Yes, Wes CLARK is totally against school vouchers- is and was ALWAYS

[FrenchieCat]

Oppose vouchers and all measures that weaken public schools
I believe that the best way to educate our children is by strengthening the public school system, not taking resources away from them.

Q: Do you support allowing parents in areas that are poor or with bad schools to use tax money to help send their children to private schools?

A: I oppose all measures that would weaken our public school system, including school vouchers.

No vouchers for private schools
Not all students learn in the same way, and only by offering a wide range of educational options can we ensure that all students develop their full human potential. I do not support school vouchers for private schools. I do believe, however, that there are many ways to expand educational options within the public school system so that each child can find his or her own path to success.
http://www.issues2000.org/2004/Wesley_Clark_Education.htm

[LimpingLib]

1. Thanks for posting a new thread on this.

The world wont stop revolving now that this has its own thread instead of a post in responce to the other worthless thread.

Please keep this and every other petty thread kicked.

[BootinUp]

5. Facts are tough to fight eh? Limping much?

:evilgrin:

[LimpingLib]

8. 1 thread is enough for each little issue.

This 2008 obsession doesnt need to be imposed on everybody else who visits here.

[Jai4WKC08]

11. Oh yeah, much better to have a thread to kick

That has a lie in the subject line.

That's what you'd much rather see, isn't it?

[ClarkUSA]

13. Stop disrupting this thread with your pet peeve

It's against DU rules. If you have a complaint, take it up with DU administration.

Get off this thread if it bothers you or put it on Ignore.

[Clark2008]

27. Well, have you expressed your sentiments in the other thread?

You know, the one with the lie in the subject line that was started by a non-Clark person to dredge up a flame war?

Because, if you haven't, then you should.

[Crunchy Frog]

74. Well, I've noticed that you start many threads about Clark.

Though many of them don't see the light of day for very long.:hi:

[Crunchy Frog]

36. Well, better to post the truth than a pack of lies.

Ain't it.:)

[ktowntennesseedem]

2. Right on, Wes!!!!

:woohoo:

[LimpingLib]

3. KICK

Hope everybody sees this now.

[bobthedrummer]

16. .

[newsguyatl]

4. ...

:boring:

[FrenchieCat]

9. What?

Should we lay down...just cause you're tired?

Plu-eaze...why did you even post?

Seems like you'd have something else to do that could keep you awake.

[ClarkUSA]

10. Yes, ACTUAL FACTS about Wes Clark can be so much more boring than lies

But I dislike lying nonetheless, don't you?

:eyes:

[Dinger]

29. Yup, ACTUAL FACTS are boring, So Why Noy Smear Instead?

These attacks on Clark aren't doing this party any good. Yes, there are definitely other DEMOCRATS I would support, but for many reasons, Clark is the one for me, and for our country. A modern day Jefferson Smith :)

[LimpingLib]

6. "just thought you wanted to know...Just because" KICK

[Adelante]

14. Thank you for the kick nt

[ZootSuitGringo]

31. I second that kick

and raise you on it. kick, kick, and kick

[ClarkUSA]

7. How enlightening and FACTUAL - for once

Thanks for the INFORMATION.

[incapsulated]

12. Thanks guys for all the kicks!

To this wonderful and factual thread!

I love you all!

God Bless DU, bastion of facts and fair play for everyone without bias or distortion!

:loveya:

[autorank]

15. ...and you know why he is? BECAUSE HE'S A REAL EFFING DEMOCRAT!!!

NEW LEADERS FOR A NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY

[Totally Committed]

55. Right On, autorank!

Thank you... you are exactly right about that!

TC

[autorank]

71. Thank you very much, thank you very much

:hi:

[carnie_sf]

17. Public schools

the furnace of the melting pot that used to be America.

[ClarkUSA]

21. My immigrant family all went to public schools - we all did very very well

The view that public schools are somehow "less than" is another successful reframing by GOP. Of course, the GOP are now starving public education of funds needed to sustain standards set by NCLB, but that's another sordid twist.

