Saturday, January 24, 2004

Dear John
Part One

Posted to Robbedvoter's weblog (Soapbox) on Sat Jan 24th, 2004 at 11:18:58 AM EST



Dear Mr Kerry

I had sworn to myself I'd never vote you for anything after your refusal to join the Florida 14 in denouncing the Florida electoral votes (Jan 6, 2001) and then insulting me by saying "No one asked". I did.

You topped that with your vote for war (the Kennedy or Byrd resolutions were not good  enough for you?)

On St Patrick's Day you quipped: I may not be Irish, but at least I am not French". Lovely.

You followed this with yet another scornful message to those "who cry in their tea cups over the stolen election" So, if democracy twarting is so meaningless to you, who appointed you the gate keeper of the democratic party? How dare you question Wesley Clark's credentials?

I am sick and tired of Mayflower democrats like you and Dean who think the membership in the party is some kind of birthright. (I advise you to take a look at James Trafficant and Zell Miller before you puff up too much with your titles)

I am a former independent, drawn to the democratic party by anger over the stolen election (tea cup cryer to you). It's attitudes like yours that maybe driving me back out, to independent status.

P.S. Is marrying a republican a mortal sin or a misdemeanor for Mayflower Democrats like you?

Kindly take me off your mailing list - as a former independent, I am not worthy..
 
Dear John | 50 comments (52 others not shown) | Group threads together | Post A Comment | Edit Story
(#102) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 02/01/2004 06:33:55 AM EST

Reply

Kerry IS the leader in something:
"A study by the Center for Responsive Politics shows Kerry has received more money from lobbyists than any senator, current or former, dating back to 1989, when the center first starting collecting the data. As of September 31, 2003, Kerry had received nearly $640,000 from lobbyists, the group said."
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/31/elec04.prez.main/index.html


(#101) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/31/2004 08:14:03 AM EST


(#100) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/30/2004 10:24:10 PM EST



battles
He says he "led the fight" on several fronts, but few bills bear his name.
January 30, 2004Modified:January 30, 2004
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=134
Summary
 
John Kerry is fond of saying "I led the fight" on a lot of things -- against Arctic drilling, against Bush's Medicare prescription drug legislation, for federal grants for 100,000 new police officers, against Newt Gingrich's attempts to lessen environmental regulations.
But reporters who cover Congress often gave others credit for the leading roles in some of those fights -- with scant mention of Kerry.
And The Associated Press last July found that only eight laws had Kerry as their lead sponsor, five of them "ceremonial," two relating to the fishing industry, and one providing federal grants to support small businesses owned by women.More


(#99) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/30/2004 07:36:07 PM EST

Reply

For Immediate Release
Date: January 30, 2004
http://clark04.com/press/release/214/
Dr. Mary Frances Berry Responds to Senator Kerry's Remarks On Affirmative Action
Today, in a conference call with reporters, Dr. Mary Frances Berry, Chair of the United States Commission on Civil Rights, made the following remarks:
Back in 1992, when I read what Senator Kerry was saying about affirmative action, I felt like someone had kicked me in the stomach. I was deeply disturbed, because Senator Kerry was saying exactly the same thing that opponents of affirmative action were saying - that it was reverse discrimination, that the policy was a failure, that all it did was perpetuate racism. And even worse, he made no suggestions about what legal steps should be taken to improve it.
Last night, at the debate, I was surprised when he invoked the name of Bill Clinton in discussing the "mend it, don't end it" approach to affirmative action. President Clinton was not yet in office when Senator Kerry made that 1992 speech. And once Clinton was in office, and we were engaged in the difficult debate about the future of affirmative action, Senator Kerry was nowhere in sight. While we were struggling to do all we could to make progress on these issues, he was simply missing in action.


(#98) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/30/2004 04:36:01 PM EST

Reply

   Kerry no stranger to lobbyists' donations
Senator among top recipients in Congress from special interests
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/20040130-9999_1n30kerry.html
By Dana Wilkie and Joe Cantlupe
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE
January 30, 2004
WASHINGTON - In his quest for the White House, Sen. John Kerry says he is committed to sweeping out the "special interests" he contends are trying to manipulate federal laws and policies.
But the Massachusetts lawmaker and Democratic presidential front-runner is among Congress' top recipients of money from some of those special interests - drug companies, HMOs, lawyers, investment firms, real estate interests and contractors, among others."more
I wonder if him not voting against the Medicare buster bill had anything to do with those HMO kick backs...
And you had the chutzpa to smear Clark whose entire life is open for all to see


(#97) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/30/2004 09:40:24 AM EST

Reply

http://robbedvoter.forclark.com/story/2004/1/30/9319/54910
with quotes from transcript


(#96) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/30/2004 07:59:17 AM EST

Reply

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62318-2004Jan30.html
.
Moderator Tom Brokaw asked Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) why he had said it was a mistake for Democrats to focus on the South during previous national elections. "I never said Democrats made a mistake," Kerry replied. "I never said that at all."
But in a town hall meeting Monday in Hanover, N.H., in response to a question about electoral strategy, Kerry said, "Everyone always makes the mistake of looking South."


(#95) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/30/2004 07:39:32 AM EST

Reply

.
sfgate.com/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/01/29/WMDS.TMP
The front-runner, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, speaking Wednesday as he flew to St. Louis to campaign in the Missouri primary, said Kay's testimony called into question the integrity of American intelligence, and he urged the administration to come clean.
according to CNN yesterday, Kerry actually called for Tenet's resignation. Asked in the debate of Chenney's manipulation of intelligence - he hedged.
Clark in the same debate : do not blame the intelligence community, this is W's responsibility!
discussed here:
http://bartcopnation.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=11&topic_id=8756&mesg_id=875 6&page=


(#94) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/29/2004 04:51:50 PM EST

Reply

PNAC Project Director Contributes to Kerry
Mark Gerson is a project director at the Project for the New American Century (1) and a contributor to the Kerry campaign (2):
         GERSON, MARK L
         NEW YORK,NY 10017
         GERSON LEHRMAN GROUP
         6/30/2001
         $1,000
         Kerry, John
         GERSON, MARK L
         NEW YORK,NY 10017
         GERSON LEHRMAN GROUP
         6/30/2001
         $1,000
         Kerry, John
         ------------------
A Question:
One David Epstein, Office of Secretary of Defense, Net Assessment, is a "project participant" at PNAC (3).
Campaign filings show these contributions to the Kerry campaign (4):
         EPSTEIN, DAVID
         CAMBRIDGE,MA 02138
         PATTON BOGGS/SENIOR PARTNER
         6/30/2003
         $2,000
         Kerry, John
         EPSTEIN, DAVID
         CAMBRIDGE,MA 02138
         PATTON BOGGS/SENIOR PARTNER
         3/5/2003
         $2,000
         Kerry, John
         EPSTEIN, DAVID
         CAMBRIDGE,MA 02138
         PATTON BOGGS/SENIOR PARTNER
         8/1/2003
         $2,000
Note that these contributions exceed the legal limit.)
While these filings list Epstein as a senior partner with Patton Boggs, he is not listed on the Patton Boggs website.
Is the Epstein of the Office of Secretary of Defense and PNAC participant the same as the Epstein of Patton Boggs? The
Net is pretty well scrubbed of any mention of either Epstein. Can anybody confirm or deny they are one in the same?
         -------
Sources:

1.     http://www.newamericancentury.org/aboutpnac.htm
2.     http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.asp?NumOfThou=0&txtName=GERSON&txtState=%28all+stat es%29&txtZip=&txtEmploy=&txtCand=Kerry&txt2004=Y&txt2002=Y&txt2000=Y&Ord er=N

3.     http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
4.     http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.asp?NumOfThou=0&txtName=epste...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=22 3379


(#93) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/29/2004 02:15:16 AM EST

Reply

http://www.tnr.com/etc.mhtml?pid=1261
Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition ... to the early use of military force by the US against Iraq. I share your concerns. On January 11, I voted in favor of a resolution that would have insisted that economic sanctions be given more time to work and against a resolution giving the president the immediate authority to go to war."
--letter from Senator John Kerry to Wallace Carter of Newton Centre, Massachusetts, dated January 22 [1991
"Thank you very much for contacting me to express your support for the actions of President Bush in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. From the outset of the invasion, I have strongly and unequivocally supported President Bush's response to the crisis and the policy goals he has established with our military deployment in the Persian Gulf."
--Senator Kerry to Wallace Carter, January 31 [1991]


(#92) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/28/2004 04:21:24 PM EST

Reply

 
http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200401220835.asp
     As a senator with the responsibility to cast a vote on a variety of contentious issues, Kerry has had many opportunities to square off with the president. Yet an analysis of Kerry's 2003 Senate voting record shows that he did not show up for most of the Senate's confrontations with the White House.
The publication Congressional Quarterly examined 119 recorded votes held in 2003 in which the president had taken a position. CQ found that Kerry was present for just 28 percent of those votes. In contrast, Kerry's colleague from Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy, was present for 97 percent of the votes.
****
And we know some of them were Omnibus Bill (overtime), the Medicare hand grenade, The FCC media consolidation.


(#91) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/28/2004 03:20:56 PM EST

Parent | Reply

As for that talk with Kerry, Kerry refered to it Sunday morning, on Face the nation. He said he has a lot of respect for Clark, they cleared  the misunderstanding and the canpaign should.t be fought on that ground. And then he showed he lacks honor by allowing the same evening the 60 minutes interview (probably taped before) without editting or commentary. 2 days before the NH elections, to a 60 minutes audience Kerry let the lie out
     And that sums up his caracter - none.


(#90) (No rating)

by jerseyshore (Jerseyshore@clark,com) on 01/28/2004 09:45:16 AM EST

Rate this: - 1 2 3 4 5 + | Parent | Reply

"my son was a lieutenant and I was a lieutenant"




(#89) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/28/2004 07:00:26 AM EST

Reply

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0401/27/wbr.00.html
CLARK: Well, I think John Kerry did a fine job in Vietnam. I was there about the same time. I also was a junior officer in Vietnam. I was a company commander.
snip
BLITZER: Do you owe John Kerry a little bit of an apology for sort of that tone of what you said?
CLARK: I think that John Kerry and I have already had that discussion.
And it's very clear that -- my son was a lieutenant and I was a lieutenant. And no Democrat and no Republican will ever drive a wedge between me and our nation's veterans. It's just that simple.


(#88) (Rated 5.00/1)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/27/2004 09:15:56 AM EST

Reply

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/story/153468p-135093c.html
Kerry, Dick Short Names on Petitions
By MICHAEL R. BLOOD
DAILY NEWS POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT
Sen. John Kerry and Rep. Dick Gephardt were allowed on the New York
State primary ballot even though they did not file enough nominating
signatures to qualify, officials said yesterday.
The candidates took advantage of a secret political peace treaty
hammered out by Democratic state chairman Herman (Denny) Farrell in
which they agreed not to challenge each other's petitions." More
In related news, Clarkies gathered 43,000 signatures for Wesley Clark, well in excess of the 5,000 required.


