2/17/2004
Fascinating postmortem
Check out this post-campaign analysis from Matt Bennett, Clark's communications director, and Craig Smith, who worked on the Lieberman campaign.
2/13/2004
Wes Clark endorses John Kerry
I don't follow leaders blindly, but I have to say Clark as a VP would help absorb the criticism that Kerry will face from August - November. Clark comes to this without any anti-Nam, peace movement baggage. If not VP, then he'd make a great Secretary of State or UN Ambassador.
Clark can't be SecDef because he hasn't been retired from active duty for 10 years.
Honestly, pick Clark as VP and Bill Richardson for Secretary of State, and you've got a dream team.
2/12/2004
MARCH MEETUP IS STILL ON!
Hey, just because Wes Clark dropped out of the race doesn't mean we can't have one last meetup for old times' sake.
Instead of the old reliable Brounshidle, we will hold our final Clark 2004 campaign meetup at the Buffalo Brewpub - New York State's Oldest Brewpub!
MARCH 1st at 7:00 p.m.
What we need you to do is go to http://clark2004.meetup.com and vote for the Buffalo Brewpub location. If you already voted for the Brounshidle, go back and CHANGE YOUR VOTE!
It'd be great to see everyone again and raise a pint to our efforts, to General Clark, and to the defeat of George Bush in November.
If you haven't already, please go and join the Democrat meetup at http://democrat.meetup.com. The next meetup is set to happen at the Starbucks coffee on Main Street in Williamsville at 7pm on February 18th. It'd be nice to have a big turnout.
Cheers!
A new look for a new movement
I switched to the Democratic party in order to help elect Wesley Clark President of the United States.
I think there's a great many, like me, who want to continue working toward the future that Wes Clark envisioned.
Join us as we look forward to new challenges, new ideas, and new battles to forge a New American Patriotism.
2/11/2004
Clark's Hard-Charging Campaign Comes to a Close
Here's a good wrap-up from the LA Times. (Registration req.)
By Eric Slater, Times Staff Writer
MEMPHIS, Tenn. Wesley K. Clark's late-starting whirlwind of a run for the White House always had the odds against it. Tuesday night, the quest ended when the retired four-star general bowed out of the Democratic presidential race after finishing third in Tennessee and Virginia.
Clark, who had never run for public office, in a relatively short time built a nearly nationwide campaign and during the last three months of 2003 raised more money than any other candidate except former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean.
Clark's campaign was bedeviled by rookie mistakes and organizational problems. But his main trouble probably was more basic - most voters simply didn't know much about the man who served as supreme allied commander of NATO.
Click the link for more.
It's over.
General Clark dropped out of the race last night after finishing a disappointing third in Virginia and Tennessee. I'm sorry to see it come to this, and I think that although rookie mistakes were made, he ran a good race with a positive, inspiring message.
I'm very proud to have worked for Clark, volunteered for Clark, and to have had the opportunity to see him speak and to meet him.
I'm also grateful for the friends I've met in this effort.
No matter whom you choose to support, it is imperative that George W. Bush be removed from office. I'll still vote for Clark in March, but I'll vote for the Democratic nominee in November - whoever that may be.
Thanks for visiting this weblog. I don't know if I'll keep updating it or not. Check in and see.
2/06/2004
eblock Tennessee!
The win in OK and our 3rd place finish in NH were made possible in large part by remote phonebanking from Clark supporters around the country.
The Clark campaign has made it known that it wants to win Tennessee.
To that end, please become an eblock captain and make as many calls to TN as you possibly can. Make sure to tell people from where you're calling.
http://www.forclark.com/eblock
Clark and the Media
Here's one take: There's only so much media oxygen out there and Clark can't catch his breath.
"I don't get it. If Clark was floundering and the press was pressuring him to withdraw, I'd understand. But if Clark is doing just as well as Edwards, why won't the pundits give him his due?"
Indeed.
2/04/2004
Clark wins OK, 2nd in ND, AZ, NM
Last night was a good night.
Not a great night, but a good night.
The media, of course, will concentrate on Kerry, Edwards and Dean.
Let me reiterate:
Edwards has been at this now for over a year - longer, I think, than any of the other candidates. IIRC, he was the 1st to declare his candidacy. I think he's doing worse, not better, than one would expect, but that's not the spin du jour.
Dean has yet to win one primary or caucus. He's also been at this for over a year, and just weeks ago, he had more money and momentum than any other candidate in the field. For some reason, however, he gets this anticipatory coverage from the media, and I have no idea why.
Heck, Al Sharpton polling double digits in SC is bigger news than anything Dean did or didn't do last night.
The exit polling is showing that people are far more concerned about the economy and electability than they are about Iraq or even terrorism. This makes sense - with what would you be more concerned - an abstract risk of possible terrorist attack, or the fact that you lost your job and might not make your mortgage next month?
So, I think that shift in focus has really done Dean in, and it hasn't done Clark any favors. Edwards isn't running a homeland security campaign, he's running a feel-good domestic agenda campaign, and people are responding. That's why he did so well in OK last night.
I think that the Clark campaign really needs to re-focus as it goes into the primaries leading up to, and including Super Tuesday. It needs to get its domestic message out there. It's a good one.
Forget Michael Moore's deserter comment. Forget Iraq for now. Tell America about your plan for their future. Tell them how you'll return fiscal responsibility, accountability to our country. Tell them about your tax relief package for the middle class. Tell them about your health care agenda.
And when you're done, remind them that you fought in wars and sent people to fight in wars, and that you'll be accountable and responsible when making such tough decisions.
We can do this folks. We have a month to make a difference leading up to Super Tuesday. Now's our chance.
2/03/2004
E-block
For Wes Clark today. http://www.forclark.com/eblock
Here are the final Zogby numbers for today's contests.
A win in OK and strong showings in ND, AZ and NM would be very welcome, indeed.
1/30/2004
The Liberal Dem Candidate's been selected...
Dick Morris (I know, I know) has an interesting take on where the Dem nominee-selection stands right now.
He believes that the party's primary process boils down to the selection of one liberal, and one moderate democratic candidate.
The party has unequivocally selected Kerry to be its liberal candidate.
The question of who will be the moderate candidate is still split between Clark, Edwards and Lieberman.
Transcript of the SC Debate last night
Click here if you missed it.
I think Clark did a great job. He was strong and his answers were well-thought-out and well-delivered.
The most striking thing was just how haunted Dean looked. He was totally off his game.
I also think that Kerry's getting off waaaay to easily.
1/29/2004
Clark down South
Clark is focusing his efforts down South, and he gave an absolutely fantastic speech yesterday in Tulsa, OK. Here is a link to the entire text of that speech.
He's getting into a groove now. He needs to hammer on all the themes contained in this speech. Hopefully, in advance of tonight's debate, he's received some better preparation for the inevitable horse-race and/or gotcha questions.
Here's a summary of Clark's take on real values:
PATRIOTISM, FAITH, FAMILY VALUES, INCLUSION
First is patriotism. When you're President of the United States, that means, first and foremost, protecting this country and all its citizens - at home and abroad. To do that, we need the strongest armed forces in the world. But we also need to commit ourselves to using force only as a last resort, after we've exhausted all other options.
Unfortunately, our President has a different approach. He took us to war even though there was no connection to September 11th and no imminent threat to the United States. Even though our allies weren't fully on board, and we hadn't exhausted all diplomatic alternatives. Even though we didn't have a plan to win and get our troops home safely. That's not patriotism. It's bad leadership.
And today, even after the capture of Saddam Hussein, our troops are still in harm's way, and al Qaeda is still at large. More than 120,000 service men and women are still in Iraq, placing enormous stress on tens of thousands of families back at home. And more than 500 have been killed -- sixteen in the last week alone.
This simply cannot go on. We need to clean up the mess in Iraq. I've got a success strategy to do just that - to get our soldiers home with Iraq and America standing strong, so we can focus on the war on terrorism and the real enemy: Osama bin Laden and the al Qaeda network. We've got to rebuild our alliances and restore America's historic role as a leader around the world. And we've got to give our veterans and soldiers the care and benefits they deserve.
The second value I want to discuss is faith. Not just where you pray, or who you pray to, but the fundamental value all faiths teach: that if you have more in life, if you're more fortunate, or more favored, then you have an obligation to reach out and help those with less.
