home

Clark On McCain and Other Things

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 08:58:15 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

My fanboy moment, General Wes Clark on Face The Nation today:

By Big Tent Democrat

< Why Must Obama Not Rock The Boat? | Florida 's First Execution Since Botched One Set For Tuesday >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Clark On McCain and Other Things | 201 comments (201 topical)
    I love Wes Clark (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by Dalton Hoffine on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:02:01 PM EST
    An upstanding guy. A great thinker. A great strategizer. He's one of four or five I'd love to see be Obama's VP at the moment.

    Yes, (5.00 / 6) (#2)
    by ghost2 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:04:19 PM EST
    I love Clark, but I wish he didn't have to do this.  

    Poor Wes. Has to say that Barack has judgement, and character, and communication skills.  ...

    Whatever.  

    [ Parent ]

    What else can he say? (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by Dave B on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:28:15 PM EST
    They got nothing else...


    [ Parent ]
    He sounds like a star student (5.00 / 5) (#11)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:33:50 PM EST
    who has to defend someone else's iffy paper.

    [ Parent ]
    That just turned my stomach. (5.00 / 4) (#16)
    by nycstray on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:45:47 PM EST
    Obama should be ashamed of himself.

    [ Parent ]
    I think he would be Obama's best choice (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by kenosharick on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:08:37 PM EST
    and the choice would probably be ok with Hillary- not that Barack would ask her. On the other hnd, I am starting to think mccain's only (or best anyway) chance is to pick a woman.

    I love Clark... but this makes no sense (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by dianem on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:11:48 PM EST
    I don't think he made the case. He argued that Obama has better qualifications in terms of being persuasive and having better judgment, which is quite cool and was effective, but the part about how McCain's Senate Armed Services Committee experience or squadron leadership shouldn't count made no sense whatsoever.

    Clark must be very conflicted. He is a (5.00 / 5) (#7)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:15:00 PM EST
    smart guy, but I don't think you should be touting
    "better judgment" when it comes to obama...he clearly has not shown any good judgment imo.

    [ Parent ]
    There is a clear conflict of memes here (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by Edgar08 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:34:42 PM EST
    Clark's judgment led him to endorse someone who Obama thinks lacks the judgment to be president.

    What does Obama think of Clark's judgment as far as that's concerned?

    Not to mention Clark's endorsement of Kyl/Lieberman as well?  Which Obama clearly thought was an endorsement of the Bush/Cheney path to war.

    It's all just a mess.  No one knows what to think anymore.

    [ Parent ]

    When did Clark endorse (5.00 / 0) (#72)
    by miriam on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:48:30 PM EST
    Kyl-Lieberman?  Please cite your source.  I am quite certain he was opposed to it.  In fact, Clark funded a website to oppose an attack on Iran which included a petition--I know because I signed it.

    I found myself cringing at the General's  endorsement of Obama. OTOH, Clark is the one American semi-politican whom I trust, and if he finds Obama acceptable...he must have good reason. He's far too smart to be bamboozled by anyone. And has far too much integrity to say things he does not mean.  America comes first with Clark.  

    [ Parent ]

    It's right here (none / 0) (#89)
    by Edgar08 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:58:07 PM EST
    Huff po link warning.

    link

    [ Parent ]

    On Iraq? (5.00 / 3) (#84)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:55:01 PM EST
    Who had the better judgment, McCain or Obama?

    That is the question that Obama should put to the country EVERY DAY.

    [ Parent ]

    When I see an ORIGINAL transcript (none / 0) (#148)
    by MarkL on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:35:26 PM EST
    of the speech he gave in 2002, I'll be able to answer that question.

    [ Parent ]
    Never going to happen. (none / 0) (#152)
    by oculus on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:39:11 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    It is passing strange ... (none / 0) (#178)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:58:02 PM EST
    that only like 17 seconds of that original speech survives.

    But is there any evidence that the existing transcript varies from what he delivered?

    [ Parent ]

    Who knows? (none / 0) (#180)
    by oculus on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 12:00:04 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Quite right. (none / 0) (#157)
    by oldpro on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:43:04 PM EST
    And that would likely get him halfway home.

    Then what?

    Re Iraq, I mean...

    What a gawdawful mess.

    [ Parent ]

    The only thing I can think of is that these (5.00 / 4) (#10)
    by JavaCityPal on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:30:06 PM EST
    people aren't watching the day to day campaigning. For him to say those things with a straight face means he has never watched a stump speech. When it comes to military, Obama has nothing to stand on. Wes Clark would not be a good VP choice. Who would handle the domestic issues?

    [ Parent ]
    Frankly, I think Wes should (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by hairspray on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:16:00 PM EST
    have been the president with either Hillary (1st) or Barak (2nd) as the VP.  We would have had real experience at the WH.

    [ Parent ]
    Clinton/Clark best choice (none / 0) (#175)
    by oldpro on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:56:42 PM EST
    this year.

    But as BTD said, if Clinton won she would have had to ask Obama to be VP.

    And he would have accepted.

    Has the window closed on the reverse?  It certainly appears so right now.  Must be waiting to talk to Bill.....

    [ Parent ]

    Clinton/Clark best choice (none / 0) (#176)
    by oldpro on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:57:44 PM EST
    this year.

    But as BTD said, if Clinton won she would have had to ask Obama to be VP.

    And he would have accepted.

    Has the window closed on the reverse?  It certainly appears so right now.  Must be waiting to talk to Bill.....

    [ Parent ]

    Clark is a fine advocate... (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by Jerrymcl89 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:12:34 PM EST
    ... for Obama, and I think he's a good choice to mend fences with Clintonites if Obama does not want to chose Hillary. I hope to hear more from him during the campaign.

    I watched up to 2:55 (5.00 / 4) (#8)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:17:37 PM EST
    but honestly, I don't think Clark makes a great case for Obama's presidency. He comes across very well, but the substance isn't there.

    This: (5.00 / 3) (#12)
    by Thanin on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:34:35 PM EST
    "Well I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president."  

    ... is so true.  Well said Clark.

    Does Clark think that going to elementary (4.62 / 8) (#14)
    by MarkL on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:42:10 PM EST
    school in Indonesia qualifies one to conduct foreign policy?

    [ Parent ]
    Bad riff (5.00 / 4) (#20)
    by Valhalla on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:51:07 PM EST
    Clark is probably the only one who can attack McCain on NS and foreign policy, but every time he comes out with one of these lines, it just begs the question -- well, what has Obama to compare with it?

    If say, being a POW doesn't give you good FP cred (and I agree it doesn't), what does Obama have that's any closer?  Indonesia?  A speech on the war years ago?  Filling a rock arena?  Living in Chicago?  Writing a book?  What?

    It just spotlights Obama's total lack in the same area.

    Just because Wes Clark can make these statements doesn't mean it's a good idea.  Getting snarky about McCain's war record just isn't going to sway independents and moderate Republicans.

    [ Parent ]

    He needs to stick to pro-Obama rhetoric (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by dianem on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:20:34 PM EST
    I think that the less they say about McCain's foreign policy experience, the better. If he had just stuck to "Obama has better judgment", he would have made his case quite effectively.

    [ Parent ]
    Absurd (5.00 / 2) (#82)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:54:03 PM EST
    McCain;s experience was to cheerlead bush's Iraq Debacle. they should talk about that aLL THE TME. ALL THE TIME


    [ Parent ]
    Exactly. (5.00 / 2) (#105)
    by Marco21 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:03:09 PM EST
    If McCain's service to his country somehow led him to believe invading Iraq is a good idea, his judgement is surely impaired. Doesn't mean he didn't serve his country with honor. It means he isn't serving its best interests now.

    [ Parent ]
    A lot of people find military service impressive (none / 0) (#203)
    by dianem on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 01:27:58 AM EST
    A lot of people remember having McCain lead on a number of political issues, like campaign finance. Heck, I wasn't particularly political when that started and I was aware of it. You can't just dump the responsibility for the Iraq War on anybody you want, over and over again. At some point people start to feel as if you're just taking advantage of someone's position on the war to tar an otherwise qualified poerson. People are worried about a lot more than Iraq. I'll be surprised if Iraq is even on the list of the top 3 by the time the election comes around. The ecnonomy, gas prices, and jobs are going to be higher. Americans are selfish. They never have done much more than put yellow ribbons on their cars and salute the flag. Why should they worry when Iraq is no longer in the headlines?

    [ Parent ]
    Youre probably right... (none / 0) (#66)
    by Thanin on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:44:07 PM EST
    I was simply agreeing with is assessment of McSame.

    [ Parent ]
    Hmmm (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:53:27 PM EST
    Some of you really are funny about politics. the question is already begged. clark's statements do not change that.

    too funny.

    [ Parent ]

    Why does it have to be attacked? (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by txpolitico67 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:58:11 PM EST
    Too bad we cannot talk issues of 2008 as opposed to those of 40 years ago.

    [ Parent ]
    For that you will have to ask Sen McCain (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by Politalkix on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:13:46 PM EST
    He seems to be running on his POW record. That is why the MSM is making an issue out of it.

    [ Parent ]
    Clarke was adressing the issues of 2008 (none / 0) (#130)
    by Rojas on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:14:32 PM EST
    How long have you been in Texas?

    [ Parent ]
    No, (5.00 / 4) (#21)
    by Gabriele Droz on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:52:16 PM EST
    Hillary was his first choice.  Now he's doing what he can to use his influence to direct future war strategy towards sanity, hoping it will sink in and stick, both with Obama's group as well as the public.

    [ Parent ]
    I hope (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:53:03 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I hope *he can* (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:53:20 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Met too! n/t (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by Gabriele Droz on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:01:12 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Nope (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:52:22 PM EST
    But we are talking about McCain here. Are you arguing for McCain in this thread?

    [ Parent ]
    Probably not. n/t (none / 0) (#74)
    by Thanin on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:49:01 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    VP or Secretary of State (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by MKS on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:42:13 PM EST
    As Obama realizes just how smart Clark is, he will find a way to use him at a very level.

    Clark has also honed his teevee skills....

    TV skills... (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by A little night musing on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:02:34 PM EST
    Yes, I was thinking that. I've always liked Clark, but his presentation wasn't always the best.

    But this is a good showing indeed!

    [ Parent ]

    Clark learned to do well (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by MKS on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:35:36 PM EST
    on t.v. while on FOX debating Hannity....Towards the end, he made Hannity look so bad I almost felt sorry for him.

    [ Parent ]
    Almost Is The Operative Word (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by squeaky on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:37:40 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    So agree here BTD, (5.00 / 4) (#17)
    by Gabriele Droz on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:47:02 PM EST
    Last night I watched the 1994 movie "When Lions Roared" (for the first time), with John Lithgow as Franklin D. Roosevelt, Bob Hoskins as Winston Churchill and Michael Caine as Joseph Stalin.

    It was all about the decision-making and diplomacy involved in getting three "super"-powers to stop Hitler after he had begun to invade Russia and was moving fast.

    As I was watching it, I kept trying to imagine Obama filling the shoes of either one of the three, and I just couldn't do it by a long shot.

    Wes Clark, on the other hand....

    Fan here too.

    Could Obama fill Carter's shoes? (5.00 / 3) (#18)
    by MarkL on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 09:50:13 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Good question. (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by Gabriele Droz on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:03:13 PM EST
    Sigh.  For some reason I don't even have a lot of faith in that.  I could be wrong though.

    [ Parent ]
    Could he fill Mondale's shoes? (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by MarkL on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:05:44 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    come on (none / 0) (#40)
    by boredmpa on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:07:37 PM EST
    quit teasing and get to the punchline...it starts with an M and ends with an n.

    [ Parent ]
    And the answer to that is.. no. (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by MarkL on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:08:11 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Truman said (none / 0) (#143)
    by MKS on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:31:13 PM EST
    about the same thing about JFK.....

    [ Parent ]
    I guess we'll all have to wait and see (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by Gabriele Droz on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:38:03 PM EST
    until Obama really makes his mark, before we can decide if he really is another RFK, don't we?

    Signs so far are ambiguous, don't you think?  I mean the whole thing is up in the air, and nothing like he came out with.  What are we to make of it?  Trust, interpret, hope, or question?

    We don't get enough answers from him or his camp to do any of it.  So we're in limbo.  We're not all followers right now.  We're looking for signs and signals that he supports us.  That's all.

    Not too much to ask for, when asking us to vote for him.

    [ Parent ]

    Clark nor Obama have anything to apologize for (5.00 / 4) (#35)
    by jerrymc on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:05:22 PM EST
    Wesley's comment was right on point. What does flying an airplane into a combat zone have to do with one's ability to run the most powerful and complex country on earth? The answer is NOTHING! McCain lacks good judgement on social-economic issues that face average Americans every day. His only outlook is to resort to combativeness or supercilious banter as a solution to everything. I was happy to hear Clark put the tail right on McCain's forehead.

    I'd agree that being shot down in a (none / 0) (#196)
    by Grace on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 01:01:03 AM EST
    plane doesn't qualify anyone to lead -- But what about McCain's attendance at War College?  I'm sure Clark went through that too but Obama never has.  

    Why did Clark not mention McCain's War College experience?  

    [ Parent ]

    National War College (none / 0) (#198)
    by Grace on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 01:04:55 AM EST
    Here's a link:  National War College

    Colin Powell was also a graduate of National War College.  

    [ Parent ]

    I think I did enough to get past (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:07:21 PM EST
    the profanity blockers, but who knows. I think my point stands.

    you didn't (none / 0) (#53)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:25:49 PM EST
    get past it and I deleted the comment.

