Another political question

[so.cal.fan]

Does anyone know why Michael Moore is supporting Gen. Wes. Clark?
I find this odd. Clark is not even a liberal, is he?
Michael Moore is very left of center, what did I miss here?

[chrisg]

Quick internet search & I found this; should be what you want-

http://www.clark04.com/moore/

[so.cal.fan]

Wait a minuet! I watched CNN during the Iraq war and heard Gen. Clark's comments.........while it's true the "embedded "Generals and other high rank officers on Fox News and MSNBC were a little more pro-war/Bush policy, Clark didn't sound anti-war to me, perhaps I just didn't get it?


Thanks for the link, I hadn't read that.

[JustRalph]

Moore and Madonna.........I bet the old General is happy about that.

Clark has flipped on almost every issue. The scary part is at a high level military conference several of his old Military buddies were asked if they endorse him. One came right out and said"he won't be getting my vote" and the others all refused to answer Clark guestions..........the stuff I hear is he was run out of the Army after embarrassing us in Bosnia. Generals don't get run out of the Military though. They get crappier and crappier assignments until they get the picture. Then they decide to retire. It is kind of like an executive stops getting the important emails or invited to the top level meetings. Eventually he gets the point.

Now Clark gets the Michael Moore vote.......yahoo! That ought to bring a bunch..........

Isn't Clark the one who started the "oh my god, we are in over our heads" stuff on day two of the Iraq invasion. then 3 days later looked like the biggest fool on Televison?

[Secretariat]

You can read Moore's own words for endorsing Clark on this link:

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/in...ate=2004-01-14

And you can read Moore's reaction to his mention during last night' s debate at this link.


http://www.michaelmoore.com/

Both are interesting to read.

[JustRalph]

This morning on the Imus show they referred to the Bush Awol story as "an absurd allegation" that is without merit..........and they chastised Clark for his involvement in continuing the ruse. I can't remember who they were talking to on the phone, but it was a national reporter who agreed.........

so you can link to the allegation all you want........most people think it's a dead story..............I understand............with a year to go, you gotta start dredging up everything you can......... this is just the start of this crap..........

Oh yeah...BTW.......Clark holds a rally with Ted Danson tonight.

This is the Clinton wing of the party pulling the strings and if you can't see that, you are missing something.............

[JustRalph]

Dean is after the Cheryl Crow endorsement

[chrisg]

Originally posted by JustRalph
The scary part is at a high level military conference several of his old Military buddies were asked if they endorse him. One came right out and said"he won't be getting my vote" and the others all refused to answer Clark guestions..........the stuff I hear is he was run out of the Army after embarrassing us in Bosnia. Generals don't get run out of the Military though.

It's cracks like that that tend to keep me away from the off topic board.

One, there's a difference between those you work with & those that are your buddies. Two, ever heard of jealousy?

Three, HOW IN THE HELL DID HE EMBARRASS US WHEN HE PREVENTED ANY CASUALTIES ON OUR SIDE?

I'm not trying to pick on you Ralph, because this stuff goes on here at this board all the time.

But
A) People ought to get the facts straight.
B)SoCalFan should have started another thread instead of masking her political agenda behind a request for information.

[ljb]

As a political observer i would like to post my opinion as to why Clark accepted Moore's support.
Clark is down in the polls and can get a boost if he shows more animosity towards Bush. Reluctant to do so himself he uses Moore's outrageous statement that Bush is a deserter.
While it is accepted fact that Bush did go AWOL during his last year in the Air National Guard, he is not a deserter. Desertion takes place during times of war. Bush went AWOL during peace time. AWOL is a punishable offense of course, unless you have friends in high places.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by chrisg
[COLOR=blue]It's cracks like that that tend to keep me away from the off topic board.

I'm not trying to pick on you Ralph, because this stuff goes on here at this board all the time. But
A) People ought to get the facts straight.
B)SoCalFan should have started another thread instead of masking her political agenda behind a request for information.

It was just fun with Dean..... the pic was some fun......Clark is a different story

Chris: try this pic......it was one step toward Clarks down fall
These are facts Chris.............


Generals don't talk bad about each other. It is common knowledge though that Clark was removed for refusing to follow orders. It is the General officers Corp version of going off the deep end. These guys can launch missiles and attacks on a whim if they are "off the reservation" so to speak, it can be real scary.





Why, that looks an awful lot like Serbian war criminal Ratko Mladic. Check out his mug on his cool "Wanted by Interpol" page.
http://www.interpol.int/public/Wante...1995_47754.asp

Still too vague? The following should shed some light on General Shelton's "vague" comments:

On August 27, 1994, representing the Joint Chiefs of Staff during a fact-finding mission to Bosnia, Clark "ignored State Department warnings not to meet with Serb officials suspected of ordering deaths of civilians in a campaign known as ethnic cleansing" and paid a courtesy call on Serbian army commander Ratko Mladic. Mladic was already the subject of multiple U.S. war-crimes charges: "artillery attacks on civilians in Sarajevo" and the "razing of Muslim towns and villages," along with random acts of "mass murder." According to a contemporaneous Washington Post report: "On Friday [August 26, 1994] and again on Saturday, State Department officials said, they instructed [Clark] not to go, but he went anyway." The meeting "occurred as the Clinton administration is trying to isolate the Serbs in advance of possible military action against them."

[chrisg]

Thanks for not answering my question Ralph. I'll try to make this my last visit to the off topic board as I can see I was just a sucker/tool for more political posturing.

I should have known better.

[JustRalph]

I thought I answered with the photo and article........

this photo was displayed all over the world........it embarrassed the U.S.

[Larry Hamilton]

Geez, how can you deny the story the picture tells. How can you deny that his one and only superior officer replied "I will not vote for him"

If you want to get in a huff, get in a huff about he came from Arkansas and was promoted over many fellow officers by you know who. He was a political appointee, thats no secret, at that level ALL generals are.

These aren't opinions, they are facts. We may come to different conclusions, but THEY ARE FACTS.

Thanks Ralph

[Derek2U]

It must b tuff but then again if ur gonna b pres get use 2 tuff.
Last night I dint like any of the DEMS' showing except Lieberman,
but since he isn't even a possibility (thank Budha) -- what diff did
ThaT make? They GrandStand 2 much and they don't know basics: hehe peter jennings laid traps. Like how many peeps
rellie know what's fiscal policy vs monetary policy? hehe ..
Sharpton certainly didnt. And Clark & that deserter remark by
Moore.... yikes, what a Lame Remark about our President. That
was sooo NO NO NO Clark's OUT 100% 4 me. And, Kerry, when
will YOU learn 2 just Keep SHut & not go over by more then 39
minutes after the bell? Edwards looked whipped like he had
2 many orgys after Iowa ... hehe happy but not focused. I woulda told him 2 play low & light (much like Lieberman did).
And that vegan ohio dood, MulchNik (the 1 who looks other-planetary) hehe .... i dunno he's says some cool ideas but #43
+ cheney would b laffin all year if He was the opposition. Neways
all i can tell U is the obvious, today at work this all came up & I
can tell u the obvious: wall st says 43=44 hehe . Is it a 2:5?
Neways, good night guys, i gotta go dancin 2night like its 1999!!

[JustMissed]

Originally posted by chrisg
Thanks for not answering my question Ralph. I'll try to make this my last visit to the off topic board as I can see I was just a sucker/tool for more political posturing.

I should have known better.

Don't let the door hit you in the ass as you leave in a huff!

JustMissed