Wes Clark : Road To The White House

This just in from Gordon Suber...thanks Gordon!

General Wesley Clark will speak and answer questions.  He continues to say, "I haven't said I won't run."

And notwithstanding what appears to be media wisdom, it is not too late for a solid candidate to enter the fray.

Details:

Road to the White House series
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
7:30 PM
Taj Lounge
48 West 21st
New York City

$7

RSVP ASAP!  http://www.dl21c.org

•  Tips for Gordon?

  by deadmessengers on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 10:31:12 AM PDT

  •  Gordon is a really great guy.

    by Barbara on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:24:59 PM PDT

    •  And a great writer - he's doing a book about

      the Wes Clark campaign for President.

      by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:27:51 PM PDT

  •  I don't suppose

    This is C-Span's "Road to the White House" thing? If not, will someone be taping it and posting it? I'd love to watch!

    by stax on Mon Mar 12, 2007 at 06:21:32 PM PDT

•  Tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick...

  Are you listening, General?

  Tempus is fugiting.

  by Jimdotz on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 10:39:53 AM PDT

  •  Lest your name be

    Wesley Cunctator.

    by brainwave on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 12:08:34 PM PDT

  •  Yeah, I like Clark, too, but

    I'm starting to think he's not going to run, especially how crowded the field is with big name candidates. But if he doesn't run, he'd make a great running mate --Obama/Clark, Edwards/Clark, Clinton/Clark. He'd compliment any of them as a running-mate.

    by machopicasso on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 12:09:01 PM PDT

    •  I'm reluctantly feeling the same way

      It's feeling like it's getting too late to me.  He'd be a great VP, anyone who didn't choose him would be a fool IMO.

      by Urizen on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 12:18:04 PM PDT

      •  No rush. There's > 6 mos to his previous entry

        Clark is watching the current Democratic candidates in their usual circular firing squad.  He's in no hurry.  He might form an exploratory committee sometime in the next three months, but I doubt if he'll do so much before Memorial Day, or possibly as late as the 4th of July.  He says this early campaigning benefits no one but political consultants and comentators - because very few Americans are ready to start thinking about their Presidential choice for 2008.  In the meantime, he's working overtime to whip up some opposition to a Bush airstrike on Iran.

        http://www.dailykos.com/...

        Clark entered the 2004 race on September 17, 2003. In spite of that late start, which everyone remembers, people forget that by January 18, 2004, he was second to Dean in national polls.  That's the day George McGovern endorsed him.  Then came the Iowa surprise.  Here's what happened:

        http://www.dailykos.com/...

        by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:34:50 PM PDT

    •  Clark is going to run - almost no more doubt

      http://www.dailykos.com/...

      by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 12:48:11 PM PDT

    •  when he enteres is not relevant to his

      qualifications, nor his crossover appeal. ...nor his appeal to the troops and his international reputation.

      by Pivot on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:56:23 PM PDT

  •  Tick tock, tick tock, tick (but no tock)

    I think time has run out, especially if he wants enough funding to actually win the primary.

    Game over.

    by polecat on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:23:42 PM PDT

    •  Then you are in for a big surprise. There's time

      http://www.dailykos.com/...

      and,

      http://www.dailykos.com/...

      by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:42:12 PM PDT

      •  Hope you're right. I'm not sanguine about it. nt

        by polecat on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:45:57 PM PDT

•  I don't think that it is fair that NY

  is getting so many Wes Clark appearances.

  I'll be glad when he announces and spreads the love!

  by ZootSuitGringo on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:15:22 AM PDT

  •  I'll be happy to see him in Denver in August 2008

    accepting the Democratic Party's nomination to become the next President of the United States.  :)

    That'll be fair enough for me.  ;)

    by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:44:34 PM PDT

•  *#!^*@ Grrrrr!

  I wish I could be there!  Hi Gordon.  Say hello for me please!

  by Deb in England on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:17:00 AM PDT

•  Email and phone to DL21C

  Contact DL21C:

  Main email:
  [e-mail]

  Phone:
  212-979-2218

  Snail Mail:
  200 E. 10th St. #134
  New York, New York 10003

  by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:17:36 AM PDT

  •  Thanks for adding this!

    n/t

    by deadmessengers on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:42:08 PM PDT

    •  Happy to.

      by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:45:07 PM PDT

•  Yesterday's diary on Wes was all new info -

  for those of you who missed it:

  http://www.dailykos.com/...

