People who mad at Obama because of what he said regarding Wesley Clark's comments on McCain...

[zulchzulu]

...are not looking at the long view regarding how any other statement would come back again. (On Edit was:political neophytes and certainly not anyone I would want in the campaign at this time).

Sure, Wesley Clark is (probably) correct in his assessment in the view that John McCain was only a captain when he was shot down and became a POW. Yes, that is not necessarily "experience" that makes someone a President of the United States.

Yes, I know all about how some Vietnam veterans who were POWs or are named Ted Sampley called McCain "Johnny Songbird". You can connect the dots on why they have their reasons. Guess what, they are going to attack McCain with their 527s in the fall.

What confounds me is that people are mad at Obama for doing what EXACTLY had to be done regarding Wesley Clark's comments. Obama CAN'T agree with those comments for a number of reasons.

One, the media is looking for something to nibble on for the next weeks before the conventions happen. As was evident with the Reverend Wright "issue", the media had to fill in the blanks after Mississippi had their primary. The Pennsylvania primary was 42 days later. Was the media to be trusted with perhaps discussing the issues that matter or would they love to run with a story the ABC broke and the rest of the puppets followed along?

They did precisely what they do best. Be lazy. Be over the top. Be intellectually dishonest. Rinse and repeat ad nauseum.

OK. Flash forward.

We are approaching the Fourth of July. This is red meat for jingoism, especially since no one can stop the multiple disasters of gas prices skyrocketing, food prices skyrocketing, the housing crisis spiraling out of control and people just starting to get interested in the differences between McCain and Obama.

What worse thing to do to the Obama campaign than to have Obama be considered disrespectful of the military record of McCain? What worse thing to happen than for Wesley Clark to pull out the "he's only a captain" card for Obama to have to defend?

Clark is actually doing two things with his statement. He is planting the seed of doubt about McCain and perhaps getting the likes of Ted Sampley to want to start firing volleys and negative ads before what their autumnal attack would be. He is also weighing Obama down where the mainstream media pundits see an opening for another "kick back and relax and watch the fireworks" that they got from the so-called Wright issue.

Anyone who is angry at Obama for separating himself from Clark's comments on McCain's wartime record need to hone their skills (On edit: are really bad) at political strategy. It's chess, not tic tac toe.

[crankychatter]

1. you probably noticed when they have nothing to whine about, they invent shit NT

k/r

some people can't be happy unless they're fucking miserable

[DevonRex]

6. Yep. And making other people miserable, too. nt

[FrenchieCat]

2. I think that you may have correctly assessed the game that some DUers are playing

Which is why there's a panic that sets in like every 3 minutes, in reference to how the Obama campaign is playing chess.

[DevonRex]

3. Every day it's a new whine. I never thought it'd be like this in

here. I'm not naive about politics. But I guess I was a bit naive about GD:Presidential.

[Cha]

29. I remember we all got behind

Kerry or we weren't on DU.

[DevonRex]

40. I wondered about that. I left here way before 2004 and didn't

come back again until February. So I thought maybe this is how it's always been. Guess not, huh?

[Cha]

41. The way I remember it and anyone can

correct me if I'm wrong on this.. And, we had Kerry much earlier than Obama..the bushits attack Kerry and we defended him.

I think this will pass and I can't wait!

[hlthe2b]

4. If you want anyone but the choir to listen, you might just tone down

the condescension and patronizing tone. As they say in the South, you get more flies with honey than vinegar....

[zulchzulu]

9. Surely...

... I was not being condescending...

Political discussion cannot or should not be catering to thin skins and soft praises.

[hlthe2b]

13. If someone agreeing with you finds it so... chances are....

People tend not to listen when they feel insulted....

[zulchzulu]

15. I softened my opening statement a bit...

It is still how I feel, but in the times we are in, I agree with your assessment.

[hlthe2b]

25. re:

:thumbsup:

[elocs]

5. That's just the Obama bitch/whine du jour. Tomorrow it will be something else.

Count on it. Republicans may not vote for him, I don't think they complain as much about Obama as some Democrats do.

[FrenchieCat]

7. Check it out. I'm thinking this is gonna get good.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6433015

[Sparkly]

8. People who need to start their arguments by calling others "neophytes" are insecure about their own

arguments.

