Wes clark, jr. to young turks

Wes Clark, Jr. the big mouthed loquacious son of retired U.S. Army General and former presidential candidate Wesley Clark joins as a regular with Cenk Uygur Air America Radio's morning show, The Young Turks (KPTK m-f, 3-6a) Best Of The Young Turks (Saturdays, 7-10:00p).

It's Clark's first foray into broadcasting after spending four years in the Army (1992-1996) and a stint at Jersey Films as a creative executive. He'll continue working on his screenwriting career.

Clark takes no prisoners- and Democrats are not spared.

Uygur says: "He names names, calls out specific Democratic consultants that worked on the Wesley Clark campaign and goes after the party leadership. His criticism of the Democrats is only matched by his blistering attack against the Republican Party. His story on how John McCain acts in private is devastating.

(Cenk Uygur, blatherWatch photo)

He also goes after Bob Shrum, Joe Lieberman, James Carville and even some bloggers on Daily Kos. No one is spared, including me at the end. If you're faint of heart, don't watch this clip. And I'm also warning you ahead of time, if you are offended by foul language -- do not watch this.

Comments

[wutitiz]

Great....now Tom Leykis is going to tell us how to run the gov't.

[Joanie]

Michael, there is nothing in this clip I didn't already know or suspect. Not one single thing.

That's why I am all for saying screw 'em all and take a chance on somebody totally new.

That's what primaries should be for. No one should be afraid to take a chance. The Dems are just as deep into corporate pockets as the Republicans. There is no difference. The Dems just play a little softer. But not enough to make a difference as far as I'm concerned.

You can be like Duffman and put your "faith" into some crafted image and be disappointed or you can face reality and vote your ethics and real values and probably lose. But, what have you lost really?

[joanie]

And he's right about the same people who were responsible for Iran Contra being the same people around now - including Gates. Amy Goodman did a great show on it several months ago which I linked then. It is absolutely shameful that these people survived to do the same corrupt stuff twice.

[RP]

That's awesome. Give 'em hell Wes!

[Duffman]

joanie sez:
"You can be like Duffman and put your "faith" into some crafted image and be disappointed or you can face reality and vote your ethics and real values and probably lose."

I really don't know why you have to be so critical of me and my support of Mrs Clinton. Yes I do have faith in her, you haven't even given her a chance to show what she (& a like-minded Congress) can do yet. Do you EVER see the glass as possibly half-full?
Actually, there is one thing that could possibly sway me to another and that would be if Al Gore decided to run. I'm not with him 'totally' on global warming, but I do think he'd make a great POTUS. Should he decide to enter the race I would have some tough pondering to do.
As you well know NOTHING is certain in Politics; you can study the issues and candidates 'till the proverbial 'cows come home' and still you must rely on a 'certain amount' of 'gut feel'. So, pray tell - why condemn and mock me for my support of Mrs Clinton. I really don't think it's fair.

[joanine]

Critical of you? Because you never say anything based on anything specific or historical. "I have faith in her."

And "glasses half full" aren't even relevant. More "happy talk" that is meaningless. My half-full would be people having the courage to make some real changes in this country rather going with the same ol' same ol'. That's you. Your "glass half full" isn't everybody's Duffman.

And you did the same thing with Andrew. He did provide some specifics while you sort of said in a nutshell: if it isn't broken, why fix it. He told you why. Some of you think that if something is working, you don't have to know if it is working honestly or ethically. Well, others of us do care if success is brought about ethically or honestly.

That's the difference. It is one of taking responsibility rather than acceptance.

You accept her at face value; I look a little deeper. Just what do you think someone who is the biggest benefactor of insurance money is going to do for you? Just what do you think "Mrs. Wall Street" - not my original term - is going to do for you? Just what do you thin Mrs. Clinton, wife of NAFTA and CAFTA loving Mr. Clinton, is going to do for you.

If you did any homework, you'd like Edwards or Kucinich. But you like happy talk and live on "faith." And "faith" is your word for it, not mine.

You keep your "happy talk" and your opinion of "glasses half full" while I talk specifics and look at records and history.

I will be happily surprised if Mrs. Clinton achieves anything close to your expectation.

And, for what it's worth, diversity of opinion is what makes interesting discussion. Not "pie in the sky" happy talk. Sorry.

[blathering michael]

"But, what have you lost really?"

The Supreme Court, reproductive rights, stem cell research; nearly 4000 military lives; global respect and cooperation; habeas corpus, the Geneva conventions; meaningful environmental regulation; acknowledgment of global warming; separation of church & state, and much more.

Sorry, Joanie but losing to Republicans doesn't pencil. Don't know who I support yet, but self-destructing with a marginal, better-right-than-elected goofball like Dennis Kucinich isn't an option. Didn't we learn from 2000 and the results of the disastrous purity of the Nader voters?
We gotta fight on the battlefield- being aloof from it is cut & run- and shirking civic responsibility.

[coiler]

We are fucked...

[sparky]

This is great news..he has been a guest lots of times and he is excellent. I only get to listen from 4:30-6 before Stephanie comes on, but it is great radio. With the demise of Awful Jill, this show has ceased to be GenX and is interesting to listen to.

[joanie]

Totally agree, Sparky! Although, he's not as good as Seder . . . but with Rhodes (sometimes), Cenk and Wes, and Seder, we're starting to build an activist arsenal of talk radio hosts.

Michael, yes, we have lost all those things and more. You are right. But, partially right. We are not out of the woods yet. Those things are still in jeopardy. As long as the Dems are part of the cancer, the cancer will grow. Maybe more slowly but eventually even slow-growing cancer is fatal.

So, my activism is less cautious. You know very well I will vote Dem to slow the cancer because I must. But, I will continue to fight for, support, and argue vehemently for surgical removal of the whole cancer. Maybe the technique is still in R&D but I think we will not change direction in this country until the whole corporatist disease has been exorcised.

Especially a blue state like ours could have given someone like Tran a chance or at least a voice. Challenge to incumbants makes incumbants less secure and more responsive And don't you dare come back and tell me she should start at the bottom because I'll give you Darcy Burner as my answer.

Melodrama? I don't care. I think we are in much greater trouble than you do. I'm more of a risk-taker as a result.

[PugetSound]

bla'm
thanks for the link. fascinating interview. cenk tried to derail it into the 'fox news' bash etc, what made it fascinating is wesley clark able to clean house internally. that is what made the interview not a rant but something worth listening to. he was spot on about the party faithful.
and he was spot on about chris lehane. that little dude was the one responsibile for putting out the john kerry having an affair story a few years ago during the clark campaign that was later picked up by drudge, etc.

[PugetSound]

andrew
did you catch the wesley clark interview?