  Reg Interviews General Wesley Clark

  (about Arts, Labor, Education, violins, golf, pianos, stopiranwar.com etc.)

  If you didn't see it, you're in for a special treat if you go there today.

  It's more reason that we need Wes on the road to the Whitehouse.

  by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:25:39 AM PDT

•  I checked out DL21C

  and they are all about educating themselves on the issues of the day and progresive political candidates and ideas.

  I like it that Wes Clark thinks it's important to interact with average young people who are concerned about our political future.

  It's refreshing.

  No handlers between him and the interviewer.

  Amy Goodman at 92nd St Y

  RegNYC one on one

  DL21C

  by eve on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:26:46 AM PDT

•  You all need to take a look at this

  This interview with Clark has Clark talking about domestic items and has this interesting little item:

  General Clark Well, I want to be really careful about raising taxes. I really am going to try not to raise taxes, but I do believe we've got to take care of people. You have to- I, I've been telling people in business, I said, You know, we've got a potential legitimacy problem. When a CEO makes 400 time what a worker makes, then you have to ask, Why does he deserve that much?

  http://securingamerica.com/...

  Washington Woman

  EENR

  by kevin22262 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:34:31 AM PDT

  •  Great minds think alike, Kevin. That's the CCN

    post that Reg then crossposted at Kos, which I mention above.  However, you are thinking much clearer than I regarding the hints that Clark will run.  The bold statement in your blockquote is perfect as a very strong hint.

    "I really am going to try not to raise taxes, but I do believe we've got to take care of people."

    "I...am going to...(insert anything a President has to deal with)."  Wow!  That's a man thinking like a Presidential candidate.

    Anyway, here's the post linking to the Kos diary on the same imnterview.

    ttp://www.dailykos.com/comments/2007/3/10/133146/760/6#c6

    by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:49:30 AM PDT

    •  Fumblefingers

      http://www.dailykos.com/...

      by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:50:48 AM PDT

    •  I don't think that was a slip of the tongue.

      I give Clark a lot of credit from learning from his early start last time.  I think he meant to say it just like this.  He can take whatever time he believes is necessary (well, within reason!)as long as he runs.  And I hope he's planning and organizing while he's waiting.

      by dburro on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:57:43 AM PDT

      •  As I've said before....

        Wes Clark is a strategist, and I'm sure he has a plan and will work out whatever he believes is best to accomplish his mission, whatever that may be.

        by mpolley on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:45:15 PM PDT

        •  Agreed

          I think waiting and waiting might actually be a good strategy because we will get to sick of hearing about everything Hillary and Obama.  Gore might be doing the same thing though and that would probably kill Clark's chances of Gore gets in.

          by jordans11 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:08:35 PM PDT

          •  I don't think Gore will run, but that's OK

            because even though Al would be a fine President, he would be better off if Wes Clark is President.  here's why:

            http://www.dailykos.com/...

            by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:49:03 PM PDT

          •  Well, we win either way

            because I love Gore, but I get the feeling that Gore doesn't want to run at all.  Happy to be proven wrong, though.

            He's making such a huge difference as he is - he doesn't have to deal with pundits and image and polls and stupidity.  If he runs, the media starts in on him again like a pack of slavering hounds.  

            by LSophia on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 05:13:06 PM PDT

•  You might want to add the tag "Wes Clark"

  I couldn't find it under the most obvious tag.

  by Deb in England on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:40:19 AM PDT

  •  They won't let her

    I think the best tag would be "Wes Clark" too.  You know, assuming that the purpose of tags are to actually HELP people find what they're looking for?

    But TPTB at dKos have decided that "Wesley Clark" is the only acceptably tag for diaries about WKC.  Go figure. :P

    by hfjai on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 12:17:12 PM PDT

    •  Yep! I did that last time - tagged it as

      Wes Clark, and kathygo thankfully went in and changed it for me to Wesley Clark, explaining just what you've said.

      Not quite sure why TPTB did this either...weird.

      by deadmessengers on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:07:21 PM PDT

    •  A bit counterintuitive, to be sure!

      eom

      by Deb in England on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:17:55 PM PDT

•  Run Wes Run!!!!

  This is great news!!!

  by pelican on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:43:21 AM PDT

•  Wes is one I'd trust

  with the huge story in leveymg's diary at the top of the rec list. Clark has the brains to take this on, and I think he already knows a good deal about it from his comment about the "New York money people."

