While some contenders view General Clark more as a running mate than presidential threat, his credentials could pose problems for several of them. As a former military officer, he would sound at least as credible on national security matters as Dr. Dean. As a Southerner from Little Rock, General Clark might blunt the appeal of Mr. Edwards and Mr. Graham in the South.
And as a Vietnam veteran, he would temper a prominent theme of Mr. Kerry's campaign, that he is the only Democrat running to have served in combat.
An interesting (if oft-biased) article in the NY Times on Wesley Clark, who may be the Democratic Party's great white hope. This more liberal than usual military man would mean something like instant restored credibility on national security issues for a party desperate for exactly that. What this article doesn't mention is that this very asset will cost Clark dearly with the Democrat's pacifist/treasonous base, which views the American military as the KKK and the SS wrapped into one. I also like how the liberal media cant stop salivating over Howard Dean. Since when has Dean had credibility on "national security matters"? Only at the NY Times I guess.