As I've said over and over this evening: There are a multitude of shades of nuance between totally agreeing with everything Clark said and totally rejecting everything Clark said. THAT is what political strategists know how to do.

They also knew exactly what Clark was saying and what he'd continue to say. That's what disciplined campaigns keep track of.

There was no "he's only a captain" statement made. That's what people following this at home should know.

The "seed of doubt" doesn't get planted when the RNC is allowed -- even enabled -- to distort it into a gratuitous attack on McCain's military service.

Talk about bad political strategy and "chess!" I've read umpteen different "theories" on why this was a smart idea here tonight. None make a whit of sense.

[zulchzulu]

11. I've still have to see what Obama should have said from those mad at him...

... that would not just continue the endless media debauchery that would ensue...

I'd love to hear exactly what Obama should have said from those who think they are smarter than the Obama campaign.

[Sparkly]

18. Any number of things were possible.

Again, that's what these experts are paid for -- not to fold their cards and quiver under the table!!

Acknowledge General Clark's own experience and the validity of his perspective; acknowledge his voice and right to say what he believes. Then without rejecting the comment, dismiss it while leveraging it to a message about the candidate's own strength...

I wrote off the top of my head elsewhere:

"General Clark has a right to his view of John McCain's credentials. I'm running on my record of judgment when it comes to foreign policy, and believe I made correct decisions when my opponent made disastrous ones. He wants to continue the policies that have this country in a mess, and I will set the country back on course when I'm president of the United States."

[Stinky The Clown]

10. I disagree .......

..... they threw the general overboard at least as much as his words. Had they phrased it differently, it might not have raised as many hackles as it did.

Don't worry ..... you and I will not be working together campaigning. You probably wouldn't share your water bottle while we walk neighborhoods.

[zulchzulu]

14. I would share my water bottle ...

My flask... maybe...

:hi:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

12. Obama's vetting Clark for a VP spot.

But it's to be expected for the more naive, more timid elements to get upset.

[Sparkly]

22. Who are "the more naive, more timid elements?" Obama's campaign advisers? nt

[Ashy Larry]

16. Agreed!

Its pretty simple. Keep the candidate above the fray while still making the argument with surrogates and "independent" groups. Even Bush was smart enough to know not to go after Kerry's military record on his own. He got his friends to do it for him. And yes, I know that they were lying about Kerry and Clark and others are telling the truth about McCain but the strategy is the same.

[Tatiana]

17. What have Clark's comments done? Why, they've united us in defense of him.

a) The FISA fight is on the back burner in the wake of this faux scandal. (a plus)

b) Genuine questions are being raised about McCain's military record. (a plus)

c) Wes Clark can prove that he has the ability to weather a storm in lobbing a risky attack (thereby proving himself worth of being VP).

I'm loving the fact that the right-wingnuts have their panties in a bunch.

[Sparkly]

19. Who's "us?"

Doesn't look like the Obama campaign is with "us."

[Tatiana]

28. Democrats. Honestly, in this equation, it is about Democrats standing up and defending the right to

speak the truth.

[Sparkly]

31. Yup. Wish that included our candidate and his campaign spokespeople. nt

[Ilsa]

27. I'm generally with you, Tatiana. The biggest problem is

how the media is taking Clark's comments out of context. They only reply the one sentence, not the fact that Clark was discussing McCain's lack of executive experience.

My MIL, a wife of a retired Vietnam Vet career enlisted man, was very upset by it, and won't even listen to the context of what Clark was saying. She also took it out of context of NOW, and tried to identify it as something Clark said forty years ago about McCain's potential. She's hopeless on recovering from this. But other FOX Noise watchers will identify with this like her.

But I think it was a good strategic move: get people talking about how McCain wasn't a general or leader.

[Tatiana]

30. Well - there's the reason why (if this is a strategy), it's a risky one.

Some will only believe the soundbyte. But this is just Day One. Let's give it a couple of days and see where we are at. There are other vets coming out and supporting Clark's comments (in their entirety) and his right to express his views.

You'll lose a few. But we have to ask ourselves, were such people with us anyway?

[Ilsa]

50. My MIL was and still is, but only because Obama

denounced the comment. So maybe the strategy is working, in a strange way.

[Danger Mouse]

20. Recommended. Some weenies wet themselves everytime Obama doesn't do exactly what they want him to.

[Cha]

21. Thank you so much, zulch!

A different prospective that merits some thought

It will be interesting to hear what Clark has to say tonight in his interview.

[goodgd_yall]

23. I thought it was overboard of the spokesperson

to say Obama "rejects Gen. Clark's statement." I know that, realistically, Obama has to step gingerly around this, but "reject Gen. Clark's statement" is a bit strong.

Obama going into the how-great-an-American-John-McCain-is, his sacrifice and yaddayaddayadda I thought was a good response, he had to do it, but there was no need for the "rejects" statement. I, myself, am really tired of the kid glove treatment of McCain because he did something heroic during the Vietnam War. When is Obama going to stop bringing up McCain's service to his country already? We know, we know, and let's move on to the present and McCain's bad ideas for the country. It's almost like begging everyone's pardon before you criticize McCain.

[shireen]

35. good comments

I was really upset about the wording "rejects Gen. Clark's statement."
That was totally unnecessary. It sounded like he was reacting to the Fox-like spin that's taken Gen. Clark's comments out of context.


Why am I, and so many others upset about how Sen. Obama is distancing himself from Clark over those comments? Because Clark made a very valid important point. He never questioned Sen. McCain's patriotism. He honors Sen. McCain's service. Clark was addressing a very specific issue: McCain touts his war and senate service as qualifications to be president, and Wes Clark was directly refuting that point.

Clark comments should be reinforced, not "rejected". If Obama himself cannot speak to it, his other surrogates should now come out and support Clark's comments, and put it in the correct context.

[goodgd_yall]

39. Yes, I'd like to see that---

some surrogates publicly speaking favorably about Clark's statements. I'll be very disappointed if everyone shies away from doing that.

[goodgd_yall]

49. Thought I would mention----James Carville

He was on CNN saying he doesn't know what the big to-do is over what Clark said. It was good to hear him stick up for Clark. He was trying to clarify exactly what was said rather than what is being spun.

[Yotun]

24. Take off the fucking rose-tainted glasses and spare me the lectures

The only thing Obama did is reinforce McCain's image as the strong war-hero ready to be commander in chief. The wider public sees that when somebody dares to attack McCain's war record as a source of knowledge for a good president, everyody is up in arms against it, even Obama himself! So boy, that McCain must sure be some war-hero and an expert in foreign policy if even Obama will defend him!

You want to know who the political neophyte is? Its you. You are displaying the basic symptoms of the ultra-partisan, unquestioning, blind supporter of a political election- you are part of the 'base' the 'strategists' talk about on TV, the guy who'll rationalise everything and anything his candidate does as some sort of grand strategic move, or good tactical position. For fucks sake, most of this forum is like this- the democrat version of the Republican sheep. Give me a fucking break before you try to lecture people.

Here's the reality of it, rather than the grandiose delusions of strategic chess movements you play in your head. Clark was making his usual comments he's been making every time he ever shows up in a show. This time he adds a phrase that the media in their military glorification and love affair with McCain have a fit about (even though what he said is 100% correct- I dare you to name me a single skill being a POW gives somebody relevatnt to be the commander in chief). Obama did what every democrat has been doing for almost forever- whenever a new manifactured media controversy springs up against the democrats, rather than being confrontational and tackling the issue head on, he disowns, disavows and saying he disagrees. The usual Democratic bullshit, always too afraid to attack the Republicans on their lies and supposed strong spots, too afraid too tell the truth, and too afraid to take principled positions, always patronizingly 'compromising' in the name of electability- and people like you, the political neophytes, the base, the unquestioning masses, buy it all up as some sort of necessary tactical positioning.

You know what? The Democrats have been trying your sort of 'grand' strategic political games and have always lost- while the Republicans have shown no shame in attacking the Democrats directly, slandering their war service openly, and pushing extremist views forcefully en masse so that the media cannot proclaim them as out of line, given that they enjoy such widespread support. The Republicans aren't afraid of pushing onto the Democrats- and yet its the Democrats who are always compromising with these 'strategies'- fuck this. I'd love it if the democrats stopped cowering off and attacked McCain directly on his war record, directly, and en-masse. When you attack loud enough and strong enough doubts and memes remain in the pubic eye- the past few Republican years should have tought you this. When a single person attacks and his own party disowns him, it only makes your opponent look stronger to his supporters, since even the opposing team will support him, and make YOU look like a pansy to everybody else. THAT'S political reality and not the delusions in your head.

But go on. Be the 'base'. Be the guy in the 'safe' collumn. Keep supporting the same type of politics that have made sure democrats never get elected. There won't always be a Bush to fuck things up so that the Democrats get a chance to be elected. Keep up the same kinds of attitudes and see if you elect another president 4 years from now, when the Bush years will be a thing of the past, and the economy still won't have recovered (and it won't have).

And then come lecture me again for not being a blind lemming like some of you, who will follow your leaders to the end. I thought Obama would have had the guts to stick to, one, stick to his principles, and two, attack the enemy directly where it hurts, and where they lie to us. He has failed in both of those counts these past few days. And unlike you, I'm not in the 'safe' collumn.

[BlueStater]

46. You just summed up my feelings perfectly. Thank you.

Obama acted like a weenie today. There is no excusing it.

[zulchzulu]

52. So you would suggest we hand the Repigs an "issue" on a fucking golden platter?

OK.

So Obama should say what? No comment? DUMB. Say that Wesley Clark has his own opinion. Same as No comment.

You want to attack McCain's war record? You think that the mainstream media and the Repigs would not paint Obama and the Democrats as "anti-military"? Yeah, it would feel good down in the basement with the buddies doing bongs, but it would be the STUPIDEST strategy anyone could do.

I stated in my OP what the Repigs will already do to McCain in the fall. 527s are going to attack him. We don't need to do their work. If you think Obama should attack McCain's military record, I am only very happy you are not anywhere near anyone making decisions for the Obama campaign.

If you have anything to offer that is politically realistic about EXACTLY the statement that Obama would say about McCain's military record, I'd love to see it.

[wain]

26. being ex-Navy, I am offended by the comment Mccain was "only a captain"

In the Navy, that's one rank below admiral and is equivalent to colonel in the Army. Making it to o7 is very competitive and very difficult. Clark makes a huge mistake in attacking McCain on his military leadership and courage. There are too many weakness in McCain. Why attack his honorable military career?

[zulchzulu]

32. Absolutely...

I had an uncle who was on the USS Forrestal from around 1964-1968. He made it to captain. He also died years ago of AIDS. I remember how proud he was of his record in the military and was a provable example of how someone who was gay could serve honorably. I remember being a young kid that would all pile in the station wagon and drive to Norfolk to deliver him and see him off. I still have some stuff he bought when he visited Greece.

Wes Clark is well decorated and I'm hopeful that he was not denegrating the service of someone like my uncle. Granted, my uncle would have made an EXCELLENT President...

Thanks for YOUR service.

[wain]

38. You should be very proud of your uncle

I went active duty with a chip on my shoulder about the military, especially the officer corps. That changed in my experiences and discussions with Navy captains and admirals. Each was an extremely talented and dedicated individual with responsibilities that boggle the mind. That your uncle achieved the rank of Navy captain speaks oceans of his high caliber as an individual and as a leader.

[Sparkly]

33. As if ANYBODY SAID THAT!

:eyes:

[Yotun]

36. Amazing when even our own get caught up in Republican propaganda and reconstruction of the truth-but

that's what you get when even your leaders won't stand up to them.

[shireen]

37. when did Clark attack McCain's military leadership and courage?

Please read the transcript of the Schieffer-Clark interview, and tell me again, where exactly did Clark attack McCain's military career? Appended below, for your convenience, is the transcript.

http://securingamerica.com/node/2993

6/29/08: General Wesley Clark on CBS's Face the Nation


General Wesley Clark on CBS's Face the Nation with Bob Shieffer

June 29. 2008

Transcript by Reg NYC


Bob Schieffer: With us now from Little Rock, Arkansas Retired General Wesley Clark. He was for Hillary Clinton during the primaries. Once Hillary was out of it, he announced that he was supporting Barack Obama. And let's get right to it here, General. You heard what Senator Lieberman said. He said that Barack Obama is simply more ready to be President than, than Barack Obama. (sic)



GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, I think Bar- I think Joe has it exactly backwards here. I think being President is, is about having good judgment. It's about the ability to communicate. As one of the great Presidential historians Richard Newsted said, "The greatest power of the Presidency is the power to persuade." And what Barack Obama brings is incredible communication skills, proven judgment. You look at his meteoric rise in politics, and you see a guy who deals with people well, who understands issues, who brings people together and who has good judgment in moving forward. And I think what we need to do, Bob, is we need to stop talking about the old politics of left and right, and we need to pull together and move the country forward. And I think that's what Barack Obama will do for America.


Bob Schieffer: Well you, you went so far as to say that you thought John McCain was, quote, and these are your words, "untested and untried," And I must say I, I had to read that twice, because you're talking about somebody who was a prisoner of war. He was a squadron commander of the largest squadron in the Navy. He's been on the Senate Armed Services Committee for lo these many years. How can you say that John McCain is un- untested and untried? General?



GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Because in the matters of national security policy making, it's a matter of understanding risk. It's a matter of gauging your opponents, and it's a matter of being held accountable. John McCain's never done any of that in his official positions. I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in Armed Forces as a prisoner of war. 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 Air- in the Navy that he commanded, it wasn't a wartime squadron. He hasn't been there and ordered the bombs to fall. He hasn't seen what it's like when diplomats come in and say, 'I don't know whether we're going to be able to get this point through or not. Do you want to take the risk? What about your reputation? How do we handle it-'



Bob Schieffer: Well-



GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: ' -it publicly.' He hasn't made those calls, Bob.



Bob Schieffer: Well, well, General, maybe-



GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: So-



Bob Schieffer: Could I just interrupt you. If-



GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Sure.



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.



Bob Schieffer: Well, let me ask you this. Senator Obama announced yesterday that he's going to Europe and to the Middle East. Most people think that he'll probably stop off in Iraq where he hasn't been in more than two years. Why now?



GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: I think this is a good opportunity. It's a window of time. The Convention is late in the calendar this year, and he's got the window of time to go overseas, meet with foreign leaders. You know, we were meeting with him the other day and as he said he doesn't want to count his chickens before he, before they hatch. But he recognizes this country is in such a plight, both at home and abroad that no one can contemplate taking the office of the Presidency without having some very good ideas about what needs to be done from the get-go. There's not a learning period in this job. The next President's going to have to step right into the job. He's going to have to have the policies there. And I think Barack is taking a, a very sensible view of this by going abroad and meeting firsthand the leaders at this critical moment in, in times of America's needs abroad.



Bob Schieffer: General, what do you think would be the impact, let's say on Iran, on the neighborhood around Iraq if in fact Senator Obama is elected and he does announce that he's going to bring back the troops on a specific time schedule? As Senator Lieberman said, he's totally discounting things that could happen along the way. Would he follow that schedule no matter what?



GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, I don't think Barack Obama is discounting things that have happened along the way. I think the critique is more like this, Bob, that the Bush administration and Joe Lieberman in the forefront have from the beginning relied excessively on military force as the answer to all the nation's security problems. And what Barack Obama understands is that military force may have to be used as a last resort, but it's not the first resort. So, let's take the case of Iraq. This administration went to a war it didn't really have to fight. Barack Obama called it like it was at the time in a speech early on before we went into Iraq. And once there, the administration relied excessively on the men and women in uniform. It failed to put in place the overarching diplomatic strategy and the regional strategy that was necessary to deal with Iraq's neighbors. It more or less invited Iranian incursions by threatening that Ira- Iran and Syria were next on the hit list in military actions and, and efforts in the region without having an effective strategy in the region. So, when we talk about troop withdrawals from Iraq, yes, I think the major muscle movement for the United States needs to be less reliance on military power and more reliance on all the other tools of U.S. power, including diplomacy. So, it's within that vein that Barack Obama is talking about pulling troops back from Iraq. It doesn't mean that he's not going to be sensitive to other actions in the region. He's going to be much more sensitive to those actions than the kind of mechanistic, militaristic response that John McCain has habitually given. What I can foresee-



Bob Schieffer: Could I ask-



GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: -from an Obama campaign is a regional strategy that does include dialog with all of Iraq's neighbors and in which the military component is one part of an overarching strategy to protect American interests.