(#87) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 10:10:48 PM EST

Reply

According to a new book - Warrior King - the case for impeaching GW Bush by John C Bonifaz and  John Conyers:
"In giving the President this authority," the Kerry said, "I expect him to fulfill the commitments he has made to the American people in recent days - to work with the United Nations Security Council to adopt a new resolution setting out tough and immediate inspection requirements, and to act with our allies at our side if we have to disarm Saddam Hussein by force."
"If he fails to do so," Senator Kerry continued, "I will be the first to speak out."
Bonifaz goes on:
Senator Kerry broke that promise ... In the crucial days after the president withdrew his efforts to gain United Nations support for his war and before the president launched his invasion, Senator Kerry remained silent.
http://slate.msn.com/id/2094399/


(#86) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 06:03:44 PM EST

Reply

MATTHEWS: There are two men in this campaign who are running who have military background. You've got a couple of stars, medals and so does General Clark. Compare you with him.
KERRY: Well I have great respect for General Clark, but he has been a military man all his life. He has been a general.
MATTHEWS: Is he a headquarters guy and you're a field guy?
KERRY: He has generally been. No, he was in the field at one point, but very little in his career.
By and large General Clark has not had the breadth of experience in foreign policy and I think there's an enormous difference between us. I have spent 35 years-you know when I came back from Vietnam, I stood up and fought against the war. I've...
MATTHEWS: Well how did he get a Silver Star if he wasn't in action?
KERRY: I said he was. I said he had...
MATTHEWS: Right.
KERRY: ... one brief, I believe, tour in the field like that, and then he as a general. Look, I'm not disrespectful of General Clark, but there's a difference between us in the levels of our experience. There's also a difference in the values that we fought for through a lifetime. When General Clark was voting for Richard Nixon and voting for Ronald Reagan, I was fighting against both of them. When General Clark was in the military, I was standing up and fighting against Noriega, against the illegal war in Central America.
I have served on the Narcotics Terrorism Committee as chairman. I wrote a book about-called "The New War". I have been involved in opening the Philippines and getting rid of Marcos and bringing Cory Aquino to power. I personally negotiated in Cambodia in order to try to get the tribunals for.
http://msnbc.msn.com/?id=3053419


(#85) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 05:25:13 PM EST

Reply

Presidential candidate John F. Kerry is bashing President Bush's policies on Iraq, education and civil liberties. What he rarely mentions, however, is that his Senate votes helped make all three possible.

That these lawmakers voted with Bush on key issues is complicating their bids to win their party's nomination, as fellow Democrats demand explanations. As the campaign progresses, it also could make it harder for them to draw sharp distinctions with Bush on what are shaping up as among the biggest issues of the 2004 campaign, according to political strategists.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A62830-2003Sep11 172;Found=true


(#84) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 04:30:57 PM EST

Reply

He criticized President Bush for withdrawing from the Kyoto global warming treaty in 2001. "You don't just walk away from a treaty [negotiated by] 160 countries over 10 years," he said. But in 1997, Kerry voted for a resolution, which passed 95-0, saying the United States "should not be a signatory" to the treaty.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/26/opinion/main595936.shtml


(#83) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 12:08:50 PM EST

For Immediate Release
Date: December 3, 2003
Clark Campaign Response to Senator Kerry's Fondness for James Baker
http://clark04.com/press/release/103/
Clark Campaign Communications Director Matt Bennett issued the following statement in response to Senator Kerry's comments today at the Council on Foreign Relations:
"Senator Kerry's suggestion that he might use Bush family consigliere James Baker as a special envoy to the Middle East is offensive. Baker, who was the driving force behind George W. Bush's theft of the 2000 election in the Florida recount, helped to disenfranchise thousands of voters.
We liked it better when Senator Kerry was calling Baker's Florida operation 'thuggism.' If Kerry wants a former Secretary of State who headed a recount effort in Florida, let's stay away from political thugs and go with Warren Christopher."


(#82) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 11:24:54 AM EST

Reply

On Sunday, Kerry asked Dean to "stop running a negative campaign," even as he suggested that Dean can't get elected. During door-to-door campaigning Sunday, Kerry said his rival is weak on foreign policy issues, and favors higher taxes for middle-class voters. "The Republicans will just kill us on this," Kerry said. "Between foreign policy and taxes, I think it is a serious problem."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4060197/


(#81) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 05:39:55 AM EST

Reply

Kerry's Senate Career Short on Law-Making
Associated Press
Monday, July 21, 2003
WASHINGTON -- Asked what he has accomplished during his 19 years in the Senate, Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (search) gives a lengthy answer but has a short list of laws that bear his name.

His response prompted an examination of his record. Kerry has been the lead sponsor of eight bills that have become law. Two are related to his work on the Senate panel on oceans and fisheries - a 1994 law to protect marine mammals from being taken during commercial fishing and a 1991 measure for the National Sea Grant College Program Act (search), which finances marine research.
In 1999, President Clinton signed his bill providing grants to support small businesses owned by women.
The rest of the laws he saw passed were ceremonial - renaming a federal building, designating Vietnam Veterans Memorial 10th Anniversary Day, National POW/MIA Recognition Day (search) and World Population Awareness Week in two separate years.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,92477,00.html




by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 05:35:47 AM EST


Kerry Said "If You Don't Believe In The U.N. ... Or You Don't Believe Saddam Hussein Is A Threat With Nuclear Weapons, Then You Shouldn't Vote For Me." (Ronald Brownstein, "On Iraq, Kerry Appears Either Torn Or Shrewd," Los Angeles Times, 1/31/03)


(#79) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 05:27:36 AM EST

Reply

Attack
Quote: "What we need now is not just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States" (Boston Globe, April 3, 2003)
rebuff
Charge: Then-GOP Chairman Marc Racicot said Kerry "crossed a grave line when he dared to suggest the replacement of America's commander in chief at a time when America is at war." Racicot said Kerry's remark was "designed to further Sen. Kerry's political ambitions at a time when the lives of America's sons and daughters are at stake." John Podhoretz of the New York Post accused Kerry of drawing an "implicit parallel ... between Saddam Hussein and George W. Bush.
multiple foldings
Kerry issued four responses to his critics: 1) "It is possible that the word 'regime change' is too harsh. Perhaps it is." 2) It was just a "quip." 3) "That's what a presidential race is about. It's about changing the administration." 4) "I'm not going to let the likes of Tom DeLay question my patriotism, which I fought for and bled for in order to have the right to speak out."
http://slate.msn.com/id/2089125/


(#78)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 05:15:31 AM EST



http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/26/politics/26LETT.html
That may be why Mr. Bush chose to swipe at Mr. Kerry in some off-the-record jokes in a speech on Saturday night at the Alfalfa Club dinner, an annual banquet for Washington's political upper class.
"I think Kerry's position on the war in Iraq is politically brilliant," Mr. Bush told the Alfalfa Club guests at the Capitol Hilton, according to a guest who heard the remarks. "In New Hampshire yesterday, he stated he had voted for the war, adding that he was strongly opposed to it."
Also, I'd like to keep this a record of relevant reasons not to vote for Kerry. Any comments to me, this blog, opinions - mail them to me, or express them elsewhere. If you have substantial additions to this, please do. It's not a chit-chat, it's a record. Thank you.




(#76) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 05:41:15 PM EST

Reply

On the omnibus bill, a Kerry supporter brought up specifics:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=18 6510#190486
Here are the critical votes, the cloture votes
Tuesday, rejected(which is good): http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&sessio n=2&vote=00001
Thursday, passed (bad): http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&sessio n=2&vote=00002
The swing voters who went over to the dark side between Tuesday and Thursday:
Bingaman (D-NM)
Breaux (D-LA)
Carper (D-DE)
Dayton (D-MN)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Nelson (D-NE)
Reid (D-NV)
Schumer (D-NY)
Final passage (more or less irrelevant): http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&sessio n=2&vote=00003
So, in the final passage, the difference was larger: 65 to 28 - but still the non-voters were:
Baucus (D-MT) (having surgery)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Domenici (R-NM)    Edwards (D-NC)
Hagel (R-NE)
Kerry (D-MA)
    Lieberman (D-CT)


(#75) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 09:03:32 AM EST

Reply

http://Blog.forclark.com/story/2004/1/13/104013/080
> Two senior Democratic senators, Robert Byrd
> of West Virginia and Ted Kennedy of
> Massachusetts, this week proposed separate
> bills on the matter. Byrd's would require President
> Bush (news - web sites) to seek a fresh vote
> in the U.N. Security Council before attacking Iraq;
> Kennedy's would require new votes in
> Congress before doing so.
snip
The bills aren't supported by any of the
> four Democratic members of Congress running for
> president: Sens. John Kerry of
> Massachusetts, Joe Lieberman (news - web sites) of
> Connecticut and John Edwards of North
> Carolina, and Rep. Richard Gephardt (news, bio,
> voting record) of Missouri.


(#74) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 07:34:54 AM EST

Reply

http://robbedvoter.forclark.com/story/2004/1/25/61128/0616


(#73) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 07:33:39 AM EST

Reply

http://robbedvoter.forclark.com/story/2004/1/25/63853/2133


(#72) (Rated 5.00/1)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 07:23:58 AM EST

Reply

http://makethemaccountable.com/podvin/more/040124_StopCrying.htm
1/24/04
"STOP CRYING IN YOUR TEACUPS"
By David Podvin
"Stop crying in your teacups. It isn't going to change. Get over it."
That was the response of John Kerry to a liberal who condemned the theft of the presidency by George W. Bush. If the sentiment sounds familiar, that's because it isn't original. Kerry borrowed his words from America's vapid conservative posse for whom chanting the phrase "Get over it" constitutes a dazzling display of wit. More...


(#71) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 07:12:11 AM EST

Reply

KING: General Clark, we have another veteran with us tonight, Senator Robert Dole. You may know Senator Dole.
CLARK: Hello, Senator.
KING: Bob, do you have a question for the General?
DOLE: No, I think, you know, it's a tough -- you indicated it's a tough business you're in. Looking at it from my perspective, it seemed to me that John Kerry is a big winner tonight, not just in Iowa but also New Hampshire. I know you can't worry about Kerry's campaign but just as an observer I think he's going to benefit a great deal in New Hampshire. Somebody has to lose. Now, of course, you don't want it to be you but I think it may be you.
CLARK: Senator, let's be honest about this thing. The American people want a change in leadership. They're looking for a candidate that can lead on all of the issues. I'm the only person in this race who has ever done foreign policy and I know all of the domestic issues, too. It's one thing to talk about it, but if you think of foreign policy it's like major league baseball. I'm the only person who has ever played it and I pitch a 95 mile an hour fastball. I've negotiated peace agreements, I've won a war. I'm prepared to help the country that's why I'm running. I'm not worried about John Kerry or anybody else.
DOLE: We're not -- we're discussing here as friends but I think just politically you just became a colonel instead of a general...
CLARK: Well, I don't think that's at all -- Senator, with all due respect, he's a lieutenant and I'm a general. You got to get your facts on this. He was a lieutenant in Vietnam. I've done all of the big leadership. I respect John Kerry and I like him but what I'm going to say it's up to the voters of New Hampshire, South Carolina, New Mexico, Arizona, Oklahoma, all across this country, and that's what democracy is about. It's your job to handicap the race. It's my job to go out here and do the best thing I can do for the United States of America and that's what I'm going to do.
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0401/19/lkl.00.html


(#70) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 05:32:47 AM EST

Parent | Reply

http://home.comcast.net/~brianmcw/negate2.jpg



by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/24/2004 09:11:57 PM EST



But on many issues, Mr. Kerry has often struck more nuanced, politically cautious positions than those broad rankings might suggest. After the Republicans took control of Congress in 1994, Mr. Kerry proclaimed himself "delighted with seeing an institutional shake-up because I think we need one." A few months later, with President Bill Clinton locked in combat with the Republicans, Mr. Kerry voiced some doubts in a closed-door meeting of senators about the wisdom of trying to raise the minimum wage. And as Mr. Kennedy later recalled, he told Mr. Kerry, "If you're not for raising the minimum wage, you don't deserve to call yourself a Democrat."
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/25/politics/campaign/25RECO.html?pagewanted=1&hp


(
(#61) (Rated 5.00/2)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/24/2004 07:51:13 PM EST



Cheering GOP taking control of Congress
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/25/politics/campaign/25RECO.html?pagewanted=1&hp
After the Republicans took control of Congress in 1994, Mr. Kerry proclaimed himself "delighted with seeing an institutional shake-up because I think we need one."


Dear John
Part One

Posted to Robbedvoter's weblog (Soapbox) on Sat Jan 24th, 2004 at 11:18:58 AM EST



Dear Mr Kerry

I had sworn to myself I'd never vote you for anything after your refusal to join the Florida 14 in denouncing the Florida electoral votes (Jan 6, 2001) and then insulting me by saying "No one asked". I did.

You topped that with your vote for war (the Kennedy or Byrd resolutions were not good  enough for you?)

On St Patrick's Day you quipped: I may not be Irish, but at least I am not French". Lovely.

You followed this with yet another scornful message to those "who cry in their tea cups over the stolen election" So, if democracy twarting is so meaningless to you, who appointed you the gate keeper of the democratic party? How dare you question Wesley Clark's credentials?

I am sick and tired of Mayflower democrats like you and Dean who think the membership in the party is some kind of birthright. (I advise you to take a look at James Trafficant and Zell Miller before you puff up too much with your titles)

I am a former independent, drawn to the democratic party by anger over the stolen election (tea cup cryer to you). It's attitudes like yours that maybe driving me back out, to independent status.

P.S. Is marrying a republican a mortal sin or a misdemeanor for Mayflower Democrats like you?

Kindly take me off your mailing list - as a former independent, I am not worthy..
 
Dear John | 50 comments (52 others not shown) | Group threads together | Post A Comment | Edit Story
(#102) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 02/01/2004 06:33:55 AM EST

Reply

Kerry IS the leader in something:
"A study by the Center for Responsive Politics shows Kerry has received more money from lobbyists than any senator, current or former, dating back to 1989, when the center first starting collecting the data. As of September 31, 2003, Kerry had received nearly $640,000 from lobbyists, the group said."
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/31/elec04.prez.main/index.html


(#101) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/31/2004 08:14:03 AM EST

Reply

I posted my letter to this big disappointment here
http://robbedvoter.forclark.com/story/2004/1/25/61128/0616
One comment: Kerry played the good cop on FTN ("I won't campaign on this stuff" - the Dole lieutenant BS - but his surrogates keep pounding it in. Hypocritical, dishonorable smarmy - we already have that in the White House!


(#100) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/30/2004 10:24:10 PM EST



battles
He says he "led the fight" on several fronts, but few bills bear his name.
January 30, 2004Modified:January 30, 2004
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=134
Summary
 
John Kerry is fond of saying "I led the fight" on a lot of things -- against Arctic drilling, against Bush's Medicare prescription drug legislation, for federal grants for 100,000 new police officers, against Newt Gingrich's attempts to lessen environmental regulations.
But reporters who cover Congress often gave others credit for the leading roles in some of those fights -- with scant mention of Kerry.
And The Associated Press last July found that only eight laws had Kerry as their lead sponsor, five of them "ceremonial," two relating to the fishing industry, and one providing federal grants to support small businesses owned by women.More


(#99) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/30/2004 07:36:07 PM EST

Reply

For Immediate Release
Date: January 30, 2004
http://clark04.com/press/release/214/
Dr. Mary Frances Berry Responds to Senator Kerry's Remarks On Affirmative Action
Today, in a conference call with reporters, Dr. Mary Frances Berry, Chair of the United States Commission on Civil Rights, made the following remarks:
Back in 1992, when I read what Senator Kerry was saying about affirmative action, I felt like someone had kicked me in the stomach. I was deeply disturbed, because Senator Kerry was saying exactly the same thing that opponents of affirmative action were saying - that it was reverse discrimination, that the policy was a failure, that all it did was perpetuate racism. And even worse, he made no suggestions about what legal steps should be taken to improve it.
Last night, at the debate, I was surprised when he invoked the name of Bill Clinton in discussing the "mend it, don't end it" approach to affirmative action. President Clinton was not yet in office when Senator Kerry made that 1992 speech. And once Clinton was in office, and we were engaged in the difficult debate about the future of affirmative action, Senator Kerry was nowhere in sight. While we were struggling to do all we could to make progress on these issues, he was simply missing in action.


(#98) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/30/2004 04:36:01 PM EST

Reply

   Kerry no stranger to lobbyists' donations
Senator among top recipients in Congress from special interests
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/20040130-9999_1n30kerry.html
By Dana Wilkie and Joe Cantlupe
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE
January 30, 2004
WASHINGTON - In his quest for the White House, Sen. John Kerry says he is committed to sweeping out the "special interests" he contends are trying to manipulate federal laws and policies.
But the Massachusetts lawmaker and Democratic presidential front-runner is among Congress' top recipients of money from some of those special interests - drug companies, HMOs, lawyers, investment firms, real estate interests and contractors, among others."more
I wonder if him not voting against the Medicare buster bill had anything to do with those HMO kick backs...
And you had the chutzpa to smear Clark whose entire life is open for all to see


(#97) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/30/2004 09:40:24 AM EST

Reply

http://robbedvoter.forclark.com/story/2004/1/30/9319/54910
with quotes from transcript


(#96) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/30/2004 07:59:17 AM EST

Reply

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62318-2004Jan30.html
.
Moderator Tom Brokaw asked Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) why he had said it was a mistake for Democrats to focus on the South during previous national elections. "I never said Democrats made a mistake," Kerry replied. "I never said that at all."
But in a town hall meeting Monday in Hanover, N.H., in response to a question about electoral strategy, Kerry said, "Everyone always makes the mistake of looking South."


(#95) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/30/2004 07:39:32 AM EST

Reply

.
sfgate.com/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/01/29/WMDS.TMP
The front-runner, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, speaking Wednesday as he flew to St. Louis to campaign in the Missouri primary, said Kay's testimony called into question the integrity of American intelligence, and he urged the administration to come clean.
according to CNN yesterday, Kerry actually called for Tenet's resignation. Asked in the debate of Chenney's manipulation of intelligence - he hedged.
Clark in the same debate : do not blame the intelligence community, this is W's responsibility!
discussed here:
http://bartcopnation.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=11&topic_id=8756&mesg_id=875 6&page=


(#94) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/29/2004 04:51:50 PM EST

Reply

PNAC Project Director Contributes to Kerry
Mark Gerson is a project director at the Project for the New American Century (1) and a contributor to the Kerry campaign (2):
         GERSON, MARK L
         NEW YORK,NY 10017
         GERSON LEHRMAN GROUP
         6/30/2001
         $1,000
         Kerry, John
         GERSON, MARK L
         NEW YORK,NY 10017
         GERSON LEHRMAN GROUP
         6/30/2001
         $1,000
         Kerry, John
         ------------------
A Question:
One David Epstein, Office of Secretary of Defense, Net Assessment, is a "project participant" at PNAC (3).
Campaign filings show these contributions to the Kerry campaign (4):
         EPSTEIN, DAVID
         CAMBRIDGE,MA 02138
         PATTON BOGGS/SENIOR PARTNER
         6/30/2003
         $2,000
         Kerry, John
         EPSTEIN, DAVID
         CAMBRIDGE,MA 02138
         PATTON BOGGS/SENIOR PARTNER
         3/5/2003
         $2,000
         Kerry, John
         EPSTEIN, DAVID
         CAMBRIDGE,MA 02138
         PATTON BOGGS/SENIOR PARTNER
         8/1/2003
         $2,000
Note that these contributions exceed the legal limit.)
While these filings list Epstein as a senior partner with Patton Boggs, he is not listed on the Patton Boggs website.
Is the Epstein of the Office of Secretary of Defense and PNAC participant the same as the Epstein of Patton Boggs? The
Net is pretty well scrubbed of any mention of either Epstein. Can anybody confirm or deny they are one in the same?
         -------
Sources:

1.     http://www.newamericancentury.org/aboutpnac.htm
2.     http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.asp?NumOfThou=0&txtName=GERSON&txtState=%28all+stat es%29&txtZip=&txtEmploy=&txtCand=Kerry&txt2004=Y&txt2002=Y&txt2000=Y&Ord er=N

3.     http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
4.     http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.asp?NumOfThou=0&txtName=epste...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=22 3379


(#93) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/29/2004 02:15:16 AM EST

Reply

http://www.tnr.com/etc.mhtml?pid=1261
Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition ... to the early use of military force by the US against Iraq. I share your concerns. On January 11, I voted in favor of a resolution that would have insisted that economic sanctions be given more time to work and against a resolution giving the president the immediate authority to go to war."
--letter from Senator John Kerry to Wallace Carter of Newton Centre, Massachusetts, dated January 22 [1991
"Thank you very much for contacting me to express your support for the actions of President Bush in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. From the outset of the invasion, I have strongly and unequivocally supported President Bush's response to the crisis and the policy goals he has established with our military deployment in the Persian Gulf."
--Senator Kerry to Wallace Carter, January 31 [1991]


(#92) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/28/2004 04:21:24 PM EST

Reply

 
http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200401220835.asp
     As a senator with the responsibility to cast a vote on a variety of contentious issues, Kerry has had many opportunities to square off with the president. Yet an analysis of Kerry's 2003 Senate voting record shows that he did not show up for most of the Senate's confrontations with the White House.
The publication Congressional Quarterly examined 119 recorded votes held in 2003 in which the president had taken a position. CQ found that Kerry was present for just 28 percent of those votes. In contrast, Kerry's colleague from Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy, was present for 97 percent of the votes.
**
And we know some of them were Omnibus Bill (overtime), the Medicare hand grenade, The FCC media consolidation.


(#91) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/28/2004 03:20:56 PM EST

Parent | Reply

As for that talk with Kerry, Kerry refered to it Sunday morning, on Face the nation. He said he has a lot of respect for Clark, they cleared  the misunderstanding and the canpaign should.t be fought on that ground. And then he showed he lacks honor by allowing the same evening the 60 minutes interview (probably taped before) without editting or commentary. 2 days before the NH elections, to a 60 minutes audience Kerry let the lie out
     And that sums up his caracter - none.


(#90) (No rating)

by jerseyshore (Jerseyshore@clark,com) on 01/28/2004 09:45:16 AM EST

Rate this: - 1 2 3 4 5 + | Parent | Reply

"my son was a lieutenant and I was a lieutenant"




(#89) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/28/2004 07:00:26 AM EST

Reply

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0401/27/wbr.00.html
CLARK: Well, I think John Kerry did a fine job in Vietnam. I was there about the same time. I also was a junior officer in Vietnam. I was a company commander.
snip
BLITZER: Do you owe John Kerry a little bit of an apology for sort of that tone of what you said?
CLARK: I think that John Kerry and I have already had that discussion.
And it's very clear that -- my son was a lieutenant and I was a lieutenant. And no Democrat and no Republican will ever drive a wedge between me and our nation's veterans. It's just that simple.


(#88) (Rated 5.00/1)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/27/2004 09:15:56 AM EST

Reply

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/story/153468p-135093c.html
Kerry, Dick Short Names on Petitions
By MICHAEL R. BLOOD
DAILY NEWS POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT
Sen. John Kerry and Rep. Dick Gephardt were allowed on the New York
State primary ballot even though they did not file enough nominating
signatures to qualify, officials said yesterday.
The candidates took advantage of a secret political peace treaty
hammered out by Democratic state chairman Herman (Denny) Farrell in
which they agreed not to challenge each other's petitions." More
In related news, Clarkies gathered 43,000 signatures for Wesley Clark, well in excess of the 5,000 required.