Growing up in Arkansas, I learned that a lot of people can talk about religion and quote the scriptures, but not everybody practices what they preach.
We're seeing a lot of that today in Washington. Our President talks a lot about leaving no child behind. But since he took office, half a million children have fallen into poverty. He talks a lot about compassion. But his compassion seems to be directed more at the Enrons and Halliburtons of America than at the millions of American families who can't make ends meet.
That's unacceptable. And when I'm in the White House, we're going to reach out to those who are struggling. We're going to lift two million children out of poverty by raising the minimum wage, giving tax relief to hard-pressed families, and providing help with housing, childcare and transportation to those who need it most.
And that brings me to the third value I want to discuss - family values. I know what it's like to struggle to make ends meet - and to watch every penny you have. I didn't grow up with much. My dad died when I was four, and he left us with less than a few months rent. My mom took a job as a secretary just to pay the bills.
We didn't have much more when I was in the Army. For more than half of my thirty-four years, I earned less than $50,000 a year. I spent the summer of my fortieth birthday with my family living in a trailer in the Mohave dessert. So I know what it's like to struggle at the end of every month just to save a few dollars for a rainy day. I know what it's like to drive a car with tape on the muffler because you don't have the money to replace it. It isn't easy. And as president, I will never, ever forget where I'm from and who I'm for -- America's working families. They will be at the heart of every decision I make, starting with the most basic decisions about our economy. Because you can't take care of your family without the opportunity to work and make a decent wage.
But the sad fact is that today, too many Americans are working harder and harder for less and less. Under George W. Bush, the typical working family has seen its income fall by nearly $1,500. And as incomes have fallen, expenses have gone up - way up. The result is that too many families are struggling to make ends meet. The Republicans talk a lot about family values. It's time they started valuing families.
My Families First Tax Reform Plan is going to turn this around. Under my reform plan, families of four making under $50,000 will stop paying income taxes altogether - they will not have to pay a single penny in federal income tax. And all taxpaying families with children making under $100,000 will get a tax cut. The average family will get $1,500 - real money they can use for groceries, prescription drugs, and utility bills. I know how much of a difference $100 a month can make. I've been there. That's why we must give America's working families the tax relief they need and deserve.
And my plan won't increase the deficit by one dime. I'm going to pay for it by closing corporate loopholes and by having families with incomes greater than $1 million a year pay a five percentage point higher tax rate on the amount they earn over a million dollars a year. And we're going to take back the tax cuts George Bush gave the wealthiest Americans - those earning over $200,000 a year - and use that money for job creation.
That's just the beginning. You can't build strong families without basic health care. We're going to extend health insurance coverage to 30 million Americans - including every single American child.
And we're going to give every student who needs it a $6,000 grant for each of the first two years of college, helping an additional one million Americans enroll in college. Because the bottom line is that our children will never compete in the 21st century economy if they don't have a 21st century education.
These are the kind of family values that will unite our country, because strong families are the key to strong communities.
That brings me to the final value I want to talk about today - inclusion, and how we're going to bring people together.
Growing up in Little Rock, we learned about inclusion -- the hard way. I was twelve years old when we had the integration crisis at Central High School, when nine brave young men and women faced down a mob to get their education and educate all of us. It took the 101st Airborne Division to show us that fundamentally we're all alike, and that every single person in America must be treated equally regardless of their race, creed, color, gender, sexual orientation, or any other factor.
That's what we believed in the United States Army. For 34 years, I served with men and women from all backgrounds under one flag: the American flag. And right from the beginning, I knew that our diversity is our greatest strength, and that the wider we open our doors, the stronger we are. That's why I've always stood up for equal opportunity and affirmative action.
And I'm leading this campaign the same way I led in the Army. The doors of my campaign are open to everyone. Because when we take on George Bush this fall, we want everyone to join us, no matter what your party registration says. We want Democrats. We want Independents. We want Republicans too - and we won't even make them repent. There's just too much at stake not to open our Democratic doors to all who share in our values.
