Old general veeping up

New York Daily News ^ | 5/03/05 | JAMES GORDON MEEK

[kattracks]

WASHINGTON - Retired Gen. Wesley Clark's stock in the Democratic veepstakes is rising again, a new report says.

Sen. John Kerry's campaign believes Clark would be a big plus in its bid to convince voters that a Democratic White House would be just as tough on security issues as Republicans.

Also on Kerry's short list are Rep. Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.), Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) and Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, Newsweek reported.

But only Clark - a four-star former supreme allied commander of NATO - is a fellow Vietnam vet with command experience. Clark, Edwards and Gephardt lost to Kerry during the presidential primaries.

Clark would not say yesterday whether he's being wooed.

"There's a confidential process in this. I respect John Kerry's role in how he's doing this," he told CNN's "Inside Politics."

Clark said he's "not interested in that position," after vigorously defending the military service of Kerry, whose anti-war activism 30 years ago was attacked by Republicans last week.

"I can't understand why George Bush and Dick Cheney want to raise these issues about John Kerry. I mean, it is not in their interest. They did not serve. John Kerry did."

Kerry was wounded three times and won Silver and Bronze Stars for heroism in Vietnam.

Nonetheless, Republicans cite Kerry's fight against the Vietnam war when he returned home as making him unfit.

"You don't want somebody like that ... that would depreciate our military and our intelligence services in a time of war," said Rep. Randy (Duke) Cunningham (R-Calif.), who is also a Vietnam vet.

But former Sen. Max Cleland (D-Ga.), a triple-amputee in Vietnam, told CBS's "This Week" that Kerry's experience in war puts him "head and shoulders above anybody in the White House today."

Originally published on May 3, 2004

[alloysteel]

But I thought Weasely Clark would NEVER accept the VP nomination. Top spot or nothing, we were told.

But what a wonderful trial balloon to test the potential for Herself.

[Adder]

Gephardt?? Seriously??
By all means go for it but looking at it that seems to be a mistake.
Edwards? Now, he was able to stir some stumps. If as the Dems believe that national security is down the list, them an Edwards selection makes sense.
Clark, maybe...I didn't see him getting a whole lot of traction with the voters.

[Dahoser]

How is that a war the left hated then is so important as a qualification for office now?

[alloysteel]

This is the facet they are working on - all wars are, in the end, futile. Viet Nam turned futile in an incontestable manner. Therefore, this proved the virtue of having fought in that war. But only if a person agrees we lost that engagement.

Convoluted reasoning, but if one pursues logic using only one eye, that is the outcome.

[mrtysmm]

Why don't we see Hitlery on that list? From what I've read lately, Bill is making a big push to get her on the ticket. He has gaone as far as promising to delay his book if she's on the ticket...otherwise, the book comes out in June and the promotion will be at the same time as the convention...."talk about taking the oxygen out of the air"...as Susan Estrich put it.

[Sloth]

[ThinkingMan]

What is funny about this is that the Rats have spent the past 3 years insiuating that the Presidency is actually run by Mr. Cheney, with Mr. Bush being nothing more than a puppet. Now they are selling Kerry, with Clark adding his "expertise". Just another example of trying to have it both ways.

[Recovering_Democrat]

Sen. John Kerry's campaign believes Clark would be a big plus in its bid to convince voters that a Democratic White House would be just as tough on security issues as Republicans.

Good God. The only worse choice would be Howard Dean.

Really, truly, does it really matter who John Kerry picks? The top of the ticket would be so gosh-darn awful, I doubt anyone will care who the VEEP martyr, er, candidate would be...

[normy]

Its gonna be a problem for Kerry because he thinks he is so much better than all his VP choices. Clark is a poor choice if he want's to keep Nader out of the contest.

Edwards gets his ass kicked in the debate with Cheney, although he is a great crybaby who could move the soccer mom vote.

Richardson is Hispanic and I think Kerry is so elitist he could never have that.

Hillary would steal the show.

Dick Gephart, what a boring ticket

Look for Dean, thats my longshot pick.

[Adder]

She may very well be and we aren't privy to that info. I would think if her name appeared, that would be it, question answered, debate over, end of story.
But I don't think she would do it. Yes, I do....serve under Kerry for "8 years" and springboard to the Presidency in '12.
My gawd...that could be 16 freakin years of that you-gly beotch, in addition to the 8 we've already endured.
Damn. I feel ill......
BUT...if GWB defeats a Kerry/Clintoon ticket, she is damaged somewhat for '08.[Am I just hoping here? She could always blame Kerry for running a crappy campaign].

[EQAndyBuzz]

"Clark said he's "not interested in that position," after vigorously defending the military service of Kerry, whose anti-war activism 30 years ago was attacked by Republicans last week."

That's right. Clark wants to be SecDef.

Wait till he stats getting the questions about how he singlehandedly almost started a war with Russia.

[bushfamfan]

A pair of flip flops.

[Honorary Serb]

Kerry/Clark--the Serbophobic Orthodox Christian-bashing Third Way-imperialist islamoNazi-terrorist gay abortionist ticket!!!!

[rogue yam]

Good God. The only worse choice would be Howard Dean.

Aw, c'mon! You aren't even trying! Sharpton! Sharpton! Sharpton!

[smonk]

dems have lost what's left of their minds. they're
abandoning what principled positions they had left and
running after men with military records -- ANY military
record, mind you -- like drunken sophomores chasing after
the prom queen.