Vice-President would be a great ticket.. And I would also say that mr Clark would give the presidency of mr Obama something that the rest of the world can se to also. I know mr Clark are a man of dignity, and he have also a good knowledge of the world.. I would say mr Clark are in a unique situation to give mr Obama some real advice sometimes...

When Wes Clark was running for President, even that he never get the candidacy I would have voted for him in a heartbeat, and I can't vote in american election anyway.. I would say he might even manage to rebuild some of the damage the current Vice-President have managed to do to the image of the US...

In short.. Many here in the rest of the world, would like if you elected Obama/Clark as President and Vice-President... Even that US would go a very uphill battle to fix what the son of a ***** have been doing to US the last 8 year...

Diclotican

Sorry my bad english, not my native language

[davsand]

52. Nancy! Good to see you! I could be very happy with The General as Obama's VP..

I am old Clarkie anyhow, but even without that background, I see Clark as an excellent olive branch to both the Clinton wing of the party and to the Independent voters who are worried about Obama's lack of military experience. I think it is WAY too easy to forget that the election is won by not just pulling the Dem votes but also the folks who are "Independent Persuadables." Clark can help do that.

Something else I think that Clark brings to the table is an historical perspective on the Middle East that is completely lacking all too often. I heard him speak on the subject and was blown away by how much the man knows about so many different things--including that particular region of the world. I also like the idea of Obama's Muslim father and Clark's Jewish father being part of the discussion. Seems to me that maybe with that level of diversity on our ticket the US really IS exemplifying the ideal of embracing our diversity.


Laura


PS, Clark was absolutely gorgeous in the cover of the Advocate a few years ago. He really Is a very pretty man--and that makes it easier to package that ticket.

:hi:

[hokies4ever]

57. 'healing party' token V.P. choices don't make much sense

If Obama chooses him, it should be because he's the best for the job.

[pollo poco]

60. please, no soldiers

Obama doesn't need them to look tough.
And especially not that redneck, Jim Webb.
It's time to look for leaders who don't think the army is cool.
War does bad things to people's heads.
Once a person has signed up for that, they are already missing the boat, as far as I'm concerned.
Sorry, I know it's normal in this country to worship people who sign up, but I think there are saner ways to help the world than picking up a rifle and agreeing to point it where you are told.

[Clout]

61. Clark would be a good choice.

I really liked Webb and still do but he is no longer my first choice. I like Clark, Feingold, and Webb.

[seabeyond]

65. i like clark. i would have voted for him for pres. and i agree with your post. n/t

[ShortnFiery]

73. No way! Clark was almost as shrill and unsavory surrogate for HRC as Lanny Davis.

I saw a side to Wes Clark that was very unattractive and supports the many contentions that he is NOT respected by rank and file Army soldiers.

IMO, Clark's an opportunist first and foremost - he should not be given any position within an Obama Executive Branch.

If you want an truly honorable and *mostly* apolitical retired General Officer, Obama should select General (ret.) Anthony Zinni to be on his cabinet. Like Obama (and unlike Clark) Zinni was against the Iraqi Invasion from inception. Below is a link to a speech Zinni gave in 2002 - AGAINST the Iraqi Invasion with TRUE predictors of what later transpired.

Comments of Gen. Anthony Zinni (ret.) during a speech before the Florida Economic Club, Aug. 23, 2002:

http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/zinni.html

Attacking Iraq now will cause a lot of problems. I think the debate right now that's going on is very healthy. If you ask me my opinion, Gen. Scowcroft, Gen. Powell, Gen. Schwarzkopf, Gen. Zinni, maybe all see this the same way.

It might be interesting to wonder why all the generals see it the same way, and all those that never fired a shot in anger and really hell-bent to go to war see it a different way. That's usually the way it is in history. (Crowd laughter.)

But let me tell you what the problem is now as I see it. You need to weigh this: what are your priorities in the region? That's the first issue in my mind.

The Middle East peace process, in my mind, has to be a higher priority. Winning the war on terrorism has to be a higher priority. More directly, the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Central Asia need to be resolved, making sure Al Qaeda can't rise again from the ashes that are destroyed. Taliban cannot come back. That the warlords can't regain power over Kabul and Karzai, and destroy everything that has happened so far.

[Greyhound]

75. SoD, not Veep. IMO. n/t

[Tashca]

78. I"m warming to the idea.......n/t

[benEzra]

83. No, thanks.

He scares the hell out of me on the gun issue, among other things.

I would much rather see Bill Richardson as VP.

[ZombieHorde]

86. I am hoping for Brian Schweitzer!