OK, I can understand why Wes Clark doesn't want to consider a VP slot with Howard Dean — he wants to be the candidate after all! But this is dumb reasoning:
Clark, who says that he's uniquely qualified to go "toe-to-toe" with President Bush on security issues in 2004, said that whether he's on the ticket or not, the Democrats can't win with Dean as their presidential candidate."I don't think the Democratic Party can win without carrying a heavy experience in national security affairs into the campaign," he told Salon in a phone interview last week. "And that experience can't be in a vice president."
Right. How could a candidate whose main political experience has been being governor of a state (admittedly one that borders on another country) be elected President of the world's greatest democracy (TM)? What are they going to do, get a VP with more international relations experience and military background and let him advise on foreign policy? It would never work.
Well, true, maybe it doesn't work, but we have been referring to Dubya as "President Bush" for the last few years, haven't we? Imagine how well things could go if we had people in those two jobs with brains and hearts.
I know, I know, September 11, everything's changed, blah blah blah. I think Howard Dean understands this. It's not clear to me from Clark's muddled campaigning, that he does. It's a shame he's not willing to consider what could be an excellent partnership and a good thing for the country — and wasn't that supposed to be the point?