  He has the courage, integrity, and (as far as I know) enough personal financial distance from these con men to do it effectively. I can't help but believe that if he knew he'd act.

  Someone needs to be sure he sees that diary.

  by cotterperson on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:49:49 AM PDT

  •  I also think he can take

    on the swamp critters in D.C. quite handily.

    by hairspray on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:52:12 AM PDT

  •  The challenge will be,

    can he run a successful campaign and still remain distanced from the con men crowd?

    Hope so.  I'm sure it's possible, but it would require a lot of strength and a LOT of grassroots support.

    Guess that's what we're here for.

    by BaldEagle3 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:02:23 PM PDT

    •  He has lots of both!

      Hope so.  I'm sure it's possible, but it would require a lot of strength and a LOT of grassroots support.

      by deadmessengers on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:46:42 PM PDT

    •  As he said in NYC to Goodman

      ....you must be bigger than your job.

      Wes Clark believes that government pushes and bends people, and therefore, people must hang on to their moral and ethic center. Thus, are you bigger than your job?

      I think he is.

      by Donna Z on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 04:36:54 PM PDT

  •  Wes Clark on Military Industrial Complex

    Radio Interview with Laura Knoy:
    http://www.nhpr.org/...

    I think General Eisenhower was exactly right. I think we should be concerned about the military industrial complex. I think if you look at where the country is today, you've consolidated all these defense firms into a few large firms, like Halliburton, with contacts and contracts at the highest level of government. You've got most of the retired Generals, are one way or another, associated with the defense firms. That's the reason that you'll find very few of them speaking out in any public way. I'm not. When I got out I determined I wasn't going to sell arms, I was going to do as little as possible with the Defense Department, because I just figured it was time to make a new start.

    I think that the military industrial complex does wield a lot of influence. I'd like to see us create a different complex, and I'm going to be talking about foreign policy in a major speech tomorrow, but we need to create an agency that is not about waging war, but about creating the conditions for Peace around the world. We need some people who will be advocates for Peace, advocates for economic development not just advocates for better weapons systems. So we need to create countervailing power to the military industrial complex.

    Clark: Don't spare Pentagon
    http://www.cnn.com/...

    "We're faced with a very serious deficit problem. We need to keep the--we need to go back to the top 2 percent and repeal those tax cuts. We need to put all the government spending programs on the table, including the military programs. We need to then have no new programs unless you can pay as you go. And then we need a simpler, fairer, more progressive tax code. "

    by km4 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:35:08 PM PDT

•  Needs the attention

  He said recently (I think his most recent Democracy Now! interview, but not positive) that he gets more media attention as a potential candidate than he would as either a candidate or a non-candidate. He will probably wait as long as possible to announce.

  by yinn on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:52:29 AM PDT

  •  Nawww

    He gets zero attention as a noncandidate.  Getting in would give him more attention because he changes the dynamics of the race.

    by jordans11 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:08:49 PM PDT

    •  Have you ever been to a

      function where Wes is appearing?  Methinks not.  Even his UCLA lectures are fully booked in advance.  

      by jinny on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:34:34 PM PDT

      •  Having just attended the the last UCLA conference

        I can attest to that.  It was packed - and, oh yeah...EXCELLENT!

        by deadmessengers on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:49:10 PM PDT

    •  I think it's a matter of the type of attention

      He's concerned about.

      He's trying to work with and influence members of Congress.  If he's a candidate, too many politicians figure whatever he says is about promoting his candidacy, and they are careful how they react based on who they're supporting or might want support from later on.

      As far as reaching normal folks like you and me, I think he figures the mainstream media is a lost cause, and he's going for for a grassroots-based effort.

      by hfjai on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 04:01:12 PM PDT

      •  I can attest to that

        I was gathering signatures for Stop Iran War.com's petition, and a lot of the indigo-blue people I was talking with wouldn't sign until I pointed out that General Clark wasn't running.

        I conveniently left off the "yet."  What is it with some people????

        Also, a few people wouldn't sign because sanctions are still on the table.  (SIGH)  It was almost a relief to get rained out.

        Tomorrow, I'm going to go lean on some clergy.  Hee.

        by LSophia on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 05:16:10 PM PDT

•  The more the merrier.

  I would love to have Clark participating in the discussion.  I might even vote for him.

  by Gator on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:53:23 AM PDT

•  Meanwhile,

  Wes continues to lose ground in Iowa.

