|
 Wesley
Clark
excerpts
from
the Iowa Daily Report
October 1-15, 2003
…
Houston Chronicle
article by Katharine Q. Seelye of the New York
Times, “Clark out to prove he’s best candidate”.
Excerpts: “WASHINGTON -- Gen. Wesley Clark, the
newly minted Democratic presidential contender,
swept through the capital on Tuesday, introducing
himself to House members and trying to persuade them
that his candidacy was viable. He was guided by Rep.
Charles Rangel of New York, one of the most powerful
Democrats in Congress and an influential black
leader. About 65 members went to meet the
general at the house of John Winburn, a Democratic
lobbyist who is a friend of Rangel. Among them was
John Dingell of Michigan, the senior Democrat in the
House. The meeting was
closed. .... Clark has 10 House
endorsements. (10/01/2003)
…
Boston Globe online article by Peter S.
Canellos, “Unlike past generals, Clark will
have to fight”. Excerpts: “Almost from the
moment retired General Wesley K. Clark announced for
the presidency, news organizations began showing
pictures of past generals who became president,
arrayed like a new set of collectibles from the
Franklin Mint: Washington, Jackson, Harrison, Grant,
Eisenhower, and more. But parallels between Clark's
run and those of past generals are nothing but
trivia. With a few exceptions, generals were
courted by party bosses to front their tickets the
way producers try to sign up movie stars to rescue
failing Broadway musicals. The generals were handed
their nominations with little or no effort on their
parts. Clark is the first general to suit up for
a presidential run since the nominating process
became democratic in 1972. That means he's going to
have to do something few previous
general-politicians have had to do: fight.
Despite a medium-long list of congressional
endorsements and encouragement from the stepdaddy of
most Democratic contenders, Bill Clinton, Clark is
running an insurgency campaign. That means he's
going to have to take on not only George W. Bush,
but the whole political establishment, running as a
maverick against all the professional politicians.
...Will they love Wes
Clark when they see their military man hustling for
votes just like another politician? (10/01/2003)
…
Union Leader online article by AP writer
Kelley Shannon, “Democratic candidate Clark
visits Texas”. Excerpts: “Retired Army Gen.
Wesley Clark swooped into the heart of President
Bush's territory Monday and declared the nation
needs a change in leadership. "I'm happy to be down
here in George W. Bush's home state. I think people
in Texas know very well what this administration is
Washington is about today," said Clark, who
entered the Democratic presidential race 12 days
ago. Clark repeated his call for an independent
investigation into reports that a Bush
administration official leaked the identity of a
covert CIA agent. Clark said the name was released
"in violation of law, in violation of good sense, in
violation of protection of the American intelligence
system." "It's wrong, it's shady, it's cheap. And
we're calling for an independent commission to be
established," Clark said, to cheers from the crowd.
… Clark also said Bush's tax cuts have hurt the
economy and that Bush has taken the United States
into "an unnecessary war in Iraq in which we've
lost hundreds of people. We don't need to be there."
After folk singers warmed up the crowd in this
Democratic bastion of Texas, Clark stepped onto a
stage in front of a large Texas flag at a downtown
park, where some 400 people greeted him with chants
of "We want Clark!" Some held signs that said,
"Texans for Clark" and "Don't Mess with Wes." During
a pause Clark's speech, someone in the audience
yelled, "Give 'em hell, Wes." Clark responded: "Let
me tell you something. We're going to give them the
truth and they're going to think it's hell."
He went on to say that he was
paraphrasing President Harry Truman and
he praised Truman's presidency. "He
understood where the buck stopped,"
Clark said. (10/01/2003)
…
Wesley Clark leads and support for Bush plummets in
New York survey. Clark pulls in 18 percent in the
New York survey by the Quinnipiac University
Polling Institute.
FoxNews.com carries the following AP
report, headlined “Clark Pulls Ahead of
Democratic Pack in New York.” Excerpts:
“Wesley Clark is among the leading Democratic
candidates in New York just two weeks after he
entered the presidential race, according to a poll
of state voters that also shows President Bush's
ratings falling. Clark, a retired general
with no political experience, was at 18
percent in the survey by the Quinnipiac
University Polling Institute released Wednesday.
Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean had 17
percent support, Sen. Joe Lieberman
of Connecticut 13 percent and Sen. John Kerry of
Massachusetts 12 percent. The numbers were
within the poll's margin of error of plus or minus 5
percentage points for Democratic voters. The
remaining candidates in the 10-way field were in
single digits. In a reflection of Clark's
political strength -- and Bush's drop -- the race's
newcomer outpaced the president 48 percent to 41
percent. Several of the other Democratic
candidates also were favored over Bush in the
Democratic-leaning state, with Dean over Bush,
47-43 percent; Lieberman favored, 49-42
percent and Kerry 48-43 percent. Bush
and Missouri Rep. Dick Gephardt (search) were
running close, 46 percent to 44 percent. The
poll found Bush's job approval among New Yorkers
had dropped from 52 percent in June to 42 percent,
close to where he was prior to the Sept. 11
terrorist attacks. After the attacks on the World
Trade Center and Pentagon, Bush's approval ratings
in New York soared into the 80s. Republicans plan to
nominate Bush at their convention in New York in
August 2004. "He's had a bad run," Maurice
Carroll, director of the Quinnipiac poll, said of
Bush, adding: "The economy is sinking in." In
New York, there are 5 million Democrats and 3
million Republicans. The poll surveyed 1,201
registered voters, including 454 Democratic voters
Sept. 23-29 and had a margin of error of plus or
minus 3 percentage points.”(10/02/2003)
…
Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark has
jumped into the Rush Limbaugh controversy. He says
ABC should fire Limbaugh for remarks he made about
Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb.
