Clark says he's against the 87 billion.

[IranianDemocrat]

In the new issue of Times. Go check it out.

[GainesT1958]

1. Good--it's a good thing to be against a 'blank check' for Halliburton...

And, while I'm at it, I'm suuure glad my home-state senator (the one who's also running) voted "Nay" on it, too! :D

B-)

[sleipnir]

2. Good to hear!!!, but

what took him so long to announce this?? I feel this is more of the Clark "wait and see" public opinion approach, I wish he'd come out against it weeks ago. Maybe someone can direct me to offical statements from early this month late last month, but I can't find them.

[StephNW4Clark]

3. I'll look for you. I remember Clark...

...in an interview saying that $87 billion is very difficult to spend efficiently and effectively. I think it was even before his candidacy was announced. He was saying that the money to the troops was a good idea, but spending $20+ billion without specific objectives and accountability would be a waste of money.

[sleipnir]

6. Thanks

I read the offical statement Clark put on his website, but that was just 4 days ago. I'm not hounding on Clark, but this is his bread and butter specialty, military spending, appropriations. He's the expert, I would have expected something rather quickly.

I know that Dean put out a statement about the same time, but Kucinich and Braun have railed against the 87 billion from the beginning and Kerry was opposed about 2 weeks ago.

I think Clark should be leading the charge in issues like this, not waiting around for poll numbers and public reaction.

[JohnKleeb]

7. Thats good that Braun did too, and of course Kucinich

I just hope Kucinich gets props for standing up intially of all the candiates against it.

[returnable]

8. I'm guessing here...

..but part of it probably involved waiting to see what the specifics of the proposal were.

I mean, the day after Bush announced the $87 billion figure in that national address, people were expecting the candidates to vote "yea" or "nay" on the spot.

That's kinda crazy. Without knowing how the money was going to be appropriated, it would've been stupid to even offer up a definitive yes/no.

All of the candidates (except Kucinich and, I believe, Graham) said they supported funding for the troops. They wanted to see how Bush's proposal actually addressed those concerns before commenting further.

Once the bill was actually submitted to congress and the nuts and bolts of the spending could be viewed and analyzed, the candidates could then make informed decisions.

And for what it's worth, Clark had expressed skepticism about the $87 billion figure from the time it was announced.

That he waited until researching the actual cost breakdowns before stating his position is a plus, not a minus, in my book.

[KittyWampus]

4. Clark Addressed The Issue Weeks Ago

Can't remember what venue.

This is old news repackaged in the Time article (haven't read yet).

[Cocoa]

5. lack of official statements is a big minus for Clark

before he announced, all questions I had about Clark were directed to the many "Draft Clark" sources, which of course Clark couldn't be expected to be responsible for.

It hasn't changed much since he's announced. The last time I checked, his official site didn't have an "On the issues" section.

[bicentennial_baby]

9. Try

the "Speeches" section, where you'll find his policy speeches, one of which he's giving tommorrow in NH. There will be four in total over the next month, and they will be posted there as they are given.

[JasonBerry]

10. Well????

I'm confused. As a CNN analyst, Clark was CLEAR that since we were there we needed to do "whatever is necessary" to "complete the mission." I'm against the $87,000,000,000.00 because I am against the whole thing. Clark is NOT, so, how does he reconcile his position? How much would HE propose? Place finger to the wind, hold steady, allow worn-out political insiders to check the American pulse, put on the smile and speak forth with results from political insiders the results from American pulse-taking. The Clark way, so far.