That's how our party has succeeded in the past and how it will succeed in the future: by pulling together winning coalitions from across the spectrum. Coalitions of southerners and seniors, of veterans and rural Americans. That's what Franklin Delano Roosevelt did during the New Deal. And what led John F. Kennedy to victory in 1960 and Bill Clinton to the White House in 1992. And, I'm going to build on that same winning strategy in 2004 - on the same coalitions that built our great party -- to send George Bush back to that ranch in Texas.
That's what my campaign for president is all about - bringing those values to Washington. They are the values I lived and led by for thirty-four years in the military -- and the values we need now more than ever to set our country straight.
Let me finish up by saying this: I respect my opponents in this race. But I think that there is one issue above all others in this primary. And that is: Who is best equipped to beat George Bush. In a closely divided country, I think we need someone from the heartland to win. In a country at war, I think we need someone with the experience and understanding to lead. Someone who's been on the frontlines of battle and international diplomacy. In the face of a ruthlessly political President, I think we need someone who knows what he stands for -- who has put his career on the line for what he believes -- to stand up for Americans.
So, if you are happy with the direction of our country, you should support the politicians who are running it. But if you think we can build a better America, and you want someone who is part of the solution, then I am your candidate. If you want a higher standard of leadership back in Washington, then I am your candidate. If you want a leader committed to the national interests, not the special interests ... to open, honest, and accountable government, then I am your candidate. If you want leadership committed to the next generation, not just the next election, then I am your candidate.
1/28/2004
New Hampshire
Congratulations to Wes Clark, his team and the entire NH GOTV effort. Wes Clark finished third in New Hampshire.
Unfortunately, the media and punditry seem to think otherwise. For some reason, Edwards is getting positive press having finished fourth, and Clark is getting negative press having finished third. This is absolutely ridiculous.
Don't get me wrong - I like Edwards, and he's my second choice in this thing. But Edwards was among the first candidates to declare for the Presidency. He's been campaigning for a year. He had great momentum out of Iowa, having finished second. And all he could pull off was a fourth place finish, and he's getting positive press?
The Draft Clark movement began last summer, but there was no campaign or campaign apparatus until September 2003. There was no money until September 2003. The campaign stumbled quite significantly throughout the Autumn of 2003. Yet Wes Clark finished an amazing third in New Hampshire - his first election.
Pundits and bloggers are spinning that Clark's results are a disappointment because he had New Hampshire all to himself for the 1st two weeks in January. Well, those two weeks in January propelled him to third place. Not only third place, mind you, but third place behind the long-standing Senator from neighboring Massachusetts, and third place behind the former Governor of neighboring Vermont.
In short, I think that Clark's third-place showing was a very positive outcome, and should help him in the upcoming February 3rd states. Now that the year-long pancake breakfast politicking is through, it's going to be more sound-bites, more media events, more TV ads. Clark has the advantage of cash in hand to make a go of it in these states.
It's up to us to help him. If you can go to South Carolina or one of the other February 3rd states, go. If you can make phone calls and write letters, do so. Become an e-block captain at the Clark04 website and you can get numbers to call, and scripts to read right there on-line. You can get names and addresses for letters right there on-line.
Let's not give up, and let's show the punditry and the media that this campaign has momentum, energy, life and legs.
1/27/2004
Congratulations.
The NYS Board of Elections has posted the final, certified list of candidate delegate slates.
I'm proud to report that all of the delegate slates for WNY qualified. Congratulations to everyone for their hard work in November and December.
Dixville Notch, baby!
Clark takes it in midnight New Hampshire voting in Dixville Notch and Hart's Location.
Nooners
Many of you may have seen Peggy Noonan's despicable hit piece against General Clark this morning in the WSJ (online only) Opinion Journal.
To the uninitiated, Ms. Noonan wrote thusly about her first encounter with her former boss and apparent unrequited love interest: "I first saw President Reagan as a foot, highly polished brown cordovan wagging merrily on a hassock. I spied it through the door. It was a beautiful foot, sleek. Such casual elegance and clean lines! But not a big foot, not formidable, maybe a little ...frail. I imagined cradling it in my arms, protecting it from unsmooth roads."
Blecch.
Noonan also believes that God sent magical dolphin/angels to save Elian Gonzalez. She called former Vice President of the United States of America Al Gore a "new-age whack job."