The
New York Times article, written by AP
political writer Ron Fournier, headline,
“Democratic candidate Clark urges ABC to fire
Limbaugh over McNabb remark”. Excerpts: “Democratic
presidential candidate Wesley Clark on Wednesday
urged ABC to fire conservative commentator Rush
Limbaugh for saying the media wanted Philadelphia
Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb to succeed because
he is black. Clark, a retired Army general who
entered the race Sept. 17, called the remarks
"hateful and ignorant speech." Before McNabb led
the Eagles to a 23-13 victory over the Buffalo Bills
on Sunday, Limbaugh said on ESPN's pre-game show
that he didn't think McNabb was as good as
perceived. "I think what we've had here is a little
social concern in the NFL. The media has been very
desirous that a black quarterback do well," Limbaugh
said. "There is a little hope invested in McNabb,
and he got a lot of credit for the performance of
this team that he didn't deserve. The defense
carried this team." ABC is the parent company of
ESPN.s In a letter to ABC president Alex Wallau,
Clark said, "There can be no excuse for such
statements. Mr. Limbaugh has the right to say
whatever he wants, but ABC and ESPN have no
obligation to sponsor such hateful and ignorant
speech. Mr. Limbaugh should be fired immediately(10/02/2003)
…
NewYorkTimes online article by Bernard
Weinraub, “The Latest Star on the Hollywood Circuit
– Clark”. Excerpts: “The hottest star in
Hollywood at this moment is not Nicole or Julia or
the two Toms, Cruise and Hanks. It is a 58-year-old
retired four-star general who seems to have
Hollywood's Democratic Party loyalists — which
means the bulk of the town — in a fever. "General
Clark definitely has the flavor of the month
status," Steve Tisch, a producer and prominent
Democratic contributor, said about Gen. Wesley
K. Clark of the Army, the newest entry in the
Democratic presidential primary contest. Mr. Tisch
may be overstating, or understating, the case.
Hollywood may turn out to have a short-term
infatuation with General Clark, comparable to the
way agents, producers and executives embraced Steven
Seagal for what seemed like a few minutes and then
dropped him. Or General Clark may have the endurance
and staying power of Clint Eastwood. Whatever the
case, General Clark is, in a word sometimes used by
Variety about a film or a star, a luminary. He is in
town on Wednesday and Thursday for a series of
fund-raisers and meetings given by some of the most
vocal and affluent Democrats in town. They
include Norman Lear, the producer; Peter Morton,
chairman of the Hard Rock Hotel and Casino; Larry
David, creator of "Seinfeld"; and Mr. Tisch, a
member of the wealthy Tisch family in New York.
The couple Mary Steenburgen and Ted Danson,
longtime friends and supporters of former President
Bill Clinton, are also holding an event for General
Clark. Richard Donner, the producer-director, and
Jerry Moss, the music executive, are planning a
fund-raising breakfast. The other week, General
Clark had lunch with Steven Spielberg. … Andy
Spahn, a political adviser who runs corporate
affairs for Dreamworks, attended the Spielberg lunch
with General Clark, who is based in Little Rock,
Ark. "There's a lot of buzz about General Clark
now," Mr. Spahn said. "He combines in one package
the attributes of several other candidates. He's got
the Southern base of John Edwards, the outsider
status of Howard Dean and a military record that
trumps John Kerry." … Mark Fabiani, a top
adviser to General Clark,said, "The outpouring of
interest from California has been incredible, and
we're struggling to keep up with it."
(10/02/2003)
…
Washington Times article: Clark’s
deception; Clark’s disingenuous behavior continues
to be exposed. Back in December 1995, the
Clinton administration announced it was sending U.S.
military troops to the Balkans for one year. "It
was common knowledge within the Pentagon, as the
deployment plan was coordinated among the services,
that the Clinton administration intention from the
get-go was to keep the forces there longer, but to
make the one-year commitment to get past the 1996
presidential election," the official said.
"General Clark was the leading cheerleader within
the [Joint Chiefs of Staff] for the Clinton plan,"
said the official, who sat in on one meeting when it
was made clear to all present that the public
position of only a year was a ruse. U.S.
troops have been in the Balkans since January 1996,
despite the best efforts of Defense Secretary
Donald H. Rumsfeld to get them out.
(10/03/2003)
… Clark to speak
to Black Caucus. Fox News reports that
retired Gen. Wesley Clark, who grew up at Little
Rock, and now lives there, is scheduled to appear at
the forum in his hometown on Sunday at Philander
Smith College. "We want to have an opportunity
as a caucus and our constituents to hear directly
from the various candidates and to be able to pose
questions that speak specifically to the needs of
our community," said Sen. Henry Wilkins, D-Pine
Bluff, the caucus chairman. "We hope to get a better
feel for where each of the candidates is coming from
and how they'll meet the needs of our constituents."
(10/03/2003)
… The Democratic National Committee meeting in
Washington D.C. proved to be easy ground for the
2004 presidential candidates. According to an
article in the
Des Moines Register, by Jane Norman,
candidates Wesley Clark, John Kerry, Joe
Lieberman, Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich and Carol
Moseley Braun took aim at President Bush – and
also each other…Wesley Clark said he is
pro-affirmative action, pro-choice, pro-environment,
pro-education and pro-health care. "If that
ain't a Democrat, I must be at the wrong meeting,"
he said. "There was only one place for me, and I
want to tell you, it is great to be home." Sen.
John Kerry said that his opposition to Bush
"is not a commitment I made in the last few weeks or
last year, or that I stumbled across in the course
of this campaign" and that he "stood against"
both presidents Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.
Kerry also said he and the "Democratic wing of the
Democratic Party" opposed the Contract With America
and former GOP Speaker Newt Gingrich in 1994,
appropriating a phrase often used by Dean. Sen.
Joe Lieberman of Connecticut said Republicans once
were the party of Abraham Lincoln and Dwight
Eisenhower, but "today they are the party of Rush
Limbaugh and Arnold Schwarzenegger." "That's the
party of values?" said Lieberman. Howard Dean
said he wants a president "who's going to appeal to
the very best in us and not the very worst," and
that "we have been silent too long." Democrats are
out of power in the White House and Congress because
"we didn't stand up for what we believed in," Dean
said. Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio said he led
opposition to the war among House Democrats, in
defiance of a leadership that includes Gephardt.
"I believe we truly represented the feelings of
millions of Americans," Kucinich said. "It is time
to bring the troops home." Former Illinois Sen.
Carol Moseley Braun said the voters "are ready to
embrace a clear alternative to George Bush."
(10/04/2003)
… The
Associated Press is reporting today that Wesley
Clark has raised over $3.5M in his first two weeks
campaigning. The article, written by AP’s
Sharon Theimer, points out that newcomer Clark
raised more in those two weeks than some of the
other wannabes (e.g. notables, John Edwards and
Bob Graham). It looks like Clark has made good
on his Internet strategy, too – over two-thirds
of the money raised is attributed to the Internet.
(10/05/2003)
… more on Clark: Clark faxed voter registration
form to Pulaski County, Arkansas, on Friday & Wes
visits El Dorado, Arkansas’ Musicfest on Saturday.
This report, from the
ElDoradoNew.com: “All over the land, there’s
a new spirit of patriotism. People sense there is
something wrong with this administration,” Clark
said… On Friday, he faxed a registration form
from Washington to the Pulaski County registrar’s
office, officially aligning himself with the
Democratic Party.” The El Dorado News also
reports Clark is holding a town hall meeting today
at Philander Smith College in Little Rock, Arkansas.
(10/05/2003)
… Wesley Clark takes a jab at Jeb, as in the
brother of GWB and governor of Florida.
Washington Times
InPolitics writer Greg Pierce
reports: “Democratic
presidential candidate Wesley Clark on Saturday
accused Florida Gov. Jeb Bush of wrongdoing in the
2000 election. The retired general, speaking in El
Dorado, Ark., "suggested that [President] Bush's
brother, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, influenced the
recount in that state in the 2000 presidential
election," the Associated Press reported without
further elaboration. However, the wire service did
quote Mr. Clark as saying:
"I don't put a lot of
stock in these polls that have me leading President
Bush 49 to 46 percent, but if things keep going this
way, he's going to need a brother in the 49 other
states to win this election." (10/06/2003)
… Newbie candidate Wesley Clark took his
turn in Iowa’s Sen. Tom Harkin’s “Hear it from the
Heartland” presidential forum yesterday in Fort
Dodge, Iowa. The
Des Moines Register’s Thomas Beaumont
covered the forum. Excerpts: “Democratic
presidential candidate Wesley Clark defended his
allegiance to the party Monday under pointed
questioning. "I made a recent decision," Clark
said. "I was either going to be the loneliest
Republican in America, or I was going to be a heck
of a Democrat." But Fort Dodge lawyer Neven
Mulholland pressed Clark on recent revelations that
he was the keynote speaker at an Arkansas Republican
fund-raiser in May 2001 and that he voted for Ronald
Reagan for president in 1980. "I did not vote for
George W. Bush. I voted for Al Gore," Clark told
the 50-year-old lawyer. But Mulholland said Clark's
response about his political affiliation was
cursory. "I don't think he really answered the
question," said Mulholland, "I don't think he
gave us a lot of specifics tonight. He's going to
have to be more specific to get my support."
Clark, who has not said whether he will compete in
the Iowa caucuses, was quizzed about health care,
jobs, taxes, abortion, education and foreign policy
issues by members of the audience of roughly 300
central Iowa Democratic activists. Harkin has held
out the possibility of an endorsing a candidate but
said he would not decide until next month. Clark
must decide soon whether to organize a campaign for
the Iowa caucuses or bypass the leadoff nominating
event, party leaders said Monday. Clark met with
Gov. Tom Vilsack and labor groups in Des Moines, but
he remained tight-lipped about whether he would
mount an aggressive caucus campaign.
Iowa
Democratic Party Chairman Gordon Fischer said
Clark's two trips [to Iowa] have been productive,
but he urged the former NATO commander to commit to
Iowa soon. "There's time for him to do that, but I
would think he would want to make a decision fairly
soon," Fischer said (10/07/2003)
…
Wesley Clark may well remember this day as GONG
Wednesday – not only has Clark’s national
campaign manager Donnie Fowler quit and his official
web blog suffered a cyber-meltdown, now the
Washington Post says he may have acted illegally
in accepting fees for his campaign speeches.
According to the article: “Clark touted his
candidacy during paid appearances at DePauw
University in Indiana and other campuses after he
entered the presidential race on Sept. 17. Under the
laws governing the financing of presidential
campaigns, candidates cannot be paid by
corporations, labor unions, individuals or even
universities for campaign-related events. The
Federal Election Commission (FEC) considers such
paid political appearances akin to a financial
contribution to a candidate. Clark is getting
paid as much as $30,000 for speeches,
according to people familiar with his arrangement.
He has two more scheduled for next week.” The
article goes on to quote Clark’s general counsel
(translation: attorney) as saying the General
did not break FEC laws because Clark “is not
attempting through those speeches to specifically…
influence his election. Oldaker says Clark only ‘incidentally’
mentioned his candidacy in the speeches. [IPW NOTE:
more fodder for our ‘amateur’ charge…] (10/08/2003)
...
An editorial, titled "Come to Iowa, Mr. Clark,"
pinpoints the fallacy of Clark's avoiding Iowa in
his presidential quest. Excerpts: "...To
become a complete candidate, Clark needs to share
his thinking on the whole array of issues. Iowa
would be a good place to begin. As a late
entrant, Clark might be tempted to bypass Iowa. The
other major contenders have been plying Iowa for
many months. Moreover, the caucuses are dominated by
Democratic regulars who will not be quick to embrace
a newcomer to their party. He might stand a better
chance in states that have open primaries instead of
caucuses. Nevertheless, Clark should come to Iowa.
He would not be expected to win the caucuses or
perhaps even to do well, but meeting with Iowans
in their homes, cafes, church basements and union
halls -- the essence of a caucus campaign -- is the
perfect way for the American people to get to know
Wesley Clark and for him to know them. Come on,
general. Establish a beachhead in Iowa."
(10/08/2003)
…
With Florida Sen. Bob Graham officially out of
contention, who’ll get the political Graham goodies?
In today’s
Des Moines Register, political reporter
Thomas Beaumont says most of the spoils will go to
newcomer Wesley Clark. Beaumont cites
Graham’s 13 Iowa offices and 50 Iowa staffers, a
wise acquisition for Camp Clark – if
Clark chooses to go for it in earnest in Iowa’s
caucuses. According to Graham’s Iowa campaign
chairwoman Shelia McGuire Riggs, “I think he [Clark]
would be wise to do that. I know that Clark’s
national office has been calling. The Graham staff
is top-notch and very experienced.”
(10/08/2003)
… It was “Amateur Night”
at Camp Clark last night, as national campaign
manager Donnie Fowler abandoned his post. Fowler, one
of three Gore2000 political pros,
resigned leaving ample speculation as to the
real cause. A breaking news report by
Associated Press political reporter
Ron Fournier cited two anonymous associates
as saying Fowler had disagreements with
communications director Mark
Fabiani of California and Washington
policy adviser Ron Klain –
both had been aboard Gore2000 with
Fowler. Two main areas of disagreement were
connected to Fowler’s departure: Fowler’s
concerns that the Internet draft-Clark
supporters are not being taken seriously by ‘top
campaign advisers’, and Fowler’s frustration
with the campaign’s over the top focus on
Washington DC and below the radar approach in
key states. The AP/Fournier article then drew a
parallel to the ill-fated Gore2000 campaign,
which was similarly plagued with an
overly-Washington focus. The article pointed out
Fowler’s computer-savvy asset to the campaign
and his support of the grassroots draft Clark
supporters. With Fowler out, how would the
Internet loyalists and Internet aspect of the
campaign fare?…
Reuters posted a seemingly conflicting
report later in the evening, attributing
Fowler’s resignation to a flap over his
impending demotion – a glaring bit of revelation
that was not in the AP/Fournier story.
