Former Democratic Party presidential candidate and current Obama campaign flack Gen. Wesley Clark supports chickenhawk warmonger Barack Obama, who never served a day in the military, by attacking John McCain's military record and supposed lack of executive experience.
Gen. Wesley Clark, acting as a surrogate for Barack Obama’s campaign, invoked John McCain’s military service against him in one of the more personal attacks on the Republican presidential nominee this election cycle.
Clark said that McCain lacked the executive experience necessary to be president, calling him "untested and untried" on CBS' "Face the Nation." And in saying so, he took a few swipes at McCain's military service.
"He has been a voice on the Senate Armed Services Committee. And he has traveled all over the world. But he hasn't held executive responsibility. That large squadron in the Navy that he commanded - that wasn't a wartime squadron," Clark said.
Now that's audacity.
First of all, take note, all you who have proudly served in the military outside of wartime - that experience no longer counts.
How this line helps Obama, who has no military or executive experience at all, is a mystery. But we encourage the Obama campaign to continue with it. By all means, compare your military credentials and experience to Senator McCain's every day until November.
Remember way back in 2004, when John Kerry's few months in Vietnam were so critical to his presidential qualifications? Well, by this point, especially after the last few weeks of the Obama campaign, no one is going to accuse the Democrats of being sticklers for consistency.
Update: Illustrating the Democrats' shifting standards, we found this quote from DNC Chairman Howard Dean, via a helpful commenter at Blackfive:
"The real issue is this," Dean said in March 2004, when endorsing formal rival Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., "Who would you rather have in charge of the defense of the United States of America, a group of people who never served a day overseas in their life, or a guy who served his country honorably and has three Purple Hearts and a Silver Star on the battlefields of Vietnam?"
Another Update: Some helpful background on McCain's non-executive experience from The Weekly Standard.
And more from Townhall and Michelle Malkin.
Reading this post, it is obvious that you did not see this interview or you would have noted that General Clark said he and thousands in the military honored Sen. McCain's service. The General's point is that serving in the military does not equate foreign policy experience.
It is very curious that you would demand respect for John McCain, which Gen. Clark gave, and yet you are willing to misrepresent the words of Gen. Clark, a man who took for bullets for this country and continued to serve it honorably.
Comment by Donna Z — June 29, 2008 @ 1:33 pm June 29, 2008
"The General's point is that serving in the military does not equate foreign policy experience."
Who said it does? It did seem important to Democrats in 2004.
"It is very curious that you would demand respect for John McCain..."
Where in the post is respect demanded for John McCain?
"...and yet you are willing to misrepresent the words of Gen. Clark..."
What words were misrepresented?
"...and continued to serve it honorably."
Who said anything about Clark's service record?
It would be much more valuable if you read and commented on the actual content of the post.
Comment by The Editors — June 29, 2008 @ 2:10 pm June 29, 2008
Yes, Clark said he honored McCain's military experience, then attacked him on it! But how does saying McCain did not order the bombs to drop mean he was not qualified to be president. I am not aware of Obama ordering any bombs to drop either!
However, keep in mind that McCain had a bomb to drop! Obama has never had that responsibility! So Clarks statements are stupid on the surface; if his comments tell us why McCain is not qualified to president, those same comments count double agianst Obama!
Comment by Heather — June 29, 2008 @ 8:19 pm June 29, 2008
Apparently some of you haven't seen the follow-up comment from the transcript (http://securingamerica.com/node/2993).
---------------
Bob Schieffer: I have to say, Barack Obama has not had any of those experiences either, nor has he ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down. I mean-
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be President.
Bob Schieffer: Really?!
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: But Barack is not, he is not running on the fact that he has made these national security pronouncements. He's running on his other strengths. He's running on the strengths of character, on the strengths of his communication skills, on the strengths of his judgment. And those are qualities that we seek in our national leadership.
Comment by JP — June 30, 2008 @ 4:25 am June 30, 2008
Sticklers for consistency. What about the Republicans running George Bush, who couldn't even complete his initial contract in the Air Guard?
Then there's Dick Cheeny, who used 5 deferments to dodge service in the Vietnam War. That's four more than Bill Clinton had.
And both men hid behind surrogates who attacked John Kerry's military record in 2004. I also noticed your snide "few months in Vietnam" comment regarding Mr. Kerry.
As far as military experience goes, Gen. Clarke has more than either Mr. McCain or Mr. Obama.
And for the record, I spent 8 years in the Marine Corps Reserve, including a deployment in Iraq.
Love the blog and keep up the good work.
Comment by Kresie — June 30, 2008 @ 5:07 am June 30, 2008
The general has a very valid point that I hope is not lost. We all honor McCain's military service, but McCain's service does not make true the claim that McCain is the most qualified. If this is the yardstick by which we qualify presidential candidates, where would Bush measure up? Kerry actually had more real combat related experience than Bush, and it didn't automatically qualify Kerry to be presisdent either. So, the General is correct.
We should not allow the whiny, cry-baby, non-substantive response of the McCain team to make us lose sight of the validity of the General's comments. On this issue, the Obama team should not apologize or offer up any kind of condemnation. Let the truth stand. It is what it is.
Comment by Bad Idea — June 30, 2008 @ 7:51 am June 30, 2008
If my memory serves me correctly, Wesley Clark failed in his attempt to run for President of the United States, and he is now indorsing Barack Obama.
The mere fact that he is indorsing Barack Obama, says it all; his words are MEANINGLESS! If he were not indorsing anyone, and said the same thing, then one would have reason to take notice.
It’s a shame, but his rhetoric is now just another politician’s convoluted, cockamamie nonsense!
Comment by Russ — June 30, 2008 @ 8:06 am June 30, 2008
if there is ever a backfire on biography problem, it's McCain's. But for the fact that he spent 5 years in an N Viet prison camp, he'd be another right-wing republican who, for a few fleeting moments, had positions that veered from the party line. He returned to full lockstep to win the nomination; other than that, he's just a cranky old man who reminds one of an old retired uncle you see only at family weddings - dressed in a suit that doesn't hang well and looking like he'd rather be out back working on his outboard motor.
Comment by malach hamovess — June 30, 2008 @ 8:46 am June 30, 2008
The last time we elected someone who had been shot down in war was George H W Bush, known as "41" and little else...not quite the favorite of the current president's party, eh?
Does anyone seriously think being shot down in war qualifies one to lead the US? If so, the primaries in the future are gonna be even longer than this one.
Noone was denegrated here. Experience was assailed. It hardly compares to the rumors propagated by Karl Rove about McCain in South Carolina, 2000...
Compared to that, Clark should be on the top of the McCain Christmas card list.
Comment by Wayne — June 30, 2008 @ 9:10 am June 30, 2008
"Does anyone seriously think being shot down in war qualifies one to lead the US?"
Again, who made that claim? No one did. Try to be honest.
"...the rumors propagated by Karl Rove about McCain in South Carolina, 2000..."
Where is your evidence?
Comment by The Editors — June 30, 2008 @ 9:37 am June 30, 2008
Simply an illconceived attempt to take a swipe at McCain - which tells you something about
the "judgment" of the Obama campaign. Obama is simply attempting to avoid discussions of his
own lack of experience and judgment.
Comment by Rich — July 1, 2008 @ 7:36 am July 1, 2008