Time for Obama Team to Call General Wesley Clark and Request His Services

-

wesley clark twn 2005.jpg
The Obama campaign needs to reverse course and reach out to General Wesley Clark who is the No. 1 most requested surrogate by Democratic Party fundraisers. He is a thoughtful, top tier, command experienced strategist. He once told me that we need to organize an “Urgent Action Climate Change Task Force.”
How many generals are really, totally committed to climate change as a national security issue? The answer is not many — but Wesley Clark is.
And first in September 2005 and then again in January 2006 at events that I helped organize, Wesley Clark laid out brilliantly the reasons why Iran must be engaged with a broad negotiation agenda without preconditions. He broke the ground for engaging Iran — far before any other possible presidential contender did so.
We hear too much about a comment that Clark made about McCain on “Face the Nation” (which was technically correct) — but we don’t hear enough about the times he was right before just anyone on some tough calls — particularly on Iran.
I’ll never forget his speech at YearlyKos in Chicago 2007 when he called on President Bush to stop hiding between David Petraeus.
The Obama campaign has not offered a “role” — as of yet — to General Clark at the Democratic convention.
I have been told by Wesley Clark’s office that the General would do anything he could do on behalf of the party and on behalf of Barack Obama if he could be of service. He has two board of directors meetings scheduled the week of the convention, but I know that he would adjust his schedule to be there. He wants to play a role — and I think Dems need him now and will need Clark’s service for many years ahead.
So, I very much hope that the Obama campaign will reach out to General Clark and offer him a role at the Convention — a role that fits the stature and service of Wesley Clark.
I know Clark will be there if the Obama campaign engages him. . .because Clark is a dedicated team player, a strong supporter of Obama and the Dems, and someone who Dems should not take for granted.
Let’s see what happens.
Note to Obama team: It’s time to recruit General Clark and the many who respect and support him into your big tent.
— Steve Clemons
P.S. — Still on constant VP watch. I’m perplexed and worried about the rumors of Obama going to Indiana on Saturday. I don’t know if Bayh has some how turned around his situation with the Obama campaign.

Comments

57 comments on “Time for Obama Team to Call General Wesley Clark and Request His Services

  1. Richard says:

    Hmmm, I could of swore I saw Gen. Wesley Clark on stage today. I was wondering if there will be a comment on the fact that your inside info was wrong???

    Reply

  2. Mr.Murder says:

    Yes, Clark has Russian Jewish ancestry,. I’m certain he’s anti Semetic. Just like Hillary is racist….

    Reply

  3. samuel burke says:

    here is the article from the forward re wes clarkes comment
    about new york money people, he obviouly offended someone.
    http://www.forward.com/articles/top-dem-wesley-clark-says-
    ny-money-people-pu/
    Fri. Jan 12, 2007
    washington – retired general wesley clark drew harsh criticism
    this week after reportedly saying that “new york money people”
    are pushing america into a war against iran.
    by tuesday, clark, a past and likely future democratic candidate
    for president, was working to assure Jewish groups that he was
    in no way attempting to advance an antisemitic conspiracy
    theory. but the controversy still had jewish organizations
    bracing for a new wave of claims that they are the driving force
    behind any future military strikes against tehran.
    if i know my american power politics i think its safe to say that
    wesley clarke will not be the chosenone.
    the same goes for dennis ross, he is the man when it comes to
    mideast negotiations whether it be a republican or a democrat in
    the office…..one would think that there could be a better choice
    but i guess the list offered up only contains one name.

    Reply

  4. pauline says:

    Dan,
    Thanks for bringing Ferraro’s name up, she’s not one I would have considered. She is a political fighter, but I see her as one who hasn’t “won” enough in recent years or in her entire career for the O team to give a thumbs up.
    I think we’re all guessing at this point anyway, so I’ll throw out Chuck Hagel’s name again as a stronger possibility. He’s got the foreign policy experience, he’s been a winning senator for many years and he’s a white male.
    Reaching across the aisle for a running mate might be just enough “change” to get that large number of Zogby polled groups to pick the dem ticket.
    Time will tell. . .