  As a matter of fact, it may already to late for him to be a serious factor in Iowa.

  by JR Hawks on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:59:25 AM PDT

  •  Concern troll?

    He hasn't lost anything in Iowa yet.  There's plenty of time.

    by hfjai on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 12:22:26 PM PDT

    •  But I'd like to see him

      get in there soon. I just sent my first donation of the '08 race to John Edwards. Wes is my #1 choice, but he's got to let me know he is a choice.

      by aggressiveprogressive on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 12:59:52 PM PDT

      •  Please.....

        I'm cringing here.  Save your money for Wes if he's your #1.  

        What is people's rush to throw their money around with such a long way to go?  I don't get it.

        Save it for the best...he's coming.

        by northWESterly on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:06:16 PM PDT

    •  Yup, he trashed Gore & Obama Too

      by FishOutofWater on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 12:59:52 PM PDT

      •  He has a nerve

        calling himself junior "hawks".

        Have you met twister and cyclone?  They do some nasty spins.

        These trolls think they're dealing with fools - the fools.

        by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:56:16 PM PDT

  •  Iowa is not going to be as

    important for 2008.  All of the States who've decided to hold their primaries have done so so that their votes count.  The new early voting States are the true face of America and will make a huge difference to the vote and the current system in 2008.

    by jinny on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 12:39:09 PM PDT

    •  Maybe so, but Wes will do well in Iowa this time

      Like he said, everything about his campaign will be different this time.

      by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:58:00 PM PDT

  •  So, you like Mc Cain's chances better?

    So far you have said nothing good about Dems.

    Do you support that tired guy that bush turned into the White House doormat?

    by FishOutofWater on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 12:59:13 PM PDT

  •  Then I guess it's a good thing Iowa & NH don't

    get to dictate who our nominee is, any longer, isn't it.

    by deadmessengers on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:51:32 PM PDT

  •  I could just pop over to Jordan Creek Mall and

    prove you wrong in an hour flat, first hundred adults I ask.  Sorry, but what a load of crap.

    by venatrix on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:58:21 PM PDT

•  change the title

  "White House", not "Whitehouse". Whitehouse is from Rhode Island.

  by DrReason on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 12:04:10 PM PDT

  •  I did, thanks! Was typing too fast, on too

    little coffee, and not paying attention.  Thanks for catching my mistake ;-)

    by deadmessengers on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:53:59 PM PDT

    •  hahaha

      > little coffee

      I hear you. :O) All charges are hereby dismissed.

      by DrReason on Sun Mar 11, 2007 at 06:03:19 AM PDT

  •  Are those the people with the tiny little

    juicy hamburgers?

    by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 03:00:44 PM PDT

    •  Mmmm... White Castle.....

      They closed 'em down in these parts. :(

      by hfjai on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 04:03:40 PM PDT

•  What is he waiting for? n/t

  by Potus2020 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 12:04:59 PM PDT

  •  In his interview with Amy Goodman

    on Democracy NOW last week:

    AMY GOODMAN: Will you announce for president?

    GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, I haven’t said I won’t.

    AMY GOODMAN: What are you waiting for?

    GEN. WESLEY CLARK: I’m waiting for several different preconditions, which I’m not at liberty to discuss. But I will tell you this: I think about it every single day.

    by jen on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 12:20:56 PM PDT

    •  Well I guess that answers my question. :-) n/t

      by Potus2020 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 12:23:00 PM PDT

•  Later today

  Later today, I'll post the remaining segments of Wes Clarks conversation at the 92nd. St. Y,  edited from the rush transcript provided by Democracy Now. Diaries 1, 2 and 3 are here.

  In segment 3, he discussed 24 and popularizing torture, civilian casualties and weapons bans.

  In this forth and final segment, Clark responds to Amy Goodman's questions about foreign policy, middle east oil, Jimmy Carter and Congress.

  by CalifSherry on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 12:30:07 PM PDT

  •  Do you know if there's a transcript

    of the whole interview?
    Amy Goodman as you know just featured a portion of her 92nd St Y interview of Wes Clark on Democracy Now.

    She didn't include the discussion of American Generals from the books that Wes Clark edited.

    by eve on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:07:14 PM PDT

    •  Full transcript

      HERE.

      by jen on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:22:57 PM PDT

      •  That's not the full transcript

        The lecture was over 1.5 hours. The Amy Goodman transcript is about 1 hour.  There were a lot of interesting tidbits left out.

        by roseba on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 04:25:22 PM PDT

    •  We did one.

      Melange and I did one and sent it in to securingamerica.com that included the bits not in the Democracy Now episode.  I'm not sure what they're doing with it.

      by Reg NYC on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 03:01:27 PM PDT

      •  That would be interesting to see.

        Wes made some very interesting comments about Patton, Eisenhower, Jackson and Grant.

        by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 03:06:10 PM PDT

      •  thanks for doing that, Reg NYC

        and your terific interview with General Clark.

        by eve on Sun Mar 11, 2007 at 03:18:57 PM PDT

•  Just a few days

  of waiting, to know what he has to say. I guess I can wait.

  by Donna Z on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 12:59:28 PM PDT

•  Help Stop War with Iran

  Spread the word that AIPAC  is lobbying to take out the language in the Iraq war supplemental appropriations bill restricting Bush's authority to go to war with Iran.

  by gorillaintheroom on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:14:01 PM PDT

•  would make a good Sec. of Defense

  Don't try to rise about your station

  Edwards/Obama 2008

  by formernadervoter on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:29:11 PM PDT

  •  Good advise

    Edwards and Obama would be wise to take.

    by jen on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:34:59 PM PDT

    •  Obama would be wise to either stay in the Senate

      or maybe accept nomination as the VP candidate, because he's really not likely to win the Presidency this time around.

      Edwards is a good trial attorney.  He might make a good Attorney General, but he's not likely to be on the Dem ticket again after being on the losing ticket in 2004.

      by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 03:09:39 PM PDT

  •  Not eligible

    He hasn't been retired from the military for 10 yrs yet. Them's the rules. But he has a lifetime of executive experience for what is essentially a management position. His qualifications for the job are really superior to everybody else's. Legislators really don't have the right skill set. That could be why no Senator has been elected to the WH since 1960.

    by jasmint53 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:38:27 PM PDT

  •  Don't rise above your station??

    Let's see... We have a one term senator and a half a term senator who think they have enough experience to be President. That gives me loads of confidence.

    by Texas Dem 1958 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 01:56:25 PM PDT

    •  Didn't we found the country over that little

      station in life issue?

      by venatrix on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:00:38 PM PDT

      •  Seems like I read that somewhere. n/t

        by Texas Dem 1958 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:42:39 PM PDT

  •  are you effing kiddking us?

    Are you not aware that he was the Supreme Allied COMMANDER of NATO??? So how would he be rising above anything to become the COMMANDER in chief? ...I won't bother to elaborate on his extensive experience in dealing with Congress and bureacracy, let alone the EXECUTIVE and diplomatic finesse with which he so successfully lead NATO.

    by Pivot on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:30:31 PM PDT

    •  Didn't Solano Lead Nato?

      Wasn't Clark the General of it's army, but the organization is under civilian control?  That was my understanding.

      by citizen53 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:48:32 PM PDT

      •  Supreme Allied COMMANDER of NATO

        Has head of State status, e.g. on equal footing with all the other Presidents, Prime Ministers and Kings.

        by BOHICA on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 03:00:20 PM PDT

        •  Head of State?

          Is that not an overstatement?  NATO is an organization.

          A head of state can make binding decisions for his/her country, can't he/she?  

          I thought the SACEUR had to obey superiors.

          by citizen53 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 04:20:19 PM PDT

          •  In terms of protocol

            SACEUR is the equivalent of a Head of State (i.e. diplomatic precedence and that sort of thing).

            The SACEUR's residence is a castle.  Yes, an actual castle.

            Heads of State cannot necessarily make binding decisions about their countries without the consent of their legislatures - if they have one.  It depends on the constitution.

            For the purpose of reporting, the SACEUR reports jointly to the Secretary of Defense and to the NATO Secretary-General, I believe.  Not 100% on that, since I don't carry Waging Modern Wars around with me.

            by LSophia on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 05:21:00 PM PDT

            •  Thanks for the info...

              There's a reason that leaders are called "Head" of State.  It's not because they live in a castle, as I'm sure you would agree.

              SACEUR is clearly an important job.  I am not interested in slighting the position.  To equate it as the comment did to a true head of state or a king, however, is somewhat of an exxageration, irrespective of diplomatic status.

              by citizen53 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 05:33:39 PM PDT

              •  It's not just the castle

                in terms of diplomatic precedence, the SACEUR is considered the equivalent of a Head of State.  

