Michael Moore (almost, but not quite) endorses a General?!

The Emperor Fabulous · September 16, 2003, 00:55

Quote:

September 12, 2003

Dear General Wesley Clark,

I've been meaning to write to you for some time. Two days after the Oscars, when I felt very alone and somewhat frightened by the level of hatred toward me for daring to suggest that we were being led into war for "fictitious reasons," one person stuck his neck out and came to my defense on national television.

And that person was you.

Aaron Brown had just finished interviewing me by satellite on CNN, and I had made a crack about me being "the only non-general allowed on CNN all week." He ended the interview and then turned to you, as you were sitting at the desk with him. He asked you what you thought of this crazy guy, Michael Moore. And, although we were still in Week One of the war, you boldly said that my dissent was necessary and welcome, and you pointed out that I was against Bush and his "policies," not the kids in the service. I sat in Flint with the earpiece still in my ear and I was floored -- a GENERAL standing up for me and, in effect, for all the millions who were opposed to the war but had been bullied into silence.

Since that night, I have spent a lot of time checking you out. And what I've learned about you corresponds to my experience with you back in March. You seem to be a man of integrity. You seem not afraid to speak the truth. I liked your answer when you were asked your position on gun control: "If you are the type of person who likes assault weapons, there is a place for you -- the United States Army. We have them."

In addition to being first in your class at West Point, a four star general from Arkansas, and the former Supreme Commander of NATO -- enough right there that should give pause to any peace-loving person -- I have discovered that...

1. You oppose the Patriot Act and would fight the expansion of its powers.

2. You are firmly pro-choice.

3. You filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in support of the University of Michigan's affirmative action case.

4. You would get rid of the Bush tax "cut" and make the rich pay their fair share.

5. You respect the views of our allies and want to work with them and with the rest of the international community.

6. And you oppose war. You have said that war should always be the "last resort" and that it is military men such as yourself who are the most for peace because it is YOU and your soldiers who have to do the dying. You find something unsettling about a commander-in-chief who dons a flight suit and pretends to be Top Gun, a stunt that dishonored those who have died in that flight suit in the service of their country.

General Clark, last night I finally got to meet you in person. I would like to share with others what I said to you privately: You may be the person who can defeat George W. Bush in next year's election.

This is not an endorsement. For me, it's too early for that. I have liked Howard Dean (in spite of his flawed positions in support of some capital punishment, his grade "A" rating from the NRA, and his opposition to cutting the Pentagon budget). And Dennis Kucinich is so committed to all the right stuff. We need candidates in this race who will say the things that need to be said, to push the pathetically lame Democratic Party into have a backbone -- or get out of the way and let us have a REAL second party on the ballot.

But right now, for the sake and survival of our very country, we need someone who is going to get The Job done, period. And that job, no matter whom I speak to across America -- be they leftie Green or conservative Democrat, and even many disgusted Republicans -- EVERYONE is of one mind as to what that job is:

Bush Must Go.

This is war, General, and it's Bush & Co.'s war on us. It's their war on the middle class, the poor, the environment, their war on women and their war against anyone around the world who doesn't accept total American domination. Yes, it's a war -- and we, the people, need a general to beat back those who have abused our Constitution and our basic sense of decency.

The General vs. the Texas Air National Guard deserter! I want to see that debate, and I know who the winner is going to be.

The other night, when you were on Bill Maher's show, he began by reading to you a quote from Howard Dean where he (Dean) tried to run away from the word "liberal." Maher said to you, so, General, do you want to run away from that word? Without missing a beat, you said "No!" and you reminded everyone that America was founded as a "liberal democracy." The audience went wild with applause.

That is what we have needed for a long time on our side -- guts. I am sure there are things you and I don't see eye to eye on, but now is the time for all good people from the far left to the middle of the road to bury the damn hatchet and get together behind someone who is not only good on the issues but can beat George W. Bush. And where I come from in the Midwest, General, I know you are the kind of candidate that the average American will vote for.

Michael Moore likes a general? I never thought I'd write these words. But desperate times call for desperate measures. I want to know more about you. I want your voice heard. I would like to see you in these debates. Then let the chips fall where they may -- and we'll all have a better idea of what to do. If you sit it out, then I think we all know what we are left with.

I am asking everyone I know to send an email to you now to encourage you to run, even if they aren't sure they would vote for you. (Wesley Clark's email address is: mailto:info@leadershipforamerica.org). None of us truly know how we will vote five months from now or a year from now. But we do know that this race needs a jolt -- and Bush needs to know that there is one person he won't be able to Dukakisize.

Take the plunge, General Clark. At the very least, the nation needs to hear what you know about what was really behind this invasion of Iraq and your fresh ideas of how we can live in a more peaceful world. Yes, your country needs you to perform one more act of brave service -- to help defeat an enemy from within, at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, an address that used to belong to "we, the people."

Yours,

Michael Moore

Wow...the liberalist of the liberals and the former NATO supreme commander?

What IS this world coming to?

Drake Tungsten · September 16, 2003, 01:14

There went Clark's already slim chances of becoming the President.

The Emperor Fabulous · September 16, 2003, 01:18

Slim chances? He has 9% in the Gallup poll...that makes him 5th, and he's not even running yet. Not one debate, not one campaign stop. Soon, Kerry won't be the only war hero, Gephardt won't be the only strong Southern, and Dean won't be the only one who can draw liberals in.

Drake Tungsten · September 16, 2003, 01:21

You can't win without money and it's pretty much too late to get started on that front.

Dis · September 16, 2003, 01:28

Moore is a doofus.

I don't understand why he's popular. You can see the dishonesty in his eyes. And he looks like a geek who isn't smart enough to be a nerd, but still can't get any *****.

MichaeltheGreat · September 16, 2003, 01:34

Moore is popular in the same way Limbaugh or Liddy is popular.

And Moore's endorsement is on a par with Sharpton's or Jesse Jackson's in regards to it's value for winning the election.

Promethus · September 16, 2003, 01:42

It's Sensices? (SP)

Victor Galis · September 16, 2003, 01:57

I had a discussion with Imran where we both agreed that we could potentially vote for the same candidate in 2004.

Imran Siddiqui · September 16, 2003, 02:13

Potentially

.

Dis · September 16, 2003, 02:47

wouldn't it be cool to see Michael Moore, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter in a gang bang?

actually I heard Ann Coulter and bill Maher are real good friends. We all know how Bill Maher is- he has a very active bachelor life. Me thinks he's banged Ann Coulter. A little conservative/liberal horizonatal action if you know what I mean

laurentius · September 16, 2003, 02:54

Soldier wants to be president? Not a good idea.

Oerdin · September 16, 2003, 02:58

Why? Soldiers have traditionally made excellent Presidents and many, if not most, Presidents have served in the military. Also am I the only one who thinks Clark knows he can't win the Presidency and that he's really just trying to raise his profile so he will be choicen as a running mate? As a southern with a strong military background he seems the ideal running mate for most of the Dem candidates.

laurentius · September 16, 2003, 03:06

Well, as an european soldiers running for presidence/emperor just seems a little too familiar

Also I think thers a little difference between a parson who has served in the army and active duty general.

Chemical Ollie · September 16, 2003, 03:13

I just bookmark this thread for now, until I get home from work.

Victor Galis · September 16, 2003, 04:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Potentially

.

That's close enough for Hell to freeze over, I'd say

Ecthy · September 16, 2003, 04:09

Michael Moore

George W Bush

Drake Tungsten · September 16, 2003, 04:13

Chicoms

Lima Deltas

Sava · September 16, 2003, 07:41

ahh the Moore haters come out of the woodwork. Moore is really quite benign, I don't know why you conservadopes are scared of him. He doesn't attack like those mouth-breathers on the right. He just goes up to people and asks questions. Most of the time, people don't like the questions. Like when he went up to corporate execs and asked, "Why did you layoff tons of workers when you are showing record profits?"

Nobody ever has any answers to his questions, and no one bothers to debate his points which are always supported with credible sources.

You know someone must be on to something if all the nay-sayers can do is make fun of his weight.

MikeH · September 16, 2003, 07:54

Regardless of what you think of Michael Moore the general is right that dissent and debate is essential if you are to have a proper democracy (even if it's really a republic or constitutional monarchy).

Drake Tungsten · September 16, 2003, 08:15

Quote:

He doesn't attack like those mouth-breathers on the right.

You obviously haven't read "Stupid White Men."

The Emperor Fabulous · September 16, 2003, 08:48

Quote:

Originally posted by laurentius
Well, as an european soldiers running for presidence/emperor just seems a little too familiar

Also I think thers a little difference between a parson who has served in the army and active duty general.

You've never heard of George Washington or Dwight Eisenhower, have you.

Plus, Clark is retired.

chequita guevara · September 16, 2003, 09:53

Quote:

Originally posted by The Emperor Fabulous

You've never heard of George Washington or Dwight Eisenhower, have you.

Plus, Clark is retired.

Yes, but let's not forget Jackson and Grant. Some of our best President's have been generals, but also some of our worst.

DaShi · September 16, 2003, 10:04

I don't know. The letter reads like he has a crush on the general.

chequita guevara · September 16, 2003, 10:10

Clark is definately a liberal. Moore never gave up on the DP, he just was using the Greens as a way to reinvigorate the left of the DP, get them off their butts and start fighting again. Clark is what Moore was looking for all along, politicaly, though I'm suer he's not happy about Clark's role in the destruction of Yugoslavia.

DinoDoc · September 16, 2003, 10:22

This deserves to be posted here:

Quote:

Originally posted by TheStinger
Clarke is a loose cannon. He ordered the UK General in Kosovo to stop the Russians taking Pristina(i think) airport. The Uk general on account of not wanting to start World war 3 refused and was very nearly dismissed.

You really wnat this man 1 step from being in charge of the nukes

chequita guevara · September 16, 2003, 10:33

Did Clark have orders?

DinoDoc · September 16, 2003, 10:38

Beats me. Ask Stinger. I just thought the post deserved to be in this thread even if it is mainly about Moore's slobbering love letter to Clark rather than the Dean is Evil thread.

Bosh · September 16, 2003, 10:52

Quote:

wouldn't it be cool to see Michael Moore, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter in a gang bang?

No. No it would not.

And I have a strong feeling that Coulter's politics are in large part a (remarkably successful act). I'm not sure if that makes her more evil or less...