September 15th, 2007
07:01 PM ET
11 years ago

Clark endorses Clinton

Clark announced his endorsement on Saturday.

(CNN)–Wesley Clark, the retired four star general who ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2004, announced his endorsement of Senator Hillary Clinton on Saturday.

"I'm very pleased today to announce my endorsement of Senator Clinton to be our next President of the United States," Clark said on a conference call with reporters. "She'll be a great leader for the United States of America, and I think she'll be a great commander in chief for the men and women in the armed forces."

“The world has reached a critical point, and we need a leader in the White House with the courage, intelligence and humility to navigate through many troubling challenges to our security at home and abroad," Clark also said Saturday.

"I want to thank General Clark. He and I have been friends for twenty five years," Senator Clinton said on the call after Clark made his announcement. "I'm looking forward to having him involved with my campaign, working with him now and into the future, and so I'm very grateful for this endorsement. It means a lot to me personally, as well as a real sign of confidence in my ability to be president and commander in chief."

Clark was the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, and led the allied military operation in the Kosovo war in 1999 under President Bill Clinton.

Shortly after announcing Clark's backing, the Clinton campaign sent out a statement touting the endorsement of Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Michigan.

- CNN's Mark Preston and Jamie Crawford

Filed under: Hillary Clinton • Race to '08
soundoff (104 Responses)
  1. Eric NYC

    it irks me that hrc gets all the endorsement headlines. cnn is a joke. hmmm...who does Time Warner want as president? that's all i need to know....

    September 15, 2007 01:52 pm at 1:52 pm |
  2. Peter, Los Angeles, CA

    This guy is actually the fist US military commander who under Bill Clinton lead illegal (against UN charter/approval) NATO aggression against Yugoslavia in 1999 based on lies (sounds familiar?) that there were "hundreds of thousands" of dead Albanians.... Both Clinton and this guy eat from the same pot. Cooked by Albanian-American PACs. Having these people decide our future will just bring us closer to confrontation with a more serious forces in the world then dubious Al Queida, like Russia.

    September 15, 2007 01:53 pm at 1:53 pm |
  3. Cody, Tupelo, MS

    Jen got it right when she said:

    "Surprisingly, Hillary did not benifit from this 25-year friendship with a four-star general by casting a good vote for Iraq back in 2002.

    Hillary won't make any better of a President than the current one. I won't vote for someone just because they're here on CNN every day– that doesn't mean crap about their capabilities as a potential President.

    I'll cast my vote for someone who might actually have the brains to do something right. The first time. Hillary voted for the war. John Edwards voted for the war. Obama is already talking about war in Pakistan and he isn't even President. Enough said.


    September 15, 2007 01:54 pm at 1:54 pm |
  4. Alexis, Los Angeles, CA

    Whoever gains the White House in 2008 will no doubt have to confront the most difficult issues of our time; a declining dollar, a bankrupt federal government ($70+ Trillion unfunded liabilities), the prospect of Peak Oil production, outsourcing, unemployment, a declining educational system, corporate greed on an unimaginable scale and failing social cohesion. As a conservative, I don't envy any new president given the potential problems they face. At least let us do our best to elect a person with whom the American people can trust. Is this possible? Only time will tell.

    September 15, 2007 01:55 pm at 1:55 pm |
  5. Hillary????????, IN Missouri

    Another reason for Bush/Cheney in '08.


    September 15, 2007 01:59 pm at 1:59 pm |
  6. alan St Louis MO

    You Clinton bashers are two faced. First you bash her because she was only Bill wife and that does not count as experance or serving in the white ok fair point Then in the same breath of air you bash her for what her husband done. And put what her husband has done on her record. LOL so which is it?? Egg heads doing the same thing Bush is doing (CHERRY PICKING) cherry picking the bad stuff off of bill record and place it on hillary but all the good he has done for the country dont count. Why she was only first lady then. HIPO CRITS

    September 15, 2007 02:10 pm at 2:10 pm |
  7. George

    Barack enjoys strong support from the military, as evidenced by him being the candidate ( out of all of the Republicans or Democrats) receiving the most contributions from military people.
    Posted By Michael James – Illinois : September 15, 2007 1:27 pm "

    Documentation please.

    Strong support? Who are the Generals supporting Senator Obama? Are there as many of those as there are UNION ENDORSEMENTS?

    September 15, 2007 02:13 pm at 2:13 pm |
  8. david knowles

    fair to assume that Clark will get a cabinet position:

    September 15, 2007 02:15 pm at 2:15 pm |
  9. Joe Smith Boise, Idaho

    What has our country come to...Hilary Clinton as commander in chief. She and her husband 'loathe' the military. She is an overweight slob (not just physically), eating from the public trough her entire adult life. She has no concept of the military or of discipline,leadership etc. The nuclear suitcase in the hands of another Clinton. What is wrong with you people?

    September 15, 2007 02:49 pm at 2:49 pm |
  10. Russell NC

    Who cares about Wes Clark? He amounted to nothing in the last election. Hillary is a lost cause.

    September 15, 2007 02:50 pm at 2:50 pm |
  11. B.F. Pinkerton, TX


    Your documentation for Obama leading the military donations is below.

    September 15, 2007 02:59 pm at 2:59 pm |
  12. david, chattanooga

    oprah endorses obama because he is black. now clarke endorses hillary–ostensibly because she is white.

    what's not to love about america??

