Reply #29: If *only*, Wes is probably thinking - lol [View All]

"If anyone is thinking of going over there and leaving the good general a message, don't put anything negative about Hillary's chances as the subject. It won't get posted. Trust me."

Please. It's the nature of the Clark blog to argue everything and anything. Always has been. There are posters who are happy with the endorsement and posters who don't mind it and posters who are like no way in frigging hell or on this green earth! Clark has never exerted control on what is said or not said there, even though sometimes I've wished he would. It's not some well-oiled machine and disciplined corps, and if that's what the Clinton Campaign thinks they're getting, it will be a rude awakening.

Clark looks at it as a town hall where civics is rough and tumble, and so what? It's about democracy and ultimately that takes free speech and he doesn't curtail it. Like I said, he's probably thinking "If only they could STFU for five minutes." But block posts negative about Hillary's chances? This is a discussion being held all over the Internet. Clark (and I guess, Hillary) are entirely aware that the netroots has to come to grips with her candidacy, if that's possible, and it's not going to come about because Wes Clark says so or because Hillary Clinton wants it to be. It's going to come about because the people work the issues, just as Wes Clark urges they do.

What will happen is what's happened at times in the past when there is dismay over something Clark has determined is important enough yet doesn't quite fit with what his grassroots supporters want. He stands by his principles. We decide if we can live with it. If not, we go away, or we stay and work on other projects within the community, or we fall in line behind the General, either because we agree with what he wants or because we trust him.