Obama to General Wesley Clark: Your Services Not Needed
General Wesley Clark is not attending the Democratic National Convention. I was told by General Clark's personal office in Little Rock that he would not be attending.
He was informed by Barack Obama's people that there was no reason to come.
General Clark has been given no role of any kind at the convention.
Rubbing salt in the wound even more, the "theme" of Wednesday's Democratic convention agenda is "Securing America."
Wesley Clark's PAC also happens to be called SECURING AMERICA.
This is a mistake in my view. There are a lot of perspectives and competing agendas about how to direct America's next national security posture -- and General Wesley Clark should be one of the top tier names and personalities at the table.
Clark is loved by the netroots -- and I'm sure that they would hope that the Obama campaign will revisit this decision to exclude General Wesley Clark from the entire Democratic National Convention ageda.
-- Steve Clemons publishes the popular political blog, The Washington Note
Update: I have reconfirmed with General Wesley Clark's office that he has not been asked to play a role at the Democratic National Convention. His staff have told me that while his schedule remains tight, he would rearrange his schedule to help play any constructive role on any days of the convention if asked.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I am on General Clark's email list and as soon as Hillary suspended her campaign, he immediately started strongly supporting Obama. He has also been very active in generating support of down ballot Democrats. I know Obama distanced himself from Gen. Clark's comments about being shot down and spending time in a prison camp not qualifying a person to be President (even though it was the truth), but that doesn't seem like enough to cause Obama to ask him not to come to the convention. That seems a bit extreme, and quite unlike the person I have seen Obama to be. I wonder if this is another one of those media creations?
Wesley Clark's son posted at Daily Kos and said pretty clearly what Steve posted here.
For the full statement, see
http://www
Excerpts:
. . .
"It's not a fake out or some secret plan, he isn't going to be VP or probably anything else in an Obama administration, assuming he's elected.
. . .
I know some you think you can change this by launching VP diaries a couple times a day in hopes that Obama will be swayed by the "netroots.
It's a beautiful day. Go outside and get some sun.
Bad move -losing even more respect for Obama
What would it have hurt to have him there? Esp since hes the only one with the guts to
call McCain out on using his POW experience as foundation to be president.
Biden is fine but Gen Clark is a better choice.
Wes Clark has forgotten more about foreign policy than Barack Obama may ever know. Obama could not afford the comparison, especially if Clark feels free to express any opinions which have not been cleared through Axelrod. It's really very simple: you don't give somebody a prominent role in your campaign who obviously knows more than you do (unless you're GWB).
If you support Wes Clark as Barack Obama's running mate, please sign the petition at the aptly named http://www
Obama needs Clark as his vice-president. Period.
Senator Obama's inner circle is making an enormous mistake. The Democrats have to show that they have SPINE! General Clark would make a GREAT Vice-President. Think about this:
Most of the US budget has been tied to a disastrous WAR for the past five years - Iraq - over a Trillion dollars of our treasury and probably more; over 4,000 US soldiers killed and over 100,000 Iraqis killed and over 100,000 wounded soldiers - not to mention the loss of reputation the USA around the world.
We don't have enough money for education, health plans, infrastructure - highways, bridges, etc, and major social programs. Since the Bush White House goofed in Iraq - enflamed Moslems around the world for his invasion of Iraq when the real battle was Afghanistan - can we afford to lose Afghanistan? Can we afford to lose Pakistan? Since our military is over stretched - General Clark has the background, intelligence and deep understanding of foreign policy and an expertise in Defense. I didn't mention the other crisis - Iran.
We need a vice-president who can stand up to the Republican SMEAR machine if the Democrats want to win in 2008. If they don't - and want to perpetuate the weak myth continue to make foolish steps. America needs excellent judgment from Senator Obama and backbone, otherwise, I'm afraid America will get four more years of George Bush. If it is not General Clark there is only one other choice and that is Senator Biden.
Thank you for giving us some indication what is going on.
When General Clark was in his thirties, Al Haig, then Supreme Allied Commander, singled out Clark as one of handful of people in the world who was an expert on Eastern Europe. While we may credit Haig with hyperbole, I doubt he was far off. Clark was still at West Point when he was doing research that included documents in Russian. Listening to him recently amounts to a geography lesson for those of us who want to understand what is going on.
It is difficult to believe that on a night devoted to security and veterans there will not be a place for General Clark who has spent hours, days, and weeks supporting Democratic veterans and bolstering the foreign policy case for the party. This is more than a snub, it is wrong. Obama, it would seem, just would like to push Clark out of the party.
General Clark has called foreign policy as he sees, and he is right. I will miss his voice.
Clark was told he wasn't needed at the convention? Are you kidding me? We need people with some cajones in the democratic party. There are just too many wimps that let the republicans say whatever lie they want.
Wesley Clark is not afraid to speak the truth and we need him. I hope the Obama camp reconsiders.
Just because he's not being included at the convention doesn't mean he won't continue to play a role as an Obama surrogate and may later be a significant player in an Obama administration
Yes, it's a bad sign.
I wish you were right. Would you work for Obama if you were Clark, after two public dismissals?
Obama needs to fight the Republican's attacks. General Clark would have been a great ally.
Obama has no military credentials, zero,nada, none. McCain is going to pound that over and over and over again. Lets face it, his military service is all McCain can offer. Obama blundered. To quote Talleyrand," It was worse than a crime, it was a mistake."
Obama is setting himself up for a swift boat trip without a paddle. He needs to get a pair and I don't mean paddles.
This race is going to be closer than we think. The Democrats won in 2004 on an anti-Bush, anti-war agenda and then did nothing. Morphing into enablers who failed to live up to their rhetoric. This could end like Dewey vs. Truman.
Many admire Clark and his service: a true patriot ,smart with an excellent war record and experience in Eastern Europe.
Obama gave a dismissive slap in the face to Clark and to all of us who admire & respect the General.
I could never vote for McCain
I worked for Obama's senate campaign, knocking on doors, making phone calls and was an Obama poll watcher. Once proud of those efforts, I am now having second thoughts about putting my shoulder to the wheel for Obama again after some of his recent actions, especially this incident, and his weak reponse to the GOP smears.
Obama is falling into the usual Democratic candidate trap and bending over backwards to avoid confrontation with the Republicans. This has everything to do with Clark saying that being a POW didn't qualify McCain for the presidency. So now Team Obama doesn't invite him so as to avoid having to answer charges that they are giving a platform to a man who attacked a war "hero". All this does is make Obama look weak and not showing loyalty to those who defend him. You would NEVER see the Republicans do something like this, and it's cojones like that that wins them elections. Allowing them to go on and screw the country up further.
I am liking the Dems chances less and less this Fall with each passing day and things like this are the reason why.
We're not privy to what goes on behind the scenes. Perhaps Clark was one of Hillary's enablers when she overstayed her welcome in the primary. And Obama recently learned about it. Or perhaps he will surprise everyone by walking out to the podium on Wednesday as Obama's VP choice. Anything can happen.
Might have a lot to do with Clark calling out the PNAC's slogan "seven countries in five years," which appears to be foreign policy consensus judging by the behaviour of both parties.
It occurred to me that there are a couple of conditions under which this would be justified. They'd include the imminent release of very bad press about Clark, or discovery that he'd spoken poorly about Obama recently, or some other similarly negative factor that necessitated an unequivocal statement of where things stand. Hope it's not true, of course, but it's just a thought.
Compared to who? Bayh who spent time shining Clinton's mirror is speaking about Securing America's Future (I gotta say, I find that strange.) Biden challenged Barack in debates and gushed over McCain. Oh please....
There are 25 millions vets in this Country. If Obama spurns Wesley Clark he will be kissing away a lot of people who would have voted for an Obama/Clark ticket over a McCain/? ticket.
General Clark, should have a speaking role at the convention. I don't understand why the Obama campaign would want to shut him out, if indeed that is what they're doing. A mistake, in my opinion. As an Obama supporter I would ask the Obama campaign to reconsider. I would also hope future President elect Obama would consider Gen. Clark as Secretary of Defense.
Isn't he the one who so harshly attacked the Nominee during the primary compgain ?
No. That was Bill Clinton.
Who IS speaking at the convention.
I beg to differ; General Clark did NOT 'so harshly attack' the nominee. He spoke the truth about Senator McCain, 'with all due respect,' and stated his opinion that being a prisoner of war is not the type of experience that would be useful to a President.
my friend Elleng , I meant the attack on the other Nominee .not the one you mentioned.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
