Clark’s Clunker

This comment is pending approval and won't be displayed until it is approved.

We have forgotten.......To the fact that the suicide rate for war vets is through the roof!!!!! Death is death no matter how u see it. You have to realize that people are killing themselves because innocent people are dying for NOTHING!! Listen to you're hearts and realize that no amount of killing or bombing or OVERTHROWING will ever equal the loss that we all felt on 9/11! Hate begats hate, turn the other cheek !!! Whatever happened to that? Anger always gets the best of everyone... You would think that the highest office in the land would take the ultimate teachings into consideration considering he's on a mission from god right?

People who think Wesley Clark asked a reasonable question about McCain's POW experience and how that qualifies him for President are just simply stupid and thinking that because military Generals lost the war in the Civil War and Licoln somehow won because he was not a military person are again stupid. If you don't understand a person's character is the most important attribute to being President and how many men Licoln sent to their deaths because he didn't understand how many men would be lost doing his dumb bidding then you have no business even voting in November.

Obama has been deemed to lack the qualifications to be commander chief based upon a lack of military experience. Clark's comment was simple and direct, does being a prisoner of war, a war over 34 years old, give someone experience necessary to be the commander in chief, and if so, how?

Abe Lincoln had no, repeat no experience in the military. He, like Obama, was a lawyer and politician. Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America, was a West Point graduate, who prided himself on the military skills he gained in the Mexican-American War as a colonel of a volunteer regiment, and as U.S. Secretary of War under Franklin Pierce. Who won the war between the states? Abe Lincoln!

Thank you, General Clark. In our terrorized society where everyone is afraid to point out any truth if it contradicts the neocon storyline, you had the courage to. Our media is controlled by the neocon fearmongering these days, so it's an uphill battle. But soldier on, my good man, soldier on.

How refreshing! The truth from General Clark. When was the last time that "failure" (losing a mission over Vietnam) was a laudable action? I'd be more impressed of Cap'n McCain returned with a planeload of people trying to escape the wrath of the Cong (Viet). Keep keeping them honest, Wes!

McCain was a celebrity POW because
of his father's admiralty in the
Navy.

This business that his injuries
are from beatings and torture are
fiction.

His injuries are from the impact
he suffered when he ejected from
his plane and hit the surface of
the lake. He was unconscious when
he was pulled out of the water.

Mr. McCain was tortured by the NVA and VC. That is a fact and not in dispute. POWs from the Viet Nam War deserve the same respect we give to the men and women serving in Iraq and other hostile environments. Mr. Clark's comments were disrespectful to all U.S. military personnel, and is an index of the character of the author as well as the candidate he supports.

Christ! It's simply unbelievable how the press is coming to the defense of McCain over an imaginary affront.

Let's debunk this BS:

1) Clark simply repeated the words of the questions when he said "riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down". Yet, Klein and others cite this as an insult.

2) Clark did not criticize McCain's service--although there are plenty of things to mock in it--precisely because he thought so highly of McCain's Vietnam record. But, in the end, this record amounts to being shut down, captured and tortured. It may be a profile in courage, and qualification for medals and military career promotion, but it's hardly qualification for Presidency forty years later.

3) There were two attacks on John Kerry's military record. One criticized his use of his service as qualification for higher office. The other was the Swift Boat fabrication that has been thoroughly debunked. There is a vast difference between criticizing the service itself (swiftboating) and criticizing the use of past service as a career crutch. The latter is perfectly legitimate and is exactly what Clark has done. The former is, at best, unseemly. Unfortunately, the media's love affair with McCain precludes them from being able to tell the difference.

4) There are plenty of questions about McCain's leadership skills. Even his own reasoning behind leaving the military for a career in politics is open for review. By attacking Clark, the press is giving McCain a pass and is implying that his qualifications cannot be questioned by anyone else either. This is preposterous!

I don't want to go into the idiocy of the Obama campaign disavowing Clark comments. Clark was not just correct--his remark was on the money. It is in McCain's interest to revert this election year to the usual pageant, where actual qualification don't matter--only the image is important. McCain is no W, but there is no reason to ignore his faults.

1. Please show me where Gen. Clark calls McCain's military credentials into question. Clark is not trying to argue that these experiences did not happen to McCain. Nor is he calling them anything other than heroic. He's not even arguing that the character McCain showed as a POW isn't Presidential. He's arguing that McCain's military record doesn't, in itself make him a foreign policy expert today. In addition to arguing that McCain's record in the Senate is not reassuring on that point.

Are you saying that getting shot down and being a POW IS IN ITSELF a foreign policy leadership credential? How so?

2. Clark's one month in Vietnam, where he was hit by four shells, is far from the total of his experience and you know it. Otherwise how would he have become a general. Just as one point of comparison, how many languages does McCain speak, compared to Clark?