(#87) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 10:10:48 PM EST

Reply

According to a new book - Warrior King - the case for impeaching GW Bush by John C Bonifaz and  John Conyers:
"In giving the President this authority," the Kerry said, "I expect him to fulfill the commitments he has made to the American people in recent days - to work with the United Nations Security Council to adopt a new resolution setting out tough and immediate inspection requirements, and to act with our allies at our side if we have to disarm Saddam Hussein by force."
"If he fails to do so," Senator Kerry continued, "I will be the first to speak out."
Bonifaz goes on:
Senator Kerry broke that promise ... In the crucial days after the president withdrew his efforts to gain United Nations support for his war and before the president launched his invasion, Senator Kerry remained silent.
http://slate.msn.com/id/2094399/


(#86) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 06:03:44 PM EST

Reply

MATTHEWS: There are two men in this campaign who are running who have military background. You've got a couple of stars, medals and so does General Clark. Compare you with him.
KERRY: Well I have great respect for General Clark, but he has been a military man all his life. He has been a general.
MATTHEWS: Is he a headquarters guy and you're a field guy?
KERRY: He has generally been. No, he was in the field at one point, but very little in his career. By and large General Clark has not had the breadth of experience in foreign policy and I think there's an enormous difference between us. I have spent 35 years-you know when I came back from Vietnam, I stood up and fought against the war. I've...
MATTHEWS: Well how did he get a Silver Star if he wasn't in action?
KERRY: I said he was. I said he had...
MATTHEWS: Right.
KERRY: ... one brief, I believe, tour in the field like that, and then he as a general. Look, I'm not disrespectful of General Clark, but there's a difference between us in the levels of our experience. There's also a difference in the values that we fought for through a lifetime. When General Clark was voting for Richard Nixon and voting for Ronald Reagan, I was fighting against both of them. When General Clark was in the military, I was standing up and fighting against Noriega, against the illegal war in Central America.
I have served on the Narcotics Terrorism Committee as chairman. I wrote a book about-called "The New War". I have been involved in opening the Philippines and getting rid of Marcos and bringing Cory Aquino to power. I personally negotiated in Cambodia in order to try to get the tribunals for.
http://msnbc.msn.com/?id=3053419


(#85) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 05:25:13 PM EST

Reply

Presidential candidate John F. Kerry is bashing President Bush's policies on Iraq, education and civil liberties. What he rarely mentions, however, is that his Senate votes helped make all three possible.

That these lawmakers voted with Bush on key issues is complicating their bids to win their party's nomination, as fellow Democrats demand explanations. As the campaign progresses, it also could make it harder for them to draw sharp distinctions with Bush on what are shaping up as among the biggest issues of the 2004 campaign, according to political strategists.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A62830-2003Sep11 172;Found=true


(#84) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 04:30:57 PM EST

Reply

He criticized President Bush for withdrawing from the Kyoto global warming treaty in 2001. "You don't just walk away from a treaty [negotiated by] 160 countries over 10 years," he said. But in 1997, Kerry voted for a resolution, which passed 95-0, saying the United States "should not be a signatory" to the treaty.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/26/opinion/main595936.shtml


(#83) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 12:08:50 PM EST

Reply

    Dec 2003    Nov 2003    Oct 2003    Sep 2003
For Immediate Release
Date: December 3, 2003
Clark Campaign Response to Senator Kerry's Fondness for James Baker
http://clark04.com/press/release/103/
Clark Campaign Communications Director Matt Bennett issued the following statement in response to Senator Kerry's comments today at the Council on Foreign Relations:
"Senator Kerry's suggestion that he might use Bush family consigliere James Baker as a special envoy to the Middle East is offensive. Baker, who was the driving force behind George W. Bush's theft of the 2000 election in the Florida recount, helped to disenfranchise thousands of voters.
We liked it better when Senator Kerry was calling Baker's Florida operation 'thuggism.' If Kerry wants a former Secretary of State who headed a recount effort in Florida, let's stay away from political thugs and go with Warren Christopher."


(#82) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 11:24:54 AM EST

Reply

On Sunday, Kerry asked Dean to "stop running a negative campaign," even as he suggested that Dean can't get elected. During door-to-door campaigning Sunday, Kerry said his rival is weak on foreign policy issues, and favors higher taxes for middle-class voters. "The Republicans will just kill us on this," Kerry said. "Between foreign policy and taxes, I think it is a serious problem."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4060197/


(#81) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 05:39:55 AM EST

Reply

Kerry's Senate Career Short on Law-Making
Associated Press
Monday, July 21, 2003
WASHINGTON -- Asked what he has accomplished during his 19 years in the Senate, Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (search) gives a lengthy answer but has a short list of laws that bear his name.

His response prompted an examination of his record. Kerry has been the lead sponsor of eight bills that have become law. Two are related to his work on the Senate panel on oceans and fisheries - a 1994 law to protect marine mammals from being taken during commercial fishing and a 1991 measure for the National Sea Grant College Program Act (search), which finances marine research.
In 1999, President Clinton signed his bill providing grants to support small businesses owned by women.
The rest of the laws he saw passed were ceremonial - renaming a federal building, designating Vietnam Veterans Memorial 10th Anniversary Day, National POW/MIA Recognition Day (search) and World Population Awareness Week in two separate years.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,92477,00.html


(#80) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 05:35:47 AM EST

Reply

Kerry Said "If You Don't Believe In The U.N. ... Or You Don't Believe Saddam Hussein Is A Threat With Nuclear Weapons, Then You Shouldn't Vote For Me." (Ronald Brownstein, "On Iraq, Kerry Appears Either Torn Or Shrewd," Los Angeles Times, 1/31/03)


(#79) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 05:27:36 AM EST

Reply

Attack
Quote: "What we need now is not just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States" (Boston Globe, April 3, 2003)
rebuff
Charge: Then-GOP Chairman Marc Racicot said Kerry "crossed a grave line when he dared to suggest the replacement of America's commander in chief at a time when America is at war." Racicot said Kerry's remark was "designed to further Sen. Kerry's political ambitions at a time when the lives of America's sons and daughters are at stake." John Podhoretz of the New York Post accused Kerry of drawing an "implicit parallel ... between Saddam Hussein and George W. Bush.
multiple foldings
Kerry issued four responses to his critics: 1) "It is possible that the word 'regime change' is too harsh. Perhaps it is." 2) It was just a "quip." 3) "That's what a presidential race is about. It's about changing the administration." 4) "I'm not going to let the likes of Tom DeLay question my patriotism, which I fought for and bled for in order to have the right to speak out."
http://slate.msn.com/id/2089125/


(#78) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 05:15:31 AM EST

Reply

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/26/politics/26LETT.html
That may be why Mr. Bush chose to swipe at Mr. Kerry in some off-the-record jokes in a speech on Saturday night at the Alfalfa Club dinner, an annual banquet for Washington's political upper class.
"I think Kerry's position on the war in Iraq is politically brilliant," Mr. Bush told the Alfalfa Club guests at the Capitol Hilton, according to a guest who heard the remarks. "In New Hampshire yesterday, he stated he had voted for the war, adding that he was strongly opposed to it."
Also, I'd like to keep this a record of relevant reasons not to vote for Kerry. Any comments to me, this blog, opinions - mail them to me, or express them elsewhere. If you have substantial additions to this, please do. It's not a chit-chat, it's a record. Thank you.




(#76) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 05:41:15 PM EST

Reply

On the omnibus bill, a Kerry supporter brought up specifics:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=18 6510#190486
Here are the critical votes, the cloture votes
Tuesday, rejected(which is good): http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&sessio n=2&vote=00001
Thursday, passed (bad): http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&sessio n=2&vote=00002
The swing voters who went over to the dark side between Tuesday and Thursday:
Bingaman (D-NM)
Breaux (D-LA)
Carper (D-DE)
Dayton (D-MN)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Nelson (D-NE)
Reid (D-NV)
Schumer (D-NY)
Final passage (more or less irrelevant): http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&sessio n=2&vote=00003
So, in the final passage, the difference was larger: 65 to 28 - but still the non-voters were:
Baucus (D-MT) (having surgery)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Domenici (R-NM)    Edwards (D-NC)
Hagel (R-NE)
Kerry (D-MA)
    Lieberman (D-CT)


(#75) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 09:03:32 AM EST

Reply

http://Blog.forclark.com/story/2004/1/13/104013/080
> Two senior Democratic senators, Robert Byrd
> of West Virginia and Ted Kennedy of
> Massachusetts, this week proposed separate
> bills on the matter. Byrd's would require President
> Bush (news - web sites) to seek a fresh vote
> in the U.N. Security Council before attacking Iraq;
> Kennedy's would require new votes in
> Congress before doing so.
snip
The bills aren't supported by any of the
> four Democratic members of Congress running for
> president: Sens. John Kerry of
> Massachusetts, Joe Lieberman (news - web sites) of
> Connecticut and John Edwards of North
> Carolina, and Rep. Richard Gephardt (news, bio,
> voting record) of Missouri.


(#74) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 07:34:54 AM EST

Reply

http://robbedvoter.forclark.com/story/2004/1/25/61128/0616


(#73) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 07:33:39 AM EST

Reply

http://robbedvoter.forclark.com/story/2004/1/25/63853/2133


(#72) (Rated 5.00/1)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 07:23:58 AM EST

Reply

http://makethemaccountable.com/podvin/more/040124_StopCrying.htm
1/24/04
"STOP CRYING IN YOUR TEACUPS"
By David Podvin
"Stop crying in your teacups. It isn't going to change. Get over it."
That was the response of John Kerry to a liberal who condemned the theft of the presidency by George W. Bush. If the sentiment sounds familiar, that's because it isn't original. Kerry borrowed his words from America's vapid conservative posse for whom chanting the phrase "Get over it" constitutes a dazzling display of wit. More...


(#71) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 07:12:11 AM EST

Reply

KING: General Clark, we have another veteran with us tonight, Senator Robert Dole. You may know Senator Dole.
CLARK: Hello, Senator.
KING: Bob, do you have a question for the General?
DOLE: No, I think, you know, it's a tough -- you indicated it's a tough business you're in. Looking at it from my perspective, it seemed to me that John Kerry is a big winner tonight, not just in Iowa but also New Hampshire. I know you can't worry about Kerry's campaign but just as an observer I think he's going to benefit a great deal in New Hampshire. Somebody has to lose. Now, of course, you don't want it to be you but I think it may be you.
CLARK: Senator, let's be honest about this thing. The American people want a change in leadership. They're looking for a candidate that can lead on all of the issues. I'm the only person in this race who has ever done foreign policy and I know all of the domestic issues, too. It's one thing to talk about it, but if you think of foreign policy it's like major league baseball. I'm the only person who has ever played it and I pitch a 95 mile an hour fastball. I've negotiated peace agreements, I've won a war. I'm prepared to help the country that's why I'm running. I'm not worried about John Kerry or anybody else.
DOLE: We're not -- we're discussing here as friends but I think just politically you just became a colonel instead of a general...
CLARK: Well, I don't think that's at all -- Senator, with all due respect, he's a lieutenant and I'm a general. You got to get your facts on this. He was a lieutenant in Vietnam. I've done all of the big leadership. I respect John Kerry and I like him but what I'm going to say it's up to the voters of New Hampshire, South Carolina, New Mexico, Arizona, Oklahoma, all across this country, and that's what democracy is about. It's your job to handicap the race. It's my job to go out here and do the best thing I can do for the United States of America and that's what I'm going to do.
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0401/19/lkl.00.html


(#70) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 05:32:47 AM EST

Parent | Reply

http://home.comcast.net/~brianmcw/negate2.jpg



by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/24/2004 09:11:57 PM EST



But on many issues, Mr. Kerry has often struck more nuanced, politically cautious positions than those broad rankings might suggest. After the Republicans took control of Congress in 1994, Mr. Kerry proclaimed himself "delighted with seeing an institutional shake-up because I think we need one." A few months later, with President Bill Clinton locked in combat with the Republicans, Mr. Kerry voiced some doubts in a closed-door meeting of senators about the wisdom of trying to raise the minimum wage. And as Mr. Kennedy later recalled, he told Mr. Kerry, "If you're not for raising the minimum wage, you don't deserve to call yourself a Democrat."
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/25/politics/campaign/25RECO.html?pagewanted=1&hp


(
(#61) (Rated 5.00/2)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/24/2004 07:51:13 PM EST



Cheering GOP taking control of Congress
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/25/politics/campaign/25RECO.html?pagewanted=1&hp
After the Republicans took control of Congress in 1994, Mr. Kerry proclaimed himself "delighted with seeing an institutional shake-up because I think we need one."