Well, the most telling paragraph in her piece is the first one:
"Let me assert something that I cannot prove with a poll but that is based on serious conversations the past few months with Republicans and also normal people: 9/11 changed everything."
And she has the audacity to call Wesley Clark crazy.
1/26/2004
Meet the Press yesterday
Clark is getting a lot of grief for the Michael Moore flap from the SCLM.
He missed a terrific opportunity or two in yesterday's Meet the Press. It was all well and good for Clark to respond the way he did at the debate on Thursday, but by Sunday he should have been able to say something including these points:
1. Michael Moore is entitled to his opinion.
2. Michael Moore is entitled to choose the words that he uses.
3. I would not have chosen the word “deserter”.
4. Since Thursday, I have briefly reviewed the controversy surrounding Bush’s last two years of Natl Guard Service.
5. Based on my cursory review of the available information, it appears that AWOL would more properly describe George W. Bush’s failure and refusal to complete the last two years of his Natl Guard duty.
6. As far as Moore’s sentiment is concerned, I agree that evidence appears to show that Bush failed to complete his duty. I just disagree with his choice of words.
Instead, he bobbled it. He did say he wouldn't have used "deserter," and then gave a 2-minute or so monologue on domestic issues.
The AWOL thing doesn't go to domestic issues - it goes to foreign policy. I.e., do you want a retired General or a Guardsman who went AWOL sending your kids into battle?
I would have liked a strong response that took the President to task. Clark’s greatest selling point is his military/executive experience. He could have taken this opportunity to hit Bush in the National Security solarplexus, but didn’t.
It was a missed opportunity, and judging by the polls it hasn’t done him any favors.
It looks like Kerry & Edwards are getting most of the undecideds, to Clark's detriment. I'm really getting sketchy about tomorrow. If Clark doesn't come in at least 3rd after spending the entire month of January in NH, it won't bode well, and what's left of his momentum (which has recently been erratic) will be gone.
1/24/2004
Buffalo News Mention
Click here.
It's a week late, and is part of a story on all the campaigns locally. Still nice to get a mention.
1/23/2004
If the wingnuts
Are this crazed over Clark's performance last night, and Hannity and Bennett and the NRO and Sullivan are climbing over themselves to denounce Clark...
...that can only mean that Clark did a great job last night in the DEMOCRATIC debate.
Also, check out York's last attempted hit piece on Clark:
After hammering Clark for allegedly supporting the war in Iraq in his Times of London article, he adds this, which basically contradicts the very thesis of his diatr...I mean, piece:
"To be fair, Clark expressed some reservations in the articles. He cautioned that more work needs to be done in Iraq, 'before we take our triumph.' There was still resistance to be dealt with, by 'armed persuasion.' Looting had to be stopped, order restored, and humanitarian aid begun. And weapons of mass destruction had not been found.
"Clark also wrote that the war had left the U.S. and Britain diplomatically isolated. Still, he said, 'the immediate tasks at hand in Iraq cannot obscure the significance of the moment': 'The scent of victory, if not the end of the operation, is certainly in the air.'"
Open letter to Andrew Sullivan
This is what I'm responding to.
You opine that Clark is toast (probably because you’re parroting what Sean Hannity and virtues guru/serial gambler Bill Bennett had to say about the Clark/Moore issue.
You say Clark gave up an opportunity to condemn Moore. Why should he? It’s an undisputed fact that Bush was unaccounted for during his last, required, year of Guard service. Bush has never produced convincing evidence to dispute the accusation that he was AWOL during that period of time. So, Moore used “deserter” instead of “AWOL”. Semantics.
Besides, Clark is running in the Democratic primary. Not the Republican primary. So, the opinions of Sean Hannity and Bill Bennett (and Andrew Sullivan, for that matter) are somewhat irrelevant.
Clark gave a fantastic answer to the London Times article question he got from Brit Hume (who apparently didn’t hear the previous question about Clark’s democratic bona fides). Clark didn’t want to impugn the President’s policies in a foreign publication. Clark was genuinely jubilant that the soldiers (with whom he had been a comrade for 34 years of his life) had won a decisive military victory. (I don’t find it hypocritical or disingenuous to oppose the decision to go to war, but celebrate its swift victorious outcome. In fact, many ordinary people share that opinion). He congratulated the soldiers, and their leaders for that victory, and set out several roadblocks that he saw ahead. He was right about those roadblocks, and the Pentagon thought they didn’t exist. That’s why a year later, Iraq is still largely chaotic, and over 500 servicepeople have been killed (more than during the war itself).