    Reply

  5. WigWag says:

    The suggestion of Geraldine Ferraro is silly. She suffers from a serious form of cancer; multiple myeloma. This has been widely talked about in the press. Fortunately multiple myeloma is now treatable with a drug that was once universally detested because it caused birth defects, thalidomide. But while thalidomide treats the cancer and allows patients to live with the disease for a long time, it doesn’t cure it.
    No one with multiple myeloma would ever run for president or be selected as vice president.

    Reply

  6. Dan Kervick says:

    Pauline,
    I think the affirmative action quote from Ferraro is the big reason why Obams *might* choose her. People know that a big issue in this race is that, apart from Obama’s position on issues, a lot of white Americans are just “uncomfortable” with a black man. Ferraro probably expressed the thoughts of a lot of white Americans when she said what she said, and the fact that she was smacked down so hard might strike some of them as a typical case of un-PC thoughts on racial relations in the United States being punished and silenced. A Ferraro choice would show people that Obama is not vindictive, doesn’t have a chip on his shoulder, is not afraid of hearing those views expressed, and is capable of having an open, mutually respectful and productive relationship with people who express them. It’s a very conciliatory gesture.
    The real estate issue is more serious. My sense is that once people reach “a certain age”, scandals from the past don’t stick so much. For example, I suspect Obama could even get away with picking Gary Hart. Hart is now a bona fide “senior statesman”. People probably forgive 71 year old men for the philandering they did when they could still get it up without medical assistance.
    A bigger problem might be her son, who is in some legal rouble.

    Reply

  7. pauline says:

    Dan,
    You’ve brought in a name that hasn’t received any VP coverage, and accurate pollster John Zogby would know why.
    Geraldine Ferraro does have baggage such as her real estate husband wouldn’t release his tax returns when she ran as the first female VP way back in 1984. She was charged with violating the Ethics in Government Act by failing to disclose details of her family’s finances. The House Ethics Committee never followed through, but it is certainly a negative talking point.
    Also, I see her pro-abortion stance as a real campaign issue since she is also Catholic. And if you look at the Zogby polling results, Barry O has fallen over double digits with Catholics, women and the 25-34 year old voters. With both Barry and Geraldine being pro-choice, that ticket would probably lose big-time to these same groups, as well as any conservarive/indie voters who are “on the fence”.
    Ferraro has also lost several times in the past decade trying revive her own political career.
    As an honorary finance committee member for HRC’s 2008 run, these comments probably don’t sit well in the O camp.
    “If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept”.
    As much as I like her progressive stances on many issues, Geraldine has baggage, but imo she doesn’t bring enough to the dem tent that Barry doesn’t already have.

    Reply

  8. DonnaZ says:

    The interview: John McCain is a hero
    Obama does have to be a fighter pilot because it is not a requirement for the presidency & Obama has better judgment and better communication skills with the latter being the most important tool that is needed in the Oval Office.
    Note: Those were Clark’s statements, and I am still puzzled why those words were rejected.
    Wes Clark is always ahead of the curve on matters of foreign policy. His concern about Iran dates back to his Aug. 2002 testimony to congress. If only more people had listened to him.
    As far as his environmental concerns go, they too date back. In his 100 years statement he cited two things that America must hang on to: our Constitution (Gen. Clark has received environmental awards) and our environment. He has continually voiced energy as a national security issue.
    There was a comment made earlier that stated that Gen. Clark can only talk with authority about the military. If you remember, Gen. Clark’s first appearance at YK2006 was as a member of the science panel. No notes and he blew them away.
    I am sorry that the Democratic Party including Team Obama will deprive the nation of an important voice when we really need it. Clark’s exclusion during the Convention is stupid and insulting.

    Reply

  9. Jefferson says:

    Steve,
    Given your interest in a more sensible approach to dealing with
    Russia why on Earth would you want Clark to be back in
    government? Have you forgotten that he was willing to risk
    EVERYTHING over the airport in Pristina?
    For those with short memories:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/671495.stm
    Read Jackson’s account:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1562161/Gen-
    Sir-Mike-Jackson-My-clash-with-Nato-chief.html
    From what I’ve read Clark is unrepentant about his judgement
    in this episode. Do we really need that kind of hubris back in
    the White House?
    Really Steve, you need to explain yourself better on this one.
    Clark looks a lot like Bayh in camo, here.

    Reply

  10. KR says:

    Steve,
    As it’s likely the midnight hour for the Obama’s VP announcement, I want to thank you for all you’ve doneto promote dialogue and understanding on foreign policy and national security issues through this blog, especially to those of us who are not experts in the field.
    I certainly would never had developed a strong respect and appreciation for all those who commit themselves tirelessly towards this field, in particular for your efforts over the years to host General Wesley Clark in several keynote addresses sponsored by the New America Foundation. Thank you for the invitations to allow ordinary concerned citizens and bloggers like myself to attend these important events:
    1. Wesley Clark Keynote – America’s Purpose Convention (2005) http://news.webshots.com/album/444390900EZzgAH
    2. Wesley Clark Keynote – State of the Union DC (2007)
    Also, you wrote above:
    “I’ll never forget his speech at YearlyKos in Chicago 2007 when he called on President Bush to stop hiding between David Petraeus.”
    Did I ever forward you 2 pics that I took of you blogging at General Clark’s keynote address at Yearly Kos in Chicago?
    1. http://news.webshots.com/photo/2470342630059023915PnEoAT
    2. http://news.webshots.com/photo/2483227140059023915YTsHhH
    It’s not the clearest of pics, but I’ll send it via the email address that I entered for this post, if you like.
    Thanks for all you do and for all you’ve done providing Wes Clark the medium to express his profound insights and expertise on NS and FP for our country through your efforts at the New America Foundation!
    If he’s not chosen as Obama’s VP, well, …. I honestly could use a real vacation. But I hope that NAF continues to invite Clark to articulate and educate us on the important issues that confront us during these dangerous times.
    KR
    Forever, … A Clark Democrat! :)

    Reply

  11. Dan Kervick says:

    OK, the message I’m hearing from Obama is that the person he chooses is going to show that he is not afraid of being challenged by an independent thinker. He also clearly wants someone who is going to make people go “Wow! I didn’t see that coming!” That suggests to me that he is going to choose someone who has criticized him very vigourously in the past; someone close to an enemy.
    Clark? The criticisms weren’t that harsh. Clinton? Maybe. But here is my official stunning sleeper pick:
    Geraldine Ferraro.
    This sends precisely the message Obama wants to send, and to precisely the groups he wants to send it to. It says that he is a a young black man who is not afraid to take advice from an older white woman, the group Obama is having trouble with, even an older white woman who accused him of playing the race card. It shows he is not spiteful and vindictive. It would really help in a big way to heal the division that was opened up during the primary campaign. And she would be great at getting in taking on McCain in a hardball way, from a position as a generational peer. She’s older than Hillary, a veritable “elder stateswoman” now. She has strong progressive credentials.
    Obama mentioned the pick would be “complementary”, and Ferraro is the exact complement top Obama: older/younger, female/male, wgite black.
    The Hillary folks will love it! The convention is going to be hunky dory! It’s perfect.

    Reply

  12. ed says:

    What the hell is “new york money”? Is that code for something? And what are you getting at with “i wonder how he got there?” Could you be more specific, please? Thanks in advance.

    Reply

  13. samuel burke says:

    new york money will not allow obama to pick gen clark.
    is dennis ross really on obamas team now?
    i wonder how he got there?

    Reply

  14. pauline says:

    Carroll wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>But what the close polls show me is that Obama has less to lose by being bold in his VP pick. . .
    Carroll, have you seen this?
    Released: August 20, 2008
    Do Obama’s Sinking Poll Numbers Signal History Repeating for Democrats?
    By John Zogby
    “As the Democrats head into their convention, should they be singing the Eurythmics 1985 hit, “Here Comes That Sinking Feeling”?
    Just as party leaders pack their bags for Denver, our latest Reuters/Zogby poll finds their nominee in some trouble, as Republican John McCain has taken a five-point lead over Barack Obama. That is a 12-point reversal from the survey we took for Reuters in July. Interestingly, Obama’s margins among what had been his strongest demographic groups dropped by as much as 12 points. These include Democrats, women, city dwellers and younger voters – those ages 25-34. Also, Obama has lost his lead among the swing Catholic vote, dropping 11 points to McCain over a month.”
    from:
    http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1542

    Reply

  15. Teena says:

    It will be Clark on the ticket, mark my words. He’s conspicuously absent and for good reason. He is the VP pick.
    Obama/Clark ’08 – Securing America’s Future

    Reply

  16. Tahoe Editor says:

    Let’s reconvene on Saturday. Can some1 txt me when Barack txts you? I’m sure I won’t get his txt.

    Reply

  17. ed says:

    “In fact, given the rumored attitude of the Obama camp toward Gen. Wesley Clark, I’m a bit discouraged about Barack Obama right now.”
    Well, there’s the rub. They’re just rumors. Enhanced and spread at this site, one can’t help but notice. Thanks Steve!

    Reply

  18. ed says:

    You’re nuts TE, Clark is just the ticket. But I’ve been saying that for some time now, unlike, you know…

    Reply

  19. Tahoe Editor says:

    Clark is a good military surrogate for Obama & the Dems, but he’s not 3-D enough to be on the ticket.

    Reply

  20. Deborah White says:

    I fully agree with Steve Clemon’s words here. In fact, given the rumored attitude of the Obama camp toward Gen. Wesley Clark, I’m a bit discouraged about Barack Obama right now.

    Reply

  21. Carroll says:

    I hope this is over soon. I am spending way too much idiot time following what I have no control over.
    But what the close polls show me is that Obama has less to lose by being bold in his VP pick and and playing his choice as who he thinks adds the most military/foreign concerns “talent” to the team for the “good of the country” than he does by playing the usual selection game.
    I think Clark would now be the only logical choice if that was Obama’s main requirement in a VP.
    I could vote for that ticket.

    Reply

  22. Nobcentral says:

    I’d say this is probably the most complicated VP decisionmaking process I’ve seen in my lifetime. For the Dems:
    Clinton wins the base but jumpstarts the GOP against the ticket. Bayh, et al, voted for the war on Iraq. “Soft” candidates (Sebilius) aren’t going to help beat back GOP tricks if Obama stays “nice”. A number of the names that have been floated (Kaine and Hagel, for ex) aren’t particularly liberal and have serious, substantive platform conflicts with Obama.
    For the Repubs:
    McCain is trying to cultivate his “maverickness” image which would be fueled by picking a Lieberman or a Ridge. But that would drive the GOP base insane and would likely be political suicide as the radical repub base isn’t voting for a pro-choice Repub. Which leaves a host of uninteresting numbskulls who might placate the base and convince them to vote for McCain but would antagonize the “independents” that McCain has to win to have any hope in the election.
    I honestly have no idea how this is going to play out. But it looks like Obama needs an attack dog under him who is fairly benign politically (thus Clark would be a good choice) while McCain needs a middle of the road Repub who is pro-life and has a long history of working with the Dems to get stuff done (I have no idea who that would be). No matter who is chosen, it makes a good story.

    Reply

  23. Jim says:

    As a pro-choice, native Pennsylvanian, I’d love to see McCain
    pick Tom Ridge.
    * First Homeland Security Secretary
    In which capacity, by his own admission, he played with the terror
    threat levels according to the needs of the Bush/Cheney ’04
    campaign.
    And he did a bang up job preparing evacuation and coordination
    plans, didn’t he (See, NOLA, Katrina)?
    Of course, he did introduce the nation to duct tape as a national
    security measure, so he has that in his “national security” portfolio.

    Reply

  24. pauline says:

    Madge:
    Barry O is not really that “well-known” by many voters. And Zogby says O’s poll numbers are slipping right now. While HRC is polarizing, I think more voters will buy into the “change” of having the first African-American Pres and first woman VP more than a “more of the same” repub warmonger ticket.
    If however, Barry O only adds incredibly unknowns like bayh, Sebelius, Kaine or whoever to his ticket, assuming it is “his” ticket, the dems will return to their barns in November with their tails a-draggin’.
    If McCrankster selects liarman, ridge, rice, Pawlenty, giuliani, etc etc, then a Barry O/HRC ticket has the best winning chance. Barry O/unknowns stand no chance.
    The WWIII fed contract crowd is probably foaming at the mouth thinking of the piles of war money to be made if McCrankster/liarman or who? can lie their way in. Forget all this foreign policy talk bs, THEY WANT MONEY!! Even power and control are secondary.
    Someday soon we ladies will be video-stripped at the airport while we’re forced to throw an extra $20 bill in the “security bucket” before boarding. Comrade chertoff is probably laughing out loud knowing we will someday be paying the $20 for some TSA pervert to stare at us for free!
    A McCrankster/liarman or who? team would be all about handing out fed war contracts, including more airport revealing video surveillance. Promoting peace and fair trade while balancing individual liberties and rights is not even in their random thoughts.
    Who knows, for an extra $100 grand, a VP liarman might consider conducting personal tours of his 51st state holy land with an autographed 4×6 color photo.
    Watch for these and other special tv “offers” coming soon.

    Reply

  25. Tahoe Editor says:

    Ridge said all the right things over the weekend, noting it’s the VP’s responsibility to back the nominee’s positions.
    He sounded great talking about Obama’s cluelessness at the national level.
    Securing Pennsylvania while sending Rush Limbaugh’s crowd into the bleachers and appealing to all those NObama “women of a certain age” who were gung-ho for Hill? Ridge = smart pick.
    If you think the pro-life vote won’t come out for McCain, dig this cartoon.
    This election is a referendum on Obama — they’ll come out to vote.
    http://cartoonbox.slate.com/hottopic/?image=1&topicid=114

    I’m not surprised Clark will be in Denver — but he won’t be on the ticket.

    Reply

  26. bluemoon says:

    Update regarding General Clark’s attendance at the Convention from The Washington Times chat, about 1:05 p.m. August 21 Thursday
    http://www.washtimes.com/livechat/2008/aug/21/gen-wesley-k-clark/
    Gen. Clark, are you really not participating in the Democratic convention, and why not? Thanks. by cbellantoni
    Answer: I will be at the Convention as soon as I finish some business requirements in Europe that I simply couldn’t reschedule. I should be there on Thursday as things now stand. by Wesley_Clark

    Reply

  27. Mr.Murder says:

    Ridge has Homeland Security background now, he’d reinforce McCain’s security profile.

    Reply

  28. Josh R. says:

    Ridge is pro-choice on abortion. That effectively eliminates him from contention.

    Reply

  29. Tahoe Editor says:

    As a pro-choice, native Pennsylvanian, I’d love to see McCain pick Tom Ridge.
    * First Homeland Security Secretary
    * 12 years in Congress
    * 6 years as governor
    He’d be a great counter if Obama picks Biden, a.k.a. the “third senator from Pennsylvania.”
    “Tom Ridge shakes the Democrat board game upside down.” — MSNBC Jester Christ Matthews

    Reply

  30. Tahoe Editor says:

    “Urgent Action Climate Change Task Force”
    Do you really think he came up with that on his own?
    Clark has been overly eager to hitch his wagon to anyone who’ll take him. He speaks with credibility ONLY on military matters. Take him out of that element and he struggles to spin yarn from others’ talking points. And he’s already said military service is no qualification — so what does he have left?
    He fills Obama’s gaps, but his own gaps rival Obamas.
    An Obama-Clark ticket would just highlight each other’s deficiencies.

    Reply

  31. Dan Shea says:

    I think General Clark is one of the most exceptional people of our time – and not just for his public work and service. I have personally witnessed his commitment to servicemembers and their families after my brother was killed in Iraq. The Democratic party would be wise to keep him on board and at the front of their platform on “Securing America.”

    Reply

  32. Jim says:

    I think Clark should be the Veep, and as a fairly strong Obama
    supporter I think it is bewilderingly stupid for the campaign to not
    take advantage of Clark’s skills and record–hanging him out to
    dry with Bob Schieffer et al made and makes me want to bang my
    head against a wall.
    But there is one problem with this story as it’s usually told. My
    memory is that Clark let it be known that he would be out of the
    country convention-week before the Obama campaign said he
    wouldn’t be needed. I don’t want to get bogged down in, as Father
    Broder would admonish us, the blame-game, just pointing out
    that this isn’t so black and white as Clark (and Clinton) supporters
    and Obama-bashers want to present it.
    That said, they both oughta get over it.
    No Bayh. Please god, no Bayh. No Evan Freakin’ “Iran is what we
    thought Iraq was and wasn’t Bayh”.

    Reply

  33. Nobcentral says:

    Steve,
    Couldn’t agree with you more about Clark. He’s got an impeccable reputation, he’s got the attack dog criteria necessary, and he’s, without a doubt, they type of foreign policy thinker that the Dems desperately need. For too long the Dems have been labeled weak on national security issues. Clark could help turn back that perception. I still want to see him as VP.

    Reply

  34. Madge says:

    I could be wrong of course, but I sincerely believe that *nothing*
    would energize the Republican (and Indie) base faster than HRC on
    an Obama ticket. I suspect the projected Republican turn-out at
    the polls might even double.
    I believe Clark, on the other hand, would have been a sure win.
    Too sad. Really. I always believed that General Clak should have
    remained neutral throughout the Dem primary in order to retain
    his “a-political voice” on matters of national security – a real gift
    to the American public.

    Reply

  35. Josh R. says:

    As a follow up: attack McCain on his integrity through his constant changing of positions; link him to Bush and say he’s a third term; but do not mention his military service. I fault Obama here when he says “McCain honorably served his nation” – don’t even mention it, guy, just leave it to the way side. The frame has been set by over a decade of reporting that McCain+Service=War Hero. You’re not changing that by November. Just don’t mention it as there are plenty of other places where you can attack him and that will actually work.

    Reply

  36. pauline says:

    I’ve posted this earlier on some other TWN VP topic — sorry, they’re all starting to look the same.
    Barry O will have to pick HRC in order to unite the dem party and solidify the independent voters.
    She’s not my favorite, but if Barry O wants to be sworn in as the first African-American president (long overdue imo) in January, he’ll have to be standing next to the first female, pants suit wearing VP.
    All this VP political play is not rocket science.
    Clark may neatly fit into a Barry O admin, but if the O camp is dumb enough to pick bayh-bayh, or any of the other unfamiliar names, McCrankster is the next DC mafia boss.
    And watch out world if that happens!

    Reply

  37. Josh R. says:

    “We need to take that deflective shield away from the bastard.”
    You’re not going to be able to. McCain has worked for over a decade to build tight relationships with the Washington media elite. They view him as a hero and will protect him. You can keep on saying what you want, but they’ll keep on calling you anti-soldier. Over and over. For days upon days. And instead of talking about the economy or anything else that might benefit you, you end up defending yourself from those smears.
    http://mediamatters.org/items/200803070011
    In the eyes of the press he is a war hero, end of story. You can attack his honesty and integrity, but you have to do so in a way that minimizes attention to his war service because you are NOT going to get a fair shake on that. The ten minutes of good press on Olbermann (and now Maddow) will not make up for the hours of thrasing you’re going to get on every other channel and news story.

    Reply

  38. Madge says:

    Of course Wes Clark should be given a speaking slot in Denver and
    no doubt any number of his supporters have written to Camp
    Obama with that request. As well, Clark should have a major role
    in an Obama administration. This isn’t even arguable, Mr.
    Clemons.
    Realistically speaking however, that might just require “America’s
    Royal Family” to forfeit one or two of their rooms at the Inn. You’ve
    got Bill – you’ve got Hill – and you’ve got Chelsea in the line-up.
    There just doesn’t seem to be any space left at the ‘Clintonian
    Convention’, what with the ongoing demand for “catharsis” from
    the silver-medalist. Sad they don’t get it: this is no longer about
    them.

    Reply

  39. Bethie says:

    I think that Clark should say that again. And I think that he should repeat it over and over and over. He was and is right. He talks like a General discussing the poor performance of a soldier not someone who gives a free pass to someone because he was caught by the bad guys. The whole idea behind this is to take a bad performer and make him into a hero while the right took a strong performer in Kerry and made him bad soldier. Hit McCain again and again on being a failure. Being a POW does not make you a good soldier or a good President, or even an honest guy. We need to take that deflective shield away from the bastard.

    Reply

  40. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Interesting.
    Months now, and still, no one has clearly outlined Obama’s experience and qualifications for being placed in the Oval Office by our mass marketing entities, such as ABC and CNN.
    We find ourselves in the remarkable position of debating which person, (all possessing experience and skills surpassing the presidential candidate’s), will ascend to the second seat. Its like putting the scalpel in the hands of the nurse, and consigning the surgeon to the instrument tray.
    Meanwhile, the nation is pretty much consigned to the fact that McCain is an all around lousy choice, but what the hell, out of some sort of wierd perverted partisan loyalty, millions are gonna vote for him anyway.
    Poof, a few years worth of emails “dissappear” from our King’s computers, and congressional subpoenas are countered with a universal chorus of “Fuck you, we’re above your quaint and stupid laws”.
    Afghanistan goes to shit, our foremost “ally” in the “war on terrorism” fires Bush’s asshole buddy Mushariff, Cheney fires up a new Cold War, and Bush admonishes Russia for a handful of Georgian deaths that is years away from the million or so we’ve murdered in Iraq.
    If this ain’t a train wreck in the making, I don’t know what is. Clark would be smart to RUN in the other direction if either one of these pathetic posturing fools so much as glances at him. The only person that could possibly want the Vice President’s seat, at this point, is an accomplished fool, or a shameless and murderous criminal. We’ll probably end up with someone that is both.

    Reply

  41. Anna says:

    Obama gets to choose the VP he is most comfortable with and meets his own needs, however happy I would be with Obama/Clark, and that’s a whole lot of happy. But Obama is wrong in shutting the General out of the convention speaking lineup; it makes no sense to me. Obama also needs Clark out on the stump, where Clark is going anyway as the good Democrat Clark is. Obama should embrace Clark as a campaign surrogate, the POW and the MSM be damned.

    Reply

  42. jonst says:

    If Obama wants to reject Clark for numerous reasons i.e. support of Hillary, position on climate change, because Clark is perceived as popular in the blogsphere, whatever, fine. That is Obama’s business. I think he would be foolish to do that, but fine. However, i suspect he is rejecting even being in the same town with him because of the McCain flap during Clark’s appearance on Face the Nation. And if THAT is Obama’s reason then Obama is truly clueless and on the defensive. What Clark said was true and it was appropriate, and it needed to be said.