3. When Clark made the "I'm a general and he's a LT" it was clearly a lighthearted remark and once again the MSM (middle school media) played Gotcha. The most rudimentary familiarity with Gen. Clark shows that he would never belittle anyone's service, of any rank, whatever their job is, from flying fighter jets to refilling the vending machines in the breakroom.

4. Your paragraph that begins "On that front" isn't even coherent. Your use of "yet" is out of place because Obama and Clark are, in fact, making a similar argument about McCain.

The question is not whether
McCain is qualified. He is.
But he's not entitled to be
POTUS. The question is whether
he is the right man.

His POW experience in fact
may have negatively impacted
him and distorted his
worldview. All he talks about
is war here war there war
everywhere.

As a POW he was not tortured.
He suffered leg and shoulder
injuries when his plane was
shot down and crashed into a
lake. He was tangled up in
his parachute and was drowning.

A North Vietnamese man who
lived nearby came out of his
house and helped him to safety.

In 2000 when he ran for President,
he was asked what he thought
of the North Vietnamese. He said:
I will hate them till the day
I die.

McCain is the wrong man.

The North Vietnamese quickly
discovered that McCain's
father was an admiral in the
U.S. Navy at the time.

He was not tortured. He was
treated like a high-value POW.

Despite that, McCain supports
the torture of POWs in
contravention of the Geneva
Convention of 1864.

Rick said:
"Clark’s comments seem to miss a vital point about the McCain campaign: Yes, his military service is part of his stock campaign biography, but McCain is not running on that record nearly as much as he’s running on his service in Congress."

I disagree. I think most of the public would disagree. McCain has very much been making his five years as a POW the central point of his campaign. His service in Congress? Supporting Bush? He's been running as far from that as he can. Which leaves him with a fuzzy, non-specific claim of 'experience'...and five years as a POW.

And of course going after the wingnut branch of the evangelical vote (Parsley and Hagee) until that was spotlighted and stopped.

McCain simply doesn't have much to run on at all.

ABC News totally misrepresented what Gen. Clark said. You said he questioned McCain's "patriotism." He did not and never has. His point was that flying a jet and getting shot down doesn't qualify him to be President. In the past Clark has said that he (Clark) has experience as a general and a commander of forces. McCain was only a pilot, not a commander of forces. When has Clark questioned McCain patriotism? You only said that because it fit in the piece you were doing on Obama's patriotism speech and your continuing fascination with the important question of flag pins.

They played a game with the press and the public, Swank. This time it became very obvious.

These are the same tricks use to pound Senator Clinton. The Obama campaign is a one-trick pony.

McCain asked the right questions. How will any of this bring down the price of gas one cent? How will any of this help rebuild infrastructure? How will any of this change the politics in Washington?

The answers are obvious even to those poor bitter people clinging to their values in the face of the BS blizzard from Chicago.

He did not call into question McCain's military credentials or experience, he only said that that experience does not necessarily qualify him to be President, which is true.

This time the divide and spin ploy backfired on Obama. Send the surrogate to make the divisive statement, then put Obama in front of flags for a press conference in the appropriately named town and have him toss the surrogate under the bus and tell the opponent not to do what he just did... again.

Except it isn't working. Clark couldn't even tell the difference between Diane and Robin on GMA this morning. Kind of near sighted?

Obama is playing with symbolic leadership but anyone who ever had to lead a combat unit can tell you the first people to fall are the ones wearing the loudest uniforms. Obama has a lot of style but no substance.

I think the Hillary supporters are right to hold back their support until they see something worthy of it. So far, no sale.

The more I hear of Obama and his tactics,the more I cannot stand the guy. I will never ever vote for him.

NO OBAMA NO WAY!

You know I get so sick of the media voicing their opinion of who said what, etc. They certainly get their view of situations out to the public and then sit back watch it grow into a mountain. I respect McCain and Obama. I do not believe what Clark said deserves the outrage that has developed in the media.
McCain's service record was not in question only the fact "does it qualify him for the office of President of the United States of America??????

Please tell someone that at least McCain has experience at something that takes courage, unlike Obama. If this is the Obama manipulation of the moment, it is failing miserably. Try discussing substantive ideas instead of personality issues. Stop with the rhetoric and start telling us how you intend to change the political arena when you can't even change the way you play the same old tired political games. As an independent, you lost me.

Does anyone doubt Obamas ability to stage events after this. I mean a speech in Independence, Mo about patriotism, while a suurogate talks trash about McCains military service.

Obama is taking a very low road after pledging to have a campaign that doesn't sling mud. I quess this is just another flip flop by Obama.

His "words" and speeches mean nothing to this Independent anymore.