Bob Schieffer: Do you think that Barack Obama's going to put Hillary Clinton on the ticket? Would that be a good thing, General?



GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: I'd love to see Hillary Clinton on that ticket, but- I have a lot of respect for Hillary. I've known her for a long time. I think she's an outstanding person. But I think that's a decision that, that Barack Obama himself is going to have to make, and I'm sure he's weighing that decision.



Bob Schieffer: Alright. Well, General, thank you so much for being with us this morning.



GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Thank you.



Bob Schieffer: Hope we can talk to you again along the way....



GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Thank you, Bob.

[rhett o rick]

34. Good post. K & R. nm

[Evergreen Emerald]

42. It is the same strategy he used in the primary

The surrogates say what his campaign wants him to say. He stays above the fray, but the message is out there, and everyone is talking about it. That is what he did with "Racism!" and Clinton.

The difference is that the media is not letting him get his message out there as easily as they did in the primary. He was allowed to put any message out and they would just mimick it. Now they are questioning the message.

The problem is that when people are talking about Vietnam and McCain's service, they are not talking about Iraq. This is not the conversation we want to have.

I can't decide if creating this conversation was a good strategy for the Obama campaign or not.

[Cha]

44. Oh Bullshit...still fighting the primaries

I see..and still wrong.

[Evergreen Emerald]

45. No...not fighting the primaries...noticing the same strategies employed

Get over the primaries...jeez everything that is said is seen by you through the primary prism...we cannot even have a conversation without you and your buds whining about the primaries being over.


My post is regarding the present. Not the past, except to point out the same strategy. Get over yourselves and have a conversation.

[Cha]

47. You're still the little victim..whining

about hillary. hillary lost..Obama won.

[Colobo]

48. Evergreen, let's move on.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

43. EXACTLY!!! The M$M will do anything to protect their Loverboy, McSame!

Where was the outrage when the Repukes and the Shitboat Liars went after Kerry? Where was McSame? Where was he when his party went after Max Cleland, a triple-amputee and true war hero! Where was McSame? Too busy licking Dumbya's balls at the Grand Canyon? Where was McSame when the Repuke Stepford Wives mocked Kerry's military service, wearing purple band-aids at the Repug Convention? Where was the outrage in the media?

If those of you who are angry at Obama cannot answer these questions, then you know why Obama could not accept Clark's statements, however true and honest they may have been.

http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/attacking_mccains_military_rec.php?page=all

“Attacking” McCain’s Military Record
What Wesley Clark really said, and how the press missed it

By Zachary Roth
Mon 30 Jun 2008 03:54 PM

<snip>

So: The latest round of mock outrage—in a presidential race that has turned the tactic into an art form—now comes in response to comments made by General Wesley Clark. Appearing as a surrogate for Barack Obama on CBS’s “Face the Nation”, Clark, in reference to John McCain, said:

I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war…But he hasn’t held executive responsibility. That large squadron in the Navy that he commanded—that wasn’t a wartime squadron. He hasn’t been there and ordered the bombs to fall.
When moderator Bob Schieffer interjected that “Barack Obama has not had any of those experiences, either, nor has he ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down”, Clark responded: “Well, I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president.”

The McCain camp, sensing an opportunity, complained that Clark had “attacked John McCain’s military service record.” Of course, Clark had done nothing of the kind. He had questioned the relevance of McCain’s combat experience as a qualification to be president of the United States. This is a distinction that you’d expect any reasonably intelligent nine-year old to be able to grasp.

But many in the press have been unable to. ABC News political director Rick Klein led the outrage, writing in a blog post on ABCNews.com:

Find me a single Democrat who thinks it’s good politics to call into question the military credentials of a man who spent five-and-a-half years as a prisoner of war.

</snip>

[zulchzulu]

51. McSame has brought out an old SBVFT liar on his stage...so we know how he really feels...

Unfortunately Wesley Clark has given the Repigs something to whine about. I don't think he's going to stand down either. He's going to be in a few interviews today...we'll see.