    September 15, 2007 03:18 pm at 3:18 pm |
  13. Ron, la canada, CA

    oprah endorses obama because he is black. now clarke endorses hillary–ostensibly because she is white.

    what's not to love about america??
    Posted By david, chattanooga : September 15, 2007 3:18 pm

    i absolutely agree with david from chattanooga. clarke is only endorsing hillary because she is white, the same way oprah endorsed obama because he is half-black. this really needs to stop. it doesn't matter who endorses who. just vote for whoever you want. endorsements shouldn't matter.

    September 15, 2007 03:21 pm at 3:21 pm |
  14. Who cares? Yorba Linda, CA

    Clark only supported Clinton because they are both from Arkansas. Boo! Thank GOD you didn't win the Presidency when you ran, because you would have been yet another Arkansas man trying to seed the Office of the Presidency to Hillary. Booooo!!

    September 15, 2007 03:22 pm at 3:22 pm |
  15. Neil M. Heckman, NA Souda Bay, Crete

    I am so sad you gave up – and to her? You've got to be kidding – hoping to be her VP? Pathetic. Go home. Signed -a guy who has spent as much time as you have trying to make a difference – but still am. NMH

    September 15, 2007 03:29 pm at 3:29 pm |
  16. alan St Louis Mo

    The President do not need to know jack about the miltary. That is why there are Generals in the military. These Generals make about 120Grand a year. But however the presisdent needs to know world politcs. This current government scores a F minus. Bill scored an B plus maybe an A minus. Back then our diplomcy was meaningful. Today other contries just laugh at us. So bashing someone becuse of no military strenths is just stupid. I think our government is by the people for the people. Not a facist by the military for the military. I serve in the military and still serving. I serve it to protect "for the people by the people." I dont not serve it "for the miltary by the military." Which this adminstration seems tring to do. Military dont dictate policy they only enforce the policy the people tell them to enforce. Any one rember Germany before WW2. It was a Democracy that hittler convinced his people to change for the military by the military. How did that turn out? Military has no place in politics in deciding what laws there should be. But having a military back ground is not bad either.

    September 15, 2007 03:36 pm at 3:36 pm |
  17. Kim, Mpls, MN


    Here's your proof on Obama leading military donations to date(USA Today). Do HRC supporters read anything else but CNN? Figures.

    September 15, 2007 03:44 pm at 3:44 pm |
  18. Angelina Smith, Lake Forest, IL

    Oalala ... whoever, I just want to have a smart, intelligent, great leader for America. Someone who can recover the US' negative image in the international arena at the moment. Well, someone who can say to the world that the US is not merely an arogant "police" of the world but the country of great and cultured cum civilized people. Do we have one in store?

    September 15, 2007 04:04 pm at 4:04 pm |
  19. Cable King Pittsburgh Pa

    Like it or not, Hillary has climbed another step on the staircase to the White House.

    September 15, 2007 04:13 pm at 4:13 pm |
  20. Kim, Mpls, MN

    I can see through HRC's political game. She basically outright called Gen Petraus a liar and she got called on it. In order to minimize the already in process backlash from the Republicans and the military she pulls Clarke out of her pocket. Nice timing don't you think?

    Think people, this means nothing.

    September 15, 2007 04:25 pm at 4:25 pm |
  21. Mike, Louisville, KY

    My dream ticket would have been Obama/Clark. Obama doesn't have enough foreign policy experience you say? How about a four-star general to ask for advice?

    September 15, 2007 04:27 pm at 4:27 pm |
  22. L. Olson

    Why would anyone vote for Hillary Clinton who could not even set up a satisfactory health care plan for her DH when he was in office? All she is going to do is tear our military apart just like her DH did. That is why the military was in such bad shape when Bush took over. I don't endorse what Bush is doing, but this gal is worse.

    September 15, 2007 04:36 pm at 4:36 pm |
  23. Walt, Belton, TX

    When Bill Clinton made Clark into a four star general he fulfilled the old adage that any idiot can get promoted. When Clinton fired Clark for being incompetent, it showed that even Clinton could recognize incompetence.

    Even a stark raving idiot like Clark can be taught to say "thank you."

    September 15, 2007 04:37 pm at 4:37 pm |
  24. Garrett Babb Indianapolis, IN

    Oh yeah? Well Garrett Babb and all of his friends endorse Ron Paul. Where's the article on that? Look, if you need movie stars and political heavyweights' recommendations because you can't make your own decisions, then just don't vote. Please consider what's important to you and the issues that are important to you before you go with whoever the media deems "most popular"

    September 15, 2007 04:38 pm at 4:38 pm |
  25. Steve B, Phoenix AZ

    General Clark said “The world has reached a critical point, and we need a leader in the White House with the courage, intelligence and humility to navigate through many troubling challenges to our security at home and abroad," he endorsed the right candidate if we want to bring about change, if we want to stop good american solders from dying senselessly. The only people who say different only care about the oil not the 3775 confirmed dead american solders, and certainly not this BS Terrorist excuse. Every agency in the government except the white house has excepted that there weren’t any terrorist until we got there. This war is a failure and gwb’s presidency is not just a failure but horrible burden on this country. And if we really want change for the better Gen. Clark is right ditch the fat old white guy and vote a president with some real stones.

    Clinton 08!!!

    September 15, 2007 04:43 pm at 4:43 pm |
1 2 3 4 5