Wes Clark blasts McCain again on military experience

Email Print posted by callisto 06/30/2008 11:00:14 AM EST

Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit
If you like this story, digg it!
Go get 'm Supreme Commander :)

Great Clark quote:
"Well, I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president"

Interview of General Wesley Clark on Face the Nation June 29, 2008: http://www.mccunt.org/blog/ wes-clark-blasts-mccain-on- military-experience.html
< Send This To Everyone You Know (Or Even Don't Know) | Michael Savage VS. The Homosexual Mafia >
 Display:
Wes Clark blasts McCain again on military experience | 33 comments (33 topical, 0 hidden)
Well... (none / 0)
I think General Clark just took himself right out of the VP running. Now whether that was by Obama's design or not you all can argue about, but coming out with that sort of attack on McCain really sets Clark up poorly with independents. Now am I saying that Clark's statement was wrong? No, he was in fact mostly correct. But thats never the point when it comes to this game we call politics. If Obama were to select Clark as VP, this incident will be all they talk about in the MSM (and the fact that he has no civilian experience whatsoever). I think Obama will use General Clark as an attack dog on security and defense issues, but I think that the media will turn on him if he selects him as VP. Im sorry to disappoint all the Clark lovers in the audience, but either 1) the man is not politically savvy enough to handle the spotlight or 2) Obama doesnt want him as VP and has chosen this course for the General... Either way, Obama is getting pretty used to throwing people under the bus (or tank in this case). Obama's character is really coming into question for a lot of people, and this Clark incident is bringing out more of that... if this is how he treats his 'friends"... Just some thoughts of mine - Thanks! :)

by bobo1 on 06/30/2008 09:03:49 PM EST

Audition (none / 0)

I suspect this whole Clark flap is an audition for the VP slot.  Think about it, if Clark were VP this would be his job, tearing down McCain on defense.

So you let him run his biggest attack out there and see how people react.  If he pulls it off, he is the guy to neutralize the McCain: War Hero aspect.  If it fails, you aren't attached to the guy so you can wash your hands and the attack is still out there.

And, of course, no matter what the pundits say, it will resonate because its true.

Finally, the story should do well on the comeback.  Eventually the MSM will start talking about how Clark isn't just a billy-badass career military guy (from the South to boot) but someone who was horribly injured in Viet Nam and NEVER MENTIONED IT WHILE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.  People don't know that now (hell, I didn't) but it should make for a nice "Round 2" contrast story where we learn Clark's money has always been where his mouth is.

Ultimately if people accept Clark's attack he gets to be the war hero that didn't try to capitalize and that should cheapen McCain's political career at least somewhat. 

by ProfRich on 07/01/2008 12:00:11 AM EST

[ Parent ]
hope you are right (none / 0)
I thought the same thing when Clark did his first attack on Morning Joe--that he was trying out for the VP position.  I hate how he is being trashed in the media though and I didn't expect Obama to reject his comments outright.

by desertpear on 07/01/2008 12:23:19 AM EST

[ Parent ]
As VP (none / 0)

Clark is no good to Obama if he can't fade the heat for these kind of statements without having to bring Obama to bear.

If Obama wants to get the pushback on this, he can do it himself.  The VP, in his role of attack dog, has to maintain at least an illusion of independence or he is pointless.

I think its about 50/50 Clark will be able to flip this whole thing.  I mean Clark's bio is a giant elbow from the sky that might land pretty heavy on the pundit clowns.  Of course, it might not.  We are gonna see how invincible Saint John's Patriot Shield is.

But like I said, if this attack backfires, Clark wasn't a good choice from the get go. 

by ProfRich on 07/01/2008 12:31:13 AM EST

[ Parent ]
At least (none / 0)
the Supreme Allied Commander(!) isn't backing down.

by Spencer on 07/01/2008 12:42:59 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Totally agree (none / 0)
see my good cop bad cop post. There's no real downside for Obama here. I don't think he's pandering like bobo does. I think he's keeping a safe distance. Wes can take care of himself.

by hazmat on 07/01/2008 12:35:31 AM EST

[ Parent ]
And the true victim... (none / 0)
...once again is the truth, the things Clark said were correct

on a side note:
after year's of taking abuse by the Repugs and Democrats countering this with superior morality, by not attacking back (something the American people have not rewarded them for), I for one would like to see someone fight back, fight back with attacks that are based on facts, no matter how it is perceived

so here here for Clark and if Obama is too much of a pussy to appreciate that, his loss

Obama needs to be carefull to not make the same mistake as previous Dems and loose by trying to be decent, when the other side are vile, incompetent, lying sacks of sh*t

McCain has already given a sign of how he's going to go, by hiring that swiftboater, now are Dems again going to sit there and take it or finally sharpen their knives and attack back with everything they have

I've had it, the world has had it, half the American people seem to have had it, Republican leadership has caused so much pain and death, we can not allow a third term of this

by callisto on 07/01/2008 08:03:02 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Finally (none / 0)
Someone on our side grows a pair. In that link Wes Clark defends his comments, says he speaks for himself. Lookin more and more like a veep everyday.

by hazmat on 06/30/2008 10:32:10 PM EST

Ho so, hazmat... (none / 0)
Obama just put him under the bus by not backing him up. If Obama had come out today and said "I stand by what Clark said" blah blah blah I would say theres your man...

But he didnt, he dodged and weaved and put another supporter under the political bus.

I think this incident speaks volumes about Obama's character - I say bravo to General Clark - and I'll ask all of you -

Will the Real Barack Obama please stand up?

Thanks...

:)

 

by bobo1 on 06/30/2008 10:48:52 PM EST

[ Parent ]
How now, Bo Bow? (none / 0)

Wait, why are you asking us?  One of us is the actual democratic presidential nominee?  And we don't even know it?  DUDE you're blowing my mind.

by OneHitKill on 06/30/2008 10:56:05 PM EST

[ Parent ]
weak sauce (none / 0)

Obama did the right thing as someone who didnt serve--he let someone who did serve in Vietnam and has a immensely better military record go after McCain as only Clark can.

Clark has an immensely valid point that he si refusing to let go.

Good for him.

by calturner on 06/30/2008 10:59:42 PM EST

[ Parent ]
If you read my postings, cal... (none / 0)
You would know that I do not disagree with what Clark said. He told the Truth!

What Im asking is why is Obama hiding behind the cover of politics as usual by denouncing the statements?

Where is this man of change?
 
Where is the different kind of politics?

Again I ask -

Will the Real Barack Obama Please Stand Up?

:)

by bobo1 on 06/30/2008 11:09:38 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Its called good cop bad cop (none / 0)
And its brilliant. If Obama didn't plan it, he's just lucky. If he did, he's done what even George Bush failed to do--effectively distance himself while the charge remains out there. And the beautiful part is, McCain got the swiftboaters to back him. You wanna talk about rookie mistakes. That's a gift Obama couldn't have imagined in his wildest dreams. Now, Obama can claim the high ground while McCain is defined as a right-wing smear merchant, all while the story keeps circulating that the former allied commander in Europe thinks McCain has bad judgement and isn't qualified to be president. (yes I know that's not what he said, but it doesn't matter)

by hazmat on 06/30/2008 11:10:44 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Since I used to be a cop... (none / 0)
I think you're a bit off base here, hazmat. When one plays good cop bad cop, one is generally trying to extract information that would otherwise be unavailable through normal interrogation. That scenario doesnt fit here, because what Obama is supposedly doing is to extract votes from the right wingers and independents...

I dont see how this game benefits Obama. It just shows him to be the political weakling that a lot of people (like me) suspected he was from the beginning.

Again, I dont disagree with what Clark said - he was right - but Obama had a chance to be the man of change, but instead he retreated back into his corner with no gain visible to those he is trying to sway...

Good Cop Bad Cop only works if the point is made - Nobody is talking about McCains record - they're talking about how Obama put Clark under the bus...

McCains record is safe and secure among the media and the majority of voters, no worries there...

Thanks!

:)

by bobo1 on 06/30/2008 11:19:47 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I'm gonna meet you half way (none / 0)

It appears for all the world that Obama threw Clark under the bus, like you said in Tim's thread. But I'm going to stand by my interpretation that McCain made a mistake to tie himself to the swiftboaters. He used to be able to say that he rejected these guys in 2004 when he defended Kerry. That's gone. And you're wrong that nobody is talking about McCain's record. There's been a steady drumbeat on this from the left, and the fact that McCain is defending himself against Clark's comments (especially taken out of context) indicates that it's getting traction. And Clark is driving his own news cycle. I predict its not the last you're going to hear from him (and others) on this subject. I'm just hoping Obama is gaming the system here and not "eating his own" as you say (which I agree is highly possible).

by hazmat on 06/30/2008 11:40:22 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I hope you and Rich are right (none / 0)
I hope that Obama is gaming this. I know he's got a smart bunch of people in his campaign. 