Friday, January 23, 2004

Faux psy-ops MO - good cop turning bad Story score: · Add to my Hotlist
By Robbedvoter [Add to my Buddy List]
Posted to Robbedvoter's weblog (Soapbox) on Fri Jan 23rd, 2004 at 07:16:14 AM EST


The Moderate independent did a great job explaining the Faux set up against the democrats last night:

http://www.moderateindependent.com/v2i2debate.htm

The only thing to add to their perfect article is personal knowledge:
In 2001, against my advice, NYC activists put together a demonstration against Faux. A lot of tricks were played on us by Roger ailes, some of them chronicled by me at the time here:
http://www.legitgov.org/front_foxnews.htm
What happened afterwards however is more relevant. Cheryl Guttman, the organizer of the event was invited on Insanity and Coma to talk about  the protest. In the green room, she was asked if she watches the show and she said "no".
   Once on the set, Hannity was passive. It was Colmes, the assumed good cop who ripped into Cheryl: "How can you protest us without watching?" They barely allowed Cheryl to respond.
   The point was : we were protesting Faux news - and especially their biased coverage of the coup, not some itty bitty cable show for freepers. (I made this point in a correspondence with Coma and he got so mad he wrote back 12 times!).(Colmes  endorsed Kerry- that should help)
    Which brings me to last night. One would think they'd have Britt Hume, Chenney's buddy confront the general. Instead, they had Jennings - the nice guy from ABC do it.
   Why was Jennings even there, on the Faux set up?
Previously, Jennings had done a beautiful profile of Clark.
So, after having Bob Dole bark at Clark, Roger Ailes thought the Cheryl method should work: surprise the enemy with unexpected source of attack, expected ally turn against you method.
   Clever, Ailes, but this man did strategy for a living. Didn't exactly phased him. Now he has a new hook to bring disaffected deanies in, and W's AWOL is fair game.  Michael Moore has a new platform and who was not impressed by Clark's defense of Moore? Nicely done. Next?
Faux psy-ops MO - good cop turning bad Story score: · Add to my Hotlist
By Robbedvoter [Add to my Buddy List]
Posted to Robbedvoter's weblog (Soapbox) on Fri Jan 23rd, 2004 at 07:16:14 AM EST


The Moderate independent did a great job explaining the Faux set up against the democrats last night:

http://www.moderateindependent.com/v2i2debate.htm

The only thing to add to their perfect article is personal knowledge:
In 2001, against my advice, NYC activists put together a demonstration against Faux. A lot of tricks were played on us by Roger ailes, some of them chronicled by me at the time here:
http://www.legitgov.org/front_foxnews.htm
What happened afterwards however is more relevant. Cheryl Guttman, the organizer of the event was invited on Insanity and Coma to talk about  the protest. In the green room, she was asked if she watches the show and she said "no".
   Once on the set, Hannity was passive. It was Colmes, the assumed good cop who ripped into Cheryl: "How can you protest us without watching?" They barely allowed Cheryl to respond.
   The point was : we were protesting Faux news - and especially their biased coverage of the coup, not some itty bitty cable show for freepers. (I made this point in a correspondence with Coma and he got so mad he wrote back 12 times!).(Colmes  endorsed Kerry- that should help)
    Which brings me to last night. One would think they'd have Britt Hume, Chenney's buddy confront the general. Instead, they had Jennings - the nice guy from ABC do it.
   Why was Jennings even there, on the Faux set up?
Previously, Jennings had done a beautiful profile of Clark.
So, after having Bob Dole bark at Clark, Roger Ailes thought the Cheryl method should work: surprise the enemy with unexpected source of attack, expected ally turn against you method.
   Clever, Ailes, but this man did strategy for a living. Didn't exactly phased him. Now he has a new hook to bring disaffected deanies in, and W's AWOL is fair game.  Michael Moore has a new platform and who was not impressed by Clark's defense of Moore? Nicely done. Next?
Faux psy-ops MO - good cop turning bad Story score: · Add to my Hotlist
By Robbedvoter [Add to my Buddy List]
Posted to Robbedvoter's weblog (Soapbox) on Fri Jan 23rd, 2004 at 07:16:14 AM EST


The Moderate independent did a great job explaining the Faux set up against the democrats last night:

http://www.moderateindependent.com/v2i2debate.htm

The only thing to add to their perfect article is personal knowledge:
In 2001, against my advice, NYC activists put together a demonstration against Faux. A lot of tricks were played on us by Roger ailes, some of them chronicled by me at the time here:
http://www.legitgov.org/front_foxnews.htm
What happened afterwards however is more relevant. Cheryl Guttman, the organizer of the event was invited on Insanity and Coma to talk about  the protest. In the green room, she was asked if she watches the show and she said "no".
   Once on the set, Hannity was passive. It was Colmes, the assumed good cop who ripped into Cheryl: "How can you protest us without watching?" They barely allowed Cheryl to respond.
   The point was : we were protesting Faux news - and especially their biased coverage of the coup, not some itty bitty cable show for freepers. (I made this point in a correspondence with Coma and he got so mad he wrote back 12 times!).(Colmes  endorsed Kerry- that should help)
    Which brings me to last night. One would think they'd have Britt Hume, Chenney's buddy confront the general. Instead, they had Jennings - the nice guy from ABC do it.
   Why was Jennings even there, on the Faux set up?
Previously, Jennings had done a beautiful profile of Clark.
So, after having Bob Dole bark at Clark, Roger Ailes thought the Cheryl method should work: surprise the enemy with unexpected source of attack, expected ally turn against you method.
   Clever, Ailes, but this man did strategy for a living. Didn't exactly phased him. Now he has a new hook to bring disaffected deanies in, and W's AWOL is fair game.  Michael Moore has a new platform and who was not impressed by Clark's defense of Moore? Nicely done. Next?

Thursday, January 22, 2004

Kerry and the Syria Accountability Act

By JasonFromWaltham [Add to my Buddy List]
Posted to JasonFromWaltham's weblog (Soapbox) on Thu Jan 22nd, 2004 at 06:00:01 PM EST

http://jasonfromwaltham.forclark.com/story/2004/1/22/1801/68576
Below you will find the letter Kerry sent me when I urged him to stand against the Syria Accountability Act back in October of 2003. I am a Kerry constituent and have seen how much he has neglected MA since running for President. Feel free to flame or email me. This is the Kerry I know.
 
I am 28. Syria has been an issue all my life. Why did he give THIS administration the tools to become increasingly belligerent against them? Why now?

The voting record on this "Act" can be found at

http://capwiz.com/c-span/issues/votes/?votenum=445&chamber=S&congress=1081

Edwards voted in favor of it. Lieberman and Kerry missed the vote. At least Edwards took a position.


Text follows bellow

----------------------------------------------------------


October 23, 2003

Dear Mr. XXXX:
Thank you for your letter regarding the Syria Accountability Act.  I appreciate knowing your views on this important issue.
As you may know, Syria has an extensive history of human rights violations, connections with terrorism, arms proliferation, previous involvement in narcotics trafficking, and illegal occupation of Lebanon.


The Syrian government has historically ruled by methods such as torture, arbitrary arrest and detention, prolonged detention without trial, and limits on freedom of speech and the press.  Since 1979, the State Department has regularly placed Syria on the list of countries that
support international terrorism, and has also accused Syria of pursuing a nuclear weapons program.
I supported talks between Secretary of State Colin Powell and Syrian President Bashar al-Asad, which took place on May 3, 2003.  At this time, Secretary Powell iterated that Syria must stop supporting terrorist organizations and harboring escapees from Iraq.  Since the meeting,
Secretary Powell has said that Syria has taken some limited steps towards reform, but that these limited steps are not enough.  Like Secretary Powell, I am concerned that Syria is not whole-heartedly working towards meeting U.S. demands.  We must ensure that Syria does not acquire and
distribute additional weapons thereby exasperating tensions in the Middle East, raising potential threats to Israel, and undermining arms control.
I cosponsored the Syria Accountability Act to hold Syria responsible for its support for terrorism, occupation of Lebanon, and possible pursuit of weapons of mass destruction.  I am hopeful that substantial Congressional support for the Accountability Act will influence Syria to meet the demands raised by Colin Powell in May in a more timely and transparent manner.  The Accountability Act includes bans on the export of military items and of dual use items to Syria, and requires the president to impose at least two additional bans, chosen from the six included in the Accountability Act.  The Accountability Act does not give the president the option of prohibiting the U.S. from exporting food and medicine to Syria.
Thank you again for taking the time to share your views with me on this important matter.
Sincerely,
John F. Kerry
United States Senator
 
Kerry and the Syria Accountability Act | 6 comments | Group threads together | Post A Comment
(#6) (No rating)

by JasonFromWaltham (jasondavis@massforclark.com) on 01/22/2004 07:11:41 PM EST

Rate this: - 1 2 3 4 5 + | Reply

In the house both Kucinich and Gephardt skipped the vote too.
http://capwiz.com/c-span/issues/votes/?votenum=543&chamber=H&congress=1081


(#5) (No rating)

by JasonFromWaltham (jasondavis@massforclark.com) on 01/22/2004 07:01:20 PM EST

Rate this: - 1 2 3 4 5 + | Parent | Reply

Absolutley. People make fun of Teddy all the time, he does not deserve it. I may not always agree with him, but at least he cares enough about me as a constiuent to vote and take a stand and fight once in a while.  


FYI - FAUX JUST HAD A RESEARCHER ON (#4) (Rated 5.00/1)

by grannyfran on 01/22/2004 06:53:43 PM EST

Rate this: - 1 2 3 4 5 + | Reply

discussing Dem candidates voting records.  Of  the 119 bills which Bush has supported or endorsed, Kerry only cast a vote 28% of the time!  I don't remember the exact figure, but Edwards and Lieberman did a little better -- around the 50% range.  Gephardt was the worst -- 19%.  They've all been too busy running for president to be on the Senate floor and do their jobs.
In contrast, Teddy Kennedy was present to vote on 93% of the 119 issues.  I guess this shows who's been minding the store and kind of dismisses their "While Wes Clark was busy being a Republican, I've been fighting for Americans against Bush and the neo-imperialists and for Democratic values" arguments.
 