    [ Parent ]
    Fair enough. Sorry. (none / 0) (#55)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:28:49 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Wes Clark ... (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:19:41 PM EST
    makes a very effective advocate.

    It also looked to me like a VP audition.

    Clark is my 2nd choice for VP after Hillary.  But I don't think Obama will pick him.  Obama doesn't want a VP who could upstage him.

    McCain and his war record. (5.00 / 2) (#54)
    by Selbourne on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:28:03 PM EST
    Like all Americans I respect any man who has put his life on the line for his country. We should give them all the care they need and a leg up in the country they protected.
    President Carter, President Kennedy, President Bush (the elder) all saw active service, but I do not recall anyone claiming that this service specially qualified them for the presidency. On the other hand President Eisenhower's service as Supreme Commander of all Western Armies in Europe during World War II clearly helped to prepare him for the presidency.
    So the point is not to disparage Captain McCain but to point out that being shot down and being tortured as a prisoner of war is a misfortune that deserves sympathy, but is not a qualification for the presidency.

    Well Said (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by jerrymc on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:25:27 PM EST
    I absolutely concur.

    [ Parent ]
    McCain passed the test with flying colors (3.50 / 2) (#77)
    by OxyCon on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:51:43 PM EST
    Being tortured every day as a POW for five years, when he could have chosen to be released if he disparaged our country shows the devotion and love that McCain has for his country.
    To me, this is a personal strength of McCains and the way the Obama campaign is now disparaging McCain's service is a totally Rovian attack...taking your opponent's strength and making it his weakness, and it's bullcrap.
    Is "change you can believe" simply "changing the Dem party into the worst aspects of the Repub party"?
    Clark was basically playing the "McCain is a crappy pilot who got himself shot down" card.
    What's next? McCain is mentally ill because of the torture he endured?

    [ Parent ]
    Heh (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:56:38 PM EST
    Answer the question - does it qualify him to be President? Yes or no?

    [ Parent ]
    To me (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by OxyCon on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:11:11 PM EST
    What McCain's actions during his military service prove is his dedication and love for his country. There aren't many people running for office who have this proven quality. It's a rarity. Tammy Duckworth comes to mind. As for whether this qualifies him to be president, I think most Americans would chose the man who willingly sacrificed and suffered for his country over the man who willingly listened to someone say "God damn America" every Sunday for 20 years. Does McCain's service give him any practical experience to be president, probably not, but it does prove his dedication to our country. Clark ran on his service in 2004 and the right wingers really denigrated his service, so I'm surprised that he would say that "McCain was riding in a plane". That's a very obvious sign of disrespect for a Naval officer pilot, do you agree?

    [ Parent ]
    Fair enough (none / 0) (#136)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:20:18 PM EST
    Is loving your country a sufficient qualification to be President?

    [ Parent ]
    And, I don't think the timeline (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by MKS on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:00:57 PM EST
    shows that he was returned to torture....Conditions for the POWs had improved...Granted, McCain is to be commended but  many tend to overstate what happened....McCain's own accounts do not go as far as many others...

    [ Parent ]
    Clark did not disparage (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by miriam on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:11:24 PM EST
    McCain's service.  On the contrary, he lauded it.  But his point is well taken--being a prisoner of war hardly gives one the right to claim being an expert on the military or national security.  Clark was the NATO Supreme Allied Commander, juggling 19 nations' troops and their commanders and their governments during a war. I think I'll take his judgment about experience over McCain's any day.

    [ Parent ]
    This is not true (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by MKS on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:16:21 PM EST
    You say:

    Being tortured every day as a POW for five years

    He was not tortured every day for 5 years....he was in captivity for 5 and 1/2 years....

    And, here is what David Hackworth had to say about McCain:

    McCain refused an early release. An act of valor? Three former POWs told me he was ordered to turn it down by his U.S. POW commander and he "just followed orders."

    McCain himself acknowledges that others were offered and refused early release.

      Hackworth testified before Congress in 1971 that the Vietnam War was lost and the Viet Cong flag would fly over Saigon by 1975....

    [ Parent ]

    There's nothing sinister about ... (5.00 / 1) (#185)
    by Robot Porter on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 12:08:51 AM EST
    attacking a candidate's perceived strengths.  That's just smart politics.

    Rove used lies to attack both Gore and Kerry's perceived strengths.

    Clark did not do that.

    [ Parent ]

    That Is Nasty (none / 0) (#83)
    by squeaky on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:54:09 PM EST
    McCain is mentally ill because of the torture he endured?

    Although I would say that all who support torture and endless war are mentally ill, irrespective of the causes.

    [ Parent ]

    Please also (none / 0) (#59)
    by Politalkix on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:35:06 PM EST
    do not forget Senator Dole and Senator McGovern's distinguished military service to our country.

    [ Parent ]
    Wesly Clark on McCain's Qualifications (5.00 / 0) (#57)
    by oyoung47 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:29:44 PM EST
    Rick Sanchez suggested that General Clark might be trying to swiftboat John McCain.  But, my understanding of the meaning of the term, swiftboating, is that it refers to when an opponent distorts someone's record, as the 527s distorted John Kerry's war record.  If my understanding is a correct interpretation of the word's meaning, then Rick Sanchez's use of the term on his 9:00 pm show (Sun, 6/29/08) is in error.

    I have been appalled to watch news-casters and talk show hosts' amazement, shock, and irritation about Wesly Clark's questioning of McCain's own qualifications to be Commander-in-chief.  Yet, these same folks regularly replay McCain's dispersions about Obama's qualifications to be Commander-in-chief--mindlessly accepting that McCain has a legitimate right to cast such dispersions.  I can't help but wonder why this is so given that McCain's Senatorial record regarding foreign policy decisions show a history of being wrong more often than being right.  Go back and check what McCain has had to say about every military action since becoming a Senator.

    Further, the qualifications for President of the U.S. are set forth in the Constitution.  All other attributes are those citizens choose to apply.  The President's Commander-in-chief role is one that very few modern day Presidents have had top level military experience in.  Thus, it has become, by nature, an on-the-job learning role.  It requires a thinker and I would rather have an ex Harvard Law Review editor in the role than an ex-prisoner of war who has demonstrated himself to be a man of limited mental capacities.  

    That one can view being a prisoner of war as an experience  that qualifies someone to be commander in chief is actually laughable.  


    Heh Rick Sanchez (5.00 / 2) (#70)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:47:15 PM EST
    the new Russert?

    Let me put it bluntly, Rick Sanchez is dumber than a sack of hammers.

    My own response to this would be to ask the McCain camp if they think that getting shot down over Vietnam qualifies him to be President.

    Because if it does, what does that make Ace Vietnam pilot Randy Duke Cunningham? George Washington?

    [ Parent ]

    You just insulted the hammers (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:03:08 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Is that smarter than a box of rocks? (none / 0) (#109)
    by MKS on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:04:33 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    heh (none / 0) (#115)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:07:02 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Your Harvard Review Guy... (1.00 / 1) (#79)
    by txpolitico67 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:52:43 PM EST
    needs to learn that there are 50 states in the USA and that the Great Lakes are in Michigan.

    Obama cannot complete one sentence without a disfluency...maybe that's why he had Clark go on and say the things he said about McCain because he would "um, uh, um, uh" his way through it.

    Gee, wonder who else we can think of who does the same thing when not reading from a teleprompter?

    [ Parent ]

    My Dad, one of my big brothers and my 2 uncles (5.00 / 3) (#63)
    by txpolitico67 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:42:18 PM EST
    who all vote Dem, were PISSED at Clark for saying what he said about McCain.  In their eyes, they found it offensive they he would defend a guy who never served against someone who was a P.O.W.

    The servicemen in my family don't take that stuff lightly.  This is just more of a wedge that is being driven between Obama and life long Dems.

    I almost find this a parody.  And did u hear about the Obama supporters changing their middle names to Hussein?

    The world is nuts right now.

    Ridiculous (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:58:12 PM EST
    Your family sounds like a ridiculous group of people to me.

    [ Parent ]
    Wow (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by txpolitico67 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:00:01 PM EST
    ridiculous huh for having an opinion?  Guess you would be the laughing stock of yours then, huh?

    [ Parent ]
    Of course (5.00 / 0) (#110)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:05:43 PM EST
    What, you think your family or you or me or my family are immune from holding ridiculous opinions?

    Don't be silly. Of course their statements are ridiculous.

    IN MY OPINION. Perhaps you think mine are ridiculous. Feel free to say so.

    I won't be offended.

    [ Parent ]

    He did state that the (5.00 / 1) (#201)
    by Grace on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 01:20:07 AM EST
    servicemen found it unacceptable.  I live with an ex-serviceman too and he finds all of this type of thing unacceptable.  

    McCain served.  He was a POW.  There is no reason to try and tear his record down at this point unless you are doing it "only for political reasons."  And he finds it disgusting.    