Again, anonymous sources were used as the source
of this information. The article quoted an
anonymous campaign source as saying, “Clark
needs some more experienced political hands
running things." … Meanwhile, two to three
hours after AP/Fournier’s first report, a
revised version surfaced – or I
should say, didn’t surface. Gone was
the Yahoo.com front page status (it originally
got top billing over the California recall race
news!). After much searching, the
AP/Fournier article was found buried deep in the
links of YahooNews…. no more front page Yahoo
news reference. The article had been revised to
include the information evidenced in the
Reuter’s account, attributing Fowler’s departure
to his objection to a pending demotion.
With
anonymous sources abounding in both the AP and
Reuters stories, no concrete facts emerged
beyond the basic: Donnie Fowler is gone after
three weeks on the job. And that can’t be “good”
news for Camp Clark. (10/08/2003)
… An IPW exclusive: The resignation
last night of Clark campaign manager Donnie
Fowler blew the lid off a Pandora’s Blog Box
last night, mixing Clark loyalists and
not-so-loyalists in a murky mess of postings.
The mayhem began at 6:34 pm, as news first hit
of Fowler’s resignation. Initial shock and
confusion soon gave way, as Clark loyalists
posted their deepest -- and prior un-posted
– doubts and fears. Many expressed frustration
over the campaign: lack of response to emails,
poor blog functionality that drives people away,
a newsletter sign-up with no newsletter, money
paid for a Clark book that never showed up,
promises not kept by Clark and top staff to post
on the blog personally, lack of supplies
and coordination for events, etc, etc. But
the hardest hitting comments were about the
General himself. Referring to the ring of
three running the campaign (now two, with
Fowler’s exit), comments appeared ranging
from “If he [Clark] can’t manage three men, how
does he expect to run the country?” to “No big
deal.” Waters thus stirred, comments
surfaced on Clark’s lobbying past, lack of
substance in his answers, and apparent inability
to get his act together regarding the campaign
itself. Smelling blog blood, rival bloggers –
or trolls (the term for
evil-intentioned, assassin bloggers) --
entered the fray. They posed as official Clark
blog staff, unleashing a firestorm of false
comments. It worked. The woefully
inexperienced Clark-sters were soon at each
other’s cyber throats, branding their own as
“trolls” and kicking them off the blog comments
string... IPW COMMENTARY: All of this
proves a simple point: Wesley Clark is an
amateur. A brilliant, brave, war-medal
saturated amateur. The General’s late in
the race start, rag-tag conglomeration of
Internet foot soldiers and holier-than-thou
Gore2000 pros, and bungling verbal flip
flops is painful evidence thereof. Politics is
more than head knowledge. It requires the kind
of ‘know-how’ that springs from the gut -- not
from the head and not from the staff. Perhaps a
simple analogy is in order:
Humpty-Dumpty sat on a wall,
Humpty-Dumpty had a great fall,
And all the king’s horses and all the
king’s men
Couldn’t put Humpty together again.
Clark’s fall from the NATO wall as Supreme
Commander is not something that can be ‘put back
together again’ through the office of President
of the United States. NATO did not give Clark
the title of Supreme Commander because he was an
amateur soldier. (10/08/2003)
… Paul Bedard, of
WashingtonWhispers fame, writes about ‘Wesley
Clark’s soap opera.’ As reported in
yesterday’s
IPW Daily Report, Camp Clark chaos is evident.
Excerpts from the article: “The
political intrigue plaguing Wesley Clark's
Democratic presidential campaign continues to
deepen. Insiders tell our Suzi Parker that
one day after campaign manager Donnie Fowler
quit over concerns that Clark was letting
Washington hands, not Clark fans and activists, run
the show, he fled Arkansas. Sources say his foes
pushed him out by leaking his resignation to the
Associated Press Tuesday while negotiations over his
role were being discussed and before he quit. The
message being sent: Hasta la vista, baby.
Interesting, said the insiders, was who showed up
minutes after Fowler left his office: Ex-John
Kerry and Al Gore spokesman Chris
Lehane. …Add to that the turmoil around Clark
spokeswoman Kym Spell, who previously worked
for both Kerry and John Edwards, two of
Clark's foes. Campaign sources say that lawyer and
former Clinton aide Mary Streett was called
in to help on the press plane, a move that upset a
surprised Spell. The result: Streett went home to
Chicago. It's all got Clark allies wishing he'd put
his uniform on again, play general, and right his
listing ship.” (10/09/2003)
General Wesley Clark is surrendering.
(No, not like Bob Graham…) Clark has decided
to surrender his past and future speech fees.
Probably a good strategy, after the Washington
Post’s report on possible FEC law breaking by the
newbie Dem candidate. [IPW NOTE: see
yesterday’s Daily Report item]. In a Reuters
report in today’s
Washington Post, Camp Clark spokesman
Mark Fabiani said, “From here on, General Clark will
give no more paid speeches,” and added that Clark
would return the payments for speeches he had given
since he entered the presidential race “to avoid any
distraction from the real issues that matter to
Americans.” (10/09/2003)
IPW report:
Complaint filed against U of Iowa
regarding Wesley Clark speech on Sept. 19 --
Has the University broken Federal law?
The University of
Iowa Law School may have run afoul of the Federal
Election Commission. Two University of Iowa Law
School students, Michael Davis and Annette Stewart,
along with Jason Cole, chairman of the Iowa
Federation of College Republicans, have filed a
complaint against the university, Clark and his
campaign.
This exclusive
IPW report comes on the heels of the Clark
campaign’s announcing that Clark would return the
speaking fees he received since entering the
campaign.
The Clark campaign
is of the belief that they have done nothing wrong,
according to Washington Post’s PoliticsOnline.
"Based on our review of the FEC guidelines, we
believe that the paid speeches Gen. Clark delivered
since he announced his candidacy were appropriate,"
campaign spokesman Mark Fabiani said. "From here on,
Gen. Clark will give no more paid speeches."
“This like
stealing a purse from a little old lady and then
giving her back the purse after you’ve mugged her,”
said Davis.
The FEC has stated
that is not sure whether its prohibition of
candidates accepting speaking fees from
corporations, labor unions, individuals or
universities for campaign-related events was
violated.
In an e-mail from
Cole to
Iowa Presidential Watch, Cole outlines steps
taken by Davis to convince University of Iowa
College of Law dean William Hines that the Richard
S. Levitt Family Lecture Endowment Fund paying
presidential candidate Clark to lecture at the
University of Iowa would be in violation of the
Federal Election Commission standards as an illegal
contribution to the Clark campaign. Clark was paid
$30,000 plus travel-expenses for he and an
aid from the Levitt Family Foundation.
“They [the
university] cannot continue to be ostriches and keep
their heads in the sand on this matter,” said Davis.
It appears the
University made attempts, albeit inadequate, to
measure up to the standard required by the FEC.
The trio of U of
Iowa students – Cole, Davis and Stewart -- laid out
in their complaint to the FEC in the following
standard necessary for the University to follow:
We believe AO 1992-6
best applies to the issues at hand. In that
situation, Vanderbilt University invited white
supremacist and 1992 presidential candidate David
Duke to speak on affirmative action. Duke had
experience speaking on this topic. This is similar
to Clark’s knowledge of and recent public
discussions about United States military policy.
In an advisory
opinion, AO 1992-6, the FEC at the time said if Duke
discussed his campaign or the "qualifications of
another presidential candidate, either during the
speech or during any question and answer period [it]
will change the character of the appearance to one
that is for the purpose of influencing a federal
election."
In another twist of
irony, according to Washington Post’s
PoliticsOnline, Brad Litchfield -- who helped
draft the 1992 FEC advisory opinion as head of that
department -- is now working for the Clark campaign.
University of Iowa tried
The University made
attempts to prohibit signs in the auditorium and
control the questions so that they would not be
political in nature. They required that everyone
enter through one door into the Memorial Union to
prohibit signs, reiterated that the General’s speech
was "The American Leadership Role in a Changing
World," screened the questions from the audience to
prohibit any political nature that might occur and
canceled a scheduled press conference with Clark
before the lecture.
“Dean Hines did try
by opening the lecture saying that the speech was
not to be political. However, there were illegal
signs in the auditorium. I mean illegal signs
because the law requires that the signs say who they
are paid by and these signs didn’t. At some point
you have to recognize that you are violating the
law,” said Davis.
University of Iowa failed
The complaint filed
by the three students, cites the following facts: in
his speech Clark discussed his qualifications and
spoke disparagingly about President Bush’s
qualifications; individuals gathered in the Union
wearing Clark for President buttons; people close to
Clark’s presidential campaign organized supporters
from out of state to travel to the University of
Iowa to attend Clark’s lecture; and Clark
participated in a collateral campaign rally while in
Iowa City at the Hamburg Inn that included the
media.
Attorney Nicole
Marie Gustafson, who is a member of the Indiana Bar
Association, represented the three students in the
filing of the possible wrong-doing before the FEC.
They ask the FEC to take the following actions:
-
The Federal
Election Commission should declare “political” and
“for the purpose of influencing a federal
election” Clark’s entire September 19, 2003, trip
to the University of Iowa College of Law.
-
The Commission
should find Clark and his presidential campaign
committee in violation of federal election law.
-
The Commission
should find the University of Iowa, the University
of Iowa College of Law, the University of Iowa
Foundation, and the Richard S. Levitt Family
Lecture Endowment Fund in violation of federal
election law.
-
The Commission
should sanction and fine Clark and his
presidential campaign committee for violating
federal election law.
-
The Commission
should sanction and fine the University of Iowa,
the University of Iowa College of Law, the
University of Iowa Foundation, and the Richard S.
Levitt Family Lecture Endowment Fund for violating
federal election law.
-
The Commission
should require that Clark return to the University
of Iowa College of Law or its Richard S. Levitt
Family Lecture Endowment Fund the $30,000 plus
travel expenses for two to deliver the political
lecture.
-
The Commission
should require that Clark reimburse the University
of Iowa, the University of Iowa College of Law,
the University of Iowa Foundation, and the Richard
S. Levitt Family Lecture Endowment Fund for all
expenses incurred for the Lecture and all other
activities related to the trip. This should
include, but is not limited to: transportation,
room and equipment rentals, security, food,
drinks, entertainment, media relations, and legal
work.
-
The Commission
should refer this case to the United States
Department of Justice for investigation of
potential criminal activities.
-
The Commission
should refer this case to the United States
Department of Treasury’s Internal Revenue Service
for investigation into potential Internal Revenue
Code violations.
Clearly the Clark
campaign is trying to put this matter behind them.
However, complaints tend to be long and drawn-out
matters. It certainly doesn’t help that the
University of Iowa is named in the complaint, which
happens to be an Iowa sacred cow here in the
first-in-the-nation presidential kick-off state.
(10/09/2003)
Follow up Story --
U of Iowa Dean of Law William
Hines
spins his opinion regarding Clark speech at
University
As reported yesterday in
IPW’s Daily Report,
a legal complaint has been filed against the
University of Iowa in the wake of possible FEC/Federal
law violations concerning the payment of fees and
travel expenses (for two) to Democratic candidate
Wesley Clark. Clark spoke at the University on
September 19th. Today’s
Des Moines Register (Thomas Beaumont’s report)
gives this brief accounting on the matter: “Law
school Dean William Hines said he had not heard from
Clark’s campaign, but was confident no rules had
been broken by the university. ‘No public funds
were allocated for this purpose,’ Hines said
Thursday. “The speech was funded with the income
from an endowment created by the Levitt family.”
IPW Editorial Comment
Nice spin, but the thin veil of the Levitt
Foundation is easily pierced. The Dean and the
University of Iowa control the foundation,
the university’s communication offices were used for
publicity, the event was held at the university’s
Memorial Union and it utilized university staff and
resources.
The complaint, filed on by two of the three students
and were present during the Clark speech at the
University on Sept. 19th, cites the following facts
in support of the FEC-filed complaint:
·
In his speech Clark discussed his
qualifications and spoke disparagingly about
President Bush’s qualifications;
·
Individuals gathered in the Union with
Clark for President buttons and signs;
·
People close to Clark’s
presidential campaign organized supporters from
out of state to travel to the University of Iowa to
attend Clark’s lecture;
·
Clark participated in a collateral
campaign rally while in Iowa City at the Hamburg
Inn that included the media.
It would appear that Clark did step ‘outside the
box’ of FEC Federal Campaign laws. And if he did, he
did so under the auspices of the University of
Iowa.
Clark’s words and actions were done while under the
‘contractual control’ and responsibility of the
University. The University was the boss of Clark
during Clark’s time at the University on September
19, 2003 (regardless of whose nickel paid for it).
The University of Iowa’s Law School Dean, William
Hines, signed the contract with Wesley Clark.
Hines’s signature on the contract with Clark put the
full weight of the University behind enforcing
that contract in all of its scope, implicit and
implied. In this case, that meant making certain FEC
Federal Campaign laws were not broken. We’re talking
about a law school, here, and the dean
thereof. Certainly the dean of one of the greatest
law colleges in the country understood what his
signature on that contract meant -- or did he?
So, when the Clark for President buttons and signs
appeared in the lecture hall during Clark’s speech –
despite earlier University efforts to avoid it
– it was then the responsibility of the University
to step in and stop the violation. They did not do
so. When Clark touted his ‘qualifications’ and
slammed President Bush’s qualifications during his
speech – despite dean Hines’ clear guidelines
when introducing Clark -- it was the
responsibility of the University to step in and stop
the violation. Again, they did not do so. Dean of
Law Hines comments today in the
Daily Iowan that it was a ‘standard Clark
speech’ that Clark ‘had given on many occasions’
doesn’t cut it Why? Because Clark used this
same speech in announcing his candidacy for
President.
As for Dean of Law Hines, he heads up one of the
greatest law colleges in this country. It was his
responsibility, or those representing his authority
during the Clark speech, to stop the violations.
They did not do so. And now, one of the greatest
universities in America is being held accountable
for Dean of Law Hines’ lapse. Why? Because the
University of Iowa is the boss of Hines.
In the report of the
Daily Iowan today the following is reported:
·
FEC spokesman Ian Stirton said all
complaints to the agency are private and would not
say whether the commission is investigating the
Clark situation.
·
Stirton said a 1992 FEC advisory
opinion regarding a speech by then-presidential
candidate David Duke at the University of Nashville
found that the law is not violated if a candidate,
not the campaign, was paid directly, no campaign
contributions were solicited at the event, and the
speaker's candidacy was not mentioned - which was
the case in Clark's speech at the IMU.
Further analysis
Clearly Clark’s candidacy was mentioned with the
‘Clark for President’ signs and buttons. More
importantly, that is not the full standard according
to the FEC Advisory Opinion 1992-6. In that opinion,
it outlines that personal attributions or derogatory
comments about the opponent may not be a part of the
speech delivered and paid for by anyone other than
normal contributions to a campaign. This does not
include a $30,000 speaking fee paid for by a
foundation controlled by a University, like the
Levitt Foundation.
(10/10/2003)
…
Who gets the bounty of staff left over from the Bob
Graham withdrawal from the Presidential Race?
According to an article in today’s
Des Moines Register, by Thomas Beaumont,
here is the situation so far…
-
Wesley Clark’s campaign:
Steve Bouchard, Graham’s New Hampshire campaign
director – HIRED in same capacity
Julie Stauch, Graham’s Iowa political director
– contacted
Sarah Benzing, Graham’s Iowa field director –
contacted
-
John Kerry’s campaign:
Julie Stauch, -- contacted
-
Howard Dean’s campaign:
Sarah Benzing –
contacted
-
John Edwards’ campaign:
Sarah Benzing --
contacted
… Following directly on the heals of last night’s
DNC-sponsored presidential debate in Arizona comes
the NAACP debate today in South Carolina. As
reported Wednesday in the IPW Daily Report, South
Carolina NAACP president James Gallman
objected to the lack of presidential candidates
responding to the cattle call to all, prompting a
hasty inclusion of more of the pack of nine. It
appears that there are still three holdout, however:
John Kerry, Wesley Clark and Howard Dean (whose
loyal web log ‘bloggers’ say should get legitimate
pass on this one – he promised his daughter he would
Clark (10/10/2003)
…
Camp Clark is making successful gains at the
expense of the Dean campaign, denting Dr. Dean’s
top-dog status on the Internet and in Hollywood.
According to an article in today’s
WashingtonPost , written by Thomas Edsall,
Clark’s campaign has signed up around 100,000
supporters and half of these were gleaned through
the Internet. Excerpts: “… the campaign is
trying to overtake Dean, who as of yesterday had
enlisted 461,206 people through the Internet…. Most
major fundraisers and donors in California are
remaining uncommitted, waiting to see how well the
candidates do in the early jockeying, debates, polls
and fundraising. But Clark's initial success has
eaten away at some of Dean's potential support,
especially in the Los Angeles area. According to
many political activists there, Clark has
supplanted Dean as the star attraction and the main
focus of political attention…the candidate has
lined up a solid commitment from Peter Morton,
founder and chairman of the Hard Rock Hotel and
Casino Inc. Morton said he plans to host a
dinner for Clark in Las Vegas later this month and a
November fundraiser in Los Angeles. … "Clark has
started off faster than any of the candidates," an
uncommitted Democratic donor commented.
"Now,
we'll see if he can sustain his momentum as he gets
tested with his handling of these controversies,"
including the resignation of his campaign manager,
Donnie Fowler, and challenges to the propriety of
some of his paid speech-making. (10/10/2003)
… Kid glove treatment was clearly over regarding
newcomer candidate Wesley Clark. Knocked off
the newcomer pedestal when Joe Lieberman
said he was “very disappointed” by Clark’s changing
positions on Iraq (the flip-flops of which began the
very day Clark entered the race), Clark responded by
saying, “I think it’s really embarrassing that a
group of candidates up here are working on changing
the leadership in this country and can’t get their
own story straight.” Wasn’t that what
Lieberman’s point? -- that Clark was not getting
his story straight? Political veteran Lieberman
flashed Clark a ‘Lieberman grin’ and replied,
“Wesley Clark… welcome to the Democratic
presidential race. None of us are above questioning.
That’s what this is all about.” Clark’s
inability to discern the negative from the valid was
evident, as he put in yet another amateur
performance. Clark has no prior experience running
for any political office. News articles abound
today, covering the debate from various angles. Here
is a hefty helping of them. Click away!
·
Des Moines Register (written by AP writer Nedra
Pickler)
·
NationalReview (written by Byron York)
·
BostonGlobe (written by Patrick Healy and Glen
Johnson)
·
WashingtonPost (a long article, written by Dan
Balz),
·
WashingtonTimes (by Stephen Dinan)
·
New York Times (this is a rather dry, excerpts
only article – missing a lot of comments)
·
New York Times, again (written by Katharine
Seelye and Jodi Wilgoren)
·
New Hampshire’s
The UnionLeader (using the AP story by Ron
Fournier)
·
CNN (who broadcasted the debate)
·
FoxNews (an early in the evening AP story)
·
and for those who really want to know…
the
complete transcript of the debate
(10/10/2003)
…It was a Dem-lemon of a debate yester in South
Carolina yesterday. The state NAACP-sponsored
presidential candidate debate seemed to have a
revolving door on it, as Dem candidates came and
went. Three candidates showed up so late they
missed the entire event – Carol Moseley Braun, John
Edwards, and Dick Gephardt. Luckily, their
reason was legitimate – all three were stuck on a
plane that couldn’t get off the ground in Phoenix..
YahooNews.com today gives a report, by
Associated Press’ Jeffrey Collins, headlined,
“Dem Candidates Bash Bush at NAACP Forum.”
Excerpts: “Three Democratic presidential candidates
turned their focus back to a familiar target at an
NAACP forum Friday night. One day after other
candidates ganged up on Wesley Clark at a debate in
Phoenix, the retired general got a free pass as his
only two opponents [Sharpton and Kucinich]turned
their anger toward President Bush. Then scheduling
problems left him the only candidate on the stage
for the last 25 minutes, turning the forum into the
"Wesley Clark Show." Plane problems kept three
candidates from arriving in time to participate in
the 90-minute forum, three decided not to attend and
two left early to catch flights. … Al Sharpton and
Dennis Kucinich criticized Bush's economic policy,
his handling of the war in Iraq and his education
policy. They saved some of their sharpest rhetoric
for the U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and the
Patriot Act. "He's not much of an attorney and I
know for sure he's not a general," said Clark,
interrupted by applause. … but soon Clark was the
only candidate around. … Connecticut Sen. Joe
Lieberman met with South Carolina NAACP leaders
individually Friday, but had to leave Charlotte
before the forum started so he could return to
Washington before sundown to observe the Jewish
Sabbath. Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean was
attending parents weekend at his daughter's college
and Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry had a
long-standing commitment to campaign in New
Hampshire. Dean, Kerry, Lieberman and Edwards had
been Clark's adversaries at the Phoenix debate.
(10/11/2003)
James Taranto’s
Best of the Web column gives his take -- and
some others’ -- on the debate Thursday night in
Arizona. Excerpts:
“Yeah, we sat through last night's Democratic
debate, but somehow all the excitement is gone now
that Bob Graham has dropped out of the race.
Watching Graham was like watching a high-wire act;
despite his perfectly balanced persona, you knew
that at any minute he could stumble into saying
something totally insane.
Still, there were some highlights.
·
John Kerry, the haughty,
French-looking Massachusetts Democrat, who by the
way served in Vietnam, managed to cite his Vietnam
service in the course of a rare quintuple pander (to
two ethnic groups and three states): ‘Can I say
that when I was serving in Vietnam on a small
boat, the one thing I learned was nobody asked you
where you came from. Nobody worried about your
background. You fought together, you lived together
and you bled together. And I came back here to a
country where I saw a whole bunch of people who'd
served in Vietnam discriminated against, a
lot of them from Arizona, a lot of them from
New Mexico, Southern California,
because Latinos and African-Americans
I saw were drafted and on the front lines in far
greater numbers than my friends from Yale or other
people.’
Way to go, Senator.
·
Dick Gephardt, meanwhile, seemed to
be losing his mind. Here's what he had to say
about Iraq: ‘[The president] keeps saying we've got
30 countries helping us. Yes, Togo sent one soldier.
That isn't what we need. We need France, Germany,
Russia. There's only three countries in the world
that can give us both the financial and the military
help that we need.’
Only three countries? That's rather insulting to
Britain and Australia, is it not?
·
National Review's
Byron York nicely sums up another Gephardt
blooper. A woman in the audience who owns a
restaurant asked what Gephardt would do to ease the
tax burden on small businesses. Gephardt replied
that he would raise their taxes by repealing all the
Bush tax cuts, then promised that his health-care
plan would cover 60% of the cost of providing
insurance to her employees. "The problem was, almost
anybody watching could guess that Bobby C's Lounge
and Grille, like many small businesses, probably
didn't have a full-scale employee health-care plan,"
York writes. "Even John Kerry could figure that
one out." Ouch!
·
Wesley Clark provided more evidence
that he's not ready for prime time. The
Washington Post describes how he responded when
opponents faulted him for flip-flopping on Iraq:
Said Clark: "I think it's really embarrassing that a
group of candidates up here are working on changing
the leadership in this country and can't get their
own story straight." He noted that his position
has been "very, very clear" throughout the
debate over going to war. "I would never have voted
for war," he said. "The war was an unnecessary war,
it was an elective war, and it's been a huge
strategic mistake for this country."
But Clark
was attacked because on the day after he announced
his candidacy he told reporters that he "probably"
would have voted for the resolution. The next day,
he reversed himself and said he would not have
supported it.” (10/11/2003)
… The Clark Campaign has added several Clinton
veterans to its top positions, but the top 2 spots –
national campaign director and political director –
are still vacant. An article in yesterday’s
New York Times outlined the details. Excerpts: “Gen.
Wesley K. Clark announced a raft of top appointments
to his presidential campaign on Friday, just days
after simmering tensions inside the fledgling
organization led to the resignation of his campaign
manager. Several of the new appointees are veterans
of the Clinton administration. And the
campaign has entered discussions with former Vice
President Al Gore's campaign spokesman, Chris
Lehane, who recently left the presidential
campaign of Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts.
Clark campaign officials said that with the
appointments, the campaign was setting firm lines of
authority and would become a more stable operation,
though it still lacks a campaign manager and a
political director.” Here is a listing of the new
staff and their positions:
o
Matt Bennett… Director of
Communications.
Credentials: veteran of the Clinton White House and
the last five Democratic presidential campaigns
o
Eli Segal… Chief Executive Officer.
Credentials: former Clinton official
o
Mickey Kantor… Chairman of
the Steering Committee.
Credentials: the former national chair for the 1992
Clinton-Gore campaign, secretary of commerce and
United States trade representative
o
Richard Sklar… Chief
Operating Officer.
Credentials: 1997 ambassador to the United Nations,
President Clinton's special representative to
promote economic reconstruction in Southeast Europe
o
Diana Rogalle… Finance
Director.
Credentials: former finance director for the
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee
(10/12/2003)
…On the
Des Moines Register’s Sunday Editorial pages:
David Yelsen column, titled “Hit the trail to
Pisgah, Clark.” Yespen finds Wesley Clark
long on resume credits, and short on specific
answers to the very issues Iowa caucus goers and
voters need. In the race for the Dem nomination,
Yepsen points out that Clark’s biggest problem of
all, though, is bypassing Iowa altogether.
Excerpts: “… while Clark was addressing a group of
Iowa Democrats, his national campaign manager was in
the process of quitting because he was being
demoted. (It seems the manager wanted to move the
campaign out of Washington, D.C., and into places
such as Iowa and New Hampshire but was
running into objection from old Bill Clinton
hands.) It wasn't just the staff problem. Clark
entered the race late. He flubbed his debut by
mishandling the question of whether he would have
voted to go to war in Iraq. In May 2001, he gave a
speech to an Arkansas GOP fund-raiser where he sang
praises of … And he's now being accused of violating
campaign-finance laws by accepting lecture fees
while a presidential candidate. (Including about
$30,000 for a University of Iowa lecture.)
Individually, none of those things is fatal to a
presidential candidate. Collectively, they show a
campaign that's incompetent. It's enough to make you
wonder if Clark's effort will fizzle as quickly as
it rose. Many showed up at the community college
here to hear him offer details about issues.
Instead, he served up a pretty thin soup. …That
lack of meat on the bones doesn't bother a lot of
Clark's supporters. They're for him because of his
resume, not because of his positions. But a lot of
other issue-oriented Democrats are looking for
something more in a candidate. …Clark's biggest
problem in Iowa isn't lack of detail. It's the
question of whether to do much campaigning here or
not. … there are only 15 weeks left in the Iowa
campaign, and Clark is going up against opponents
who've been here for months. … the road to the
White House runs through places such as Pisgah and
What Cheer. Iowa activists in those places won't
honor candidates with their votes if the candidates
don't honor them with their presence.
(10/12/2003)
… Finally, an apples-to-apples
article on the fallacy of the Wesley Clark poll
numbers. And leave it to
Washington Times’ Donald Lambro to
nail it. Here are excerpts from today’s Lambro
article, titled, “Clark leads the pack but not in
the right places.” Excerpts: “Wesley
Clark may be leading the Democratic presidential
pack in the national polls, but he is far behind the
front-runners in the crucial early state races that
will heavily influence, if not decide, who will
become the party's nominee.
With behind-the-scenes support from former President
Clinton, the retired four-star general from Little
Rock, Ark., who was supreme commander of NATO
forces, catapulted into the lead in the national
polls right after he announced his candidacy last
month and has held that position ever since. Three
weeks after he entered the contest, he is still
drawing 22 percent in the national Gallup Poll —
outdistancing his four top rivals who have been
campaigning for more than a year.
But national
polls are largely irrelevant in the state-by-state
delegate-selection contests that usually turn on
county-by-county, street-level politics that
narrowly appeal to each state's local, cultural and
political interests.”
(10/12/2003)
… Wesley Clark’s Pentagon past holds room for
question, regarding Clark’s ability to lead.
Today’s
BostonGlobe.com carries an Associated Press
article highlighting some of the prickly spots,
titled, “Pentagon battles dog Clark.”
Excerpts: “Wesley Clark, the retired four-star
general who is running for president, got himself in
hot water with his Pentagon bosses more than once in
his 34-year military career. Clark
matter-of-factly recounts when the chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff grumbled that Clark had "one
foot on a banana peel and one foot in the grave."
Less than a year later, Clark was yanked out of
his job as NATO's supreme allied commander. …it
is notable that a number of fellow retired officers
now speak frankly about what they see as the
Democratic candidate's shortcomings as a leader.
Last month, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs,
Hugh Shelton, gave a barbed answer when asked what
he thought about Clark as a presidential candidate.
"I will tell you the reason he came out of Europe
early had to do with integrity and character
issues," Shelton said. "I'll just say Wes won't get
my vote." … Dennis Reimer, a retired general and
former Army chief of staff, describes Clark as an
intelligent, "hardworking, ambitious individual .
. . [but] some of us were concerned about the fact
that he was focused too much upward and not down on
the soldiers.” (10/13/2003)
… In the first of four agenda speeches to come
this month from Wesley Clark, Clark said he
wants a new corp of civilians created. Clark
spoke yesterday at New York's Hunter College.
Associated Press writer Nedra Pickler reports today
(Yahoo.news/AP).
Excerpts: “Democrat Wesley Clark says if elected
president, he would create a corps of civilians who
could be called up for service in national
emergencies much like the National Guard. Every
American age 18 or older could register for Clark's
civilian reserve, listing skills that could aid the
country in a disaster.” Highlights of the Clark
proposal:
·
Voluntary registration
·
Five year commitment
·
Presidential power to call to active
duty up to 5000 civilian reservists for national
emergencies, i.e., floods, forest fires, terrorist
attacks
·
6-month limit on tours of duty
·
Congressional power to authorize
higher numbers of civilians to be mobilized.
·
Civilian reservists could be sent
overseas, i.e., Afghanistan and Iraq.
·
Active duty civilian reservist
benefits: health care, a stipend, the right to
return to their jobs when service is completed.
·
Civilian reserve program would be part
of the Department of Homeland Security (10/14/2003)
… New Hampshire’s undecided
voters remain at the same levels – about 30 percent
– as they were this summer. And their initial zeal
for newcomer candidate Wesley Clark appears to have
waned. Today’s
UnionLeader.com takes a look at the situation.
Excerpts: “Two prominent New Hampshire pollsters say
former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, the front-runner
in the state’s leadoff primary race, is doing the
best job among the Democratic candidates attracting
independent voters. But, say Dick Bennett and
Rich Killion, the majority of independents remain
undecided. The pollsters say this group is largely
undecided not only about which of the Democratic
Presidential candidates they will vote for, but also
whether they will vote in the Democratic primary at
all. Both pollsters say retired Gen. Wesley
Clark, the newcomer to the race, has a resume that
may attract independent voters, especially moderates
who supported Republicans in other elections. But
they say he appears to have already lost momentum
generated by his entry into the race on Sept. 17.
…. In Bennett’s latest New Hampshire poll, issued
last Thursday, Dean was favored by 29 percent of
likely Democratic primary voters, while
Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry was favored by 19
percent. No other candidate was favored by more
than 6 percent of likely voters. The poll sample
included 413 Democrats, or 69 percent, and 187
independents, or 31 percent. …Killion said Dean’s
overall performance is especially strong “when you
consider that he has not been on the air
(advertising) for the past month. That hasn’t
affected his polling. He’s still the front-runner
and isn’t losing an inch on the ballot test.”
(10/15/2003)
… Six of the nine Democrat
presidential candidates will be in Des Moines today
to attend the AARP forum, but Wesley Clark isn’t
among them. Iowa seniors have received a flurry
of attention in recent days, as the Dem candidates
compete for caucus voters’ support. Iowa seniors are
among the highest percentage of voters in Iowa. The
six candidates coming to Des Moines are: John
Edwards, John Kerry, Howard Dean, Dick Gephardt,
Carol Moseley Braun and Dennis Kucinich.
Noticeably missing from the pack is top-tiered
candidate Wesley Clark -- further evidence of
Clark’s retreat from Iowa. Why is Clark a
no-show today? IPW is uncertain. Is it part of
Clark’s ‘Retreat from Iowa’ or is it part of Clark’s
lack of stance on issues? Overall media consensus on
Clark has been that he is weak and/or lacks of
positions on domestic issues. (10/15/2003)
Clark
main page
top
of page
|