If we want someone who will fight for what is right tirelessly, Wes Clark

This is like a spin off of the thread I started about President Clinton speaking at the UN conference on climate change.

It seems to me if we want someone to represent us and lead who is tenacious, says what they mean, and means what they say...We have to find someone who is like that to begin with.

Vs. trying to take someone else and transform them into that.

You know, like getting involved with someone and trying to turn them into the person you wish they were. How often does that work? It doesn't, in my experience.

It seems to me that there is a hunger here on the group and in the nation for someone like that.

So here I am suggesting that General Clark is that person, by nature.

I'm hoping we'll give it some thought.

If you haven't followed his campaign, Wespac etc very closely, it may not be as apparent to you that he is the fighter he is.

Although being a 4 star General, having been the head of NATO, dropping in on a Presidential primary campaign at the request of we in the draft Wes Clark movement, going on the Faux news station to fight for what he believes is right, his Op-Eds and articles that periodically appear in the NY Times etc are some indications of the tenaciousness and fighting spirit of the man.

I support him, obviously.

But I bring this up because of the frustration I see here when Democrats don't fight back, or take hard stands on issues.

in our civilian government. Especially a general who lavished praise on the current bunch of criminals who have hijacked our government. Clark is either a liar or he has incredibly bad judgment. Either way, he isn't presidential material. The last thing we need at this time in our history is someone who has spent 30 years seeking military solutions to political problems, leading our country. IMO General Clark is an opportunist who would gladly have joined the current administration if asked.

If he wants to be a politician let him start somewhere other then the top.

As we saw in the 2004 primaries,most Democrats don't care for Clark.

I know, this is a very unpopular opinion here at Clark central....oh well flame away!!!

Clark has experience, level head, is a proponent of diplomacy and has used same in his career, and contrary to what some people say, I haven't heard him praise the present administration. His judgement is right on. Speaking of generals, General Eisenhower did an exceptional job as president and Clark's poltical experience tops Eisenhowers. Also, he is not in the hands of ideological whack jobs. Time we had someone with brains and integrity in the leading role in this country. So there!

I think last time was the time. He's certainly better than most of the candidates so far and better than nearly all in Congress except for a few. I'm looking for forceful rebuttals to the whole politics of today right now and no words that even in the slightest confuse any issue. I'm not sure I'm going his route this time.

rebuttal of everything here and now.

Issues are complex, and nobody is likely to agree with me on all issues.

'08 is a long way off when taking into consideration all that has been lost in this country and the fast track we are on into unchartered waters. If we lose in '06, then not much is going to matter. I think we'll then be in an entrenched semi-dictatorship.

this point. The Democrats are all over the map. And none are really honing in on the "Big Picture" of Iran and the entire Middle East. Kerry makes me sick...he's late to the game in parroting some of Clark's ideas.

I'm getting more and more disengaged with this party. I think Clark is, to a certain extent, as he refers to them in the NYTimes op ed as "The Democrats"....

Terrorists? Has he trained some of the resistance against Chavez? He needs to explain his gig at that school of the Americas.