PDA

View Full Version : "I Spark For Clark" Campaign Button



otis-willie
09-21-2003, 04:07 PM
"I Spark For Clark" Campaign Button

The "I Spark For Clark" Campaign Button is available at URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wesleyclark/

This button was first created and displayed on the DEA Watch website,
9 December 2001.

-- DEA Watch
The Voice of the Drug Enforcement Agent
http://members.aol.com/deawatch/daily.htm

Luxembourger
09-21-2003, 06:20 PM
If I were American I would vote for him .
He is a tough guy who cares for the Military and the domestic issues which are important too.

None could say now the Democrats don t care for the millitary or are anti-military . I prefer moderate Democrats like CLark or moderate Republicans like Powell

2 Things a presindet of any party must do : care for the military, care for the economie and care for the average and poor ameircan

And I think that s what he will do !

Seoulstriker
09-21-2003, 06:31 PM
If I were American I would vote for him .
He is a tough guy who cares for the Military and the domestic issues which are important too.

None could say now the Democrats don t care for the millitary or are anti-military . I prefer moderate Democrats like CLark or moderate Republicans like Powell

2 Things a presindet of any party must do : care for the military, care for the economie and care for the average and poor ameircan

And I think that s what he will do !


you have NO clue what kind of person Clark is. Clark is the kind of person who will do anything to get liked to get promoted. He was begging Clinton for a 4 star promotion. He almost started WWIII. He was fired by Clinton for being as ineffective a general can get. He has NO political experience. He has no vision for America.

Democrats in this country don't give a **** about the poor. They just incite all kinds of problems to be elected by that base, such as class warfare. They will lose in 2004 no matter what.

jdbjdb
09-21-2003, 06:34 PM
Clark doesn't even know what he supports and what he doesn't support

96B
09-21-2003, 08:06 PM
He has not really gone into specifics about what he is for and against. Only finally has he admitted he was even a Democrat no too long ago.

Seiyuuki
09-21-2003, 09:29 PM
Clark backtracks on Iraq war support (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/20/elec04.prez.clark.iraq.ap/index.html)

IOWA CITY, Iowa (AP) -- Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark backtracked from a day-old statement that he probably would have voted for the congressional resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq, saying Friday he "would never have voted for this war."

The retired Army general, an opponent of the conflict, surprised supporters when he indicated in an interview with reporters Thursday that he likely would have supported the resolution. On Friday, Clark sought to clarify his comments in an interview with The Associated Press.

"Let's make one thing real clear, I would never have voted for this war," Clark said before a speech at the University of Iowa. "I've gotten a very consistent record on this. There was no imminent threat. This was not a case of pre-emptive war. I would have voted for the right kind of leverage to get a diplomatic solution, an international solution to the challenge of Saddam Hussein."

Clark's initial remarks left members of his campaign team a bit flummoxed.

"That caught me off guard a little. The general has been very critical of the war," said George Bruno, a New Hampshire activist.

Clark launched his bid for the Democratic nomination on Tuesday with the type of media attention candidates crave, but early missteps underscore the dangers facing his late-starting campaign.

The former NATO commander and his campaign staff went back and forth on whether he will participate in a Democratic debate next week -- all in a single day. Creating more confusion were Clark's comments on the resolution that gave President Bush the authority to use U.S. military force to oust Saddam, remarks that were at odds with his opposition to the war...

CONFUSING...

budanski
09-21-2003, 10:26 PM
Worldnet Daily (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34685)

• He nearly started World War III when serving as NATO commander in the unconstitutional, immoral war on Serbia. When the Russians took control of Pristina airport before NATO troops, Clark, at the behest of NATO Secretary-General Javier Solana, ordered 500 British and French paratroopers to take it away from them. Thankfully, his order was disregarded by British Gen. Sir Mike Jackson, who told Clark: "I'm not going to start the Third World War for you."

• It was Clark, once again, at the center of the Waco massacre. He was in charge at Fort Hood and was only too happy to cooperate with Attorney General Janet Reno in providing the armor and personnel needed for the military-style assault on the Branch Davidian church.

• Clark attended Oxford as a Rhodes scholar with Bill Clinton. But the relationship hardly ended there. It was under Clinton's watch that Clark became a rising star in the military. And once his military career was over, he found a home working for the Stephens Group in Arkansas – the same business incubator that fostered the Clintons' rise to power.

• Clark's nickname among those who served under him should give you an idea of the extent of his megalomania. He was referred to as "the Supreme Being." Col. David Hackworth called him the "Ultimate Perfumed Prince" and added "he's far more comfortable in a drawing room discussing political theories than hunkering down in the trenches where bullets fly and soldiers die."

jdbjdb
09-21-2003, 10:33 PM
unconstitutional, immoral war on Serbia
NATO was justified in kicking Serbia's ass, the Serbs were guilty of genocide on the muslim minority, why didn't the arab countries come to their rescue?

jdbjdb
09-21-2003, 10:36 PM
Waco massacre
That wasn't Clarks fault, blame David Koresh, he had more weapons then the russian mob, plus he was having *** with several dozen 10 yearold girls.

usa320
09-21-2003, 11:03 PM
The war in Kosovo/serbia was definately justified. If saving the lives of innocent is immoral, then what is moral?

However calling on NATO forces to go rumble with Russian forces= not the brightest move.

He219
09-22-2003, 12:52 AM
why didn't the arab countries come to their rescue?

www.eastwestrecord.com (http://www.eastwestrecord.com/Get_Articles.asp?articleId=118)
The only visible results of the bombing of Serbia were an increased awareness of Islamic terrorism in the Balkans, but Albania was soon implicated. On May 4th, 1999, The Washington Times reported, citing new information from US intelligence, that the town of Tropoje in Albania was a common staging area for forces of Bin Laden and the KLA and "a center for Islamic terrorists". US intelligence also acknowledged Bin Ladin’s al-Qaeda had both trained and financially supported the Albanians and that the Kosovo border had been infiltrated by Bosnian, Chechen and Afghan mujaheedin to fight the Yugoslav army. Documents found in 2001on the body of a Kosovo Liberation Army member showed that he had escorted a number of volunteers into Kosovo, including more than a dozen Saudis. Each volunteer carried a passport identifying him as a Macedonian Albanian.

martinexsquaddie
09-22-2003, 04:35 AM
The russians were only **** stirring in Kosovo.
But hardly an excuse to start WW3 although if it had kicked off the Russians would have lost Big time :P
But Gazb could have picked up loads of russina kit on EBay so not all bad.
At least Clark went to vietnam. Bill was against it and ****ed off out the country George seemed to be for it as long ashe didi'nt go. What sort of idiot would try to attack texas? place full of Gun crazed good old boys positivly dreaming of restaging the alamo :lol: