Note to the Obama campaign: when your surrogates point out the deficiencies of your opponent, they might not want to use examples in which you are even weaker!
(via)
Clark's first clue should have been Schieffer's incredulity over the remark.
Clark's remarks were so ridiculous that Obama had to distance himself from them:
"As he's said many times before, Senator Obama honors and respects Senator McCain's service, and of course he rejects yesterday's statement by General Clark," Obama spokesman Bill Burton says in a statement.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
He said, to be precise, that nobody should devalue service, and that we should express gratitude to service men and women for their service. Full stop.
Which is more than can be said about the Republican party and the military service of Democrats.
Now the question is.. do YOU think it is accurate, and are you willing to apply that same standard to all people who were in the military and run for office?
Did you object to the Swiftboaters (not one of which actually served anywhere where Kerry did. But if you're going to take their word because they're in the military too, you have to do the same for Clark), the purple heart bandaids, the treatment of other veterans in Congress? (A few come to mind..)
Secondly, does ANY military service qualify one for the executive branch? To be frank (and my family runs toward career military folks), a pilot is NOT a commander. Being IN the military, successfully, can involve having some character traits, but that runs more to following orders, unless one is put in the position of GIVING them.
And a civilian post is not the same. I can tell you, running any civilian position like a military one is not always a good strategy. We separate out our civilian leadership from our military for good reason.
So, no. Military service is not sacrosanct, as was proven the last election. All claims by anyone who was ever IN the military, even about the military, are not to be taken as scripture without research. And not everyone in the military comes out with the automatic ability to 'lead men'.
"being shot at is not a sign of being intelligent nor of living a paricularly healthy lifestyle"
That is patently offensive. Do you think they LIKE getting shot at? A military force is a regrettable necessity and we should be glad that somebody is willing to do it.
Also, do you have any IDEA of the level of training and intelligence that's required to fly a fighter in combat??? I'm not saying it qualifies one for executive duties, but to imply that any dummy can do is is just stupid. Your ignorance on this topic is flabbergasting.
What I want to know is why its ok for McCain to exaggerate on his resume about his experience, but its not ok for Kerry?
Does he want to loose?
the problem is that he doesn't have to exaggerate. there's this hero worship in this country where a large majority of people romanticize those who fought in battle and underwent the horrors of torture and lived to tell about it. it doesn't mean that mccain was an exceptional warrior (he wasn't) nor that he is any kind of great leader.
realistically i don't expect those people to think about it critically, which is why it is important for a decorated army general, valedictorian of west point, graduate of oxford, with 34 years of military experience to say it out loud.
"Evidently, Clark's remarks were bad enough that Obama rejected them."
hm. so obama wants to play nice. good for him. although what i heard was obama (just as clark himself did) praise mccain for his service, and clark even said that mccain was a kind of hero to him. i didn't hear anyone - including righties - dispute the facts that clark pointed out. instead they want to make mccain the victim for the pity vote.
this was a very smart move for general clark. the only issue where mccain has a chance to win is on his military record. the fact that that record isn't enough is an important one. but opening this issue up for people to see, he has pulled the rug out from under mccain's campaign. expect the swift-boating of clark to begin, led by col. bud day, who's part of mccain's "truth" squad. so much for truth.
general clark is not backing down:
John McCain is running his campaign on his experience and how his experience would benefit him and our nation as President. That experience shows courage and commitment to our country - but it doesn't include executive experience wrestling with national policy or go-to-war decisions. And in this area his judgment has been flawed - he not only supported going into a war we didn't have to fight in Iraq, but has time and again undervalued other, non-military elements of national power that must be used effectively to protect America. But as an American and former military officer I will not back down if I believe someone doesn't have sound judgment when it comes to our nation's most critical issues."
"General" Wesley Clark even went so far as to point out that John McCain made a propaganda film for the North Vietnamese, in the same defamatory style as can be found in Wikipedia and similar heathen sources. But John McCain is God's elect and even should McCain choose Osama bin Laden as Vice President it is the duty of all who fear God to vote from Him, even though these voters be chosen by God for a sinners' Hell.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.