Comment from Phil C
Time: January 23, 2007, 11:22 pm

I don’t think it’s to late for Clark. Though I agree time is growing short. Clark, I believe, is waiting till after the National Security conference at UCLA in Feb to announce, Wes has said repeatedly he does’nt want his views at the conference looked through the political lense. We’ve been debateing this and other Clark possibilities on several kos Diaries. ( http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/1/23/11826/6006 )

Comment from Catherine
Time: January 24, 2007, 1:32 am

No, considering the field, it’s not too late for Wes Clark! While artificially created no foreign policy so-called “Frontrunners” continue to get free media generated buzz…Here we are embroiled deep in a messed up war costing us billions while we lose, threatening another war with Iran; China’s shooting down our satellites; North Korea is testing missiles galore to see if they can reach San Francisco….

Comment from NormaH
Time: January 24, 2007, 1:35 am

Interestingly enough, Wes Clark is the one who could dramatically change the current dynamics of the primary race.

First and foremost, the situation in Iraq/Iran makes Clark once again a relevant candidate for the times. The General’s record of military success is unmatched by any other candidate, including John Kerry, as Clark would be the only candidate who successfully planned, led and won a war, all the while negotiating with multiple heads of states.

His intense knowledge of foreign policy stands to make a large dent in Richardson’s claim as the candidate best versed in the area. It is in fact Clark’s “early and often” detailed plans of reasonably securing Iraq while negotiating the U.S. out of the war that could neutralize Hillary, (as she and the Big Dog come as a pair), considering her documented hawkishness and lack of apologies on her Iraq vote.

Wesley Clark adds domestic national security to the national debate, something none of the other candidates offers. As the former director of Strategic Planning for the Joint Chiefs under Clinton, Clark as the “competent and credible national security” candidate could spotlight the issue of domestic terrorism. As an emergency preparedness expert (in partnership with former FEMA head James Lee Witt), Clark brings in disaster management (i.e., Katrina) as an important component to the national debate; an issue which would otherwise go missing and a debate unfortunately focused currently on personalities and charisma.

Wes Clark also disqualifies Obama as the only top contender who was right on Iraq. Not only did the General see the invasion as a bad idea as early as the summer of 2002, but he also foretold how events would unfold 98% accurately.

So no, it shouldn’t be too late for Wes Clark, even if he doesn’t announce for a few more weeks, far as I am concerned!

Comment from Susan
Time: January 24, 2007, 8:48 am

Patience. This isn’t about instant gratification.

Comment from George Sand
Time: January 24, 2007, 8:58 am

Hey, don’t shoot the messanger. I couldn’t agree with you guys more. Clark is my choice and the only man I think that can bury an Republican nominee.

I referenced Arkansas largest newspaper’s article and their question. For you folks not from Arkansas, the Arkansas Democrat Gazette i.e. the DoG is hardly a balanced newspaper - they are so red that its hard to wash the stain off your fingers.

This article IMHO is just wishful thinking. The thought the the DoG might have cover the hometown boy and future front runner probably dosen’t bode well. They beat Clinton to death over a blow job, and hardly a word about the sins and crimes Bush has committed against this country.

Comment from Dormaphaea
Time: January 24, 2007, 10:39 am

How about everyone else has started too darn early? It’s like a run on the banks, or something. Geesh.

I’ll happily wait for Wes Clark, thanks.