by desertpear on 07/01/2008 12:30:56 AM EST

[ Parent ]
It's like I said (none / 0)
Obama is very politically astute, and there's no downside for him here. I think its hilarious that Bobo thinks he's displaying weakness. As far as I can tell he's staying on message while someone who is not associated with his campaign shoots off at the mouth. I hope Obama finds creative ways to keep the story going.

by hazmat on 07/01/2008 12:39:54 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Republicans used to know this (none / 0)
All you have to do is get the message out there.  Let it crawl in peoples brains.

by ProfRich on 07/01/2008 10:18:31 AM EST

[ Parent ]
can't believe it, but... (none / 0)
...I'm again agreeing with Bobo

although Hazmat's points are totally valid and they would/will work on the informed voter.

but for the vast majority of the electorate Bobo's arguments will be valid IMO: those people remember the smear, they don't remember whether it was correct or not, or who won the arguement.
Everyone who follows it will know McCain hired that swiftboater and how wrong  that is, but Joe Sixpack won't care.

Joe Sixpack will remember McCain got attacked and Obama backed down, hence McCain was right.
Look how they got Kerry, the same thing is happening all over again, Clark could have turned this around, if Obama and all Dems stuck to Clark's line, it would have become conventional wisdom.

See it likes this: most people don't remember the individuel points that you gained by winning the arguments, they remember the bold and loud attacks AND the retreats.
Obama has ceded the ground and people won't remember it's because he's a "different" candidate, that's a point he will loose/already has lost by BS as Wright, campaign finance, ...

you can't win a fist fight, where the otherside uses a gun and the Repugs always bring a gun

we need a kneebuster from Jersey or Chicago IMO :)

by callisto on 07/01/2008 08:23:28 AM EST

[ Parent ]
The funny thing is... (none / 0)

The GOP is going nuts claiming McCain is being "swiftboated".

Isn't that admitting it is a dirty campaign trick?

Why don't they just say he is being "Republicaned" and its wrong and not fair and we should be outraged?

How can you claim "swiftboating" someone is wrong while your guy is in office after having won by "swiftboating" someone and having a candidate who is hiring the actual "swiftboaters" to work his campaign?

What kind of fucking bizarro party is this?

Will anyone ever point out the obvious and blatant hypocrisy of all this?
Absolutely not!

How hard would it be for a Sunday show host or anyone else to say "So you say Obama is wrong for "swiftboating" McCain?  Was it wrong for your party to "swiftboat" Kerry?

If they say they were telling the truth about Kerry but these are lies about McCain then you say then why the hell are you referring to it as "swiftboating"???  

Its where the word came from!!!!!! How can they explain this!!!! 

by ProfRich on 06/30/2008 11:45:02 PM EST

[ Parent ]
If you follow my link (none / 0)
you'll see that its the swiftboaters complaining that McCain is being swiftboated. How's that for bizarre!? I still think this is a net positive for Obama. He should repeat publicly as many times as he can get away with that he doesn't believe the awful rumors. And then he should wonder aloud why John McCain would associate with the swiftboaters. MoveOn should run adds smearing the swiftboaters for the trifecta. I know, in my dreams.

by hazmat on 06/30/2008 11:53:37 PM EST

[ Parent ]
That (none / 0)
is a solid point.

by Spencer on 07/01/2008 12:14:58 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Wesley Clark not backing down (none / 0)

by callisto on 07/01/2008 08:49:38 AM EST

keep it up Wes! (none / 0)
Military personnel and their extended family members are becoming very angry. They will vote for Top Gun over Crack Head.

by KenTX on 07/01/2008 09:23:27 PM EST

[ Parent ]
No they won't (none / 0)

They are angry about dying in a pointless, endless, immoral war.

They are angry McCain opposed the GI Bill and then tried to take credit for it.

They are angry about the conditions of their bases and hospitals which McCain has made clear he does not give a shit about.

They are angry about their service being extended AGAIN to fight an endless, pointless, immoral war in Iran.

And I bet they are angry the family they left here has to pay four dollars for a gallon of gas and are losing their house. 

by ProfRich on 07/01/2008 10:03:19 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Wouldn't Having Been a POW Disqualify a Democrat? (none / 0)

What General Clark said is so obvious that I can't believe that anyone actually thinks it's controversial. More likely the McCain Media is afraid of it because they realize that real Straight Talk like this could bring down the entire McCain myth.  Picking a President should be a very serious decision based on logical examination of the facts and of ALL sides and perspectives on the issues.  Why is it supposed to be an unchallengable fact that McCain is qualified?  Are they afraid that we'll realize that his POW experience should disqualify him from consideration?

