Clark set to enter 2004 presidential race!

1234568»

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 148
    Joe Conason's latest on Clark in the Observer.



    http://www2.observer.com/observer/pages/conason.asp



    Rarely, however, is press speculation proved false as swiftly as the manic predictions of doom for the Clark candidacy. Four days after his "bad day," the first new polls since his debut were published. Those surveys showed him leading the Democratic field, with the USA Today/Gallup/CNN poll placing him well ahead of his nearest Democratic rivals?and a few points ahead of the sinking President.



    So the "liberal general" may yet have a fair opportunity to present himself to the American people. For the moment, at least, most Americans are far more interested in him than in the media's opinions of him.
  • Reply 142 of 148
    Wow, has anybody checked out The Drudge Report today. Tell me that isn't partisan, hard-core Republican echoe chamber tactics. I mean, he doesn't even TRY to be "fair and balanced".



    They're really scared of this guy. Aren't they?
  • Reply 143 of 148
    shawnjshawnj Posts: 6,656member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Northgate

    Wow, has anybody checked out The Drudge Report today. Tell me that isn't partisan, hard-core Republican echoe chamber tactics. I mean, he doesn't even TRY to be "fair and balanced".



    They're really scared of this guy. Aren't they?




    Does this mean Republicans will vote for Clark?
  • Reply 144 of 148
    from Joe Conason's journal at Salon.com...



    Contrast Limbaugh's predictable attack with the reassessment of Clark offered by David Hackworth, the retired Army colonel and colorful commentator on military and political affairs. Hack, as he is known to fans, is not exactly a liberal or a dove. Nor is he unwilling, as a rule, to criticize the pretensions of the brass. But after interviewing Clark recently for Maxim magazine, Hackworth decided that his earlier judgment of the retired general was utterly wrong.



    According to Hackworth, "Clark was so brilliant, he was whisked off to Oxford as a Rhodes scholar and didn't get his boots into the Vietnam mud until well after his 1966 West Point class came close to achieving the academy record for the most Purple Hearts in any one war. When he finally got there, he took over a 1st Infantry Division rifle company and was badly wounded.



    "Lt. Gen. James Hollingsworth, one of our Army's most distinguished war heroes, says: 'Clark took a burst of AK fire, but didn't stop fighting. He stayed on the field till his mission was accomplished and his boys were safe. He was awarded the Silver Star and Purple Heart. And he earned 'em.'



    "It took months for Clark to get back in shape. He had the perfect excuse, but he didn't quit the Army to scale the corporate peaks as so many of our best and brightest did back then. Instead, he took a demoralized company of short-timers at Fort Knox who were suffering from a Vietnam hangover and made them the best on post -- a major challenge in 1970 when our Army was teetering on the edge of anarchy. Then he stuck around to become one of the young Turks who forged the Green Machine into the magnificent sword that Norman Schwarzkopf swung so skillfully during Round One of the Gulf War."



    Hackworth forthrightly confesses that his jibe at Clark as a "Perfumed Prince" was unfair and misguided. "I was wrong," he says. Then he just about endorses his fellow soldier:





    Also at mediawhoresonline.com they do a good job of showing how drudge is distorting Clark's speech... and taking quotes out of context... he even attributes a quote that Clark made about Bush 1 to Clark somehow endorsing Bush 2.



    Lame.
  • Reply 145 of 148
    Quote:

    Originally posted by chu_bakka

    from Joe Conason's journal at Salon.com...



    Contrast Limbaugh's predictable attack with the reassessment of Clark offered by David Hackworth, the retired Army colonel and colorful commentator on military and political affairs. Hack, as he is known to fans, is not exactly a liberal or a dove. Nor is he unwilling, as a rule, to criticize the pretensions of the brass. But after interviewing Clark recently for Maxim magazine, Hackworth decided that his earlier judgment of the retired general was utterly wrong.



    According to Hackworth, "Clark was so brilliant, he was whisked off to Oxford as a Rhodes scholar and didn't get his boots into the Vietnam mud until well after his 1966 West Point class came close to achieving the academy record for the most Purple Hearts in any one war. When he finally got there, he took over a 1st Infantry Division rifle company and was badly wounded.



    "Lt. Gen. James Hollingsworth, one of our Army's most distinguished war heroes, says: 'Clark took a burst of AK fire, but didn't stop fighting. He stayed on the field till his mission was accomplished and his boys were safe. He was awarded the Silver Star and Purple Heart. And he earned 'em.'



    "It took months for Clark to get back in shape. He had the perfect excuse, but he didn't quit the Army to scale the corporate peaks as so many of our best and brightest did back then. Instead, he took a demoralized company of short-timers at Fort Knox who were suffering from a Vietnam hangover and made them the best on post -- a major challenge in 1970 when our Army was teetering on the edge of anarchy. Then he stuck around to become one of the young Turks who forged the Green Machine into the magnificent sword that Norman Schwarzkopf swung so skillfully during Round One of the Gulf War."



    Hackworth forthrightly confesses that his jibe at Clark as a "Perfumed Prince" was unfair and misguided. "I was wrong," he says. Then he just about endorses his fellow soldier:





    Also at mediawhoresonline.com they do a good job of showing how drudge is distorting Clark's speech... and taking quotes out of context... he even attributes a quote that Clark made about Bush 1 to Clark somehow endorsing Bush 2.



    Lame.




    Unbelievable. I almost forgot he served in Vietnam. I also almost forgot that he taught economics at West Point.



    During the latest Gulf war wasn't the conservative media pointing their finger at everyone, with consternated faces saying, "don't you dare criticize our boys while they're fighting! You should be ashamed of yourselves," or something like that?



    The hypocricy astounds!
  • Reply 146 of 148
    Hey can anyone give me a good reason NOT to support John Edwards? So far I'm liking him, sorta.
  • Reply 147 of 148
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ShawnJ

    *sticks it to Eugene*







    I said you can't have it both ways, and I'm right. Where is Dean now? Dean is nothing, just like my original reply indicated. I said Kerry and Gephardt are more legitimate candidates than Dean, and that's true. I said Dean's popularity was superficially inflated by the blogger/internet generation. That's true.



    Clark is one frontrunner, but I know he's going to lose support from slightly less moderate Democrats come mid 2004.
  • Reply 148 of 148
    Clark got an obvious bump from his entry into the race.

    Dean is still a frontrunner and is doing the best job of raising money at the moment. He's doing well in Iowa and NH at the moment too.



    Edwards lack of experience is his only real downside.

    And he not quite as charismatic as some would lead you to believe.
Sign In or Register to comment.