The American public school system as imagined and implemented by Horace Mann was revolutionary for its time and was copied by many other nations since.

[carnie_sf]

25. It's actually pretty revolutionary for the current time

[ClarkUSA]

35. As a general rule among all known nations, yes.

The GOP would rather keep the masses ignorant and uneducated which is why they are starving the public schools of funding.

[Ilsa]

18. Our schools are going to pot and the students that need extra help

won't be getting it from private schools. Private schools usually don't want kids with academic problems or behavior issues. Properly funding our public schools is the only way to see that kids (and their parents) get the help they need.

[ZootSuitGringo]

19. I think he has experience with education

(Clark's European Command) provides logistical support for 118 schools and 50,000 students. Funding new programs such as all-day kindergarten and improved student-to-teacher ratios are extremely important. Your support for this funding is crucial. Our children deserve a world-class school system with curriculum and programs to match the best. Athletics, music, art and associated after school activities are as critical as the core academic subjects of math, science, history and English.
Source: Testimony Before the House Armed Services Committee Mar 17, 1999
http://www.issues2000.org/2004/Wesley_Clark_Education.htm

Didn't I also hear him say that he was asked to become Superintendent of California Schools, when he first retired?

Yes, I think General Clark knows about education better than most.

[KittyWampus]

26. Yes, He Testified To Congress. As Commander In US, He Had To Get $

from Congress for kids of soldiers going to public school.

[Tom Rinaldo]

20. Nice to see accurate facts in the post header, backed up n/t

[prvet]

22. Thanks

for posting this

[MoonRiver]

23. Thank You, Frenchie!

There are many who are so threatened by Clark's massive grass roots support that they will stop at nothing to try and destroy him. As a long time educator I would never support anybody who was undermining the profession I love. Clark is my guy all the way. Nuff Said.

[Coexist]

24. Thank you - if I had seen this first

I never would have replied to that other thread, thereby kicking it up!

[MoonRiver]

30. I know. That's the scam.

[ZootSuitGringo]

28. Kicking this accurate source backed factual thread

to show up above lied filled drudge type thread posted earlier by a hater of all things Clark.

[BootinUp]

32. good idea

:kick:

:hi:

[MoonRiver]

33. Truer words were never spoken.

I'm really disgusted by the factless, smear based anti-Clark vitriol here.

[Tom Rinaldo]

40. Clark criss crossed the nation backing Kerry and other Dems in 04

And Republicans never said anything one half as harsh against him as I find here at DU virtually every day. That is why I am glad Frenchie started this thread. Yes it is ridiculous that she even had to, but there are far too many misrepresentations of facts used against Clark on this board. The thread Frenchie is responding to with this is a classic example. A "controversy" about Clark was being fabricated. Every time anyone tried to set the facts right it only bumped the distorted thread up again, while the original poster never corrected the misinformation.

Yes I am a Clark supporter. I do not invade threads about other Democrats to trash them. I do not start threads about other Democrats to trash them. I don't even start threads about other Democrats to challenge their basic beliefs. Certainly not out of the blue with no breaking news or vote in Congress or whatever to specifically discuss.

Personally I would rather challenge and trash the Republicans. I am not going around digging for dirt on other Democrats to throw at the wall and see what sticks. But no, I and other Clark supporters do not stand idly by and allow false beliefs to be attributed to him by others. All good Democrats should know that lesson by now. You do not stand idly by and allow false charges to be repeated against a good Democrat until they take on a life of their own independent of any facts to support them. Never. I and other Clark supporters here at DU would might seem a whole lot more mellow to others here if there weren't that so many out right falsehoods are constantly repeated here about Wes Clark.

[ZootSuitGringo]

46. Yep.

and what's weird is that those posters who post these falsehoods about Clark really don't even know the man and his stance on the issues.

[Crunchy Frog]

34. Thank you for clarifying that fact for us Frenchie.

I would hate to run accross somebody spreading lies to the contrary based on a willful inability to understand the English language.

[ZootSuitGringo]

37. Purityofstinkypooessence keeps kicking this/her lied filled thread

all by her/his lonesome self. desperate? :shrug:

[prvet]

38. They will get more desperate

as we get closer to 08

[returnable]

42. Yep. Pretty sad.

You're lucky you weren't here during the Primary Wars. That thread is purely amateur hour compared to what went on then.

So sad that some of the vets of those Wars still keep using the same tired tactics over and over again.

Of course, it says more about them than it does about any candidate they may be discussing.

[Crunchy Frog]

44. Maybe he used vouchers to go to one of those

private religious schools. That could explain the poor grasp of the English language. It's really pretty sad about the state of our educational system.

[ClarkUSA]

49. The obsessive need to lie and smear Wes Clark keeps certain people going

It's in place of doing something constructive and important to help fix this country, which is what General Clark does.

Which reminds me of why I support him.

Thanks to those with ImpurityofMotives. :kick:

[Crunchy Frog]

56. I know. I just don't get it.

I mean, there are Democrats that I'm not crazy about, but to be so obsessed with them that I would start flamebait threads telling lies about them? It's just an absolute mystery to me. It makes me sad that there are some people in my own party who are so filled with hate and vitriol. I always associated those things with the Republicans.

[ClarkUSA]

70. Destructive obsessive behavior is often directed at Clark & his supporters

here at DU -- though there are good prescription medications able to ameliorate this sad condition. Another reason why we need to fight for universal healthcare in this country. :D

[Donna Zen]

39. As a teacher in the public schools,

I have followed this issue very closely. Of course Dems as a rule are a much better choice from my perspective. Wes gets it! He once (at least) called NCLB a trojan horse designed to gut the public schools. Exactly. If you don't work with this dastardly bill, you cannot not imagine how bad it is.

If Dems can't support Dems, then how can they be expectly to bring the country together. Hint: a game of "gotcha" won't turn that sea of red into a peaceful blue.

Just another day...goddess give me strength.

[prvet]

41. I think Teachers

are way underpaid and underappreciated.
No way I could do that job

[senseandsensibility]

77. Thanks prvet!

I'm a teacher, as are many here at DU. Your comments are appreciated. Welcome to DU, and I look forward to hearing more from you.:hi:

[Crunchy Frog]

43. Thank you for that insight Donna. n/t

[Tom Rinaldo]

45. And I know that Clark's views on Education were an important reason

why you support him in the first place. That is one reason why other's attempts to create yet another false controversy about Clark, this time about vouchers and public schools, is so aggravating. And when we defend him with facts, the follow up complaint sure as rain in the Amazon, is that Clark supporters are trying to shove him down people's throats by keeping threads about him active.

[Tom Rinaldo]

48. And that the full meaning of the comments he gave that Carol reported

was one of the strongest defenses of public education given by any Democrat in recent years. The funny thing is, that is what almost always happens when any source material about Clark is looked at fully and in context. I will never accept "gotcha" twisting of word snippets out of context to defile a good Democrat. No one should.

[CarolNYC]

73. thank you Tom...and LittleClarkie...and cestpaspossible....

...and anyone else who tried to help explain what the General said. For a while there, I thought I was losing my mind, thinking I wrote something that I didn't write...It really wasn't hard to understand, right?

[PurityOfEssence]

47. You refute what he said this week with something he said last year?

What planet are you on? What's the date of the document you're cutting and pasting? I'm using a quote that's less than a week old that says "we are not against vouchers". It sounds like he's changed his mind, doesn't it?

CURRENT stance is the issue, not history.

[returnable]

50. So sad.

You're grasping at straws.

He was talking about framing the debate, and you know it. If I tell my rightwing nutjob brother-in-law "I'm not against the Christian right, I'm for freedom of religion," that does NOT mean I'm a supporter of the wingnuts.

[Tom Rinaldo]

51. No, you were the one who brought the past tense into discussion.

Frenchie proved that Clark was also against Vouchers before, contrary to the false implication your thread header left.


And others have shown how he is opposing them now. He is opposing them by framing the discussion politically in a way that is advantageous to Democrats who believe in public schools. He stressed that Democrats need to present our views in terms of what we advocate, not only what we are against. Otherwise Republicans continually set the agenda for public debate and that slants the Field against us. Most everyone else got what Clark meant from his full comments, and he is right and Thank God more Democrats are catching on to the tricks Republicans have played on us for decades.

[PurityOfEssence]

65. Proof of Clark's earlier ambivalence on vouchers

"there may be times and circumstances on an exceptional basis where vouchering makes sense."

http://selectsmart.com/president/Clark.html

Chronology: he was undecided about this at first, then came out against vouchers during the campaign. NOW, he says "we are not against vouchers".

Dammit, defend this, okay? To use selective quotes from the past (after he'd waffled on the subject early on) to paint him as always having been against vouchers is one thing. To deny a flat statement that "we are not against vouchers" as mere framing and genius rhetoric is absurd. Defend it. Go ahead.

If, as another firebrand suggests, I don't have the right to post on this thread, just let me know what versions of documented history are acceptable.

[PurityOfEssence]

76. So, nobody wants to refute this old pro-voucher quote of Clark's?

Reality is what you say, not what ACTUALLY HAPPENED, huh?

This is deplorable. Shame on you people.

Scream, rage, call anyone who doesn't cleave to the party line "liars" and such, but when asked to explain yourselves, nobody has the spine to even show up.

Once again: Clark was wishy-washy on vouchers when starting his campaign--as shown by the quote above--became vigorously opposed to them throughout the primary season, and now says "we are not against" them. I've been very specific about this contention, and amid the flurry of dismissal, still stand by the proof that hasn't been disproven.

Using Clark propaganda from mid-campaign doesn't prove that HE NEVER WAS FOR VOUCHERS. Smashing those who disagree and having tantrums against unpleasant FACTS is pathetic.

Privilege is disgusting; as Daniel Patrick Moynihan said: everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.

[BootinUp]

78. This must be a spambot

They can't read can they? :eyes:

[Sparkly]

79. I'll try again.

General Clark has been consistent about the importance of funding public education. I don't think there's any question of that. The problem with GOP vouchers is that they'd remove funds from public schools, and that is something Clark is very much against.

He said we need to speak in terms of what we are FOR, and we're FOR strong public schools; he was saying he prefers to say it that way rather than "against vouchers."

As for "there may be times and circumstances on an exceptional basis where vouchering makes sense," I think you'd have to ask him what exceptional circumstances he has in mind. In my view, it could make sense for some students to have the option of going to a different public school than the once they're zoned for, based on schools' differences in, for example, ESL or language immersion programs, performing arts programs, advanced placement courses, special needs programs, proximity to a parent's workplace, relocation when the student only has a year left, etc.. -- those are just possible "times and circumstances on an exceptional basis" I can think of off the top of my head. That's very different from abandoning poor schools and removing funding from them.

[ClarkUSA]

52. Do not attempt to HIJACK THIS THREAD. It is AGAINST DU RULES.

Why are you disrupting this thread? Why are you coming here from that thread of you started earlier? What you are doing is against DU rules so do not continue.

You are clearly not interested in the truth. Continuity of opinion shows integrity of position and this is excatly what this EDUCATIONAL FACT-FILLED post is about.

DO NOT DISRUPT THIS THREAD FURTHER.

[Crunchy Frog]

58. No, do. Keep this one kicked instead of the one filled with lies.

[ClarkUSA]

62. LOL!

[Sparkly]

53. He said

that we should not speak in terms of being "against" things, but rather "FOR" things. And he is FOR funding public education. That means he's NOT for removing funds from public schools via voucher systems. Clear enough?

[returnable]

54. It'll never be clear enough to the willfully ignorant...

:kick:

[Sparkly]

57. In a way, it's comical!!

:crazy:

[ClarkUSA]

60. ImpurityofMotives isn't listening because the agenda is to smear Clark

This has been explained at least a dozen times.

Playing dumb helps to prolong the attempt at Clark Smear Agenda.

[returnable]

63. In that "other" thread, check post #61

The poster cops to skewing the quote to make a point:

"One has to live or die by one's statements and actions; this is precisely why it's so hard for Senators to win national elections: they have to stand up and be counted on all sorts of things that can be skewed later."

It's rare that we see a poster actually admit to smearing a candidate.

[ClarkUSA]

66. PurityofPartisanPolitics understands skewing candidates alright

We'll be watching for certain lying liars from now on.

Good catch, returnable.

:thumbsup:

[FrenchieCat]

59. There is not need to refute something that wasn't said in the context

that you are using.

What planet are you on, that you would interpret second hand information, cut off most of the meaning and quote 5 words as a change in position? The problem that you have in this fabrication is that you never heard Clark utter any of the 5 words you are using. You never even saw those words in quotes.

Why are you that desperate? It really looks just so pitiful.

The sad part for you, is that you are more than obvious to everyone but yourself....even those who might be "playing" with you.

It's a sickening ploy, what you are doing, and I would have to venture and guess that you have nothing better to do. But keep in mind that it will only make people look at you closer and question your motives. It's one thing to hate, but quite another to pile on issues that aren't really at issue. Clark was speaking of reframing, and yet you chose to do some deceitful reframing yourself.

Keep in mind that it's a sick world out there. Our education system is not your playtoy. Too many young people are struggling and having their American Dreams and their hopes dashed. For you to just start making up shit just cause you can, and consider yourself "clever" if truly not that.

Some people are part of the solution, and others are the problem. Look in the mirror and know that we are all standing behind you watching and knowing which category you truly fit.

[Sparkly]

61. Remember the "How would Rove smear Clark" question?

That's the answer: twist words out of context. Rightwingers are experts at doing that to Democrats.

I'm just sayin'.

[Crunchy Frog]

64. Unfortunately, all Rove needs to do

is read this site. Sometimes this place does a better job of smearing Democrats than that other place with the initials F. R.

[CarolNYC]

72. Ya know....

I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt on that other thread, (it's one of my faults, tending to give people the benefit of the doubt) thinking maybe you just read through the account quickly and missed what was really there...but, from your subsequent responses, I can only conclude that you are willfully distorting what was said. I just can't believe that you are so dense as to not be able to comprehend such a simple concept as what was being put forward there so the only other option that is that you are purposefully trying to mislead people about Clark.

I also thanked you for not destroying my thread about the event, and I'm still happy about that, but now I'm thinking that staying out of that thread wasn't done so much to protect the thread but because you thought that a new thread, with an inflammatory title, would get more looks than the same post buried in that days old thread.

The whole exercise, I think, reveals a lot more about you than about Clark and I thank you for that for it gives me a frame of reference by which to judge the rest of your posts.

I hope it made your day...because it's greatly saddened mine to see the stuff that goes on here. :(

Be well, OK?

[CarolNYC]

75. Oh, and do get yourself a copy

of George Lakoff's "don't think of an elephant! Know Your Values and Frame the Debate". Apparently you're unfamiliar with it and it is a most valuable resource.....You can find it on amazon...and probably even in your public library. It's short and won't take long to read...

[robbedvoter]

67. Thanks, Frenchie. I supported Clark for his passion for public education

(among other important positions I liked). He said that NCLB was a hand grenade thrown at public education - with the purpose of humiliating and defunding it. So, I will never support ANY of the senators who voted for the crap - my kid already suffers repercussions.
Wes Clark has an obvious respect for teachers, education - as demonstrated in his actions on behalf of military families, not just pretty words. As for those of you trying to turn his words inside out,

[Donna Zen]

68. Did you say schools?

And when it comes to our nations schools, George Bush is all mouth and no money!

~Wes Clark, Pembrooke 2004

[Crunchy Frog]

69. Kick! n/t

:kick:

[NMDemDist2]

80. locking for continuing a locked flame war n/t