You call Clark’s response “vacuous”. What’s so vacuous about this:
No, that's not true. In fact, if you look at the whole article, what you'll see is that the article lays out a whole series of tasks that have to be done later on.
And it's written in a foreign publication. I'm not going to take U.S. policy and my differences with the administration directly into a foreign publication.
But I made it clear in the article -- and I think you've got it there. If you read it on down, you'll see that I say this doesn't mean -- they've got to focus now on the peacekeeping, the occupation, the provision of order.
There's a whole series of tasks that I laid out for them to do that, in fact, they were incapable of doing.
I did not support this war. I would not have voted for the resolution. But once American soldiers are on the battlefield, then I want them to be successful and I want them to come home safely.
So, if Clark finishes second in NH, and SC, and his campaign has some legs, will you nominate yourself for the “Von Hoffman Award?”
Sincerely,
Alan
Bush a Deserter?
The Boston Globe reports, you decide.
Via Michael Moore's site. I think AWOL is the more proper term of art, but what the hey.
Last Night's Debate
A couple of blogs did running commentary during the debate last night.
You can get the complete transcript of the debate here.
You can read Pandagon’s commentary here.
You can read Calpundit’s commentary here
I think Kerry, Edwards and Clark did wonderfully. I think Dean didn’t do himself any favors. I think the remaining candidates are in cloudcukooland and should leave the field.
For what it's worth, Pandagon's comments almost totally mirror the thoughts I had while watching last night. I think Calpundit missed the mark on Clark, especially.
Also: Since the debate was broadcast on the Fox News Channel, I was subjected to Hannity & serial gambler Bill Bennett attacking Clark for not attacking Michael Moore. Uggh.
1/22/2004
Cybergate
Dirty Tricks redux. This Boston Globe article is making its way all over the blogosphere today.
"Republican staff members of the US Senate Judiciary Commitee infiltrated opposition computer files for a year, monitoring secret strategy memos and periodically passing on copies to the media, Senate officials told The Globe.
"From the spring of 2002 until at least April 2003, members of the GOP committee staff exploited a computer glitch that allowed them to access restricted Democratic communications without a password. Trolling through hundreds of memos, they were able to read talking points and accounts of private meetings discussing which judicial nominees Democrats would fight -- and with what tactics.
"The office of Senate Sergeant-at-Arms William Pickle has already launched an investigation into how excerpts from 15 Democratic memos showed up in the pages of the conservative-leaning newspapers and were posted to a website last November.
"With the help of forensic computer experts from General Dynamics and the US Secret Service, his office has interviewed about 120 people to date and seized more than half a dozen computers -- including four Judiciary servers, one server from the office of Senate majority leader Bill Frist of Tennessee, and several desktop hard drives.
But the scope of both the intrusions and the likely disclosures is now known to have been far more extensive than the November incident, staffers and others familiar with the investigation say."
Whoa!
I completely missed this last time I posted. Thanks to The Wesley Clark Weblog, I gave the ARG tracking numbers a second peek.
As you may know, the tracking poll is conducted every day, and three-day results get posted.
Well, yesterday's numbers were:
Kerry 29%
Clark 21%
Dean 17%
The January 20 numbers were:
Kerry 29%
Dean 24%
Clark 18%
What a complete and compelling switch! Just a week ago, Dean was at 29, Clark was at 24, and Kerry was down in 17-18 territory.
Undecideds jumped up from 11 to 15%. Kerry seems to have maxed out his bounce, for now. Dean seems to be hemmorhaging support to "undecided" and Clark. Also - Dean's favorability has sunk from 57% to 33%, while his unfavorability has shot up from 19% to 30%.
Big moves. Big news. Fingers crossed.
ARG tracker update!
OK, the numbers for Jan 19-21 are now up on ARG's site.
They reflect a stabilization of Clark's number at 19%. Kerry is on top with a whopping 27%.
Whereas a week ago, the battle was between Dean and Clark for 1st place, now these two are battling for 2nd.
