An interview addressing (primarily) the pending  release of General Clark’s new book, “A Time to Lead”  Sept. 4th

….excerpted from NYT Magazine :

Generally Speaking


Published: July 1, 2007


(Karen Ballard photo)

As a retired four-star general and former presidential candidate, you’re about to publish a memoir whose title, “A Time to Lead,” might seem to suggest you’re personally eager to lead this country. Is that an accurate reading?

“A Time to Lead” is a time for America to lead. That is the intention of the title. Certainly we are having a leadership crisis. We have an administration that has lost all sense of strategic purpose in the Mideast. I am very concerned that we have lost the foundation of America’s worldwide power and influence. It has been squandered.

Are you referring to our military strength?

The most important element of power is not the military. After World War II and through the end of the 20th century, we had a legitimacy that magnified our military strength and economic strength. We weren’t like other powers. We weren’t after an empire. We didn’t torture. What we’ve lost is our legitimacy. It’s time for every American to be a leader.

more at the LINK

C’mon Wes, get in this race!


Wesley Clark’s speech at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, May 16, 2007: “Legitimacy—First Task for America’s Security”

Joe Rothstein’s take…I agree with Mr. Rothstein, “Do yourself a big favor.”  (excerpt)

What We’ve Really Lost in Iraq: Legitimacy

By Joe Rothstein
May 18, 2007

Do yourself a big favor

Go to and click on the speech given the other day by retired General Wesley Clark to an audience at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University. Clark titled his speech: “Legitimacy—First Task for America’s Security.” Here’s his core argument: For all the military power the U.S. has at its disposal, the nation’s safety and economic strength ultimately depends on maintaining our status as a nation that pursues objectives held in common by most peoples who share the planet:

–The wise and benign use of power
–Defense of human rights
–Protection of civilian populations
–Cooperation with, not intimidation of other nations
–The primacy of the rule of law
All of that, he argues, has been put into question by our nation’s behavior in Iraq. And the result has “robbed every American” of his or her heritage and made us all less safe and secure….  

Indeed, that was the very argument General Clark made….You can listen to the speech at JU SAIS or at Securing America View a FHA from an attendee plus slide-show of the event.

Also well worth the read, Bob Guttman’s blog, “General Wesley Clark makes sense: Should he run for president?”…restoring legitimacy to the nation? What a concept! YES!

…this press release surely warmed my heart! The Republicans have lost an old war-horse. I hope the Democrats have the good sense to learn a thing or two. God knows both parties could take a page from Congressman NO-B.S. McCloskey’s book. 

Former GOP Rep. Pete McCloskey registers as a Democrat

Associated Press

Article Launched: 04/16/2007 04:53:00 PM PDT

WASHINGTON – Maverick former GOP Rep. Pete McCloskey, who represented Northern California in Congress from 1967 to 1982 and ran unsuccessfully again last year, has announced that he’s switching party registration and becoming a Democrat.

McCloskey, who was an original author of the Endangered Species Act, made his scorn for the modern Republican Party clear during his primary campaign against former GOP Rep. Richard Pombo of Tracy last year. He contended that leaders like Pombo and former Majority Leader Tom DeLay had been corrupted by power. After losing to Pombo, McCloskey endorsed Pombo’s Democratic opponent, Jerry McNerney, who beat Pombo in the general election…

(hopefully the author of the ES Act will make his presence felt in the pending race for Charlie Brown in CA-4)

…”I finally concluded that it was a fraud for me to remain a member of this modern Republican Party,” wrote McCloskey, who farms with his wife Helen in Yolo County.

For the common good, “…country before party” — Wes Clark

From Josh Marshall TPM:

Feinstein asks the question everyone’s been wondering about (from the AP)…

Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Tuesday she wants answers about the departure of the former U.S. attorney in Los Angeles, who resigned last October before the Justice Department’s dismissal of eight other U.S. attorneys sparked controversy.

“I have questions about Debra Yang’s departure and I can’t answer those questions right at this time,” Feinstein, D-Calif. and a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, told reporters in response to a question. “Was she asked to resign, and if so, why? We have to ferret that out.”

Debra Wong Yang went to work for a private law firm, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, and has said she left of her own accord.

A Gibson Dunn spokeswoman issued a statement on Yang’s behalf Tuesday night. “Debra Wong Yang’s decision to leave her post as U.S. attorney to pursue a private practice was entirely her own, and she had many options to choose from. We are delighted that she chose Gibson Dunn,” it said.

You’ll remember that the Duke Cunningham investigation spread out in several directions. One was into the CIA. Another was on to Capitol Hill. The big fish there was Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA), then Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. The Lam investigation in San Diego sparked the Lewis investigation. But the Lewis investigation itself was and is being run out of the US Attorney’s Office in Los Angeles. And that brings us to Debra Yang.

And from The Hill:

…Gutierrez and Abramoff had discussed removing Black from his position, “need[ing] to get this guy sniped out of there,” according to one of the lobbyist’s e-mails. Black had already indicted several members of Gutierrez’s administration and was starting to look at Abramoff.

Black’s case may get another look from Congress. Reps. George Miller (D-Calif.) and Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.) wrote to both the Senate and House judiciary committees last week, asking them to add Black’s demotion to their broader investigation of the U.S. attorney scandal.

In a statement made to The Hill, Miller repeated his calls for another investigation.

“The letter from Fred Black is another good example of why it’s necessary to re-open the investigation into Black’s demotion and to closely examine whether Abramoff or anyone working with him tampered with anti-corruption efforts in the U.S. attorney’s office,” he said.

“This letter is indicative of Fred Black’s perspective, which leads one to wonder why the Justice Department removed him, when he seems to be doing his job,” said Guam Del. Madeleine Bordallo (D) in a statement…


Show me the Money!

March 20, 2007

Regarding Wes Clark’s “late entry” into the race, and in an effort to alleviate some rather unfounded (in my opinion) questions as to Clark’s fundraising abilities, an item  to share:

A Wes Clark Democrat does the math here:

2004 Primary – How did Clark really do in raising money?

John Edwards raised $26,973,278 for the 2004 primary over a period of 14 months.

Wesley Clark raised $21,971,302 for the 2004 primary over a period of five months.

Wesley Clark raised $4,394,260.40 a month for the 2004 primary.

John Edwards raised $1,926,662.71 a month for the 2004 primary.


Not being a numbers-cruncher myself, I thought this was worth more than a glance. So with a hat-tip to WesDem and keeping in mind that a Clark announcement in April would still put the General @ six months earlier than his late entry – ’04…and keeping in mind that at this point in the ’04 election cycle Joe Lieberman was mainstream media’s “annointed one”…is Wes Clark too late? Are the others too early? Waiting for grown-ups? C’mon Wes, let’s give them something to talk about!

Please sign the petition ———>