Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

macintologist · Sep 22, 2003, 04:41 PM

I know Republican people who always make irrational comments against Democrats. For Clinton, it was the "draft dodging" "lying" "womanizer" "SOB". And Carter, well he was a "energy conserving" "mullah loving" "tree hugging" liberal. But what about Clark?

He's a general, so no draft dodger.
He's no womanizer.
He's not some wierd-looking liberal crazy person.

So what kind of irrational comments could be made against Clark? I'm not talking about intelligent educated remarks. Just irrational ones.

chris v · Sep 22, 2003, 04:48 PM

OT: I printed a bunch of bumper stickers a few years back which read:

I'm totally irrational...
And I Vote!

They were pretty popular for a while. Maybe I should make up some more?

On topic: Isn't he a shill for the Military Industrial Complex?

CV

eklipse · Sep 22, 2003, 05:08 PM

He's a democrat - that should be enough for a lot of republicans.

finboy · Sep 22, 2003, 06:00 PM

Originally posted by eklipse:
He's a democrat - that should be enough for a lot of republicans.

Are you SURE he's a democrat? He's not sure himself.

http://www.weeklystandard.com

Why do Republicans need to talk trash about him? He's doing a pretty good job by himself.

fireside · Sep 22, 2003, 07:59 PM

Originally posted by finboy:
Why do Republicans need to talk trash about him?

because democrats stay on topic while republican use personal attacks to win arguements.

"so, tell us how you would fix the deficit in the united states"

democrat: well i would first start by...

republican: WRONG YOU DID HAVE SEX WITH THAT WOMAN DIDNT YOU. THATS WHAT I THOUGHT I WIN.

moki · Sep 23, 2003, 04:47 AM

Originally posted by macintologist:
I know Republican people who always make irrational comments against Democrats. For Clinton, it was the "draft dodging" "lying" "womanizer" "SOB".

hrm, the "lying" and "womanizing" comments, at least, are not irrational, they have been shown to be true in court. The other comments are less than useful, I agree.

And Carter, well he was a "energy conserving" "mullah loving" "tree hugging" liberal.

I don't really have a problem with Carter, except that he was a terrible President on a number of fronts, and that the went beyond his authority as an ex-President negotiating an unfortunate deal with Kim Il Jung, and told the Clinton administration about it by announcing it on CNN (he was not an official envoy at the time).

So what kind of irrational comments could be made against Clark? I'm not talking about intelligent educated remarks. Just irrational ones.

Hrm, well, I could just make up inflammatory nonsense like some people seem to love to do here -- but that aside, I guess he record as NATO commander could get him in trouble

from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/671495.stm

"I'm not going to start the Third World War for you," he reportedly told General Clark during one heated exchange.

...he was relieved of command shortly thereafter. Other than that, I honestly don't know enough about the man.

moki · Sep 23, 2003, 04:48 AM

Originally posted by fireside:
because democrats stay on topic while republican use personal attacks to win arguements.

Have a glance through the topics on this web board, and I think you'll find that this is not true.

There are quite a few topics here personally attacking GWB, not the issues.

Face it, people are people on both sides -- some are irrational, some are open to genuine debate.

Millennium · Sep 23, 2003, 04:57 AM

What irrational things could you say against Clark?

Watch Babylon 5. Do you really want someone sharing that name as President?

AutoJC · Sep 23, 2003, 12:49 PM

Originally posted by macintologist:
I know Republican people who always make irrational comments against Democrats. For Clinton, it was the "draft dodging" "lying" "womanizer" "SOB". And Carter, well he was a "energy conserving" "mullah loving" "tree hugging" liberal. But what about Clark?

He's a general, so no draft dodger.
He's no womanizer.
He's not some wierd-looking liberal crazy person.

So what kind of irrational comments could be made against Clark? I'm not talking about intelligent educated remarks. Just irrational ones.

Problem is, it's the intelligent comments that will sink his candidacy.

fireside · Sep 23, 2003, 01:20 PM

Originally posted by moki:
Have a glance through the topics on this web board, and I think you'll find that this is not true.

There are quite a few topics here personally attacking GWB, not the issues.

Face it, people are people on both sides -- some are irrational, some are open to genuine debate.

im talking about the candidates

Zimphire · Sep 23, 2003, 01:48 PM

Originally posted by fireside:
because democrats stay on topic while republican use personal attacks to win arguements.

LOL! Now THAT is comedy.

ThinkInsane · Sep 23, 2003, 03:48 PM

The only thing I can say I have heard about Clark is that he is extremely arrogant and egotistical. That being said, I'm kind of leaning towards him in 2004. I wish I could vote in the primaries to assure his nomination, but alas, I'm just a lowly republican.

chabig · Sep 23, 2003, 03:58 PM

Apparently, when asked for whom he voted in the 2000 Presidential election, he said he couldn't remember. That's a load of crap. He's considering making a personal run for the highest office in the land. You'd think he pays attention to politics. And then he makes a statement like that...

Chris