(#3) (Rated 5.00/1)

by JasonFromWaltham (jasondavis@massforclark.com) on 01/22/2004 06:27:39 PM EST

Rate this: - 1 2 3 4 5 + | Reply

This one I WANTLahane to spread all over the place.


(#2) (No rating)

by JasonFromWaltham (jasondavis@massforclark.com) on 01/22/2004 06:18:16 PM EST

Rate this: - 1 2 3 4 5 + | Parent | Reply

Thanks. I just wish all of MA knew how many of our "democrats" aren't really living up to what they say they are doing. Since joining the party I have needed to drink heavily to keep my sanity. :D


(#1) (Rated 5.00/1)

by TOTALLY COMMITTED on 01/22/2004 06:11:17 PM EST

Rate this: - 1 2 3 4 5 + | Reply

Go get him, Jason! What a pr*ck!

Wednesday, January 21, 2004

Democratic meet-up was a blast!

By Robbedvoter [Add to my Buddy List]
Posted to Robbedvoter's weblog (Soapbox) on Wed Jan 21st, 2004 at 10:02:08 PM EST


It took place at a bar downtown named Gatsby. This was my first one - I was inspired to go by Beatrice's story about the one last month which I blogged here
http://newyorkcity.forclark.com/story/2003/12/19/174755/34

After the ABC coverage it had last tme, the room was packed! The hosts said there had to be at least 50 people - I think we were more. They were beaming, because 2 months before that there were only 7.

One of the hosts spoke a little about his visit to the Senate : you are not supposed ti carry weapons - they check you, but in the gift shop they carry pen knives"
They talked with Dick Durbin., Byron Durgan . The consensus was that W is vulnerable but they have a killer machine that shouldn't be underestimated and there is a big fight between the neocons and the Powell faction. Not really news for Clarkies but these were undecided people considering Kerry (I did enlighten them).

Anytime I'd hear Kerry mentioned (2-3 times - tentatively) I'd say - "so you don't care about the war, I take it" "Of course I do! I am against it" So, I'd point to my button and say: then why not go with the guy who stands for the same things as you do?"

Clarkies were over 50% in the crowded room - many of them new.
;We knew each other to a great extent - and were swiping NH stories. Some new Clarkies were about to go nest and I enjoyed teling them it was going to be a life transforming experience.

I told them of CCN - they were surprised to find out about it and very eager to join.
"How do you know all these things? I'd get asked. CCN - I spend 12 hours a day there and barely keep up.

If there were any deanies in the room, they didn't dare declare themselves as such. I was searching them to hand Michael More letter to them. I ended up giving it to undecideds.
Some Kuchinich people came to capitalize on the dean blow-out and had Kuchinich vs Dean literature. I added Clark stuff and bars next to it.

CNN was there filming - my purple boa had a few close ups tonight!
At one point the CNN person put a microphone on our table and advised us to ignore it. So, i started to talk about the drudge fiasco and how we set the record straight. Nest thing, I brought up CNN's misleading article about Clark's tax olan today (omitting the elimination of taxes up to 50,000 income). At that point the microphone was snatched back.
     I know better than to expect any exposure from CNN - but I had a little vindication tonight.

All in all, Clarkies looked good tonight in NYC. We were nice, not rude, and cute as butons as we all are. Brilliant, outstanding and very modest...;-)
 
Democratic meet-up was a blast! | 2 comments | Group threads together | Post A Comment | Edit Story
Way to go! (#2) (No rating)

by Anne (Anne at forclark dot com) on 01/21/2004 10:08:52 PM EST

Rate this: - 1 2 3 4 5 + | Reply

Thanks for the story!  CNN won't bother to report the facts, that's why we have to get them out there.
Wes will win!


(#1) (No rating)

by Linda Grinaker (linda4140[at sign]yahoo.com) on 01/21/2004 09:22:29 PM EST

Rate this: - 1 2 3 4 5 + | Reply

Ha! Ha!  Way to go!
Democratic meet-up was a blast!

By Robbedvoter [Add to my Buddy List]
Posted to Robbedvoter's weblog (Soapbox) on Wed Jan 21st, 2004 at 10:02:08 PM EST


It took place at a bar downtown named Gatsby. This was my first one - I was inspired to go by Beatrice's story about the one last month which I blogged here
http://newyorkcity.forclark.com/story/2003/12/19/174755/34

After the ABC coverage it had last tme, the room was packed! The hosts said there had to be at least 50 people - I think we were more. They were beaming, because 2 months before that there were only 7.

One of the hosts spoke a little about his visit to the Senate : you are not supposed ti carry weapons - they check you, but in the gift shop they carry pen knives"
They talked with Dick Durbin., Byron Durgan . The consensus was that W is vulnerable but they have a killer machine that shouldn't be underestimated and there is a big fight between the neocons and the Powell faction. Not really news for Clarkies but these were undecided people considering Kerry (I did enlighten them).

Anytime I'd hear Kerry mentioned (2-3 times - tentatively) I'd say - "so you don't care about the war, I take it" "Of course I do! I am against it" So, I'd point to my button and say: then why not go with the guy who stands for the same things as you do?"

Clarkies were over 50% in the crowded room - many of them new.
;We knew each other to a great extent - and were swiping NH stories. Some new Clarkies were about to go nest and I enjoyed teling them it was going to be a life transforming experience.

I told them of CCN - they were surprised to find out about it and very eager to join.
"How do you know all these things? I'd get asked. CCN - I spend 12 hours a day there and barely keep up.

If there were any deanies in the room, they didn't dare declare themselves as such. I was searching them to hand Michael More letter to them. I ended up giving it to undecideds.
Some Kuchinich people came to capitalize on the dean blow-out and had Kuchinich vs Dean literature. I added Clark stuff and bars next to it.

CNN was there filming - my purple boa had a few close ups tonight!
At one point the CNN person put a microphone on our table and advised us to ignore it. So, i started to talk about the drudge fiasco and how we set the record straight. Nest thing, I brought up CNN's misleading article about Clark's tax olan today (omitting the elimination of taxes up to 50,000 income). At that point the microphone was snatched back.
     I know better than to expect any exposure from CNN - but I had a little vindication tonight.

All in all, Clarkies looked good tonight in NYC. We were nice, not rude, and cute as butons as we all are. Brilliant, outstanding and very modest...;-)
 
Democratic meet-up was a blast! | 2 comments | Group threads together | Post A Comment | Edit Story
Way to go! (#2) (No rating)

by Anne (Anne at forclark dot com) on 01/21/2004 10:08:52 PM EST

Rate this: - 1 2 3 4 5 + | Reply

Thanks for the story!  CNN won't bother to report the facts, that's why we have to get them out there.
Wes will win!


(#1) (No rating)

by Linda Grinaker (linda4140[at sign]yahoo.com) on 01/21/2004 09:22:29 PM EST

Rate this: - 1 2 3 4 5 + | Reply

Ha! Ha!  Way to go!
Why I support Clark (from Gore to Clark)

By Robbedvoter [Add to my Buddy List]
Posted to Robbedvoter's weblog (Soapbox) on Wed Jan 21st, 2004 at 09:07:21 AM EST


As my handle  indicates, I am one of those still crying in my teacup over the stolen election (sorry, mr Kerry, democracy matters!)
  I spent the better part of these past 3 years hoping for a rematch Gore vs Bush where justice would prevail.
  Even after Gore's whiny bow out ("I wanna but they wouldn't let me, so I guess Bush is legitimate now") I still insisted in my only hope for the future and attempted to draft him.
      The reality shock came in April, with the moveon primaries. I had voted for Gore in the "other" category, along with 500 other people. meanwhile, in the same category, we got creamed by this unknown named Clark - with 5000 votes. I was pissed.
   Having sworn off CNN after their post coup 2000 coverage, I had no idea who this Clark person was - and how dare he steal our thunder?
As Al Gore kept telling the media how amused he was about our efforts just as his aides were egging us on, I became truly disgusted.
I expressed my disappointment with his more recent  actions in this letter:
http://writers.forclark.com/story/2003/12/10/91341/687
I started reading about Clark and it was this passage from the Esquire profile that first got my attention:

From the Esquire profile:

He was conducting what he calls "Socratic dialogue" that explored every decision the officers made, as well as every mistake. The idea was not to punish officers for their mistakes nor to second-guess their decisions. The idea was not even to hold officers accountable for their mistakes and decisions. The idea was to encourage officers to hold themselves accountable. The idea was to create a culture of accountability in which the Army's enormous investment in training and education could take root and flourish, and in which every soldier counted.

http://www.esquire.com/features/articles/2003/030801_mfe_clark_6.html

Wow! A Socratic war hero!
I was immediately hooked, but didn't dare hope that such a brilliant man will enter the race (I just "broke up with a draft relationship)
     So, I quietly hoped, gathered materials, then joined the draft movement on the rebound...what a journey this has been so far!

    Ever since, I KNOW I am part of history. I know that not only am I part of the making of a president, but also paving the way for a future that I am hoping for - the Star Trek vs Star Wars scenario.

   
Why I support Clark (from Gore to Clark) Story score: · Add to my Hotlist
By Robbedvoter [Add to my Buddy List]
Posted to Robbedvoter's weblog (Soapbox) on Wed Jan 21st, 2004 at 09:07:21 AM EST


As my handle  indicates, I am one of those still crying in my teacup over the stolen election (sorry, mr Kerry, democracy matters!)
  I spent the better part of these past 3 years hoping for a rematch Gore vs Bush where justice would prevail.
  Even after Gore's whiny bow out ("I wanna but they wouldn't let me, so I guess Bush is legitimate now") I still insisted in my only hope for the future and attempted to draft him.
      The reality shock came in April, with the moveon primaries. I had voted for Gore in the "other" category, along with 500 other people. meanwhile, in the same category, we got creamed by this unknown named Clark - with 5000 votes. I was pissed.
   Having sworn off CNN after their post coup 2000 coverage, I had no idea who this Clark person was - and how dare he steal our thunder?
As Al Gore kept telling the media how amused he was about our efforts just as his aides were egging us on, I became truly disgusted.
I expressed my disappointment with his more recent  actions in this letter:
http://writers.forclark.com/story/2003/12/10/91341/687
I started reading about Clark and it was this passage from the Esquire profile that first got my attention:

From the Esquire profile:

He was conducting what he calls "Socratic dialogue" that explored every decision the officers made, as well as every mistake. The idea was not to punish officers for their mistakes nor to second-guess their decisions. The idea was not even to hold officers accountable for their mistakes and decisions. The idea was to encourage officers to hold themselves accountable. The idea was to create a culture of accountability in which the Army's enormous investment in training and education could take root and flourish, and in which every soldier counted.

http://www.esquire.com/features/articles/2003/030801_mfe_clark_6.html

Wow! A Socratic war hero!
I was immediately hooked, but didn't dare hope that such a brilliant man will enter the race (I just "broke up with a draft relationship)
     So, I quietly hoped, gathered materials, then joined the draft movement on the rebound...what a journey this has been so far!

    Ever since, I KNOW I am part of history. I know that not only am I part of the making of a president, but also paving the way for a future that I am hoping for - the Star Trek vs Star Wars scenario.

   

Tuesday, January 20, 2004

What about this Edwards guy?

By Robbedvoter [Add to my Buddy List]
Posted to Robbedvoter's weblog (Soapbox) on Tue Jan 20th, 2004 at 02:36:11 PM EST


Date: November 11, 2003
Clark Communications Director questions John Edwards retaining Hugh Shelton.
http://clark04.com/press/release/071/
Honorable John Edwards
Edwards for President
PO Box 300034
Raleigh, NC 27622

Dear Senator Edwards:

I'm simply astounded that you have retained General Hugh Shelton as an adviser to your presidential campaign. This choice undermines the spirit of civility that you have urged your fellow candidates to uphold. Just this September, you said: "We need to be really careful that our anger is not directed at each other." Maybe you should share that advice with your own campaign team.

