Lots of people are chattering about the possibility of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State.
There's increasing chatter in political circles that the Obama camp is not overly happy with the usual suspects for secretary of state these days and that the field might be expanding somewhat beyond Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Gov. Bill Richardson (D-N.M.), Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) and maybe former Democratic senator Sam Nunn of Georgia.
There's talk, indeed, that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) may now be under consideration for the post. Her office referred any questions to the Obama transition; Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor declined to comment.
Clemons points out that this would be the same move as Bush's boxing in of rival Colin Powell in 2001, to keep Clinton from presenting a competitive threat to Obama in 2012 should Obama stumble.
Tea leaves aside, one possible choice for SoS left off the table is Wes Clark. Clark is well respected by both Rahm Emanuel and John Podesta, and obviously has the skills and aptitude for diplomacy and repairing American relations. He would also bring a much needed ace into the cabinet who could handle possible pushback from the military against Obama's command.
It's a thought. Put your transition porn gossip or speculations below.
I just got off the phone with my friend Steve Clemons, who is hosting a discussion with General Wes Clark tomorrow at 4pm ET at the New America Foundation at 1630 Connecticut. Clark will be talking about our economy and national security challenges, and the event will be streamed on The Washington Note, on OpenLeft, and around the blogosphere.
I'm a big Clark booster and think he has a real sense of vision, something that is lacking among most luminaries in our political system right now.
In addition, journalist and friend Brian Beutler, who was shot earlier this year in DC, has reactivated his website. Give it a look.
Raising Kaine first reported that Wes Clark won't be at the Democratic National Convention. Steve Clemons is now reporting that Clark was actually actually disinvited.
Clark 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."
And there we go. I heard this situation went down slightly differently than how Steve reports, though the outcome was the same.
Meanwhile, here's Clark making sense of the Georgia-Russia situation. Clearly, we'd rather hear about how to handle this delicate military tussle from Evan Bayh and Ken Salazar. I do want to point out how deeply we respect John McCain's service to his country, though of course, Wes Clark's 34 years in the military and near fatal wounds in Vietnam are kind of yawners.
Incidentally, I could see this situation with Clark changing, as the Georgia-Russia conflict does change the political dynamics.
... There's some discussion as to whether this was some sort official 'disinvitation'. In general, such things do not exist, disinvitations happen when high level officials are told they have no role in an event. The message is pretty clear. Nevertheless if you want to believe that this is simply a veto of Clark having a role at the convention and him then choosing not to come, that's an accurate characterization as well.
That's the headline from this Raw Story article on Clark's appearance on MSNBC, and indeed, it's exactly what it sounds like. Clark actually stood up against the conventional wisdom that the President must always do what Generals on the ground tell him to do.
Clark then focused more specifically on rebutting Scheunemann's remarks, emphasizing that if Obama becomes president, "as the commander-in-chief, he does not have to take the advice of the commander on the ground."
"As a general, you don't necessarily say, 'You have to listen to me,'" Abrams suggested.
"You don't rule Washington," Clark agreed. "I mean, what Barack Obama's saying is he appreciates General Petraeus's judgment, but he's got concerns that go beyond Iraq. ... Petraeus is in charge of ... one theater of this conflict, and what Barack Obama is saying is, 'I see it, I understand your concern about risks, it's my job to evaluate the trade-off.'"
Wall made one last attempt to bring the discussion back to the surge. "If you are saying to the commander-in-chief, 'Here is a strategy, I believe, that works, we need to try this, we should give it a shot' ... you would hope that that commander-in-chief would take that seriously."
"It sounds like what Tara is saying is, 'Shouldn't he at least say,"Yes,"'" Abrams remarked.
"He's not obligated to say that," Clark affirmed.
Last I checked, we don't live in a military dictatorship, but you can be sure that General Petraeus and angry conservative military elites are going to make sure that Obama gets smeared as 'not listening to the commanders on the ground' if he tries a withdrawal from Iraq. Well, the fact is, the President controls military policy, he does not have to listen to Generals, it's part of that whole civilian controls the military thing. If the President followed the orders of our military, we'd have been involved with a nuclear war with the Soviet Union in the 1960s. It's called civilian control of the military. And Wes Clark is the only Democratic surrogate making that point, clearly, effectively, and powerfully.
The ObamaClark.com campaign is already getting to the Villagers, who keep throwing tantrums that someone had the gall to suggest that McCain's military service doesn't automatically qualify him to be President. This time, it's Tom Brokaw on Meet the Press who decided to dredge up the faux outrage the very week we launched the http://www.obamaclark.com (to rounds of praise in some parts of the blogosphere and rounds of gagging within the establishment). And it was John Kerry that stabbed Clark in the back, the same John Kerry who Clark defended multiple times from the Swift Boat guys.
Crooks and Liars has the video, but the transcript is just as disgusting.
MR. BROKAW: We're going to get to all those issues, but I also want to raise what a surrogate for Senator Obama had to say to my friend Bob Schieffer on "Face the Nation." This is former General Wesley Clark talking about John McCain. He said, "I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president." He described him as untested and untried. With all due respect, Senator Kerry, he could have been talking about your qualifications. You're a Vietnam veteran...
SEN. KERRY: Yeah, I, I don't agree. I don't agree with Wes Clark's comment. I think it was entirely inappropriate. I have nothing but enormous respect for John McCain's service. I had the privilege of standing with John McCain in the, in the cell in Hanoi when we visited there together, when we worked on the issue of Vietnam together. It was an emotional moment. I, I have awe for John McCain's experience as a prisoner of war, and he, and he does understand duty and service. But...
MR. BROKAW: But unless...
SEN. KERRY: But...
MR. BROKAW: Unless I missed it, though, Senator Obama has not specifically rebuked Wesley Clark's comments.
SEN. KERRY: Oh, I think they-I thought-I did, and others did, and I thought Obama had at the time. But here's what's important, Tom. Let's not get lost in this, you know-John McCain said this ought to be about big ideas. Medicare is about to implode. You know, John McCain has a health care plan that every expert has said does nothing for the people who have no health care.
There are many reasons that Kerry, who these same hissy fit throwing establishment hacks backed in 2004, lost, and I'm not one to say that it was the Swift Boat Vets that were the only cause. It's hard to run against a President running during wartime, and Kerry got kind of a bad rap on the race. But it was the Swift Boat Vet episode during which it became obvious that as leader of the Democratic Party, John Kerry wasn't going to preserve his dignity and self-respect against a group of dishonest thugs, nor would he spend one iota of effort to preserve the millions of people in the party he was supposed to represent.
And he continues to secure this honorable legacy every day.
I had forgotten about this, but Clark really gets the netroots. Here's Ever Green Politics:
Clark is the most sought after supporter for Democrats around the country and he has been unstinting with his time and resources. He was an early and firm supporter of Ned Lamont. He endorsed Darcy and sent her money, both in '06 and this year. When her house burned down, he put out a call to his email lists for assistance for her and raised $33,400 in a few days to "cover her back".
Clark knows that loyalty to progressive principles is paramount in politics, and that we need to support the people who support those principles.
The site is catching on. Mark Nickolas thinks Clark would be a great choice and the Sideshow chimes in with the salient point that McCain thinks he knows how to win a war, while Clark has actually won one. Meanwhile, ObamaClark.com has made the recommended list at Dailykos, and we're up to around 1800 signups.
Clark, a Vietnam veteran and former supreme commander of NATO under President Clinton, had been serving as a national security surrogate for Obama until he belittled McCain's qualifications to be president during an appearance on CBS' "Face the Nation" last month.
McCain, a former Navy fighter pilot, was shot down over Hanoi and held prisoner during the Vietnam War.
"I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president," Clark said.
Matt Stoller, a political consultant and blogger who created the pro-Clark Web site, said the flap over Clark's comments "was just a bunch of insiders getting mad." The Web site argues that Clark can complement Obama with his executive experience, a military background and understanding of foreign policy. Clark endorsed Hillary Rodham Clinton during the Democratic primaries, but voiced support for Obama once he secured the nomination.
Though the story was framed in the Villager mindset, that doesn't really matter. The point is to throw this out to people all over the country, and the AP does that.
The petition has picked up the support from almost a thousand people, which is quite remarkable considering it was up on a few blogs for about 12 hours. Clark has support.
A few weeks ago, before the Villagers threw their little hissy fit, Aaron Ament and I were going to launch a short campaign to promote Wes Clark for VP. After the events of the last few days, we think it's more important than ever to do so. And so, here you are.
The basic idea behind Clark for VP is that we want to make a little noise about the position of Vice President and ask that Obama consider a real progressive in that slot who can help fix some of the most damaging aspects of the Bush Presidency.
The political argument for Clark is simple. He is a great surrogate for Democrats, with experience in 2004 and 2006 on the campaign trail, and a genuine national base of supporters. In terms of governance, which is what Obama says is the most important criteria for his VP pick, Clark can help Obama deal with the mess that the Bush administration left behind. As commander of NATO in the late 1990s, Clark won a war, so he is more likely than any progressive out there to be able to wrangle solutions from a military establishment that has been decimated by Bush's cronyism and incompetence. That is really important moving forward, since rebuilding our national security posture is a critical challenge over the next eight years
Clark also emphasizes Obama's strengths. He is popular among grassroots progressives, he was against the war in Iraq from the get-go, and he is an outsider to politics. He also demonstrated terrific political judgment in being willing to work against Lieberman in 2006, unlike, say, Tim Kaine, who endorsed Lieberman for President in 2004. This kind of savvy political judgment can help Obama avoid landmines down the road, and the Bush administration has left very little but landmines for the next President.
Before the idiot DC villagers threw a hissy fit about Clark, he was on the short list for VP. Is it realistic to see him back on that list? Well really, it's up to Obama. Choosing Clark would be a clear demonstration that Obama intends to significantly shift the political debate in the country and that he refuses to allow old school bitchy sniping from DC insiders to dominate our national political discourse. What Clark said - that McCain has no experience in national security decision-making - is absolutely true, and it's a point that needs emphasis repeatedly and effectively by someone who can deliver it.
Clark has a 34 year service record, has won a war, commanded troops all over the world, and nearly died of his injuries in Vietnam. He has run for President and been a surrogate for hundreds of Democrats all over the country, including Ned Lamont. He was against the war in Iraq, and knows the military bureaucracy inside and out. This is someone who would make an insanely good Vice President, and someone who has deep connections to the newly formed progressive communities that emerged from 2002-2006
Senator Obama would do well to choose Clark as his running mate.
Last night, Stephen Colbert and Nas spent about half the show going over accusations that Fox News is racist and anti-Obama. It was a pivotal moment for the ongoing media accountability campaign that started in 2003 or so.
Stephen Colbert dedicated half his show to the Color of Change/Moveon petition delivered by Nas.
Wes Clark is really good at dealing with national security.
Jimmy Hoffa, the guy who runs the union for truckers, rejects drilling.
Orthodox men interrupted their morning prayers to catch a glimpse of the Illinois senator, reaching out to shake his hand as he passed them by. But not all were taken by the Democrat. One yelled out: "Obama, Jerusalem is not for sale!" before Mr Obama was whisked away to his waiting plane.
Schwarzeneger is trying to cut state worker pay to the minimum wage in order to deal with a budget standoff. This is not really going to set him up well for a Senate run in 2010.
I got an email today from Moveon asking me to sign this petition against various media outlets for distorting Wes Clark's words. The subtext here is that Moveon is standing by Clark while Obama disavowed him, an implicit statement from Moveon leaders that they've had enough triangulating nonsense from Obama. And Obama gets it, fortunately. Conservatives have been using Clark to attack Obama, and Obama responded by wisely bringing Clark in from the cold. This is very good on all counts. I'm impressed with Obama's reversal, I'm pleased that Clark stood up for himself, and of course, the subtext here was Moveon's savvy counterpunch against Obama for his patriotism dig yesterday at Moveon.
They couldn't respond directly, even if they wanted to. Obama's speech attacking Moveon for their Petraeus ad left the group vulnerable, because their members would probably prize loyalty to Obama over loyalty to a questionable campaign tactic. With FISA and Clark, Moveon is on more solid ground. It's good leadership on Moveon's part, and a nice tacit reversal from Obama.
A terrific surrogate in Wes Clark and a great possible cabinet appointee has been rescued from dumb media oblivion.
Obama wants to expand Bush's faith-based initiative. Meanwhile, the Please Vote Against Telecom Immunity group on MyBO is up to 7000 members and is the fourth largest group on the site. (Update: Faith-based groups apparently can't use the Federal money under Obama's plan to discriminate.)
The recession is crushing state revenue. It's going to drive up taxes all over the country.
State tax revenues, adjusted for inflation and tax cuts, fell 5.3 percent in the first quarter of 2008 compared with the same time a year ago, according to a report to be released Tuesday; it was the third quarter in a row that total adjusted revenue declined.
George Packer is pushing hard for Obama to renounce his position on Iraq and not withdraw. This is stupid, though it's worth keeping in mind Obama's plan maintains residual troops in Iraq.
George Soros gave $500 to Ed Towns primary challenger Kevin Powell.
On a day in which Obama disavowed both Moveon and Wes Clark, it's worth making a few points. One, Barack Obama did not support Ned Lamont's campaign against Joe Lieberman, Wes Clark did. Two, Barack Obama did not bother to vote up or down on the resolution censuring Moveon for their Petraeus ad, which is part of a pattern of non-votes (Kyl-Lieberman anyone?). Three, in Obama's smear of Wes Clark, Obama actively took Clark's words out of context and then used them to disavow a military veteran who had served his country with great distinction, returning home from Vietnam after being riddled with bullets, and going on to stop a genocide in the Balkans as Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. Apparently going after a veteran is ok, as long it's a Democrat.
Obama's disavowal of Wes Clark is not a surprise if you were paying attention to his endorsement of Joe Lieberman in 2006, his wan opposition to the Military Commissions Act in 2006, and his vacillating conduct around Moveon and Petraeus. It doesn't make any sense, either. Despite Obama's handling of Lieberman with kid gloves, Lieberman is an implacable foe and will be speaking at the Republican National Convention.
After saying, "I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in the armed forces, as a prisoner of war," he added that these experiences in no way qualify McCain to be president in his view:
"He has been a voice on the Senate Armed Services Committee. And he has traveled all over the world. But he hasn't held executive responsibility. That large squadron in the Navy that he commanded - that wasn't a wartime squadron," Clark said.
"I don't think getting in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to become president."
"As he's said many times before, Senator Obama honors and respects Senator McCain's service, and of course he rejects yesterday's statement by General Clark," said Obama campaign spokeman Bill Burton.
Um, Wes Clark said in the statement that he honors McCain's service. How, exactly, can Obama both condemn Wes Clark's statement and honor John McCain's service?
Perhaps the Obama campaign is rejecting the notion that McCain has been a voice on the Armed Services Committee, although I'm pretty sure he has said stuff while on that committee. Or, perhaps they are rejecting the idea that John McCain has traveled all over the world, which is technically true since McCain hasn't been to every place in the entire world. . Or, perhaps the Obama campaign is rejecting the statement that McCain doesn't have executive responsibility, although I'm not aware of any that McCain has.
More likely, the Obama campaign is rejecting the idea that " I don't think getting in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to become president." I guess that means that the Obama campaign thinks that "getting in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to become president." Of course, by that logic, then Obama actually thinks that McCain is more qualified to be President than Obama. So, it is an odd, self-defeating statement.
Even more likely, this means that the Obama campaign will not push back against any right-wing attack on any non-Obama Democrat, no matter how spurious and weak. They ain't going to fight any smears other than those thrown at them. And that is important to know.
Oh yeah, the Obama campaign also just confirms with their statement that Wes Clark will not be Vice-President. And, you better bet that they won't take on any Vice-President who has any statement like this in the past, because they don't want to have to defend it.
Clark is just great at going after McCain. I have not seen anyone attack McCain like this except Clark; not Sam Nunn, not Jim Webb, not Kathleen Sebelius.
I was going to stay out of the VP debates, because as I mentioned the other day the formula for getting it right is really complex, and I could easily make a case pro and con for a bunch of different folks. But because it is all everyone wants to talk about in DC these days, I have continued to think about it as I have listened to everyone's arguments and counter-arguments, and I have decided that I do indeed have a favorite. Since I know all of you are just dying to know what I think (okay, maybe not, but what the hell), here's my argument.
Marc Ambinder reported a few days ago that former top military officials were being considered for VP, and that Clark is one of the names at the top of that list, along with former Marine General James Jones. Of all the names mentioned as bringing a sort of martial spirit to the ticket - Sam Nunn, James Jones, Jim Webb, Wes Clark, Chuck Hagel - Clark is by far the most progressive.
Besides, Clark believes in faster than light travel and the Vice President is in charge of NASA.
Amidst all the discussions about Barack Obama's potential running mate, the single most important consideration is being consistently overlooked.
The office of vice-president exists so that the president can be swiftly replaced in the event of his death, removal or incapacitation. Indeed, this is why we have vice-presidents. These individuals are only a heartbeat away from the most powerful office in the world.
This is such a stark consideration that it really ought to narrow things down somewhat regarding whom Obama should choose. Far too many discussions that I have observed treat the "running mate" as some kind of special electoral buddy, whose primary responsibility is to somehow grab votes that Obama could not secure on his own. Much of the reasoning behind the purported electoral impact of the running mate is ill-founded, speculative and secondary to our principal goal of electing representatives that we believe in.
I'm going to lay out my brief case for why I think Clark would be the best candidate for VP. There are a number of possible candidates for Vice President being bandied about. The most prominent is the one for Jim Webb, with Webb himself leading the charge against anyone not in elected office. As the only elected Democrat in the Senate identified as a strong military leader, this argument inherently leads the field open to him on national security grounds. Webb's argument is that, "Other than Eisenhower, the great military leader in that incredible World War II experience, you're going to want someone on your ticket who's demonstrated he can get votes."
I've already laid out my case against Webb. On the plus side, Webb was forcefully against the war from the beginning, and he pushed through the GI Bill in the Senate. He won in a swing state, and has an appealing background as an ex-Reagan official turned Democratic populist Senator. On the downside, Webb has huge problems with women, and it's not clear that he offers anything in terms of getting votes. His base in 2006 was white liberals from Northern Virginia, hardly a constituency group Obama is likely to need help with. And he doesn't help heal the Clinton-Obama divide; he isn't identified with the Clinton wing of the party. He's an island, an independent power source, which maximizes his leverage in the Senate, but isn't helpful in unifying the party.
Contrast that to Wes Clark. Clark, though not in elected office, has a better sense of what it's like to run for President. He has after all done it before, and for a neophyte, he did very well. More importantly, he has excelled at the real job of a VP candidate, which is not getting votes for the top of the ticket, but being a surrogate for the campaign and for lower ticket races. In 2006, Jon Soltz of Votevets tells me, Clark was the single most requested surrogate in the country, with the possible exceptions of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Clark is heavily involved in both his own PAC and Votevets, raising money and supporting Democrats up and down the ticket. He has huge credibility with officials all over the country because he was reliable and helpful to groups, candidates, and activists. There is simply no one else who comes close to his ability and track record of delivering a persuasive and progressive argument on national security on behalf of Democrats.
The first round votes have been counted and we are down to the final five!
Thousands and thousands of people cast first round votes in "Serve with the General" - the contest that will send General Wes Clark to one lucky Congressional District to participate in a community service project. The race to get into the final round was extremely close!
Now it is time to pick from the final five districts: Washington's 8th (Darcy Burner), California's 4th (Charlie Brown), North Carolina's 10th (Daniel Johnson), Colorado's 4th (Betsy Markey), or Minnesota's 3rd (Ashwin Madia).
The first round votes have been counted and we are down to the final five!