                (Though the castle is pretty cool!)

                by LSophia on Mon Mar 12, 2007 at 10:34:04 AM PDT

              •  You do realize

                The SACEUR gets to live in a castle.  Well, more of a villa actually, since it's not fortified.  But the residence staff (completely separate from his military operational staff) is huge -- e.g. something like 100 gardeners alone.

                Seriously, citizen.  I know you'd like to make the position out to be less important than it is, but there IS a reason the SACEUR is considered a head of state.  It's so he can meet and speak on equal terms with every other head of state, in and out of NATO.  Because the scope of his responsibility is that great.  Even in peacetime.

                I suppose that's an inconvenient truth to someone who supports a part-time one-term senator who total tenure in public service is, generously speaking, six years, and the largest organization for which he has ever been responsible is a campaign staff.

                by hfjai on Mon Mar 12, 2007 at 12:51:27 PM PDT

      •  Solano was the Secretary General of NATO, and was

        followed by Lord Robertson, I think, while General Clark was SACEUR (Supreme Allied Commander Europe).  Javier Solana was the head of the civilian arm of NATO, while General Clark was head of the military arm.

        by deadmessengers on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 03:12:35 PM PDT

        •  Isn't NATO much like the USA...

          where civilians have power over the military?

          by citizen53 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 04:21:29 PM PDT

          •  Not exactly the same

            Each member nation retains the right to veto any decision that involves that nations forces, but they don't give orders in the same sense that the US "National Command Authority" (president and secretary of defense) does to a US military commander.

            by hfjai on Mon Mar 12, 2007 at 12:58:30 PM PDT

      •  NATO is under multi-state control

        Solana was its Secretary General and was one of two officials "...reponsible for forging consensus in NATO, shaping its strategy, and representing it privately and publicly."

        General Wesley Clark -  "Waging Modern War", pg xxi

        As I understand it, neither Solana nor Clark could authorize any NATO action without the consent of the representatives of all 19 member nations.

        by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 03:23:30 PM PDT

        •  Is NATO under civilian or military control?

          That is my question.

          by citizen53 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 04:10:09 PM PDT

          •  yeah, civilians authorized military to do stuff

            by Pivot on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 05:03:53 PM PDT

  •  Just wanted you to know

    That was one of the most unDemocratic and illiberal statements I've read around here in a long time.

    by hfjai on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 04:05:44 PM PDT

  •  Are you kidding?

    Do we have stations in America, now?  Who knew?

    You might want to mention that to Grant, Washington, Harrison, Jackson and Eisenhower.....

    by LSophia on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 05:18:18 PM PDT

  •  And Edwards' and Obama's station . . .

    in life is what exactly?  And what about either of them makes you think they're not trying to "rise about their station?  And what exactly about their so-called station in life makes them any more right, ready, or deserving of being President of the United States than Wes Clark or anyone else?  Some comments are just offensive, and this is certainly one of them.

    by latinjum on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:02:47 PM PDT

•  I support Obama BUT....

  Wesley Clark has always been my first choice. I warmed up to him after really studying him last year. Of all the candidated, he is the most qualified.

  HOWEVER, you cant win if you dont play. Even if he jumps in now, he is so behind in money and organization i doubt he could make a serious go of it. He's not Al Gore. Al Gore could jump in next December and put a fully funded national team in place in about a week. Clark cant do that.

  Sadly, the most qualified guy in the field isn't running. But, we are lucky that we are blessed with good candidates like Obama and Edwards as great alternatives.

  by brooklynbadboy on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:09:57 PM PDT

  •  Don't count those chickens just yet

    okay? There's PLENTY of time. You'll see.

    by jasmint53 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 02:12:44 PM PDT

  •  There's way more than enough time left.

    This early campaigning is just going to drive voters away from the current front runners.  the only people benefitting from this are political consultants and commentators.

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 03:28:16 PM PDT

•  I hope Kos sees this diary.

  It's great to see that Wes is attending that Road to the White House discussion.

  Kos himself should reconsider his unwarranted conclusions about Wes Clark's status on that road.

  Thanks for the diary, deadmessengers.

  by what if on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 03:34:15 PM PDT

  •  My pleasure! & Thanks to Gordon Suber

    for sending the info and calling me while he's on vacation with family, and watching the Michigan St. games, to suggest I post it here.

    ;-)

    by deadmessengers on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 10:29:15 PM PDT

•  new Wes Clark at the Y diary is up

  here

  by CalifSherry on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 03:50:37 PM PDT