Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Wesley Clark - Another "liberal" voice speaks out
Outsports Discussion Board > Outsports > Politics & Religion
Pages: 1, 2
DC-Buckeye
I wanted to apologize, Charlie, and to anyone else, about that quote of mine from my post in this thread Monday night that you cut and pasted into your post above. I realize now it was uncalled for. And, on top of that, I don't even believe it to be true myself. Probably best for me just to stay out of the political threads until I can control my emotions. Besides, it's not like we'll ever succeed at converting anybody to the other side, will we? ;-)
Charlie in the Trees
QUOTE
DC-Buckeye:
I wanted to apologize, Charlie, and to anyone else, about that quote of mine from my post in this thread Monday night that you cut and pasted into your post above. I realize now it was uncalled for. And, on top of that, I don't even believe it to be true myself. Probably best for me just to stay out of the political threads until I can control my emotions. Besides, it's not like we'll ever succeed at converting anybody to the other side, will we? ;-)
No apology necessary, but it's nevertheless appreciated.

As far as converting other people goes: hope springs eternal.
FeverDog
September 12, 2003

Dear General Wesley Clark,

I've been meaning to write to you for some time. Two days after the Oscars, when I felt very alone and somewhat frightened by the level of hatred toward me for daring to suggest that we were being led into war for "fictitious reasons," one person stuck his neck out and came to my defense on national television.

And that person was you.

Aaron Brown had just finished interviewing me by satellite on CNN, and I had made a crack about me being "the only non-general allowed on CNN all week." He ended the interview and then turned to you, as you were sitting at the desk with him. He asked you what you thought of this crazy guy, Michael Moore. And, although we were still in Week One of the war, you boldly said that my dissent was necessary and welcome, and you pointed out that I was against Bush and his "policies," not the kids in the service. I sat in Flint with the earpiece still in my ear and I was floored -- a GENERAL standing up for me and, in effect, for all the millions who were opposed to the war but had been bullied into silence.

Since that night, I have spent a lot of time checking you out. And what I've learned about you corresponds to my experience with you back in March. You seem to be a man of integrity. You seem not afraid to speak the truth. I liked your answer when you were asked your position on gun control: “If you are the type of person who likes assault weapons, there is a place for you -- the United States Army. We have them.”

In addition to being first in your class at West Point, a four star general from Arkansas, and the former Supreme Commander of NATO -- enough right there that should give pause to any peace-loving person -- I have discovered that...

1. You oppose the Patriot Act and would fight the expansion of its powers.

2. You are firmly pro-choice.

3. You filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in support of the University of Michigan's affirmative action case.

4. You would get rid of the Bush tax "cut" and make the rich pay their fair share.

5. You respect the views of our allies and want to work with them and with the rest of the international community.

6. And you oppose war. You have said that war should always be the "last resort" and that it is military men such as yourself who are the most for peace because it is YOU and your soldiers who have to do the dying. You find something unsettling about a commander-in-chief who dons a flight suit and pretends to be Top Gun, a stunt that dishonored those who have died in that flight suit in the service of their country.

General Clark, last night I finally got to meet you in person. I would like to share with others what I said to you privately: You may be the person who can defeat George W. Bush in next year's election.

This is not an endorsement. For me, it's too early for that. I have liked Howard Dean (in spite of his flawed positions in support of some capital punishment, his grade "A" rating from the NRA, and his opposition to cutting the Pentagon budget). And Dennis Kucinich is so committed to all the right stuff. We need candidates in this race who will say the things that need to be said, to push the pathetically lame Democratic Party into have a backbone -- or get out of the way and let us have a REAL second party on the ballot.

But right now, for the sake and survival of our very country, we need someone who is going to get The Job done, period. And that job, no matter whom I speak to across America -- be they leftie Green or conservative Democrat, and even many disgusted Republicans -- EVERYONE is of one mind as to what that job is:

Bush Must Go.

This is war, General, and it's Bush & Co.'s war on us. It's their war on the middle class, the poor, the environment, their war on women and their war against anyone around the world who doesn't accept total American domination. Yes, it's a war -- and we, the people, need a general to beat back those who have abused our Constitution and our basic sense of decency.

The General vs. the Texas Air National Guard deserter! I want to see that debate, and I know who the winner is going to be.

The other night, when you were on Bill Maher's show, he began by reading to you a quote from Howard Dean where he (Dean) tried to run away from the word "liberal." Maher said to you, so, General, do you want to run away from that word? Without missing a beat, you said "No!" and you reminded everyone that America was founded as a "liberal democracy." The audience went wild with applause.

That is what we have needed for a long time on our side -- guts. I am sure there are things you and I don't see eye to eye on, but now is the time for all good people from the far left to the middle of the road to bury the damn hatchet and get together behind someone who is not only good on the issues but can beat George W. Bush. And where I come from in the Midwest, General, I know you are the kind of candidate that the average American will vote for.

Michael Moore likes a general? I never thought I'd write these words. But desperate times call for desperate measures. I want to know more about you. I want your voice heard. I would like to see you in these debates. Then let the chips fall where they may -- and we'll all have a better idea of what to do. If you sit it out, then I think we all know what we are left with.

I am asking everyone I know to send an email to you now to encourage you to run, even if they aren't sure they would vote for you. (Wesley Clark's email address is: info@leadershipforamerica.org). None of us truly know how we will vote five months from now or a year from now. But we do know that this race needs a jolt -- and Bush needs to know that there is one person he won't be able to Dukakisize.

Take the plunge, General Clark. At the very least, the nation needs to hear what you know about what was really behind this invasion of Iraq and your fresh ideas of how we can live in a more peaceful world. Yes, your country needs you to perform one more act of brave service -- to help defeat an enemy from within, at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, an address that used to belong to "we, the people."

Yours,

Michael Moore

Lottery # 275, U.S. military draft, 1972

Conscientious Objector applicant
sportinlife
QUOTE
FeverDog:
September 12, 2003

Dear General Wesley Clark,

Amen.
MIB
QUOTE
FeverDog:
4. You would get rid of the Bush tax \"cut\" and make the rich pay their fair share.

Yours,

Michael Moore

Lottery # 275, U.S. military draft, 1972

Conscientious Objector applicant
Great. One nut writing to another.

BTW, can someone PLEASE be specific, for once, and tell me just what is the rich's "fair share"? I've heard this blather for decades, but its believers have never been specific, instead using emotional, class warfare-based rhetoric.
sportinlife
QUOTE
MIB:
BTW, can someone PLEASE be specific, for once, and tell me just what is the rich's \"fair share\"? I've heard this blather for decades, but its believers have never been specific, instead using emotional, class warfare-based rhetoric.
Good article in today's The New York Times Magazine entitled "The Tax-cut Con" by Paul Krugman. It doesn't advocate a precise number for a "fair share" but does give a comparative analysis of how the tax burden has been differently distributed over the past 25 years.

[ September 14, 2003, 10:56 AM: Message edited by: sportinlife ]
MIB
Well, it's a statistical fact that the rich pay the overwhelming share of all federal taxes. I still, though, want someone--ANYone--to tell me specifically what the rich's "fair share" actually is.

No generalities, no concepts--specifics. What exactly is the rich's "fair share"?

When answering this, keep in mind that one is considered "rich" by the left when one's income is six figures or higher.
sportinlife
Just as the current administration decided on precise numbers for a tax cut a future one may decide on numbers for a "fair share". When were those precise numbers given?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2012 Invision Power Services, Inc.