Clark is saying he needs to come in the top 4 to follow-up on NH. It looks like that will happen, quite decisively. If he can finish in the top 2, that would be great: i.e., if he beats Dean out for the #2 slot, that would be EARTH-SHATTERING!
Cheney = Hans Blix
Joshua Micah Marshall has been arguing for some time that incurious George isn't the real problem in Washington. It's Dick Cheney.
Well, if you needed any more proof, here's some.
Cheney said "that the administration has not given up on the so far fruitless search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The 'jury is still out,' he said."
"It's going to take some additional, considerable period of time in order to look in all the cubby holes and the ammo dumps and all the places in Iraq where you might expect to find something like that,' Cheney said in an interview at the White House with National Public Radio. 'It doesn't take a large storage space to store deadly toxins, or even just the capacity to produce it.' "
Gee. Hans Blix had 200 inspectors, and was given about 6 months to search for WMD. He didn't find any. The Bush Administration all but called him a liar.
The Bush Administration overthrew Iraq, captured Saddam Hussein, has over 150,000 allied troops in the country, and has had about 10 months to find some WMD.
The best they can come up with is the supposed existence of "dozens of weapons of mass destruction-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations."
Arrrghh!
Whatever.
The ARG tracker says that Clark is starting to trend back up on the Jan 19-20 polling, but is down one point for the broader January 18-20 result.
Zogby, on the other hand has Clark losing a point per day.
I hope that he does well in the debate tonight. I really, really do. 8pm. Fox News Channel.
1/21/2004
ECDC NH Watch Party!
Click here, or here for more information.
Here's an upcoming event for which we should really have a big turnout:
the Erie County Democratic Committee New Hampshire Watch Party
Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2004
Time: 7:00pm
Location: Ellicott Square Building Lobby, 295 Main Street, Buffalo
Cost: $4/person, or free for current ECDC Sustaining Members
Pizza, wings, soda & beer will be available.
Dean & Kerry campaigns expect a big turnout. Let's match 'em.
Zogby NH Tracker
As far as I'm concerned, the Zogby tracking poll is the one to watch.
In 2000, the Zogby poll was the ONLY poll correctly to forecast McCain's defeat of GWB.
Looking at today's poll, Clark and Kerry are in a statistical tie for second place, while Dean maintains a miniscule lead in 1st.
The thing about NH being so close to Massachusetts, these people already know John Kerry. They have probably already decided whether or not they like him. The issue now will be electability.
What, precisely, is it about Kerry that makes people think he can defeat GWB?
All of the Democratic frontrunners are pretty close on domestic policy (except Dean, who would roll back ALL of Bush's tax cuts, including the ones that help middle-income families). So, what sets them apart? National Security/Iraq.
All of the Democratic frontrunners in NH agree that Afghanistan was a good thing.
All of the Democractic frontrunners in NH now make noises that are critical of the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
Dean has been consistent in his criticism.
Clark has been consistent in his position, which cannot properly be characterized as "anti-war": Clark has stated, as early as 2002, that war should have been on the table, but only as a last resort after all diplomatic, UN-sponsored means had been exhausted, and even then war should only have been carried out with a broad coalition, including (if not under the direction of) NATO.
Kerry makes a lot of noise about how "reckless" GWB was to go into Iraq. The problem is, Kerry VOTED for the resolution that gave Bush a blank check to do just that.
In any event, there's still a week to go in New Hampshire, and Zogby believes that there will be a lot of movement this week, just like there was in Iowa.
As we all noticed in Iowa, the perceived underdogs (Kerry and Edwards) defeated the presumed frontrunner (who was, in many places, already being described as the inevitable nominee), Dean.
So, a lot can happen in a week. Let's do everything we can to make sure the General benefits from it.
Write letters or make phone calls to NH. Go to this website: http://www.nhclark04.com to find out what and how.
1/18/2004
Clark for President - New Hampshire
There was a huge Clark rally in New Hampshire this weekend, and as you know a group of supporters from Buffalo made the trip to volunteer & meet the future President.
Well, they made the NH for clark site. Check it out here, and scroll down to the picture with the caption "Women for Wes enjoy the rally."
Hooray for Camille, Gail & Josephine!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


