"I'd be proud, and I am proud, to be a Democrat"...

The Emperor Fabulous · September 4, 2003, 16:25

- General Wesley Clark

Quote:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Former NATO supreme commander Wesley Clark said Wednesday he would run as a Democrat if he mounts a challenge to President Bush in 2004, but said he was not yet ready to enter the race for the White House.

Clark had not declared his party affiliation before Wednesday. In an interview on CNN's "Inside Politics", the retired four-star general said, "I'd be proud, and I am proud, to be a Democrat."

"It's a party that stands for internationalism. It's a party that stands for ordinary men and women," he said. "It's a party that stands for fair play and equity and justice and common sense and reasonable dialogue. It's a party that has had a great tradition in our country. I'm very attracted to it, and that's the party I will belong to."

He did not say whether he would seek the presidency, but "I'm closer to working my way through it."

In an address Wednesday night at New York University, Clark said he has not made "a personal decision" to run for president.

Not deterred, his grass-root supporters handed out Clark candy bars to passers-by in support of a potential campaign. He is widely expected to make a decision by mid-September.

Clark, who led NATO's military alliance during the 1999 Kosovo conflict, would be the 10th Democrat to enter the presidential race if he runs.

Supporters of a presidential draft campaign are recruiting volunteers for a possible campaign and have aired television spots in New Hampshire, Iowa and Clark's home state of Arkansas to drum up support. Clark has said he has nothing to do with the effort but would do nothing to discourage it.

The 57-year-old Clark retired from the Army after a 34-year career that included combat in Vietnam, a Rhodes Scholarship and leading the military negotiations in the peace talks that ended the war in Bosnia in 1995.

He became NATO's supreme commander in 1997, but reportedly clashed with Pentagon officials during the Kosovo campaign and was relieved of command after the war.

He was a CNN military analyst during the war in Iraq, and has been increasingly critical of the Bush administration's handling of that conflict. In August, he told CNN that the administration led the country to war under "false pretenses," and the United States is no safer as a result.

"I always had my doubts about it. I was always concerned about what would happen afterwards, and of course so much of that has proved true," he said Wednesday.

In previous interviews, Clark has said he considered President Bush's tax cuts inefficient and unwise, and would consider suspending or rescinding them if elected president.

He said years in the Army had persuaded him to support affirmative action "in principle," though he suggested its benefits could be cut at a certain income level.

Clark also said he would reconsider the Clinton administration's "don't-ask, don't-tell" policy on gays in the armed services, saying he considered it ineffective.

At least he's a democrat. I think Clark has a really good chance of getting the nod and beating Bush, and if he doesn't run for president, I think a Dean/Clark ticket would be hard to beat.

SlowwHand · September 4, 2003, 16:28

Big deal. Maybe you can get Al Haig to run as a Democrat.

Oerdin · September 4, 2003, 16:29

Lot's of Generals want to become President but only a handful have made it. I don't sense Clark has the big name pull that Eisenhower, Grant, Jackson, or Washington did.

Nubclear · September 4, 2003, 16:29

[QUOTE "It's a party that stands for internationalism. It's a party that stands for ordinary men and women," he said. "It's a party that stands for fair play and equity and justice and common sense and reasonable dialogue. It's a party that has had a great tradition in our country. I'm very attracted to it, and that's the party I will belong to." [/QUOTE]

Hardly.

The democratic party reminds me of a little brother...It whines and whines all the time about the big brother but in the end, it just ends up emulating the big brother.
The big brother, of course, being the Republican party.

DinoDoc · September 4, 2003, 16:59

Quote:

Originally posted by The Emperor Fabulous
At least he's a democrat.

Are you seriously shocked by that "revelation"?

Jon Miller · September 4, 2003, 17:06

the democratic party is much oder than the republican party

JonM Iller

DinoDoc · September 4, 2003, 17:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Jon Miller
the democratic party is much oder than the republican party

I agree that they are much odder.

mrmitchell · September 4, 2003, 17:40

Who's he again? Isn't he from Arkansas? He's got fair support and doesn't have the "liberal America-hating Red" image that Howard Dean does. However...when are Dems going to narrow down? So many candidates

Sprayber · September 4, 2003, 17:47

Quote:

Originally posted by Jon Miller
the democratic party is much oder than the republican party

JonM Iller

Berzerker · September 4, 2003, 17:59

Quote:

"It's a party that stands for internationalism.