In 1972, while McCain was undergoing physical and mental stress as a POW, another Senator, who had served well in the Navy and in his political career, but a Democrat, was chosen to run for VP. But, Senator Thomas Eagleton of MO had to resign from the ticket because he was revealed to have undergone shock treatments. It was impossible to know whether Eagleton had emerged from his ordeal stronger or not. But, it was clear that the country couldn't take the risk on someone who had undergone such difficult psychological trauma as a possible Commander in Chief. I see no difference in voting for Eagleton or McCain. I have always thought that HIS EXPERIENCE AS A POW HAS PSYCHOLOGICALLY DAMAGED MCCAIN  AND DISQUALIFIED HIM FOR CONSIDERATION AS PRESIDENT! McCain is not running for Hero. He's not running for Great Uncle. He's running to be the CinC. We need to have serious criteria and seriously examine his potential weaknesses.

It's so obviously logical that, of all the veterans from all the wars, the first ones to eliminate as candidates for President should be those who were POWs, those who were tortured, those who cracked under torture, those who underwent severe psychological trauma. We wouldn't consider electing someone who comes out of Iraq with severe combat fatigue. All voters should recognize that McCain's POW experience may have left deep psychological scars that no President should potentially have.

If McCain, or any other POW were running as a Democrat, his fitness would be strenuously questioned, and rightly so. The question facing our country isn't whether McCain's POW experience should qualify him to be President, but whether it should disqualify him. The answer is simple and clear - we all honor his service, but the risk is too great to have an Eagleton or McCain as President.

I also remember McCain's frequent appearences in the early days of C-Span, alone in the Chamber, ranting and raving like a man sadly deranged. He appeared to be more angry and out-of-control, more unhinged and unstable than any politician I have ever seen. It was scary enough at that time that McCain held any position in our government, the idea that he could ever be considered for President is absolutely frightening.


by honest abe on 07/01/2008 03:27:58 PM EST

Good news for McCain! (none / 0)

the Vietnamese are claiming he wasn't tortured after all!  That he is just making the whole thing up.  So this whole argument may be moot.

Whew!  Grampa Death really dodged a bullet there, huh?

But seriously, considering McCain is often described by members of his own party as a violent, deranged psychopath, it seems reasonable to ask what impact the torture had.

by ProfRich on 07/01/2008 04:58:38 PM EST

[ Parent ]
you guys are gettin mighty quiet! (none / 0)
Are you getting tired of the War Hero versus Drug Addict debate yet? Please don't hate me just because I'm beautiful!

by KenTX on 07/01/2008 09:31:46 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Speaking of getting quiet (none / 0)

Have you worked up the explanation of how Clark attacked McCain military record and patriotism we keep asking for?

Or are you too busy endlessly repeating the lie still? 

by ProfRich on 07/01/2008 10:04:41 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Wes Clark (none / 0)
Clearly diminished the value of McCain's military service as a qualification to be Commander-In-Chief. He did not say the same thing about John Kerry. He did not say that Obama's drug abuse and Muslim trqining disqualified him from the job.

by KenTX on 07/01/2008 10:32:12 PM EST

[ Parent ]
That is not what we asked (none / 0)
Saying he clearly did something that wasn't what you claimed isn't really a response.

by ProfRich on 07/01/2008 11:11:27 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Privileged vs self made (none / 0)
so you repugs are again choosing for a guy from a rich or privileged family?

McCain got to be a pilot because of his father's influence
McCain got to be a senator because of his 2nd wife's money

Bush got to be a pilot because of his dad's influence
Bush got to be a businessman because of his dad's contacts
Bush got to be president because of his dad and his contacts

Obama came from nothing

by callisto on 07/02/2008 08:05:12 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Scary Obama versus Scary McCain (none / 0)

The right wing wants another election to be decided based on their phony scare tactics.  So, let's be fair and logical, is there anything actually scary about the candidates:

There's nothing in the actual facts of Obama's life and character that are scary exept to the most paranoid cowards raised on an exclusive diet of right wing fictions and fearmongering.

But, no one can guarantee that a former POW doesn't have "snakes in his head" as the Bush campaign suggested about McCain in 2000.

Of course, based on the Bush Administration's pleasant definition, McCain didn't actually experience "torture" as he didn't suffer organ failure or death, but he did crack under "harsh interrogation" and reportedly twice attempted suicide. 

So, on what should we based our selection of a President, on the obvious, outrageous lies about Obama, or on the actual historical facts of McCain's POW experience? Wake up America, it would be insane to elect someone who may have deep hidden damage from a POW experience. 

 

 

by honest abe on 07/03/2008 05:36:32 AM EST

Wes Clark blasts McCain again on military experience | 33 comments (33 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: