1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Clark Gave Speech in Support of Bush Administration 2 Years Ago!!!

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by MadMax, Sep 26, 2003.

  1. MadMax

    MadMax Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    76,683
    Likes Received:
    25,924
    I don't see this guy uniting the Democratic party. No way you get a guy like glynch to vote for this guy (no offense meant by that at all glynch). I get the impression that if there were a Democrat in office right now, he'd be running as a Republican. What the hell is a speaker at the Pulaski County GOP Lincoln Day Dinner doing running for the Dem nomination???

    http://drudgereport.com/clark.htm

    XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU SEPT 25, 2003 16:05:37 ET XXXXX

    GENERAL CLARK PRAISED CONDI, POWELL, RUMSFELD AND BUSH: 'WE NEED THEM THERE'

    **World Exclusive**

    Democratic presidential hopeful General Wesley Clark offered lavish praise for the Bush Administration and its key players in a speech to Republicans -- just two years ago, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal!

    MORE

    During extended remarks delivered at the Pulaski County GOP Lincoln Day Dinner in Little Rock, Arkansas on May 11, 2001, General Clark declared: "And I'm very glad we've got the great team in office, men like Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice... people I know very well - our president George W. Bush. We need them there."

    A video of Clark making the comments has surfaced, DRUDGE can reveal.

    MORE

    Clark praised Reagan for improving the military:

    "We were really helped when President Ronald Reagan came in. I remember non-commissioned officers who were going to retire and they re-enlisted because they believed in President Reagan."

    Clark continued: "That's the kind of President Ronald Reagan was. He helped our country win the Cold War. He put it behind us in a way no one ever believed would be possible. He was truly a great American leader. And those of us in the Armed Forces loved him, respected him, and tremendously admired him for his great leadership."

    Clark on President George Bush: "President George Bush had the courage and the vision... and we will always be grateful to President George Bush for that tremendous leadership and statesmanship."

    Clark on American military involvement overseas:

    "Do you ever ask why it is that these people in these other countries can't solve their own problems without the United States sending its troops over there? And do you ever ask why it is the Europeans, the people that make the Mercedes and the BMW's that got so much money can't put some of that money in their own defense programs and they need us to do their defense for them?"

    "And I'll tell you what I've learned from Europe is that are a lot of people out in the world who really, really love and admire the United States. Don't you ever believe it when you hear foreign leaders making nasty comments about us. That's them playing to their domestic politics as they misread it. Because when you talk to the people out there, they love us. They love our values. They love what we stand for in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights."

    Impacting...
     
    #1 MadMax, Sep 26, 2003
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2003
  2. RocketMan Tex

    RocketMan Tex Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 1999
    Messages:
    18,452
    Likes Received:
    119
    It occurred before 9/11.

    Remember, 9/11 changed everything!:D
     
  3. MadMax

    MadMax Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    76,683
    Likes Received:
    25,924
    that's funny!

    but would you seriously vote for a guy who calls Reagan a great leader...a great president? a guy who says that Europe won't spend any money on defense because they know we'll always come bail them out??? a guy who claims he knows the administration personally and calls them a "great team"...people he's glad are in office?

    that doesn't seem to mesh real well with the sentiments of many registered democrats on this board.
     
  4. MacBeth

    MacBeth Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    7,761
    Likes Received:
    2
    I think that this was the question Clark addressed the best last night, and it pretty much backs up his position: He has never been partisan, he wasn't rushing to judge Bush, and he was giving his team the credit their qualifications deserved.

    And he was let down. Lied to. Misled to war. Seen us become the global bully, and alienate our allies. And it is because of just that sense of betrayal that he has come forth to try and rectify things. That has been his message all along, and I, for one, find it more credible that he wasn't among those who were trashing Bush pre 9-11 just because he was Republican and they were Democrat. Of course I'm biased, because I was a Bush supporter who went through the exact same sense of disbeleief and dismay when I saw how Bush exploited 9-11 and completely pushed an agenda that was unwise and uneccessary. In that regard , as in others, Clark mirrors my view of things.

    I think that this will actually help Clark's message to average Americans, and to moderates/non-partisans like myself. This might not play well with died in the woool Democrats, but I think that if they see him as the guy who can beat Bush they will care less if he has always bled Dem. The Republicans did that with Reagan.

    But moreover the very fact that this might be viewed as a negative for Clark in my mind just underlines the weaknesses of the partisan two-party system. Why should he have to always have hated Republicans? Isn't it more credible that he has changed his opinion of them based on their performance?
     
  5. MadMax

    MadMax Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    76,683
    Likes Received:
    25,924
    MacBeth -- ok...so he's not partisan...but he does think Reagan was a great leader...he didn't change his opinion on that...he said the Bush team is the right team for the job...he says that Europe just sits and waits on us to defend them...i don't know if he changed his opinion on that or not

    if you can't energize your base, you can't win an election. yes, you like to steal votes from the middle...but elections aren't won from the middle. they're about exciting your base and making sure they go out to vote. i don't think wesley clark does that, now. he will even further the divide in the democratic party, in my opinion...a party still struggling to identify itself.
     
  6. MacBeth

    MacBeth Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    7,761
    Likes Received:
    2

    I think Reagan was, in some ways, a great President. I don't see the problem with saying that. Clark thought Bush et al ( especially the first guy he named, the first guy I would have named, Powell) were the right people. So did I. I don't see the problem with that. I disagree with his comments on Europe, but many Americans would not. Again, though, all that this stuff tells me is not an automatic Democrat ( or Republican) with regards to his ability to evaluate, something I find worthy of praise, not condemnation.


    Now if you want to argue whether we are so committed to the knee-jerk partisanship that so many Dems will see this as a negative that he won't get the support, I disagree, but it's definitely arguable. However, as Reagan and Churchill have showed in the past, when leaders who are needed come forth in times of trial, people and parties often find a way to look past that devotion to partisanship for the sake of their country. I honestly believe that now is one of those times, and everything I hear so far makes me think that Clark is that leader.
     
    #6 MacBeth, Sep 26, 2003
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2003
  7. Manny Ramirez

    Manny Ramirez The Music Man

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2001
    Messages:
    28,823
    Likes Received:
    5,750
    I always thought that there were many Democrats who would make you believe that Reagan was the anti-Christ, and now you have a Dem candidate who actually said that Reagan was, *gasp*, a good President?

    Oh, oh! Spaghettios!

    Trust me, this revelation is going to come back and haunt Clark down the line with some people who always vote Democratic.
     
  8. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    41,683
    Likes Received:
    16,209
    if you can't energize your base, you can't win an election.

    Ordinarily, I would agree... but Bush has the unique ability to energize the far-left of the Democratic Party just as Clinton had the the ability to do so with the far-right. There's so much hatred there that "the base" will come out just to vote against Bush rather than for Clark. If Clark gets the middle, and the far-left continues to despise Bush, he's OK in my opinion.
     
  9. MadMax

    MadMax Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    76,683
    Likes Received:
    25,924
    that didn't work against Clinton
     
  10. glynch

    glynch Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    18,087
    Likes Received:
    3,605
    No way you get a guy like glynch to vote for this guy (no offense meant by that at all glynch).

    Agreed , no way I vote for Clark in the primary.

    Max,
    could you vote forClark. You usually offer advice to the Demos because you see their candidate as not being pro "defense" enough or too liberal.

    Got to vote for Clark over Bush in the general election if it get downs to it.

    If for no other reason we got to go with a guy who thinks and acquries info for himself so he isn't just a pawn to the info fed to him by advisors.
     
  11. Murdock

    Murdock Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2002
    Messages:
    180
    Likes Received:
    2

    Trust me, this revelation is going to come back and haunt Clark down the line with some people who always vote Democratic.


    That coupled with the fact that it took him several months before he actually announced that he was joining the Democratic party.

    The comparisons with Reagan's party switching and Clark's are false as well, as Reagan was established within the Republican party prior to running for President in 1980 and certainly didn't switch within 3 weeks of announcing his intention to seek Presidental Office.

    Until more is known about Wesley Clark, where he stands on various issues and if he'll actually stand up and be a fighter for what he believes in as opposed to the spinless jellyfish style Dems, I doubt I'll support him..

    Howard Dean embodies exactly what the Democratic party has been missing out on for the duration of the Bush Administration.
     
  12. MadMax

    MadMax Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    76,683
    Likes Received:
    25,924
    if it weren't for my jackassed, hard-nosed views on abortion, i could easily vote for clark. i'm not saying i necessarily would...but he's a far cry from the typical Gore/Gephardt type candidates the Dems have paraded up in past years.
     
  13. MadMax

    MadMax Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    76,683
    Likes Received:
    25,924
    THIS POST IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT! EXACTLY! DEAD ON!

    the concern among many dems here...and batman jones put it best...was that the dem party didn't have an identity because they were too spineless...here you have a candidate who lauds Reagan...who talks about Europe sitting back like fat cats while the US bails them out....who goes to freaking GOP Lincoln Day Dinners....whose own party identification tended to lean Republican until very recently...who sought out a position within the administration early on... that sounds a lot more like smelling political opportunity.
     
  14. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    41,683
    Likes Received:
    16,209
    that didn't work against Clinton

    I don't know that it didn't work... It certainly wasn't enough, but I think that was because Dole was such a terrible candidate. The theory here is that Dole was supposed to focus on the middle and then the right would have come out to support him for their hatred of Clinton. In that election, Clinton captured the middle instead of Dole so that didn't really work out. If Dole could have wooed the middle, I think he could have won.
     
  15. FranchiseBlade

    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    51,813
    Likes Received:
    20,472
    They asked Clark about that last nigh, and like a true 'politician' he answered without explaining what he was doing praising Reagan and W. at that event. He listed a bunch of things he believes in which is good, but didn't in any way clarify why he was there praising the two worst presidents in my lifetime.
     
  16. Troy McClure

    Troy McClure Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2003
    Messages:
    655
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think this proves that Gen. Clark , at that time, had no plans to run for president or the democratic nomination. But the far left (Kucinich , Nader lovers) arent going to like this.
     
  17. rimrocker

    rimrocker Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 1999
    Messages:
    23,140
    Likes Received:
    10,208
    In most elections I might share this concern, but this one's a 180... We have Bush and cronies to energize the base. Believe me, when Nov. gets here, the base will be there regardless of the nominee.
     
  18. Murdock

    Murdock Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2002
    Messages:
    180
    Likes Received:
    2

    the concern among many dems here...and batman jones put it best...was that the dem party didn't have an identity because they were too spineless...here you have a candidate who lauds Reagan...who talks about Europe sitting back like fat cats while the US bails them out....who goes to freaking GOP Lincoln Day Dinners....whose own party identification tended to lean Republican until very recently...who sought out a position within the administration early on... that sounds a lot more like smelling political opportunity


    Exactly.. General Clark from what I have seen thus far would make a wonderful Sec of Defense or VP or even Sec of State or Sec. of Homeland Security.. As of today, he has done nothing, nada.. zip.. zilch to prove any loyalty to the Democratic party.. He's come in late and generated some buzz.. We'll see how he handles himself after the newness wears off and and the canidates begin to really call him on the turf for some of these issues... Having a superior military record is great going into elections but, it doesn't always win.. Just ask Max Cleland of Georgia about that.. Military service has not been a key factor in elections for quite awhile, so I'm comfortable diminishing that aspect in relation to its overall value of Wesley Clark as a potential canidate.
     
  19. rimrocker

    rimrocker Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 1999
    Messages:
    23,140
    Likes Received:
    10,208
    from a May 20th, 2001 article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

    ________________________

    Pulaski County Committee Chairman Greg Racicot invited Wesley Clark as keynote speaker. Former supreme allied commander in Europe and leader of NATO during the recent Kosovo campaign, Clark now lives in Little Rock and works in high-technology venture capital at Stephens Inc. A hot-ticket guest speaker, Clark plans a similar appearance before the Democrats, his wife, Gert, confided.

    __________________
    US News' Washington Whispers...

    Just when Arkansas political bigs figured that local-boy-done-good Wesley Clark was set to make a bid for public office, he's surprised them all by signing on as a military and current affairs analyst with CNN, Whispers learns. Clark, a retired Army general who was one of the U.S. military bosses in Bosnia, is expected to be a regular on the cable network as it scrambles to recover viewers who've switched to Fox News Channel and MSNBC. Since retiring, Clark has been a fixture on the Arkansas political trail, speaking at key events normally reserved for campaigning pols. That's led most state politicians to assume he's planning to run for Senate or governor. Clark, however, keeps them guessing. And not just about his future: folks don't even know if he's a Republican or Democrat.
    _____________________

    From Josh Marshall...

    Now, one final point. There's this idea afoot that Clark got into the Democratic party out of some sort of opportunism, and that this happened after 9/11. Frankly, this makes no sense. Is there really any time over the last two years that getting into the Democratic party would have seemed like a good way to get into office or advance politically? Particularly in a state like Arkansas which has been trending Republican? I mean, sad to say, but I don't see it. At the moment, President Bush is looking weaker and weaker. But that's pretty recent. Clark is clearly new to the Democratic party on many levels. But as explanations go, this strikes me as an awfully weak one.
     
  20. SamFisher

    SamFisher Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    61,886
    Likes Received:
    41,411
    Madmax, the greatest force for unifying the Democratic party, glynch and all, is not who aspires to be in the white house, it's who's in the white house right now and the last four years.

    Ask any one of the several million repentant nader voters out there.
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now