Wes Clark at UCLA - The Blue Skies Book Tour
Submitted by ms in la on October 6, 2007 - 4:36am.
Democratic politics | Firsthand Accounts | Hizbollah | Iran | Iraq | Wesley Clark
BLUE SKIES... SHININ' ON ME... NOTHIN' BUT BLUE SKIES--- DO I SEE!
General Clark always ushers the blue skies into Los Angeles with his visits, and we smog breathers do so appreciate it. Parking lot #3 is a nice long walk from Dodd Hall along the gorgeous UCLA Campus grounds -- it gives you a chance to stroll through the lush sculpture gardens en route and just breathe in the crisp fall air.
The hallway at Dodd was already filled up with students and people waiting to get in when I arrived --a half hour early. I bought a copy of Time to Lead just as the doors to the lecture hall were opened -- and in we went. This time was different from his usual UCLA events as I noticed the crowd comprised of primarily students. It was refreshing to see so many of them so eager to hear Wes speak.
I settled in up front to get the little recorder to pick up Wes clearly and around 20 fresh faced kids filed into the row behind me. Then, curiously, they just stood there at their seats staring forward, in silence, for a long minute... My poor abused blog brain immediately thinks:
"Oh no, it's a Kyl-Lieberman protest-- the SDS must be organizing!".
Visions of tasers and tear gas started to fill my head, they must be really angry.... when suddenly I hear a firm voice from one of the kids call out;
"Seats!"
And they all sat down-- in unison. The whole row.
Well the smart readers here have already figured out that it was the campus ROTC, but hey, I have blond hair and I'm still trying to decipher just what kind of weird new protest form this is-- these crazy kids today... Then I caught a glimpse of all those light blue shirts in the group. Aha.
And another row steps in behind the first. Same drill.
"Seats!"
And like clockwork, they all sit. Now that's discipline. I sat up a little straighter. By the time the auditorium had filled up, there was a sea of crisp blue shirts with epaulets on the shoulders.
I look over and there he is-- General Clark peering in from the "wings", from the side door to the stage-- wearing my very favorite sky blue tie (fitting right into the Blue Skies theme), white shirt and charcoal suit. Looks great! (please do not call me a fawning drooling sycophant-- he really did look great) He's standing alongside Kal Raustiala, Director of the Burkle Center for International Relations, and fiddling on his Blackberry. In Kal's introductory speech, he mentions that Wes wrote a large portion of his book on his blackberry and the roomful of students cracks up laughing.
Wes bounds up on stage and opens with how great it is to see so many cadets in the room. Later he would caution them not to get involved in politics while wearing the uniform but to be sure to listen to everything (harkens back to the YKos "soldier" incident.)
_________________________________________________________
SO LET ME GET THIS OUT OF THE WAY FIRST
OK, so yes I did ask him. It was brief-- But here is a patchwork of what I recall.
The book signing line was long, seems everyone wanted a signed copy, and I was there chatting with Susan Blanchard of Four Star Dems and "nocore" during the wait... so I couldn't really formulate the question well in my head. I did keep repeating to myself: "General Clark General Clark General Clark" don't call him "Wes". No "Wes". Wes, bad....
I got up to the front, plopped my book down, all about business, ready to hit him with my grim question....when he suddenly grabs my hand with that big smile, that oh so happy to see you expression, and exclaims: "Hey! How have you been?!"
"General Clark, I'm fine thank you, but I really have to talk to you about the Kyl-Lieberman resolution--" (oops, where'd that big smile go?) " --it's been causing quite a stir on the blogs sir, and---"
"Yeah. I know..." he says softly resigned.
I rattle on, aware there are people shifting their weight behind me anxious to get their moment with Wes...
"Well there is this perception that you were one day "uneasy" and "uncomfortable" with it and the next day endorsing and supporting Hillary's vote for it-- some say you've done a 180, a flip-flop, after the HuffPo piece and---"
"I know I know. I'm still uneasy about it. I haven't changed my position..."
I excitedly interrupt as if someone told me I'd just won something fabulous. "You are?? You mean you still have 'unease'?"
" Yes--"
At an even higher pitch: "You do? So... you didn't lose your uneasiness for some reason, somehow and change your mind because if you did I was just going to ask you to please clarify if you could just what it was that---"
" No I haven't changed my mind ..."
"-- because I can go back to the blog and tell them if you didn't, because they all think.. I mean the HuffPo piece was---."
I reverted to automatic pilot at this point although I'm pretty sure there was a flurry of sound still coming out of my mouth.
He did say something to thank me for "getting his back" or something to that effect. I'll try to paraphrase the rest as I can recall.
Wes brought up the dilemma of having only the rock/hard place choices; voting for it or not voting for it-- and how not voting for it would imply that they were NOT a terrorist organization, which he believes they are. And he added that he is hopeful about the Webb amendment and Hillary's signing on. (These are my words here, from memory--- because at this point I am really distracted and perhaps only imagining the impatient snarls forming on those in line behind me).
I asked him, "Do you really think the Webb Amendment has a chance of passage this time, do you think it can get the votes needed?"
He said he certainly hoped so and if not, we'd just start over with another and another and don't stop. In that unrelenting Wes way.
In the excitement, I had forgotten that the UCLA helper had my camera and was waiting to take a photo of us. I was all ready to walk off -- leaving my camera with her. This would be my first photo in which I don't appear craning from behind General Clark's shoulder looking like some random stalker. Click! Thank you, thank you -- and that was that.
So there, I asked. : )
Now back to the event!
WES AT TWELVE:
Wes opened talking a little about his childhood background:
WES: I was born in Chicago, my dad died when I was 3, we moved to Little Rock, Arkansas. I grew up in the segregated south-- white only swimming pools, white only drinking fountains, white only front ends of the buses. I was there at age of 12 when we did the first integration of public schools. A huge riot began in Little Rock, sparked by a lot of angry whites, not from the school not even from the city They were all over the south really, an organization, it was the beginning of 'white rage', the beginning of Richard Nixon and the republican party's "southern strategy". So I saw that. And I worked my way through it emotionally as a 12 yr old... with parents who didn't understand any of it and had their own cultural biases... my stepfather couldn't stand Elvis Presley. The way that man wiggled his hips! It was just awful...(giggles)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He went on to discuss West Point and his Vietnam tour, and did the very animated and action packed Vietnam chapter reading that many others have already covered so well so I'll skip forward.
I know a lot of us have heard this next story told by Wes many times, but it is so critically important in the scheme of things, and there are so few who dare to discuss it, that I'm going to include it here in case we have any new readers who need exposure to some good ole General Truth Telling about PNAC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A POLICY COUP
WES: We're engaged in a war, and its a war in my view we didn't have to fight but-- we're there. And we've changed now the circumstances --so we have to find a way now to succeed in this conflict and at the same time -- It's gone on too long and we need to find a way to pull our forces back.
You see, what happened was... after 9/11 there was basically a Policy Coup in this country. The President when he ran for office said he didn't want any foreign policy adventures, was a compassionate conservative, wanted a "humble foreign policy" and... after 9/11, he embarked on the biggest adventure, the most arrogant foreign policy, the most reckless foreign policy in a hundred years of American history. (silent moment in the room) He didn't explain it to the American people. We didn't understand it. And we certainly didn't approve of it.
I remember right after 9/11 going to the Pentagon, about a week and a half after 9/11, and one of the officers called me into his office and said, " Sir I have to tell you this...."
I said, "What?"
"We're going to war with Iraq..."
I said, "Why are we going to war with Iraq".
He said, "I don't know."
I said, "Well, did they find out that Saddam had something to do with 9/11?"
He said, "Oh No no, it's not that, it's just that they don't know what to do about terrorism I guess and they know our armed forces are pretty good at attacking states... so I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to be a nail"
About 6 weeks later I went back and saw the same officer, by that time we were attacking Afghanistan and I wasn't sure whether he'd been telling me the truth or not and I said,
"I thought you told me we were going to attack Iraq? Is that still on?? And if so, why?"
He said, "Oh Sir. It's worse than that...." and he held up a piece of paper on his desk and said, " Here's a memo I just got today from the office of the Secty of Defense, it says we're gonna take out-- SEVEN countries-- in the next five years."
Iraq.
Syria.
Lebanon.
Lybia.
Somalia.
Sudan.
and.... (wait for it)
Iran.
I said... "Is that a classified document?"
He said, "Yes Sir!"
I said, "Well don't show it to me. I don't wanna see it."
If I'd seen it I would be violating my security clearances to tell you about it. So I didn't see the document. But that was the plan. That was the policy coup that took over in America.
We never were told that we were gonna take out seven countries. The American people never signed up for the that. The Congress didn't debate it. Money wasn't appropriated for it. We didn't say to the American people... 'You can't have health care, you can't have education, we're not gonna repair the bridges in Minnesota... Because WE'RE going to take out seven states in the middle east'. It was the equivalent of a coup. Run by a certain group of people inside the United States government.
We couldn't believe this flight of fantasy that they could actually believe they could invade a series of middle eastern countries with a Judaeo Christian army and impose democracy on people from a different culture. Every political scientist warned about it. And many of us retired Generals did too. But it didn't matter. It was the equivalent of a coup... It wasn't open for rational debate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
ISOLATE OR ENGAGE?
Now we have two choices, Wes tells us:
1)-- Isolationism: We can continue the bush policy--of war in Iraq and isolation of nations we don't like. We're simply not going to talk to them, we will threaten them, cajole and pressure them - in this case it's Syria and Iran, We've withdrawn our Ambassador from Syria -We're threatening Ahmadinejad He likes being threatened by America, he can go back and say I'm standing up for Iran against those bullies in the US.... In some perverse way, we like it too. Because we can say, "Yeah it's a really dangerous world out there.... We've gotta be tough, strong, and mean, we gotta think like the enemy". (beat) But we're making the enemy.
2) Engagement: On Iran: Why not send a diplomatic mission over? Send crates of blue jeans --- it's the most pro-American population in the region. Let the Rolling Stones do their concerts in Iran. Open it up. Let Citibank make loans, let Chevron repair their oil industry and let them see the rest of the world. 80% of the population of Iran wants better relations with the West. 60% doesn't believe in Ahmadinejad. Of course, I guess that's higher approval ratings than our president...(big laughs)
Which way does it go? Towards hard line isolation? Or towards engagement? That's the choice that is before you now. In your university, in your work, in the media--- you make your choices. I'm excepting the men and women here in the uniform. You don't wanna get involved in the political issues of the day. You can't . Your loyalty is to the commander in chief and your mission is to do your duty...
-----------------------------------------------------------------
QUESTIONS
Q What about Ahmadinejad speaking at Columbia University? Appropriate?
A Nothing wrong with him speaking there, he was speaking all over the place before that -- he had already given a conference at the National Press Club in Washington. So why did they focus with him speaking at Columbia? I'll come back to that.
I was disappointed that the President felt it so necessary to attack him in the introduction. I wouldn't have done that. I would have simply warned him there was a lot of animosity in America as a result of his statements and expressed the hope that he could have clarified his statements-- and let him defend himself. He should've been given a neutral platform to start, and put on notice what people's expectations were and given a chance to fend for himself up there. That's the purpose of an educational institution.
Now, so why the big deal-- and how come they didn't attack the National Press Club? Why attack Columbia University? It's like the President of the Catholic organization of NYC said on television, "It's not like Universities are for free speech or something!" (laffs) They're not? It was a bizarre statement....
I can only tell you that it's very important that we protect our universities because they are for free speech. And they are for dissent. And they are for a clash of opinion. And it's up to you, the students and the faculty, to make sure that you continue to invite people who are mainstream and people who are out of the mainstream. People you agree with .. people you (don't) And in keeping with the American doctrine of free speech... he should have been given an opportunity to speak at Columbia University. And I'm glad he was.
(Wes gets thunderous applause from this educational institution for his comments)
THE BIG QUESTION:
Here it is! The big question... which is no longer 'Are you going to run for President' but instead,
Q ''What do you think about the Kyl Lieberman amendment?"
The student went on "-- that was just voted on with 70 or something votes in the Senate that declared the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist group?"
A Well...actually they ARE a terrorist group. They are arming and supporting terrorists-- Hizbollah and Hamas and maybe other terrorist groups. So the resolution is a fact-- it's a statement of fact. The question is -- what would be the intent behind it? And the intent behind it is to ratchet up the rhetoric against Iran. And, in my view, prepare for a possible strike against Iran. (and without pausing for a breath)-- I'm very concerned about the amendment. I understand that if you were in the United States Senate and you looked at it, you'd say ''Well this is simply... true'. I mean, not to support the resolution is to say that they're NOT a terrorist organization, but in fact, they ARE a terrorist organization, they do constitute a threat. But um, I'm very happy that Senator Jim Webb and Senator Hillary Clinton have got a resolution coming up that the President can't strike Iran without coming back to the Congress. I hope THAT resolution will receive 70-some odd votes.
FLYING CHALK AND THE THEORY OF PROBABILITY
Q A lonnnnng winded question about Syria and Iran. The guy goes on detailing the history of every conflict between Iran and the US and Syria and veers off down a few side roads about the impracticality of diplomacy and Ahmadinejad, and on and on and on.... bottom line he asks if Wes thinks that pure diplomacy could really be possible with them?
Wes chirps back at him with a clean:
A I think anything is possible.
(Huge laughter "Whoo"s and applause from the crowd) He goes on.
A When I was in college studying physics, my physics professor-- when he would write things on the chalkboard and when he would ever drop a piece of chalk.... He would always look up! (Wes looks up at the ceiling) He said because the Probability Theory in Quantum Physics is... that at some point, at some level of probability, that chalk may reverse its path....(more roaring laughs from the room)
I don't think the odds of a diplomatic arrangement are quite that low... NOBODY can guarantee diplomacy can work. But think of the alternative.... I mean, can you guarantee that force will work? Who would have believed in 2003 when we invaded Iraq that we would still be there four and a half years later, with more forces than it took to invade? and that we would have lost 4000 people--be spending 800 billion dollars, and God knows what the total will be because we're not out of there.... So who would have predicted that? (You may sing along, Clarkies!---->) So you have to use force as a last last last resort and only in a case where there is an urgent and compelling threat that requires action. What I learned from Ambassador Holbrook was-- you can keep people from killing each other by just getting them to talk... even though that talking might not get you your solution...
CANDIDATE FOR A DAY
Q Many of us are looking at graduating with $120,000 of debt and I was wondering what your opinion was of that and what could be done about the problem, and if you didn't want to talk about that - what about health care in America?
A (grinning) So.. You want me talk like a candidate? (the room laughs and a few shout 'yes!'. OK, maybe I was one)
Wes delivered this fevered, rousing "candidate" type speech on education and health care, hitting all the right notes, and wrapped it up with a booming voice declaring:
" --Shame on an America that can't provide health care for every. single. child. in this country!. It's wrong! It's that simple!"
Then he quickly lowered back down to his conversational voice again and matter of factly said to the questioner:
"Thank you for giving me that opportunity."
And everyone burst out laughing at his candor. It was so earnest and cute. He relished being a candidate again for those four minutes in October in a packed UCLA auditorium.....
Wes is without any doubt, and most unfortunately, one of a kind!
Wes Clark for Vice President or Secretary of State 08
You are a trooper! Sounds like a fabulous event! I'll be looking for the second installment (hint hint).
You done good!
Wes Clark: Soldier, Scholar, Statesman.
Well,I've just read the 'question' and I want to hug (((YOU!)))
I am not one who thought he had done a 180 or any such, and I'm sad to know that he FEELS that he's in the situation he's in. He probably expected that such would occur after an endorsement. Now on to the rest.
And the REST is just GRAND!!!!!
THANKS and sleep well, MS LA!!!
do we, should we, can we 'publicize' this info? He spoke at an open forum. Should we say somethings at HuffPo, and maybe calm the storm?
Nite
People want leadership......and in the absence of leadership, they will listen to anyone who walks up to the microphone.
Lewis Rothschild, in "American President"
Thanks for the comprehensive, easily readable, and entertaining report.
It must have been a treat for the ROTC cadets to listen to stories from the Pentagon -- a place many of them envision walking the halls one day.
And thanks for your courage asking WKC about Kyl-Liberman.
I think it might have taken more "courage" for me NOT to have posed the question and come back here with an account and no mention of K/L!! : )
Tough crowd. Heh.
And yes, the ROTC kids were in awe when Wes spoke. To me half of them looked about 14 but what do I know? They hung on his words, I looked back during the Policy Coup speech especially.
Thank God we have him out there speaking on this.
Oh and I have some good news to report, for Angelinos anyways. It appears he will be swinging through LA and clearing our skies quite a bit in the space of the next months. Like once per month? Little birdie told me. Including a book signing at Book Soup (a fantastic local book store) end of this month to coincide with the Maher Show visit! Color me smiling!!
I continue to be surprised and disappointed that so far, Denver hasn't been included in any book signings.
He actually will be here Wednesday morning, October 10, for the convention of the National Association for Home Care and Hospice. A one-day pass for non-members is $675, though.
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
Wes Clark -- Don't settle for less.
Make America All It Can Be!
How wonderful! That's a cause close to my heart. It really makes me happy to know that he'll be speaking there.
What a Renaissance man Wes is.
Yeah, I know. I wish I could afford to hear his speech. It's likely to be completely different from al the speeches we've heard recently.
Maybe they'll record it and post it at their website. We can only hope.
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
Wes Clark -- Don't settle for less.
Make America All It Can Be!
Thanks so much for going....recording....and staying up waaay late to give us the highlights.
Smile on my face this morning. :)
People want leadership......and in the absence of leadership, they will listen to anyone who walks up to the microphone.
Lewis Rothschild, in "American President"
Just great! And thanks to Wes for being so.. well... so Wes!!!
It's been what for me is an unusual thing:
a really bad day before even 9 o'clock in the norning.
So I took a lil while to read here --- distraction and great milieu --- before I faced all of that stuff in my day ---
So glad, so glad I read your posting. It
was just the lift I needed.
So fine to read about Wes and what he said and his uplifting ways.
And your wonderful words in telling us about it all.
thank you, ms,
Clearsky
By declaring the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, the resolution makes the government of Iran a terrorist state since the IRG is state controlled. Its just bad policy if the object is to engage Iran in dialog. But then Lieberman has not been known to want to implement good policy.
In a tit for tat, Iran passed a resolution condemning the CIA as a terrorist organization. Which in the light of history is not far from the truth.
The coups that we fomented, the politicians we attempted to pay off, the efforts that we made in covert action, our occasional support of expediency over principles - most of them came to a bad end.
They don't justify the realist critique. They help condemn it. And in the light of history, they stand not out- they stand out not just as aberrations, but as mistakes. They're just of a lesser magnitude than the kind of mistake we made with the invasion of Iraq.
-General Wesley Clark - Legitimacy: First Task for American Security
This is my main concern re: the Kyl-Lieberman resolution and HRC's vote. It was also a waste of time when real work should be getting done. Lieberman is a weasel and anything that has his name on it is suspect. He is a vain and aspiring man.
"If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
-Samuel Adams
Just my 2 cents.
John 11:35
I would have to assume that he agrees with the Iranian vote that labeled our CIA as a terrorist organization.
Aberrations? Not hardly...its not like the US hasn't been consistent in its tactics over the decades. The CIA has done, and continues to do the very things that created a "need" for the Kyl-Lieberweenie piece of crap in regards to the IRG.
Can't have it both ways.
...at the San Fran event. As my sainted mother always said, "You have to take the bitter with the better."
...sort of like a "Bush/Dick Administraton".
How was this able to reach the floor of the Senate? (ie Lieberweenie)
Whether or not, it was 'non-binding',... it's intent was 'symbolic'. And not necessarily for DEMs or GOPs, but imo, to those whom Lieberman holds himself accountable to, ...and that's to AIPAC.
HRC's vote sent a symbolic message in this context, imo. And I have no doubt taht Lieberman will endorse Hillary, ...at least until after the primaries.
Love everything about your report--from the
typical, lovable Wes to the K/L discussion.
I love your accounts ms. They are always the right blend of substance, insightful observation and humor. You could be some VPs press secretary. Have I said it before?
From one fawning, drooling sycophant to another, I have to say that this is magnificent, MS. But then I've come to expect that from you, especially in FHAs.
Geez...is the SDS still around? I used to see them every Tuesday afternoon as we, the Naval ROTC, marched out to the drill field. But that was in the late 60s.
Your closing -- about his four minutes as a candidate -- put a tear in my eye.
And where's that picture of you and Wes?
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
Wes Clark -- Don't settle for less.
Make America All It Can Be!
was just a feeble attempt at humor ... I don't know if they're still around, kind of doubt it. Probably under some new and improved acronym?
One other thing I forgot... when I was walking across campus to get to Dodd, I heard the UCLA marching band rehearsing in a hall across the lawn-- I'm telling you with the weather we had and the sound of this big band playing-- it was a wonderful appetizer to the event! : )
I love the way you write. This "coup" theme was very similar to the one he gave at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco on the 3rd. I thought it was an amazing way to phrase what has happened to us, but I didn't think I could capture it well so I didn't do a FHA. But you and your trusty recorder did us a great favor by recapping it.
He was on fire at the Commonwealth Club on the 3rd -- he had been hit by Rush's people all day on talk radio and had done that nasty Tucker interview just minutes before. There was no reading of any book passages, just launching into the coup speech and with a personal delivery style than I've never seen in him. It was wonderful. The Club provides audio of all its speakers on the web, but it takes them a couple weeks. When it's up, I'll post it on CCN.
I hope we get to hear it soon! Sounds like another barn burner. I didn't really do any "writing" in this one. Just transcribing. It's Wes who did the writing! I need to make a note to remove some files from that recorder... The software I'd installed on my computer to do it, got wiped out when my hard drive fried in Chicago -- another thing on the To Do list.
Be sure to blog it when you get the audio files! I LOVE the Policy Coup speech-- Four Star speech!
I went to bed hoping to wake up to your FHA, and you did it!! Thank you for helping start Saturday with a smile!
I find it interesting that his HuffPo piece mentioned nothing about his uneasiness with the K-L resolution. I guess it would have been too confusing to express his support for Senator Clinton's vote and express concern about the resolution at the same time, although that seems to be what he's doing.
Have to admit, it is a bit confusing. But how cool that he took a few minutes to slide into "what if" he was a candidate. I bet my bottom $$ if Hillary hadn't run he certainly would have. And wanted to. Badly. I also bet his family certainly didn't want him to run, and I'm sure that had a huge impact in his decision, as well.
Anyways, thanks again for staying up and sharing the event with us in your typically entertaining and comprehensive way!
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right.
I went to bed at 3:30! You may be right about the HuffPo limitations, we can only speculate at this point and speculate we do!! : )
See my response to DonnaZ for more on where he seems to be coming from about it all. He is allowed to be confused as well. We are so accustomed to going to the Wes font for our clarity and to cure our own confusion, that we often don't even consider the fact that even Wes can be confused from time to time and conflicted on a particularly sticky and complex issue. I don't think he's confused on his take on Iran or the Guard... but on the political tools of the moment and only that because of whose hands those tools might be delivered into. How's that for adding to your confusion?!! :P
Another fabulous FHA! a sea of blue
...and Bravo General Clark!
(heh! the infamous memo - somehow I just 'knew' Wes still had his security clearances)
good to have that (and a couple of other things reinforced)
Thanks ms
What would you do...for a Klondike Bar?
for this, ms. And for doing the "hard work". ;)
As always...and again, it's great to hear Wes speak about PNAC "out loud". People need to know how we got where we are and to know where we (probly) are headed in order to fix it (broken record here). Bless him for that.
I haven't doubted Wes. Not for a minute....not even with the HuffPo article. It all made sense and, to me, was in line with what he'd been saying. It was a bit curious, tho....just curious, that's all....and I'll leave it at that.
My doubts lie elsewhere. My concerns are just how much political expedience we are to endure for the next year.....and where the tolerance level is. Mine is zero to none. So we'll just have to see where this path takes each of us...and hopefully, be allowed to take it....in our own due time.
Thanks again, for this wonderful write-up, ms.
And also with the blessings for him speaking out on PNAC. Not many things more needed to be taught to the American public than these foundational doctrines and our policy coup.
It just hit me typing that-- if we don't Fix It soon, history classes of the next century might be learning and memorizing PNAC Doc's as the new Founding Documents of America. Whatta mind spinning thought that is... : /
It's a real privilege to read your submissions. I appreciate every word. Thank you, sincerely.
"Some of them put on their cowboy boots and put their feet up on the desk." -Wes Clark
You've ruined us ms in la. You keep writing great report after great report, and now we just come to expect the best. This report is in keeping with your higher standard of blogging. What is left to say but "thank you."
It so pleases to hear that General Clark was given the opportunity to air some of his domestic policy thoughts. Those ideas are what I love to hear the most. After all, many politicos have snatched onto the words of the Clark-doctrine of foreign policy...some of them even have tried to understand him, but it is the straight up common sense domestic policy ideas that have been lost to 08. At their heart it is always, always, always...do you love your country!
As for the big question: I've walked around this old house, yammered with a few visitors, and all the while, I've been pondering the answer that General Clark gave. I admit that while your report brought some edification, it brought no clarification. I understand that he thinks that Iran's guard is supporting hizbollah etc., and thus, is a terrorists organization. Nevertheless, how does this resolution square with his concerns about the escalating rhetoric and/or the need for a greater diplomatic effort? Those two competing ideas leave me where I started, very uncomforable. Of course, I also remain convinced that the leadership should have pressed for Webb before they pressed for Lieberman, now I don't hold out much hope no matter who signs on or how many times it is introduced.
Thank you again ms in la for taking the time, and finding the words to ask the big question.
You have not converted a man because you have silenced him.--J. V. Marley
Well, I don't they Kyl-Lieberman ratchets up the rhetoric. That's what Bush and his tribe do. I do think that in Clark's mind, while uneasy with its implications if abused, it's an acceptable, if not perfect, stick in his suite of carrotsa and stickes.
If Webb, Clinton, et all are successful with the Webb amendment/bill, Wes can rest much more comfortably.
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
Wes Clark -- Don't settle for less.
Make America All It Can Be!
and it has been clear to me for some time
liberman is a joke, a very bad joke
his defeat in primary in effect unleashed his true colors,
there is a revenge, payback aspect to his invectivenge
Bill (from RI)
Rhetoric Ratcheting that is.... (say that 10 times!)
But my query is more how much weight to put on it in the bigger scheme of rhetoric and rattling and muscling that's been ongoing... Is it a 5 or 6 on a scale of 10 in terms of impact on the situation or a mere 3? Would a few beefy aircraft carriers on the horizon pack more punch than a name calling resolution or a scathing WaPo Op Ed? I dunno.
That would have been one of my questions for Wes but, given the time constraints, I decided to stick with the K/L one. I can say one thing from his responses... he is reading the blog, the blogs, as I had suspected, and is aware of what's being said. Unhappy he is about it, but he is reading. My third question has always been Would you please write a book on how you maintain such consistently high energy levels -- a How To -- so we might all learn your tips? : )
I have been on the road for work a lot over the last two weeks and missing the debates. I only got to skim this report but will return to reading it in full when I return home.
In Kosovo Clark was NATO Supreme Commander but he did not always have the final say on tactics and stragegy. He had to work inside the complex political world of personal egos and competing agendas in order to find a way forward consistent with his goals even when his first advice was not embraced.
I think it would be naive for any of us to not factor in the reality now that Clark is once again a team player and not a solo independent agent. I trust Wes completely. He will never act in a way inconsistent with pursuing the best path available for serving our nation. Clark is in a very different position than I am. He has real influence in important private circles, but having that influence may some times come with some strings attached. Those strings may be worth it. They were at NATO.
Sorry if I am missing from the discussion. I will have more time on Monday.
I was actually thinking yesterday -- Where's Tom? But I know how your trips take you away for blocks of time in a row. I look forward to hearing your take on it all when you get settled.
That team player factor is an important consideration, as you point out, NATO being a stellar training ground for that. Many of us are still trying to wrap our minds around the team Wes is bunting for, then on top of that we get to micromanage and uber-analyze the plays he's calling that we don't get. But that's healthy and something Wes would encourage I think.
Benefits of doubt have fluid borders and can shrink, morph and bloat as the conditions change, and as the case and the person merit it or not. In the case of Wes Clark's judgment I will confess to allowing my benefit of doubt RAM to grow extra gigabytes as needed, and let him lead me, albeit cautiously, to places I might not have ventured to had he not gone in there first and assured me; "S'Okay, you can come in. It's safe." Now that might imply to some that I have slavish, cult like mentality bereft of critical thinking skills ... but if that's so I'd have to counter with the fact that it's only surfaced a few times in all these decades, and only been assigned to a very few extraordinary humans I may have stumbled across in the journey. And Wes is one.
So even without agreeing on all things (who does), I can extend the benefit to him with a head full of question marks and blanks hoping he might fill them in... one day. And even that isn't consistent. Tuesday's doubts can whip up into Wednesday's dread and Thursday's wrath... Then by Sunday you see some new glimmer of hope in something he's said or done and the benefit grows again.
It seems that the malcontent misanthrope lingering inside each of us tries to eradicate all largesse of spirit - to block at the pass any benefit of doubt quotient we might want to extend. Inner struggle ensues and which party wins depends so much on our own life experience and how we choose to respond to problems and pain.
That's the way I'm seeing it from here. Today. Prolly change by Tuesday though.... : )
I agree Tom.
Have definitely concluded that this is Wes "working the issues" doing his best with what's at hand, in his view.
Having re-read his HuffPo diary a number of times now, trying to make sense of it, it's clear that this is not Wes making a compelling case based on his own personal convictions as he always has, because it wasn't and he didn't, but rather, an obligatory piece in an effort to salvage something from the wreckage. Based on his conviction that this is the best way to go.
It doesn't make it any less sad in my eyes, that we have lost the privilege of hearing Wes's very sound voice - "Wes Clark Unplugged" if-you-will and it doesn't make it any more palatable but
I get it
afterall...there had to have been something gained by his swapping hats with Mladic, even tho it didn't seem so and can probably never be fully explained.
...you had to be there (I've always known that)
What would you do...for a Klondike Bar?
I guess you can't really go to Iran with ONLY carrots now can you....
Wes is just as concerned about this being abused as others.
my little dig recorder was a bit on the file full side when I arrived so there were huge chunks of things I did not capture and one was the long education / health care speech. I was note taking too and pic taking and listening .... but the memory bank in my head seemed to have been just as full as the one in the recorder so much slipped into the black hole!
Not to speak for Wes but to answer your question as I see it might be.... I think he stands pretty much where you voice your own discomfort. I think he shares that feeling. When you ask how does that square with his concerns about the rhetoric. Well, it doesn't - 100% square with it. It is the reason the thing gives him "unease" and "discomfort". Like you. I think he too can be conflicted at this point in a fashion that the pieces of this puzzle just don't fit neatly together. There is some squeezing and crimping to be done to make them even be put in place. And a lot of discomfort.
Competing ideas are exactly what is going on.
This FHA was pounded out at the end of a long day, early AM, and pretty weak on the writing in my view. But I just wanted to get it to CCN right away. I wish my recorder and my brain had both had larger memory banks so that I could've brought you more! : )
Maybe nocore will write one?
I don't think they make blue jeans in the US anymore. They can probably get them from China in Iran if they want them. I do think people there want to travel and have a choice about how they live, what they wear, etc...
At least not Levis thanks to WalMart.
Levis and Walmart
If Levi clothing is a runaway hit at Wal-Mart, that may indeed rescue Levi as a business. But what will have been rescued? The Signature line--it includes clothing for girls, boys, men, and women--is an odd departure for a company whose brand has long been an American icon. Some of the jeans have the look, the fingertip feel, of pricier Levis. But much of the clothing has the look and feel it must have, given its price (around $23 for adult pants): cheap. Cheap and disappointing to find labeled with Levi Strauss's name. And just five days before the cheery profit news, Levi had another announcement: It is closing its last two U.S. factories, both in San Antonio, and laying off more than 2,500 workers, or 21% of its workforce. A company that 22 years ago had 60 clothing plants in the United States--and that was known as one of the most socially reponsible corporations on the planet--will, by 2004, not make any clothes at all. It will just import them.
I'm on my last pair of American made 501s. I despise WalMart.
John 11:35
In 1853, Strauss became an American citizen[3]and moved to bustling San Francisco, California, where the California Gold Rush was still in high gear. Levi expected that the mining camps would welcome his buttons, scissors, thread and bolts of fabric; additionally, he had yards of canvas sailcloth intended for tent-making and as covers for the Conestoga wagons that dotted the landscape next to every stream and river in the area.
Strauss and his brother-in-law David Stern opened a dry goods wholesale business called Levi Strauss & Co. Levi, estimated at about 5' 11" and 185 pounds, was often found leading a pack-horse, heavily laden with merchandise, directly into the mining camps found throughout the region. The story goes that both prospectors and miners, often complaining about the easily torn cotton "britches" and pockets that "split right out" gave Levi the idea to make a rugged overall trouser for the miners to wear. These were fashioned from bolts of brown canvas sailcloth, with gold ore storage pockets that were nearly impossible to split. Levi exhausted his original supply of canvas as the demand grew for his hard-wearing overalls, and so he switched to a sturdy fabric called serge, made in Nimes, France by the Andre family. Originally called serge de Nimes, the name was soon shortened to denim.
Sad...really, SF longer hosts Levi & Strauss
I hate WalMart too
What would you do...for a Klondike Bar?
A primary recall from 4th grade California history was the Levi's story
much bigger than Marshall at Sutter's
thanks to wickipedia for time-traveling the details
if you need to know where the clouds went
yesterday ms, they moved north :)
What would you do...for a Klondike Bar?
The Prison Blues® brand was established by Inside Oregon Enterprises, a division of the Oregon Department of Corrections. It was started with a federal government grant funded by drug money seizures, and as a plan to defray incarceration costs in the state of Oregon. The state conducted a thorough study determining that Oregon Manufacturers would not suffer from a Prison Garment Industry.
The Prison Blues® factory was created in 1989 to manufacture jeans, yard coats, and work shirts made by and for Oregon inmates. Marketing began to fuel interest in Prison Blues® products that translated into more work opportunities for more inmates to work in the factory making our authentic, prison-made blue jean brand.
John 11:35
Is Carhart the name you're trying to remember?
Cathcart was my nosey, "you shouldn't get married after you graduate, oh me, oh my," office practice teacher when I was a senior in high school. Believe me I would have avoided anything with that name for hubby's work clothes...but he did own Carharts. :)
even at the places that sell expensive jeans, really sucks. I want my good old denim Levis back. I don't care if they make them in Mexico, just so long as the quality is just as good. It's better for the environment if they make them here. Shipping stuff around that can be made here contributes to global warming.
I am not sure what we make anymore.
And I am SO tired of having to constantly toss out broken and defective Chinese made items. Sure they may have been cheap but in the end it all adds up to wasted money when the shelf life is so minimal. OTOH, I still have my original old Maytag washer dryer and they rock! The commercial is true. I've had the repairman over about twice in decades!! Ah the old days...
and it's required repairs after I got it almost 5 years ago. I have their dishwasher too. I'm just waiting to see what happens there. I don't know that anything is made here intended to last. Certainly the stuff we've sent overseas to be made isn't intended to make it for long at all. I've decided to go the Leonardo DiCaprio route for the environment and buy second hand when I can. I'm picky though. I live in a place where people get rid of really good stuff, so I can be picky. I know people who totally dress from stuff they get at garage sales around here.
I just woke up a little bit ago to see all these nice comments.
There is more to report that I could do a part 2 - but I may just embellish here. Basically more questions. On Rush, Blackwater, an interesting future Iran scenario... My favorite tune was still the Policy Coup just because of the brilliant framing and that each time he launches into that story... I see before me the bravery of a true soldier... Because it's one of those secreted, grimy stories that will litter the dustbin of history forever-- and here's Wes... standing up in a public platform shining a light on it. A force of enlightenment.
I noticed (maybe more than usual - maybe my imagination) that Wes seemed to have implemented some extra careful language into this one. Not that he doesn't always use great care when choosing his words, he does and I've always loved that about his speaking, his specificity and command of language-- but there were a few phrases here and there that seemed designed to answer questions or objections -- preemptively. I am thinking maybe it's a result of having inched closer and closer to political realms since his 04 run and what he's learned to avoid some of the backsplash. He didn't dilute anything, just a few added clauses like one might insert into a contract after legal review. : )
But that might be just my perception. He never uses his impressive linguistic skills for flash or show, but always in a communicative and instructive way. He told us all YUGO means SOUTH and SLAV - obviously was for Slavic -- and we understand just that much more another slice of history. Wes the Professor is a hard image to shake when you see him at UCLA. Wes loves being the Professor.
ABOUT THE STUDENTS:
I must share some stuff about the crowd... the young kids seated next to me.(I'd say around 19 or 20) When I sat down, were involved in this terribly heated political discussion. There were three guys and the larger one ruled the roost as the alpha male. But the fascinating part to me was overhearing not only the level of passion they had for politics but the knowledge-- it was like "listening" to a Clarkie blogument about candidates. They were debating about Guiliani (not in a good way! These kids were liberals) and Romney, they covered all of the Dems as well, but I didn't hear any of the spoon fed media tripe cliche analyses you might expect in any offhand American discussion like this. It made me so very happy to see college kids so uber informed, intelligent, and involved. And this translated through the room. All eyes and ears glued to Wes when he spoke. This was hope giving for some futute leadership pool we might look forward to.
I don't get the opportunity to hang with students so this was enlightening. Our racial makeup at UCLA is the picture of diversity, I don't think there is a group that isn't represented there. It's beautiful to see.
At one point- it was so cute (and I digress for a second) Wes asked the audience "Has anybody here actually READ the Federalist Papers?"
A tiny Asian girl in glasses and a bright yellow top behind me very shyly half-raised her hand and then quickly pulled it down again, smiling and mouthing "I did" as if hoping no one would really notice. Her guy friend next to her, long mop of curly hair looked astonished "You did?!" and she again, shyly, giggled and nodded. Wes of course saw her and acknowledged her with a big smile and nod. And a new Clarkie was born before my eyes. A hundred new Clarkies were born. These kids ate him up I'm telling you.
Back to the ardent guys next to me. When the event wrapped and we filed out, the guys were talking behind me "Wow! I can't believe he actually answered questions! Its so RARE that a politician will take questions yet alone really answer them" Kid two says--"Yeah, not only is it rare -- I think for me it's the first and only time I've seen it!" I turned around and told them how much Wes adores that part of the venue and said "Get your book signed and ask him more. You'll see, he'll engage you in a discussion, he loves it"
Again the kids say "That is so rare..." And I say "Yep, he is an extremely rare breed. And he will answer with what he's thinking, not what he thinks he should say." Well they were all fired up having seen an actual man who dwells part time in political circles that really talks the talk. My heart was warmed several times yesterday by the kids response to Wes.
A few minutes later, another cute Asian girl with long black hair in a brown sweater -- looked to have tears in her eyes and was fanning her face frantically with her hands, obviously on the brink of some sort of hysteria. Her friend asked what was up, and she said..."Oh, I couldn't believe it, he's like this big celebrity... and he was just so nice and .... Oh... Oh.... OMG!" She was post-verbal. Obviously just reeling from her very first General Clark contact. Another Clarkie was born.
I left the room with a renewed faith in the future of our country, from both General Clark's stirring speaking and from an auditorium packed with hope and freshness. Give them 15 years to season.... and if UCLA is any indication, we should be rockin by 2022... : )
I'm sure your enjoyment of the event would have been even greater if you hadn't been so frenetically busy taking such accurate notes (either mentally or on paper) so the rest of us could feel like we'd been there.
Thank you SO MUCH!
As to this:
'Wes seemed to have implemented some extra careful language into this one,' I commented recently (can't find where) that he seemed [something,] may have said 'troubled' when speaking, post endorsement. He KNOWS the challenging bridges he'll be asked to cross, and he's preparing, as ever.
Great to hear about the young'uns. Wes is STAYING!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi's
excerpt
Levi Strauss & Co. is a worldwide corporation organized into three geographic divisions:
Levi Strauss, North Americas (LSNA), based in the San Francisco headquarters
Levi Strauss Europe (LSE), based in Brussels
Asia Pacific Division (APD), based in Singapore
The company employs a staff of approximately 8,850 people worldwide, and owns and develops three major brands:
on Wes and the K/L tempest.
The way I was left seeing it was that perhaps we are all unaccustomed to getting so many shades of gray from a man we associate with clean and decisive moral absolutes. I mean that in a good way....
Wes himself seems to be treading water in a sea of unfamiliar gray looking for a black or white life preserver to hang onto.
He's clearly conflicted. His supporters are confused. The issue is complex. And there remains no neat or facile fit to any of it.
Not writing it off but trying to explore the contradictions that it seems Wes is feeling about the whole thing and maybe with a little more patience, it will become more clear to us all. I think one of Wes's many unique rare characteristics is his ability to think, see long range. It's not only rare amongst humans, but especially in political circles to have that kind of foresight and clarity. I've always felt he walks with one foot in the future. And come to trust in it.
Again... maybe there is info, intel, and strategy that we here are not only not privy to - but perhaps even totally unaware of - that plays into Wes's current "uncomfort" condition. I would wager in the mix there is some major dosage of long term thinking and strategic planning weighing heavily. And I would bet the beneficiary of that planning would be the country -- and not Wes Clark or Hillary Clinton.
But then what do I know? I'm just another drooling sycophant! :P
And now I need to go soak up the remainder of the blue sky white cloud weather he left us!
like "do you approve of Hillary's vote on the Kyl/Lieberman amendment?"
Well, anything with "Lieberman" in the name is bound to be distasteful, yet terrorists are in fact terrorists. That doesn't mean supporting a war with Iran, it means that what is is, in fact, what is. So a vote in favor of the amendment carries with it all sorts of unfortunate connotations that can't be explained with a sound bite. Whether that was the intention of those who worded the amendment, that's the way it turned out.
And then there's the fact that supporting a candidate in as public a way as Wes has cast his support behind Hillary puts a person in a difficult position. I personally have no problems with telling my friends that I am as strong a supporter of Wes Clark as ever, even while I still have issues with various aspects of her candidacy. If I were a public person who'd cast my support behind her, I would have a harder time explaining the nuances of, just for a single example, that Kyl/Lieberman vote.
I certainly respect the way he doesn't just say what people want him to say. It's like the way people want to just get the heck out of Iraq yesterday, but, in real life, we just can't do that.
His having to explain Hillary's vote, after having cast his support behind her, may be similar to the way that I and many of us are having to look at her in a new light. Somebody we trust has made a decision that we may intially disagree with but, because they have our trust, we're willing to at least take a harder look.
It's all so complicated and not suited to yes/no thinking. I can't wait until the 2008 campaign is over and we can get somebody in charge who isn't motivated by ideology, so we can maybe trust that decisions are being made not on some imaginary "good vs. evil" basis but on the basis of complicated facts and nuanced information that's all been weighed carefully away from the television cameras and sound-bite recorders.
is one of the major problems with Bushco (too many others to name). Nothing's ever just black or white.
As for the K/L Resolution, the offensive language was removed before it passed.
Why did Reid let this come up for a vote? I think holyJoe holds some leverage because of the close split in the Senate (thanks alot Connecticut).
Wes Clark: Soldier, Scholar, Statesman.
I'm becoming increasingly convinced that some people are simply wired to engage in yes-no/black-white thinking, while others are not. It's not a choice people make. They were either born or conditioned into that way of thinking.
One of my favorite lines: There are two kinds of people in the world -- those who divide the world into two kinds of people and those who do not.
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
Wes Clark -- Don't settle for less.
Make America All It Can Be!
..."I always keep an open mind...only not quite so wide open as to permit my brain to fall out."
What would you do...for a Klondike Bar?
Reminds me of another: --
Before you give somebody a piece of your mind, make sure you can get along with whats left
That the offensive language was removed from K/L prior to passing is arguable, depending on one's p.o.v.
Why would you, as a senator, deliberately offend the country with whom you, as a senator, claim you wish to negotiate by naming their official state Army 'terrorists'? Placing the name of a uniformed official army, or any branch thereof, on a terrorist list is a first for the U.S. if not mistaken. The message we received back from Iran was "up yours too, buddy", and the listing of our military and our CIA on their (s)hit-list as "terrorists" in retaliation.
What our troops on the ground will receive in return from Iran as a result of the passage of k/l remains to be seen. To date there is no solid intel proving that the IRG are guilty of crossing the border soley to massacre our troops, as bush reiterates time and time again.
So my question is, has the IRG now been
incentivized to do so by the Lieberman Act?
How black and white is that?
[note: much of what I believe on this issue, I learned from Wes Clark. He's my expert.]
watch and listen...
"You don't win people over by bombing their relatives." -- Wes Clark
because I feel good knowing, if I repeat anything I read here, I would not misquote the General...wb
(nice nic!)
See this please:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13540#comment-246321
and just know that the parts where I indicated we were talking in the book line were not recorded but there were "eye/ear" witnesses to it if that makes you feel more secure! Two other Clarkies.
I think I made the distinction in the diary which words were my paraphrasing and which were transcription.
Thanks!
blind I haven't see the link to the recording; I just thought MSLA would get around to posting the link after she had some rest; she bounded out of the lecture right to blogging - bless her - really I don't know where she gets the energy :-)
yet .... :-) Some clarity about the audio link.
There is none, first of all!
Secondly I think the poster who said they were glad there was a recording was referring to backup support if they wanted to quote from this page, which is cool -- the places where there is no recording I indicated -- like in the book line, I didn't stick my recorder on! By that time I was out of memory anyways. Also I had to "spot" record the lecture as my files were more full than I'd thought so I took copious notes as well, being cautious this time not to strain the wrist thingy again... Heh.
It's now a series of stop / go / pause / records that I captured to supplant my notes so there is no continuity and when I saw the file was near the end... I kept stopping it more frequently in case he should give one of those ground breaking answers I might need to record and not write fast enough. So words and sentences are cut off in the middle.
Also, and this is bad, but since my hard drive fried in August and I got the new one installed, I have loaded up many of the applications that were lost-- but not all. Not the one that downloads my dig recorder audio yet. There were lots of things to redo. And not lots of time to do them. : )
Next time I'll go with a clean memory and post a link for you all! Of course that means I need to reinstall the software for the recorder now so I can transfer those files out.
Hope that makes sense!
So it is on the file (about 3/4 the lecture that is).
If anyone really wants to hear the choppy bites, after I get this derned program reinstalled I can get it put up for you.
Two days late getting here, but what a treat to find a FHA from Clarkie blogger-reporter extraordinaire ms-in-la!
Like the "post-verbal" student, I can say little more than "Wow!"
I'm glad the students got a chance to hear Wes speak in person and love the perceptions about the student response.
Thank-you so much, ms, for sharing in such detail and in your wonderful multi-colored writing style.
carol4clark
General Wes Clark * * * * 4 Stars Over Texas
I know you've been busy but we've missed you around the neighborhood.
Thank you for stopping by to read and your nice comments. Hope all is going well in TX. : )
I did find the great pumpkin as I bumbled around 
and there are likely to be some mistakes in there cause I'm really tired!
There was lots more stuff on my rocking dig recorder but ...
Zzzzzzzzzzz