General Shelton has engaged in precisely the type of politics as usual mud-slinging that you profess to abhor: he initiated what has become a smear campaign that the Republicans have gleefully taken up. And his character assassination was the worst type: General Shelton leveled charges about "integrity" and "character," and then refused to back up his charge with an ounce of evidence or a shred of substantiation. Attacks like these have no place in campaigns, or in any public discourse. You should insist that General Shelton either repudiate his attacks or come forward and provide proof for what he said.

Your association with General Shelton is also curious given your position of support for the war in Kosovo. As you know, by waging war against Slobodan Milosevic in Kosovo, we saved 1.5 million Albanians from ethnic cleansing, all without losing a single American life. Have you changed your mind about this operation? Do you now think we should have refused to stop the genocide and given Milosevic free reign in the region, as your adviser apparently believes?

By associating with General Shelton on this campaign, you seem to have given in to the negative politics that you say you have risen above. I hope that throughout the campaign you will maintain the high level of dialogue that you have insisted on for others and that you will address this matter promptly.

Sincerely,

Matt Bennett
Communications Director
Clark for President

 
What about this Edwards guy? | 30 comments | Group threads together | Post A Comment | Edit Story
(#30) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 02/10/2004 02:37:27 PM EST

Reply

http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/04/sp_politics_clark021004.htm
Silver Spring, Md.: Hi, Wesley. I am a big fan of your father and Sen. Edwards. I believe it will be difficult of Kerry to win the election in November. I do not believe that a lot of southern voters will warm up to Kerry by November. If we have learned anything the last 30 years, Democrats need to win some southern states to win. It seems the south is divided between your father and Edwards. This morning, Donna Brazile described your father and Edwards as southerners "drinking from the same straw" and implied that one should drop out in the next day or two. Do you believe this assessment is correct?
Wesley Clark Jr.: No. There two very different men. Edwards is a lawyer with four years experience in the Senate whereas dad has spent a lifetime devoted to public service, has administered social programs in the Army for 34 years, has negotiated a peace treaty, has won a war, has been a businessman, has a masters degree in economics and has personal relationships with most of the heads of state in Europe and Latin America. The only similarity is that they both have a southern drawl.


(#29) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 02/07/2004 06:50:45 AM EST

Parent | Reply

It was a Wellstone amendment Edwards voted down - with the GOP!
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&sessio n=1&vote=00314#position
 
YEAs
Abraham (R-MI)
Allard (R-CO)
Ashcroft (R-MO)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Campbell (R-CO)
Chafee, J. (R-RI)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Coverdell (R-GA)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeWine (R-OH)
Domenici (R-NM)
Edwards (D-NC)
Enzi (R-WY)
Fitzgerald (R-IL)
Frist (R-TN)
Gorton (R-WA)
Gramm (R-TX)
Grams (R-MN)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Helms (R-NC)
Hutchinson (R-AR)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Mack (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nickles (R-OK)
Roberts (R-KS)
Roth (R-DE)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-NH)
Smith (R-OR)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thompson (R-TN)
Thurmond (R-SC)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)


(#28) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 02/06/2004 07:54:07 PM EST

Reply

Rate this: - 1 2 3 4 5 + | Reply
On October 6, 1999, John Edwards Was the Only Democrat to Vote Against Closing Corporate Loopholes to Prevent VA Cuts. Here's what some other Democrats had to say about the 1999 vote:
The sponsor of the amendment, Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), said the amendment was necessary to prevent "a meat ax approach to governing," and underlying legislation that "cut indiscriminately." He also said: "We all know the military is having a problem recruiting new members and getting new recruits to join branches. Would we want to discourage that effort even though we are having a problem filling those important positions that we must have to protect ourselves? I think not."
Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) said the amendment was necessary to "provide for the basics of this country - the national defense, to make sure the men and women in uniform are treated humanely and they have not only good assignments but are adequately compensated for the service they give to our country.... I sincerely hope this idea of an across-the-board cut is rejected."
And here is a supporting link:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&sessio n=1&vote=00314#position


(#27) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 02/06/2004 02:54:43 PM EST

Reply

Found at vote-smart.org and independent organization that monitors how politicians vote...
Edwards support the President in the following percentages in these years. Although in 2001 Edwards did not support the President more than 67%. On average Edwards supported the President 80.5% of the time.

2002.     76%
2001.     67%
2000.     92%
1999.     87%


(#26) (No rating)

by TOTALLY COMMITTED on 02/05/2004 07:31:47 PM EST

Rate this: - 1 2 3 4 5 + | Reply

As usual... OUTSTANDING! So much great stuff here!
I have an Edwards Blog, too! (and just posted the link to this Blog on it.)
Together, we may have every piece of "dirt" on this guy!
Please visit, and take a look:
http://totally-committed.forclark.com/story/2004/2/5/85919/89235#12
We cannot allow this man to be Kerry's opponent for the nomination -- it would be a true disaster!


(#25) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 02/05/2004 07:07:14 PM EST

Parent | Reply

Link for press release:
http://clark04.com/press/release/225/


(#24) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 02/05/2004 07:06:17 PM EST

Reply

For Immediate Release
Date: February 5, 2004
Clark Campaign Response To The Edwards Excuses
Little Rock - Clark Campaign Communications Director Matt Bennett released the following in response to the Edwards Campaign's statement today:
"Apparently it wasn't enough for John Edwards to distort the outcome of the Oklahoma primary. Senator Edwards is of the view that his loss by 1,219 votes is 'a tie.' Is this the kind of rigorous mathematical standard that John Edwards sought for our children when he voted for the No Child Left Behind Act?
"Now, the Edwards staff is engaging in precisely the kind of 'political, petty sniping' they profess to abhor. But let's get a few facts straight:
    During 2003-2004, Senator Edwards missed almost 40% of Senate votes.
*    During the last Congress, Senator Edwards Voted to Support President Bush 71.5% of the time - 76% of the time in 2002 alone.
*    Senator Edwards has said that No Child Left Behind "builds upon the practice and promise of North Carolina's example and provides increased federal resources to maintain the state's commitment to high achievement for all students."
*    Senator Edwards *voted against making No Child Left Behind testing requirements contingent on adequate funding.
    Senator Edwards *voted against allowing states flexibility in designing student assessments under No Child Left Behind.
"Senators can vote for bills and complain about them later, but Presidents must be accountable - that's what leadership is. Wes Clark understands that; apparently John Edwards does not."


(#23) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 02/05/2004 05:09:32 PM EST

Reply

Patriot act - more bragging - pres release
http://edwards.senate.gov/press/2001/oct26-pr.html
October 26, 2001
WASHINGTON-The Senate on Thursday passed a sweeping antiterrorism bill that expanded the wiretapping and electronic surveillance authority of the FBI and imposed stronger penalties for harboring or bankrolling terrorists.
"This will strengthen our nation's ability to prevent future terrorist attacks," said Senator John Edwards, who worked on the legislation as a member of the Judiciary Committee and the Select Committee on Intelligence.


(#22) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 02/01/2004 06:30:50 AM EST

Reply

On the take - faster than any other senator
"A study from the same group(Center for responsive Politics) showed Sen. John Edwards, who made his fortune as a trial attorney, has received much more in contributions from lawyers than any other senator, though he has been in the Senate only one term."
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/31/elec04.prez.main/index.html


(#21) (Rated 5.00/1)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/31/2004 07:27:35 AM EST

Reply

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/12/politics/campaigns/12EDWA.html?ex=1075698000&en=fceef912d481cf 95&ei=5070
He represented many sympathetic plaintiffs, among them some horribly crippled children. He became rich doing it, racking up more than $175 million for his clients from 1985 to 1997 and amassing a personal fortune of at least $38 million, according to North Carolina Lawyers Weekly.
At the same time, he did little or no pro bono work. Nor did he pursue public-interest lawsuits. While he speaks passionately about civil rights and the bravery of civil rights leaders, for instance, he has never used his legal skills to fight against discrimination through the courts.


(#20) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/30/2004 08:27:39 PM EST

Reply

9.11 justifies war in Iraq - WMD lies
Debate
"Can I just go back a moment ago -- to a question you asked just a moment ago? You asked, I believe, Senator Kerry earlier whether there's an exaggeration of the threat of the war on terrorism.
"It's just hard for me to see how you can say there's an exaggeration when thousands of people lost their lives on September the 11th."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/transcripts/debatetranscript29.html
comments MI:
http://www.moderateindependent.com/v2i2scdebate.htm
That was completely absurd and a huge moment in this debate.  Edwards, whose weakest point already is his lack of gravitas and foreign policy credentials, now said flat out that he is incapable of understanding that, despite the fact that 9/11 occurred, the President could still have lied and exaggerated.
What does one have to do with the other?  The answer is nothing.
To stand there and assert that you can't say, "there's an exaggeration when thousands of people lost their lives," is to buy into the most basic lies of the Bush administration.  It is the sort of thing the amoral puppets at FOX News assert.
9/11 occurring did not make Saddam have WMDs, and if the President exaggerated, as the Carnegie Report detailed him and his administration doing, then he exaggerated, regardless of what else happened.  There is no connection, and no useful presidential candidate would ever assert that allowing the slaughter of American people somehow means that it is impossible for lying to exist.  What is the connection?
Absolutely this was an horrific answer.


(#19) (Rated 5.00/1)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/30/2004 08:14:39 PM EST

Reply

Son of a millworker?
http://www.dissidentvoice.orgJan04Ireland0129.htm
"The Edwardses were solidly middle class" when Johnny was growing up, according to a four-part profile of the North Carolina senator in his home state's most prestigious daily, the Raleigh News and Observer. It's true that for a few years as a young man Edwards' father worked on the floor of a Roger Milliken textile mill. But Edwards p232;re (a lifelong Republican, like his reactionary boss) quickly climbed upward, becoming a monitor of worker productivity as a "time-study" man -- which any labor organizer in the South will tell you is a polite term for a stoolie who spies on the proletarian mill hands to get them to speed up production for the same low wages. Daddy Edwards' grassing got him promoted to supervisor, then to plant manager -- and he finally resigned to start his own business as a consultant to the textile industry. As a Boston Globe profile of Edwards put it last year, the senator never "notes that his father was part of management . . . `John was more middle class than most of us,'" says Bill Garner, a high school friend and college roommate.


(#18) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/30/2004 06:33:34 AM EST

Reply

 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Jan04/Ireland0129.htm
And while Edwards, when campaigning, bashes John Ashcroft for assaults on civil liberties, his pamphlet boasts that he'd "create thousands of neighborhood watch groups by 2007," which sounds suspiciously akin to Ashcroft's infamous TIPS program of setting citizen to spy on citizen. Edwards, of course, voted for both the blank check to Dubya for war in Iraq, and for the civil liberties-shredding Patriot Act. He's in no position to take on Dubya over his lies about Iraq's WMD -- for Edwards himself proclaimed, as late as October 10, 2002, "We know that Hussein has chemical and biological weapons"; and hailed the invasion of Iraq, which "still might prove a victory for people everywhere . . . who seek to halt the spread of weapons of mass destruction."