Oh great, is that the new world order nonsense Bush 1 was spouting? Oh, it's the "we must do the bidding of the UN" nonsense.

Quote:

It's a party that stands for ordinary men and women," he said.

Yeah, all those ordinary millionaires in Congress.

Quote:

"It's a party that stands for fair play and equity and justice and common sense and reasonable dialogue.

It's a party that stands behind you on payday with it's hand out.

Quote:

It's a party that has had a great tradition in our country.

Yup, slavery, the KKK and Jim Crow.

Quote:

I'm very attracted to it, and that's the party I will belong to."

Warts and all...

Kuciwalker · September 4, 2003, 18:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Jon Miller
the democratic party is much oder than the republican party

JonM Iller

So? For a looooonng time the Democratic Party was what the GOP is today.

Kuciwalker · September 4, 2003, 18:35

Umm... Berzerker, he was talking about the Democratic Party...

Nubclear · September 4, 2003, 18:43

Down with the democratic party!!!

Up with the Communist Party of the USA!!!

Ecthy · September 4, 2003, 19:28

looks like someone's drunk

Berzerker · September 4, 2003, 19:38

Gee sky, I did read the title of the thread and the article.

Verto · September 4, 2003, 19:43

Berzerker:

Tell it how it is!

mrmitchell · September 4, 2003, 19:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Berzerker
Oh great, is that the new world order nonsense Bush 1 was spouting? Oh, it's the "we must do the bidding of the UN" nonsense.

1) Cooperation is good.

2) He never said "We must obey our United Nations masters," but we are indeed a member of them, in addition to them being the largest international organisation in the world...perhaps at least trying not to piss them off would help?

Quote:

Yup, slavery, the KKK and Jim Crow.

The "parties are exactly the same as they were in 1860" thing has been refuted so many times that it really is just sad. You'd think eventually people would realise this troll won't work any more...

Kuciwalker · September 4, 2003, 19:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Berzerker
Gee sky, I did read the title of the thread and the article.

... and all of those quotes you were dissing - they were referring to the democratic party.

Verto · September 4, 2003, 20:05

Quote:

Originally posted by mrmitchell
The "parties are exactly the same as they were in 1860" thing has been refuted so many times that it really is just sad. You'd think eventually people would realise this troll won't work any more...

He is referring to this:

Quote:

It's a party that has had a great tradition in our country

Berzerker has shown what that is.

Oerdin · September 4, 2003, 20:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Ecthelion
looks like someone's drunk

But the real question is... Why are the rest of us not?

Ben Kenobi · September 4, 2003, 20:36

School tomorrow.

Imran Siddiqui · September 4, 2003, 20:38

So?

Odin · September 4, 2003, 22:01

The US is actually ruled by the Capitalist Party that fakes the apearance of two parties. The 2 main parties only do things that keeps them existing, hence the flip of the social positions of the two parties, when the social liberals like JFK and LBJ took power; the social conservatives bolted to the Republicans.

Timexwatch · September 4, 2003, 22:11

Clark is not going to run. It's too late in the game. Better luck with the VP spot.

The Emperor Fabulous · September 4, 2003, 23:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Berzerker
Gee sky, I did read the title of the thread and the article.

One of the few, I would assume

The Emperor Fabulous · September 4, 2003, 23:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin

But the real question is... Why are the rest of us not?

I'm the Resident Assistant on duty

I have to deal with the drunks...

The Templar · September 4, 2003, 23:27

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Big deal. Maybe you can get Al Haig to run as a Democrat.

Aww, poor Texan! Kind of hard to criticize Clark when your president is a draft dodging son of a *****, no?

Support the troops

Edan · September 4, 2003, 23:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Timexwatch
Clark is not going to run. It's too late in the game. Better luck with the VP spot.

It wasn't too late in the game for Clinton back in '91.

Berzerker · September 5, 2003, 05:20

Thx Verto for helping Mitchell with reading lessons, it had to be done

Quote:

... and all of those quotes you were dissing - they were referring to the democratic party.

Yes Sky, Clark was explaining why he's joining the Deomcrats.

Rufus T. Firefly · September 5, 2003, 05:40

Clark seems like a good guy, but not a promising candidate. He's unlikely to galvanize the traditional Democratic base and unlikely to bring new voters into the process; he will appeal to swing voters, given the strength of the GOP right now (especially as regards the damnable Electoral College), the Dems need to do more than just spoil for a larger percentage of the soccer moms.