    [ Parent ]

    Such a relativist argument... (none / 0) (#118)
    by Thanin on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:08:51 PM EST
    Just because someone has an opinion doesnt mean its right.

    [ Parent ]
    I don't find it ridiculous at all (5.00 / 3) (#191)
    by Valhalla on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 12:36:01 AM EST
    Of course, I don't know txpolitico's family any better than you do.

    But every time Clark attacks McCain's experience, it begs the question, what on heaven's green earth has Obama ever done to show he's qualified to be president?  

    But more than that, it's really not uncommon for people who've had a particular experience to resent those without it who attack it.  Sure, Clark has the experience, but Obama does not.  Fighting in a war is not a requirement for being CiC, but snarking and mocking one's military service when the greatest challenges one has faced in one's own life is -- a campaign?  living in Hawaii?  writing a book? giving speeches? -- is perfectly understandable as part of the 'offensive' category to people who've served their country.

    Beyond all that, though, I really don't think this is going to go down well in the Heartland.  I've lived in Illinois, Wisconsin and Michigan, and these are folks who think military service is a point of pride and patriotism is a virtue.  It's a pretty dangerous road Obama is sending Clark out to walk.

    [ Parent ]

    I think Clark has the bonafides ... (3.00 / 2) (#187)
    by Robot Porter on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 12:18:47 AM EST
    to make the comment.  He was award both the Bronze and Silver Stars for his service in Vietnam.  And he has held the type of executive positions that he was arguing that McCain hasn't.

    I think Clark's knowledge and experience makes him uniquely qualified to question McCain's experience argument.

    [ Parent ]

    Anything More We Need To Know? (1.00 / 1) (#67)
    by squeaky on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:44:59 PM EST
    My Dad, one of my big brothers and my 2 uncles who all vote Dem, were PISSED at Clark.....

    Let me guess, your dad, one of your big brothers and your 2 uncles were all Hillary supporters?

    [ Parent ]

    Nope (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by txpolitico67 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:56:33 PM EST
    My big brother was Edwards but he said he would vote Obama.

    My uncles are sitting this one out...they don't like Obama and won't vote R.  I don't know about my Dad.

    For me, I am going all the way McCain.  I won't vote for Obama.  Too cowardly for me.

    Okay Squeaky, go on the attack now.  It's my opinion but I feel that ur one of the paid bloggers for Obama.  So go ahead, move on my comments.

    [ Parent ]

    You were for McCain well (5.00 / 2) (#137)
    by MKS on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:23:40 PM EST
    before today....I have no doubt that Clark may not convince those who are already committed to McCain but others may take notice.....

    The hagiography of McCain has gone too far....I come from a line of lifers....My Dad has no trouble taking a look at someone's claims of service....

    [ Parent ]

    It's funny that you accuse others of being paid (1.00 / 1) (#101)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:02:13 PM EST
    because you sound for all the world like a Republican concern troll. Consistently.

    [ Parent ]
    okay (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by txpolitico67 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:10:10 PM EST
    i forgot i was supposed to lock-step to the lines being put forth by Obama's campaign.  I take supreme offense to your remark because I have worked just as hard as anyone in this place for Democratic and progressive causes.

    You can call me a concern troll all you want but I'll be g0ddamned if I will let you tell me I'm some republican.

    go to he11.

    [ Parent ]

    You can express any view you like (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:13:20 PM EST
    My own problem with your participation was trying to hide behind your fa,milies' uniforms to support your views.

    That was ridiculous and absurd. What, you think they can not say stupid and ridiculous tings because they served?

    A RESPECT for their service, but they deicded, or rather YOU decided to tell us their views, and some of think they are stupid and ridiculous points of view. And we say so. Feel free to  tell us what they think about that too if you like.

    [ Parent ]

    If your intention is to vote for and support (1.00 / 1) (#125)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:11:34 PM EST
    McCain, then you are indistinguishable from a Republican. For these purposes, your history is not relevant.

    [ Parent ]
    BS (1.00 / 1) (#107)
    by squeaky on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:03:54 PM EST
    But you are entitled to your fantasies. I voted for Hillary but have a hard time stomaching cultists, for Obama or Hillary or GOPers. Aside from gender, melanin, and style, Hillary and Obama are identical on the issues.

    I find it amazing that anyone who voted for Hillary could vote for McCain who is opposite. But I guess for many it is a beauty contest.

    [ Parent ]

    Senators Obama and Clinton (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by oculus on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:06:08 PM EST
    clearly differed on UHC, and, as the Obama supporters so frequently remind all, on AUMF, although Barack Obama was not yet in the U.S. Senate when Sen. Clinton cast her vote.  

    [ Parent ]
    Nothing (1.00 / 1) (#127)
    by squeaky on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:13:18 PM EST
    Had Clinton actually been for UHC I would say that was a big difference. Both are for covering all Americans, with the end result  as UHC. I do not see any big difference policy wise, just the way they think would be the best way to implement it.

    And as regards the war they are both hawks. I am going by their votes and policy speeches. Good for Obama that he spoke up about the war, bad for him that he voted to fund it.

    [ Parent ]

    I think you willfully diminish (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by oculus on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:27:18 PM EST
    Sen. Clinton's commitment to UHC, even though Sen. Obama repeatedly stated her plan included mandates, which would have an adverse financial impact on those who chose not to purchase health insurance.

    [ Parent ]
    No (5.00 / 0) (#145)
    by squeaky on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:32:49 PM EST
    Not diminishing anyone, I just dislike insurance companies, so anything short of a single payer plan is not UHC as far as I am concerned. Despite what they each said about each other's plan during the primary, I believe that they are on the same page regarding the health care crisis in America. They both want to see all Americans covered. Unfortunately it is a big uphill battle and their strategies for getting there were different, but end the same, imo.


    [ Parent ]
    You'll probably have the last word, (5.00 / 1) (#163)
    by oculus on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:46:47 PM EST
    as you are much more persistent than I am.  But, let me point out, when BTD says Obama and Clinton are the same on the issues, he always includes this proviso:  on the issues I care about.  UHC isn't one of the issues BTD purports to care about.

    [ Parent ]
    No UHC plans this year (5.00 / 0) (#206)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 01:55:05 AM EST
    I care about UHC and neither Clinton nor Obama's plan is actually UHC.

    Now take us back to 1992 and the plan Hillary was working on may have been complete UHC. Of course she may have been suggesting one plan as she ran for the nomination this year and another if she was elected president. On those things we never know until after they are elected...just another reason I always take the DEM candidate over the GOP candidate. Dems always shift closer to my views after elections while Republicans fall off the right side of the table.

    [ Parent ]

    Excuse me (none / 0) (#94)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:59:41 PM EST
    You brought your family to the conversation. The opinions you say they expressed are incredibly absurd and stupid.

    Now if you are trying to say that Clark lost their vote for Obama well let me say I doubt that.

    But if it did, well, c'est la vie.

    [ Parent ]

    Strongly disagree. They are (5.00 / 2) (#102)
    by oculus on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:02:24 PM EST
    entitled to their opinions, which stem from different bases because of their military service.  

    [ Parent ]
    And I am entitoed to mine (none / 0) (#114)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:06:55 PM EST
    which is that their views are stupid and ridiculous.

    What's the problem?

    [ Parent ]

    The way you initially expressed your (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by oculus on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:12:30 PM EST
    opinion didn't seem to me to acknowledge it was merely your opinion.  

    [ Parent ]
    So now I have to add (none / 0) (#133)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:16:54 PM EST
    Speaking for me only in my comments too?

    I am an ego maniac but surely you do not believe that because I state an opinion it is a fact.

    [ Parent ]

    Just add "IMO." (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by oculus on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:29:33 PM EST
    Actually, I think when you read tx's initial comment about the opinions of his family members who were in the military, you may decide to walk this one back.  But, what do I know.  I only spent two years as a Navy wife, in Norfolk and Arlington.  

    [ Parent ]
    I won't get into (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by txpolitico67 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:06:51 PM EST
    a pissing contest with you.  But I will say that I did post that comment because I for one did not serve.  I was just reflecting on what I heard today from former service members, who, happened to be family.

    And man you need to relax a little with the name-calling.  I have never called you a name or made an attack on you.  Trust me go to my blog and I can take it as much as I can dish it out.  But for the rules on this blog I cannot resort to name calling, as you can and have.  I guess you and Jeralyn are "do as I say not as I do."

    I think I will ban myself from TL because this is starting to get into DKos territory.  

    [ Parent ]

    Cya (none / 0) (#121)
    by Thanin on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:10:34 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I called you nothing (none / 0) (#122)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:11:04 PM EST
    I said, let me write it again for you - the opinions expressed by your family ACCORDING TO YOU, are stupid and ridiculous in my opinion.

    You may well feel mine are. Many people do and can say so right here.

    I will not feel insulted.

    Indeed, I KNOW that some of the opinions I have expressed are stupid and ridiculous because time has borne them out to be so.

    If you want to have a discussion, then you need to be unafraid to have your views challenged. Hiding behind your families' unfiorms won;t save the views from my scorn if, imo, the views deserve it.

    Let me tell you, I have stated that Gen. Clark's opinions on some matters in the past are stupid and ridiculous.

    And I am a fanboy of Clark's.

    No sacred cows. Learn that.

    [ Parent ]

    Most people in the military (5.00 / 1) (#204)
    by Grace on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 01:32:15 AM EST
    vote Republican.  The ones that don't could be classified as "Conservative Democrats" if anything.  

    My father is a "Conservative Democrat" w;ho also served in the military.  He doesn't take it lightly when someone tries to slight someone's military experience, particularly someone like McCain.  

    Clark was obviously set out as a "hit man" to take down McCain's experience.  I think Clark did what he could, but he didn't mention a lot of McCain's military experience.  He merely said that a couple of things McCain did wouldn't have qualified him to be "Commander in Chief."  Unfortunately, he left out a lot of other things McCain did (like graduating from National War College) that would qualify him to be Commander in Chief.  

    Clark could have also said "McCain's ability to drive a car 100 mph doesn't qualify him to be Commander in Chief" or "McCain's choice of sparse white hair instead of a luxurious rug like Kerry had doesn't qualify him to be Commander in Chief."    

    Of course, Obama's ability to spin like a top doesn't qualify him to be Commander in Chief either.  Neither does his 153 days in the Senate.    

    Anyway, to anyone who has spent a long time in the military, what Clark said was bad and did not speak to them.  If anything, those are the kinds of words that turnoff military personnel.  

    [ Parent ]

    Bill Clinton (none / 0) (#88)
    by Politalkix on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:57:30 PM EST
    contested against George H.W. Bush and Bob Dole. GHB and Bob Dole served honorably in the military but Bill Clinton did not. Not only did Bill Clinton not serve, he was accused by Republicans of dodging the draft. Do the servicemen in your family feel that it was wrong of Bill Clinton and his surrogates to question the experience that GHWB and Senator Dole had in terms of relevancy to the Presidency?


    [ Parent ]
    they were no big fans (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by txpolitico67 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:01:18 PM EST
    of Clinton either....but he wasn't going around slamming military people either on FTN, or rather, surrogates that I can remember.

    [ Parent ]
    When Clinton ran (5.00 / 1) (#205)
    by Grace on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 01:39:46 AM EST
    we weren't involved in a War.  

    [ Parent ]
    Oh, you forget (none / 0) (#138)
    by MKS on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:24:55 PM EST
    the 1992 campaign.....  

    [ Parent ]
    I also want to add (5.00 / 2) (#116)
    by Politalkix on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:07:21 PM EST
    that Gen Clark and Sen Obama have always commended Sen McCain's military service to the country. Gen Clark only disputed the notion that military experience made someone more qualified to be President (if that was so Bill Clinton would never have been elected President).
    Republicans, OTOH, never acknowledged Sen Kerry's military service.
    There should be some consistency while debating issues.

    [ Parent ]
    He didn't question military experience ... (none / 0) (#189)
    by Robot Porter on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 12:26:48 AM EST
    per se.  He questioned the specifics of McCain's military experience.  Not merely his POW experience.  He also noted that the squadron McCain commanded "wasn't a wartime squadron."

    And he then examined the rest of McCain's experience in relation the claims he makes of foreign policy expertise.

    [ Parent ]

    Clark commended... (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by Marco21 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:42:25 PM EST
    McCain's service and did so clearly. He didn't attack his service.

    It is rich to see the purple heart band-aid party get their undies in a bunch over Clark's comments.

    Love me some Wes. Always will.

    Weak. When has Sen. Obama (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by oculus on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 10:59:50 PM EST
    been in charge, deciding when and whether to drop bombs, etc.?  Clark for President.  Sure.  But don't shill for Obama by denigrating McCain, whose ability to withstand being a POW exhibits character.

    Never (5.00 / 0) (#108)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:04:07 PM EST
    And Clark's point is neither haqs McCain so let's judge them on their judgment on say, IRAQ for instance.

    McCain was a cheerleader for the Bush Iraq Debacle. Obama opposed it.

    Now what say you?

    [ Parent ]

    I say, Gen. Clark (retired) should (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by oculus on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:08:38 PM EST
    stick to criticising Sen. McCain's judgment as to U.S. involvement in Iraq.  Why does Sen. McCain's continuing support for the involvement illustrate bad judgment, uninformed judgment, etc.  That's the issue.

    [ Parent ]
    Why should he not critique (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:14:39 PM EST
    McCaon;slack of executive experience?

    Why in Gawds' name should that be off limits?

    [ Parent ]

    Because Sen. McCain was the (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by