(#17) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/29/2004 04:27:28 PM EST

Reply

Patriot Act is being abused by the Attorney General
Q: The PATRIOT Act is two years old. There has been criticism of John Ashcroft for enforcement of legislation you authored. Shouldn't those who wrote the legislation take responsibility?
EDWARDS: There are provisions, which get no attention, which did good things. The reason we need changes is because it gave too much discretion to an attorney general who does not deserve it. The attorney general told us that he would not abuse his discretion. He has abused his discretion. We know that now.
Source: Democratic Presidential 2004 Primary Debate in Detroit Oct 27, 2003
http://www.issues2000.org/2004/John_Edwards_Civil_Rights.htm


(#16) (Rated 5.00/2)

by ourwinter (ourwinter at forclark dot com) on 01/28/2004 10:47:30 AM EST

Rate this: - 1 2 3 4 5 + | Reply

"If Mr. Kerry himself unswervingly took the high road, his spokeswoman, Stephanie Cutter, did not hesitate to rebut the criticisms by Dr. Dean and Mr. Edwards in the sharpest tones. Of Mr. Edwards, Ms. Cutter said: "If his intent is to remove special interests from Washington, why has he, as a member of the Judiciary Committee, taken more than $11 million from lawyers and law firms?""
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/27/politics/campaign/27DEMS.html?pagewanted=2
NO ONE is playing this comment... we have to get it out there.


(#15) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/26/2004 10:22:51 PM EST

Reply

http://northcarolina.forclark.com/story/2004/1/26/202837/587


(#14) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 05:55:26 PM EST

Parent | Reply

http://www.evote.com/index.asp?Page=/news_section/2003-04/04182003edwards.asp


(#13) (Rated 5.00/1)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 05:51:26 PM EST

Reply

Donations to Sen. Edwards questioned
By Sam Dealey
http://www.hillnews.com/news/050703/edwards.aspx
Sen. John Edwards' presidential campaign finance documents show a pattern of giving by low-level employees at law firms, a number of whom appear to have limited financial resources and no prior record of political donations.
Records submitted to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) show these individuals have often given $2,000 to the North Carolina Democrat, the maximum permitted by law.
In many instances, all the checks from a given firm arrived on the same day -- from partners, attorneys, and other support staff.
     
Some of these support staff have not voted in the past, and those who have voted include registered Republicans, according to public records on file with various county registrars of voting.
Edwards' campaign records also reveal that many of these individuals' spouses and relatives contributed the maximum on the same day. The Hill found many of them to be first-time givers. Some have no previous demonstrable interest in politics, while others appear to be active Republicans.


(#12) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/25/2004 03:57:13 PM EST

Reply

This week Edwards hauled out former Joint Chief of Staff chair Hugh Shelton to attack Clark. As everyone knows the military vote in the South is a big deal, and Shelton, along with a lot of other military people, don't like Clark. The way Edwards sees it, if he can just hang in there with a third or fourth in Iowa and New Hampshire, then he's got a decent chance of winning South Carolina.
In September Shelton said that Clark was relieved of his assignment as NATO commander because of "integrity and character issues." He never said what these were.
Then last week Matt Bennett, Clark's communications man, said he was "simply astonished" at Edwards's use of Shelton and "politics-as-usual mudslinging." "General Shelton . . . initiated what has become a smear campaign that the Republicans have gleefully taken up," said Bennett.
Edwards kept the tiff going with a snooty reply directly to Clark: "Whatever your personal views on General Shelton, I'm sure you agree that he is a respected military leader who served our country with distinction." Concluded Edwards: "I will continue to seek his advice," adding, "When I talk to the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, it's about the safety and security of our men and women in uniform, not about politics."
http://www.villagevoice.com/print/issues/0347/mondo5.php


(#11) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/24/2004 12:51:30 PM EST

Reply

A BIG PIECE of North Carolina Sen. John Edwards's campaign message is about how he would work to "clean up" Washington if elected president. He accuses President Bush of putting "the interests of lobbyists and campaign contributors above the interests of regular people." But Mr. Edwards -- alone among the serious candidates for president -- declines to provide a list of his major campaign financiers: the men and women who have not only the capability to write $2,000 checks themselves but the networks that allow them to harvest bigger bundles for their favored candidates. President Bush posts on his Web site the names of his $100,000 Pioneers and $200,000 Rangers. Mr. Edwards's Democratic rivals -- Sens. John F. Kerry (Mass.) and Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.), former Vermont governor Howard Dean and retired Gen. Wesley K. Clark -- have, at our request, provided similar lists of major underwriters.
more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40385-2004Jan22.html


(#10) (Rated 5.00/1)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/23/2004 07:56:09 PM EST

Reply

Thanks for the overtime!
(#252) (Rated 5.00/1)
by Sybil on 01/23/2004 07:35:19 PM EST
Checked c-span's congressional records. The ominous "Omnibus" Appropriations Bill was passed on Weds, Jan 21, 2003 by a vote of 48 - 45
Senators not voting:
Joseph Lieberman (D)
Selby Chambliss (R)
Daniel Inouye (D)
John Kerry (D)
Mark Dayton (D)
Max Baucus (D)
John Edwards(D)


(#9) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/23/2004 12:21:06 PM EST

Reply

Spin Buster
Is CNN Giving Edwards a Free Pass?
The same media that sets the bar high for some candidates sets the bar low for others. While Gov. Howard Dean and Sen. Joe Lieberman are facing high press expectations, Sen. John Edwards is getting off relatively easy.
On last night's "Lou Dobbs Tonight" on CNN, the eponymous host asked National Correspondent Bob Franken, "how does [Edwards] look right now in New Hampshire?" Franken replied, "The polls don't show him looking that he's very strong. But, of course, he would say that was the case in Iowa. But, really, all he has to do here, as Woody Allen said, is show up."
Franken continued by qualifying his assertion a bit: "As long as he does fairly well here, that would be enough for him to go to what is going to be his home stomping grounds in the Carolinas and the primaries that come up after that."
http://www.campaigndesk.org/
Campaign Desk is left wondering if Franken could set the bar any lower without digging a trench.
--B.K.


(#8) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/22/2004 11:11:17 PM EST

Reply

during a game, derided the "I have a scream" speech, and identified himself as an Edwards supporter.
particularly ugly, since CBS refused the Moveon ad during Superbawl - the "sports and politics do not mix "rule


(#7) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/22/2004 03:19:10 PM EST

Reply

http://www.markfiore.com/animation/rovers.html


(#6) (Rated 5.00/2)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/21/2004 09:23:42 PM EST

Reply

Mr. Positive?
Presidential Hopeful Edwards Prides Himself On Not Going Negative -- But Document Is Hardly Positive
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/US/edwards_positive_040121.html
By Jake Tapper
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/US/edwards_positive_040121.html
Jan. 21-- On Monday night, Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina attributed his second place finish in the Iowa Democratic Caucuses to his positive message and his refusal to engage in negative attacks against his opponents.
"The people of Iowa tonight confirmed that they believe in a positive, uplifting vision to change America," Edwards said to cheers.
But ABCNEWS has obtained an official "John Edwards for President" precinct captain packet that includes myriad personal attacks for Edwards caucus-goers to make against his Democratic opponents, perhaps belying this claim.
The document -- marked "CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEDGED" (sic) and "NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION" and signed by the senator -- encourages Edwards supporters to tell undecided caucus-attendees that former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean is a "Park Avenue elitist from New York City" and say Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts has "the stale record of a Washington insider" and "has been a part of the failed Washington politics for too long."
The Edwards document also slams Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and retired Gen. Wesley Clark, who opted not to participate in the Iowa caucus, for trying to take "shortcuts to the nomination." The document adds: "Strong, national candidates do not skip states."
Rep. Dick Gephardt of Missouri is called "a good man" who led Congressional Democrats to lose control of the House of Representatives. "We can't afford another losing national campaign," the document says.
Other information in the packet slams Dean for balancing Vermont budgets "on the backs of the poor and sick," cites "another Kerry exaggeration," and goes after Clark for praising President Bush's "neo-conservative foreign policy team."
"Senator Edwards was not aware of this document," Edwards' Communication Director David Ginsberg told ABCNEWS, adding. "Once he found out about it, he takes full responsibility for it. He thinks it was wrong and has instructed the staff not to do anything like that again."
Ginsberg also stressed that the part of the document that attacked his rivals "was a small piece of a 50-page caucus training memo including instructions on how caucuses work and the senator's policy proposals." Ginsberg denied any hypocrisy.
"This was a book prepared by the field staff to help them get through the caucus process," he said. "This was prepared for field staffers who had to defend themselves while the campaign was under a barrage of attacks, phone calls, and negative mail."
`Same Dirty Tricks'?
But Dean spokesman Jay Carson noted: "It's unfortunate that they say that they're running a positive campaign and yet it appears that they're working from the same dirty tricks playbook as the other Washington candidates."
Campaign snipes are nothing new or remarkable, but such information coming from Edwards seems to deviate from his claim to a mantle of cleanliness.
Asked how he pulled off his Iowa silver medal after lagging behind in so many polls for so long, Edwards told CNN on Tuesday morning that it wasn't until the last week of the campaign that Iowa caucus-goers finally heard his "positive optimistic vision of hope."
Said Edwards: "It takes a while for that to get through ... when there's a lot of negative sniping going on. But it finally got through." 


(#5) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/20/2004 06:37:58 PM EST

Reply

http://www.house.gov/etheridge/Press-SheltonGoldPrintable.htm


(#4) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/20/2004 06:33:46 PM EST

Reply

http://www.forclark.com/story/2004/1/12/85347/4513


(#3) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/20/2004 06:25:41 PM EST

Reply

http://www.un.org/icty/transe54/031216ED.htm
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

15. Q. All right. All right. Tell me, please, General, this is The New
16. Yorker, the issue of the 17th of November. It carried an interview with
17. you as well, and it says here in the interview: [In English] "Shelton,
18. the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was Clark's boss in 1999
19. when Clark was unceremoniously told that he was being removed from his
20. position as Supreme Allied Commander, Europe."
21. [Interpretation] Then Shelton is quoted: [In English] "'I've known
22. Wes for a long time,' Shelton said. 'I will tell you the reason he came
23. out of Europe early had to do with integrity and character issues ... Wes
24. won't get my vote.'"
25. [Interpretation] So your former superior talks about your
Page 30532
1 character. Isn't that right, General Clark?
snip

9. Q. So, General Clark, since you say that what Shelton said here is
10. not correct, that it's totally wrong, then why were you removed from your
11. post in Europe prematurely?"


(#2) (Rated 5.00/1)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/20/2004 02:42:44 PM EST

Reply

http://Blog.forclark.com/story/2003/12/17/10347/370


(#1) (No rating)

by Robbedvoter (Robbedvoter at forclark dot com) on 01/20/2004 02:38:20 PM EST

Reply

:
> http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030131/ap_on_go_co/congress_iraq_4
>
> Two senior Democratic senators, Robert Byrd
> of West Virginia and Ted Kennedy of
> Massachusetts, this week proposed separate
> bills on the matter. Byrd's would require President
> Bush (news - web sites) to seek a fresh vote
> in the U.N. Security Council before attacking Iraq;
> Kennedy's would require new votes in
> Congress before doing so.
>
> But the chance of approval for either
> measure is slim, given GOP control of the Senate and a
> lack of enthusiasm from Democratic
> congressional leaders.
>
> The bills aren't supported by any of the
> four Democratic members of Congress running for
> president: Sens. John Kerry of
> Massachusetts, Joe Lieberman (news - web sites) of
> Connecticut and John Edwards of North
> Carolina, and Rep. Richard Gephardt (news, bio,
> voting record) of Missouri. more here
http://Blog.forclark.com/story/2004/1/13/104013/080