    Reply

  43. Francesco Femia says:

    I couldn’t agree more, Steve. Alienating Clark is a terrible idea.

    Reply

  44. bluemoon says:

    Barack is surrounded by professional Democratic nomination crashers. End of story.

    Reply

  45. Josh R. says:

    If you don’t understand the freeze on Clark, you don’t understand the media and its role in the current political atmosphere. All they care about is that he “insulted” John McCain and will treat him as such. Were you all just under a rock when that happened? Or do you think they’ll change course for some magical reason?

    Reply

  46. Mr.Murder says:

    Perhaps Clark issued this news plausibly. Sounds like many people are jumping off the Titanic right now….

    Reply

  47. ed says:

    Gosh, if only someone had suggested this a long time ago.

    Reply

  48. Dinger says:

    Yes, an Obama-Clark team would be the answer. Clark perfectly
    compliments Obama. Please let it be so!

    Reply

  49. bluemoon says:

    I do not believe Team Obama is smart enough to comprehend
    the asset that is Wes Clark. Clark has strenously & at times,
    single-handedly fought to make the Democrats a full-service
    party & to take national security seriously. Are they having a
    knee-jerk reaction to the uniform? Do they not understand how
    to find Wikipedia? Have they missed the last seven years? No one
    knows.
    I believe the Obama team is in deep denial & self-absorption
    marketing hype bubble not just of the swings in the polls, but
    also has quite literally little to no understanding of
    comprehensive national security– which is something Wes
    Clark can absolutely help them with.
    Are they fools? Are they idiots? Does anyone really know what
    their take is on a thousand sensitive foreign policy issues? The
    question marks loom large over November.

    Reply

  50. Spunkmeyer says:

    The Clintons and Clark have been pretty quiet lately, and Clark has
    reliably been a strong advocate for Clinton. I strongly doubt this is
    a coincidence. You might be being punked, Steve…

    Reply

  51. Chris Brown says:

    Clark, so far as I know, has not announced that he is out of the VP running. Has anyone read that he has definitively been eliminated?
    Again, the suggestion that Obama would freeze out Clark because he supported Clinton is, I think, ridiculous. He has, after all, buddied up to Bayh.

    Reply

  52. Pacific Jet says:

    Again, I just can not believe that Obama and the DNC leadership would freeze Clark out of the convention. It’s so illogical.
    Such a decision would also call into question Obama’s judgement and motivations.
    Clark is Obama’s best choice for VP.

    Reply

  53. En Passant says:

    I have always thought Obama and Clark would complement each
    other well. It’s a shame he wasn’t considered seriously. Especially
    in light of Bayh rearing his head again as VP. What a shame. It
    looks like Gore/Lieberman again.

    Reply

  54. readerOfTeaLeaves says:

    I don’t comprehend failing to take advantage of Clark’s expertise
    and experience. Sure, Clark was a very strong supporter of Hilary
    Clinton.
    As one of those ‘Hilary supporters’ that Obama needs, the fact
    that Clark publicly supported Clinton lent credibility to her
    campaign. It would also lend credibility to Obama’s.
    Clark appears to be taking the high road here.
    Obama would be prudent to do the same.

    Reply

  55. Dan Kervick says:

    I have no strong feelings about Clark one way or another, but anybody would be preferable to that loathsome neocon wannabe and the Joe Lieberman of his generation, Evan Bayh.
    And is there any chance that the Indiana resident slated to appear with Obama might be Dick Lugar? I’d prefer a Democrat, but would certainly prefer Lugar to Bayh. I know Obama and Lugar have a good relationship based on their work on non-proliferation and the Obama-Lugar act, and their trip together to the Russian near abroad. So a Lugar pick would be timely as well.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *