Hehe, Fellowship made the same thread about John Kerry a few months ago.
Indeed you are spot on I did at one time believe I would prefer John Kerry. People are entitled to change their minds and I have done such. I believe Wesley Clark is better about not using political rhetoric as badly as some of the others in the group. I believe he has the means and the will to run a balanced government. I believe he could put America on a better track than what we curently have with President Bush.
www.kucinich.us (dennis) has my vote... but he isn't going to win the democratic nomination...
www.al2004.org (sharpton) has my vote if that is the case... I think they would be good running mates... hehe...
its too bad that neither one has a legitimate shot. They really should withdraw... but all of the candidates are too stubborn to yield...
Neither Sharpton nor Kucinich have a snowball's chance in hell of winning the nomination. The value of Sharpton and Kucinich's candidacies is that they both talk about some important issues that the more mainstream contenders do their absolute damnedest to avoid addressing.
Interestingly...and with no surprise, i see the mainstream media are latching smartly onto this story
I am reluctant to admit that since he entered the fray I haven't followed the Democratic competition that closely. At that time, there were some rumblings (from staunch GOP types I believe) that basically indicated Clark was nothing more than one of Clinton's cronies, and that is how he got his post at NATO, etc.
Has he publicly addressed these sorts of issues? I will have to go read some of those links iBook posted but meantime what have you guys heard that was straight from the horse's mouth?
Both Bush and Clinton have shown themselves to be untrustworthy (but for different reasons), and so I would be reluctant to run out and vote for someone who they put into a position of power, simply because they were a fresh face / someone different. Not relevant to Bush currently since he will go for re-election, but is relevant for Clinton.
I am reluctant to admit that since he entered the fray I haven't followed the Democratic competition that closely. At that time, there were some rumblings (from staunch GOP types I believe) that basically indicated Clark was nothing more than one of Clinton's cronies, and that is how he got his post at NATO, etc.
The Clinton administration appointed him to that post, but he certainly had a career before that time. Lots of generals' careers advanced under Clinton. And the Clinton administration also fired Clark.
William Safire had this absurd fantasy that Hill & Bill asked Clark to run, so that Clark could weaken Dean, and then at the last minute Clark would drop out, Hillary would run, and she would win the nomination.
Comments
Originally posted by BRussell
Hehe, Fellowship made the same thread about John Kerry a few months ago.
Indeed you are spot on I did at one time believe I would prefer John Kerry. People are entitled to change their minds and I have done such. I believe Wesley Clark is better about not using political rhetoric as badly as some of the others in the group. I believe he has the means and the will to run a balanced government. I believe he could put America on a better track than what we curently have with President Bush.
Fellowship
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
If Fellowship was running, and I could vote, right now I believe I would vote for him.
Fellows
Thankfully, I still have 60 days to decide who I'm going to vote for.
Originally posted by Paul
www.kucinich.us (dennis) has my vote... but he isn't going to win the democratic nomination...
www.al2004.org (sharpton) has my vote if that is the case... I think they would be good running mates... hehe...
its too bad that neither one has a legitimate shot. They really should withdraw... but all of the candidates are too stubborn to yield...
Neither Sharpton nor Kucinich have a snowball's chance in hell of winning the nomination. The value of Sharpton and Kucinich's candidacies is that they both talk about some important issues that the more mainstream contenders do their absolute damnedest to avoid addressing.
Interestingly...and with no surprise, i see the mainstream media are latching smartly onto this story
That pesky liberal media!
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
People are entitled to change their minds and I have done such.
Just be sure to send that $2000 check to Clark04 before you change your mind again.
Originally posted by pfflam
I think that he is an intelligent thoughtful man who researches very deeply into any position
I agree that he researches very deeply into issues..
I invite any and all to review his statements below:
A Real Plan for Success in Iraq
Strategy for Addressing the Threat Posed by Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda
Economic Vision: Jobs and Growth for All Americans
Manufacturing Security Plan
Invest in the Education of America's Future
Protecting the Environment
Here is a Wesley Clark Video Clip
Fellowship
Tons of Clark media here while it lasts.
The NAS Parts 1-5 require Windows Media Player but they are essential listening (even if the video doesn't work.)
Originally posted by Josef K.
Just be sure to send that $2000 check to Clark04 before you change your mind again.
What did he do to be so much behind in the polls?
Originally posted by majorspunk
majorspunk.
a) Your screen name is apposite.
b) Evidently you're new around here and don't know what Scott's like. It's sort of cool to dislike him. You'll get it.
Originally posted by Anders
When Sammy Jo, Fellowship and I want to vote for the same candidate even peace in the middle east is possible.
What did he do to be so much behind in the polls?
Are you talking about Clark? He's doing very well in the polls. He's a very close second to Dean in all the national polls.
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
majorspunk.
a) Your screen name is apposite.
b) Evidently you're new around here and don't know what Scott's like. It's sort of cool to dislike him. You'll get it.
Making yourself feel better by putting down others...I thought that ended in high school...
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
Making yourself feel better by putting down others...I thought that ended in high school...
Nick
Evidently not.
Has he publicly addressed these sorts of issues? I will have to go read some of those links iBook posted but meantime what have you guys heard that was straight from the horse's mouth?
Both Bush and Clinton have shown themselves to be untrustworthy (but for different reasons), and so I would be reluctant to run out and vote for someone who they put into a position of power, simply because they were a fresh face / someone different. Not relevant to Bush currently since he will go for re-election, but is relevant for Clinton.
Originally posted by Moogs
I am reluctant to admit that since he entered the fray I haven't followed the Democratic competition that closely. At that time, there were some rumblings (from staunch GOP types I believe) that basically indicated Clark was nothing more than one of Clinton's cronies, and that is how he got his post at NATO, etc.
The Clinton administration appointed him to that post, but he certainly had a career before that time. Lots of generals' careers advanced under Clinton. And the Clinton administration also fired Clark.
William Safire had this absurd fantasy that Hill & Bill asked Clark to run, so that Clark could weaken Dean, and then at the last minute Clark would drop out, Hillary would run, and she would win the nomination.
It appears that the General doesn't have the support of the left on this one.
Fellows...You are far more conservative and religious than I , but you are a thinking man and I respect that ...whatever your views.
He murders eastern europeans, gets keel-hauled for hamming it up with the press, can't run an army, and his ideas are based in Disney's fantasy land.
Puh-flipping-leeeeeze.
Originally posted by jccbin
Clark is a dolt.
He murders eastern europeans, gets keel-hauled for hamming it up with the press, can't run an army, and his ideas are based in Disney's fantasy land.
Puh-flipping-leeeeeze.
This is precisely the kind of lucid, thoughtful, cogent, substantive and eloquently articulated political analysis I come here for. Good on you, sir!