Saturday, September 27, 2003

Who you calling paranoid?

Paid a little visit to Dean’s Blog for America today-- not to stir up trouble, but just to take a look around. For the uninitiated, it is an interesting place where the residents are likely to say outsiders just don’t “get it.”

A recurrent theme:

OT: I was talking to my friend last night and she brought up an interesting theory - that Clark is a Bush plant. Here?s her theory: The reason Clark was so wishy-washy for months on whether he would or not run was because Clark (and the right-wing neocon Republicans) waited to see if Bush?s polls would start to go down and once Bush?s ratings did begin to plummet, Clark steps in and announces his candidacy. God forbid, the Republicans didn?t want Clark to run against Bush as a Republican, so here he is - a Democratic candidate. If Clark gets the nomination - it?s a win-win situation for the right-wing Republicans. Seems plausible to me.

Food for thought

About six posts later:

Good to see everyone being positive once again. We had a few ays where some cynacism seemed to be crawling into our blog. You gotta believe!

Scroll down a bit:

FOOD FOR THOUGHT - on your theory about Clark being a Bush plant...

I think this makes some sense and is another reason that so many Republicans would rather face him, they know in the off chance that Clark wins they will have a guy that only 2 years ago was a HUGE support of Shrub and Gang.

The true test will come when Dean wins the nomination and invites Clark to be the VP, if he joins or not! Then we'll see just how much of a Democrat he really is.

The theme continues:

Food for thought:

Good thought! NUMEROUS folks I know say the same thing--Bush vs Clark = Repug against Repug. Either way, THEY win.

The “scientific view”:

It has been hypothesized here and elsewhere that Clark is a plant placed into the Democratic campaign at the urging of the Republican Party. In my view, this is a reasonable hypothesis that merits investigation. Claims by the candidate to the contrary are noteworthy but not convincing. Neither are claims of betrayal by Republican leaders.

SCLM, let’s get on that, okay?

I think the Repugs are "freaking out" about Clark because they want the Demos to think they are afraid of Clark so they will nominate Clark, wehen in reality Clark is (excuse my while I adjust my tinfoil hat) a mole planted by Rove. They want Clark in so they win either way. They don't want to face Dean in the general election so they make a big deal about being afraid of Clark to the Demos will be head-faked into pushing him to the front.

Now, here is a brave soul, who knows he risks stern rebuke for being one of those reprehensible Dems that actually wants to win, apparently even if it means running an undercover Neocon for VP.:

I just would like to say that Clark as a Veep
still looks beneficial from my perspective
because he helps to balance the concerns
people express about dean:
1) no foreign policy experience
2) concerns about being tough on terror (whatever
that means)
3) being from a whimpy state like vermont...
4) plus he's a southerner.

please don't beat him up too bad.

i think he helps with electability ...

Not the E-Word!

Finally, a voice of reason:

RE: Wes Clark - guys, lets not bash him, he's a good guy, the "He's really a RePub" is all disinformation coming from the RePugs. (see MEdia Whores Online today, to see how Tucker Carlson took a statement of Clark's about George Bush, Sr. and said that it was about our current Chief Thief.

I think the RePug strategy is first destroy Clark, then turn their lies on DEan.

Dean will win, fair and square, because he's the best candidate, AND the most electable; and a Dean/Clark ticket is a great ticket.

Glad we got that settled.

No comments: