CNN is now reporting that Obama "rejects yesterday's statement by Gen. Clark"
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on June 30, 2008 - 1:36pm.
Wesley Clark
Hello Everyone:
Here is where you can watch Gen. Clark on Face the Nation on Sunday, June 29:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15919
6/29/08: General Wesley Clark on CBS's Face the Nation
Submitted by Kat on June 29, 2008 - 12:02pm.
CNN is now officially reporting that Obama "rejects yesterday's statement by Gen. Clark" which in my opinion means that Obama is throwing Gen. Clark under the bus out of political convenience for the moment instead of doing what is right and defending the true context of what he had to say:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/30/campaign.wrap/index.html
updated 6 minutes ago
Obama responds to attacks on his patriotism
"McCain's campaign has been calling on Obama to condemn comments from retired Gen. Wesley Clark, who said this weekend that McCain's service in Vietnam did not necessarily mean that he was qualified to serve as commander-in-chief. Read about what Clark said
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/30/clark.mccain/index.html
Clark is a military adviser for Obama.
In his speech Monday, Obama did not directly address Clark's comments, but after calling attention to McCain's service, he said "no one should ever devalue that service, especially for the sake of a political campaign, and that goes for supporters of both sides."
"We must always express our profound gratitude for the service of our men and women in uniform. Period," he said.
Just as Obama was finishing his speech, his campaign released a statement about Clark's remarks.
"As he's said many times before, Sen. Obama honors and respects Sen. McCain's service, and of course he rejects yesterday's statement by Gen. Clark," Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton said..."
Let's get it straight and very clear right now that Gen. Clark was NOT questioning John McCain's patriotism BUT rather he was questioning his qualifications to be commander in chief based on his military service and on his Senate service which he is very strongly running on!
Of course, the media should accurately quote Gen. Clark in context but what else can you expect from an overall biased mainstream media that has unfairly trashed both Hillary and Gen. Clark whenever they could and who really likes John McCain?
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15872
The biased media that did a hit job on Hillary also did a hit job on Gen. Clark!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on June 24, 2008 - 2:38am.
John McCain, like Barack Obama, is also a "media darling" who many in the biased mainstream media like a lot because of all the access that he gives to them!
There is a very good reason why John McCain is called "Teflon John" by Dan Abrams:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0dA23mjiNQ
Phill Donahue: on Senator John McCain (Teflon John Seg) (8:26)
Added: April 08, 2008
April 07, 2008
MSNBC Dan Abrams
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/02/the-verdict-teflon-john/
The Verdict: Teflon John
By: Nicole Belle on Wednesday, April 2nd, 2008 at 1:10 PM - PDT
"Get the feeling that Dan Abrams reads the blogs? On Tuesday’s Verdict, Abrams introduced a new recurring segment: Teflon John, documenting all the ways that Republican presidential candidate John McCain gets a free ride from the mainstream media..."
Unfortunately I am also NOT surprised to see Obama throw Gen. Clark under the bus because it is politically convenient for him at the moment. That is the exact same thing which he did to Jeremiah Wright and to the Trinity United Church of Christ when they were no longer politically convenient for him!
Obama when it was politically convenient for him has also very clearly flip-flopped on several issues such as campaign finance, being willing to debate McCain any time any place, gun control, FISA, and on the definite promises that he made back in 2004 and in 2006 to not run for President in 2008:
1) Campaign finance:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0608/Feingold_criticizes_Obama.html
June 19, 2008
Categories: Barack Obama
Feingold criticizes Obama
2) Being willing to debate McCain any time any place:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15840
Obama first challenged McCain to debate so Obama needs be willing to debate now!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on June 19, 2008 - 1:55am.
3) Gun control:
June 26th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Obama Flip-Flops on D.C. Gun Case, TODAY!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wu9jE1MnAE
Obama Supports DC Handgun Ban (1:32)
4) FISA:
http://pol.moveon.org/immunity/080621obama.html
"Last year, after phone calls from MoveOn members and others, Obama went so far as to vow to "support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies."4 We need him to honor that promise.
Can you call Senator Obama today and tell him you're counting on him to keep his word? Ask him to block any compromise that includes immunity for phone companies that helped Bush break the law..."
5) The definite promises that he made back in 2004 and in 2006 to not run for President in 2008:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/10648
TRANSCRIPT: Obama Promised one year ago Today NOT to run for President in 2008!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 22, 2007 - 2:23pm.
To put it mildly, I am very disappointed to see the media quote Gen. Clark out of context BUT I think that it is even worse to see Obama apparently throwing Gen. Clark under the bus instead of defending him and clarifying the true context of what he said which is what Obama definitely should have done!
I cannot help but to see a very clear and consistent pattern that Obama will do and say anything that is politically convenient for himself at the moment to try and get elected. That is definitely NOT "Hope" or the right kind of "Change" which is needed in my opinion!
Mitch Dworkin
http://www.securingamerica.com/
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/10756
StopIranWar.com: "War is not the answer"
Submitted by Wes Clark on February 21, 2007 - 11:40am.
http://www.securingamerica.com/ccn/node/7191
Listen to Gen. Wes Clark fight for Dems on Sean Hannity's radio program: An excellent example for all of us to follow and what we all need to be doing to help fight back against extreme right wing Neocon smear propaganda!
will not do it and that is exactly what I have always tried to do and it is what I will continue trying to do. That is especially true when it comes to defending Gen. Clark!
Thnk you!~
"Our public servants work for us - we don't work for them. We have an obligation, as citizens of this country, to always remember that - and to never let them forget it." - DeadMessengers
E. Steven Collins is a long time Obama supporter as well as being a Democratic radio talk show host.
I was very upset and disappointed when I saw the dialogue below on CNN last night!
It looks to me like E. Steven Collins was right when he said "I think Barack Obama will distance it." The bottom line in my opinion is that both Collins and Obama should have publicly clarified what Gen. Clark really said instead of just throwing him under the bus out of political convenience for the moment!
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0806/29/cnr.04.html
CNN NEWSROOM
Two Medical Helicopters Collided in Midair; A Respected Military Leader Dissing John McCain's Military Record; Barack Obama Too Conservative? Two Medical Helicopters Collided in Midair; Condi Rice Left South Korea but the Riots Still There; North Pole Reportedly Melting; Fueling Station for Hydrogen Cars
Aired June 29, 2008 - 22:00 ET
RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: "All right. There's a new story that's coming in to us tonight that's no doubt going to reverberate for days, if not weeks. Here it is. A respected military leader dissing, some might say, swift-boating John McCain's military record.
Retired General Wesley Clark is a Barack Obama supporter we should note, and has even been mentioned by some as a possible VP. He held firm on CBS this morning that McCain's military service does not qualify the senator to be president. Here's what happened when Clark was questioned about that comment that he's made.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEN. WESLEY CLARK (RET.), OBAMA SUPPORTER: I'll 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.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Republican strategist Renee Amore is joining us. Democrat and radio talk show host E. Steven Collins have become fixers for us here. How about it, guys? Was he right to make a comment like that?
RENEE AMOORE, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Absolutely not, as far as I'm concerned, Rick. I mean, it didn't make sense to me at all. What has Obama really done?
SANCHEZ: But the question is, regardless of what Obama has done -- Steven, I'll take it to you. Was it disparaging in and of itself?
E. STEVEN COLLINS, DEMOCRAT/RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: He shouldn't have said it. I mean, I was at the National Constitution Center when the senator was here. And one of the biggest rounds of applause he got was when a person there stood up and said to him that they saluted him for his service to this country.
We all know how incredible his service has been and I think Barack Obama will distance it. I don't know why he actually said it. He is a respected retired general. And I think the real point he was making was, does the whole notion that because the senator has this war experience, somehow earn him special points to being an expert in foreign affairs and qualify him to be commander-in- chief.
I think that's the central issue countering this discussion that Barack Obama doesn't have the same kind of experience.
SANCHEZ: How about it, Renee?
AMOORE: No. I just think he wanted to downplay what the senator has done. And I think it's important for people to know what the senator has done. If people are aware of what he has done. You even said it as a big time Democrat.
You know, that he is to be respected when he was here in Philadelphia. People really applauded that particular piece for us. His war service and what he's done and how he's done it. So I definitely think he wanted to make it like it was not important.
COLLINS: But it still doesn't make him an expert in foreign policy.
AMOORE: But he's not saying he's an expert.
(CROSSTALK)
AMOORE: He understands it more. He understands it more than Barack Obama. I mean, he has not been in any situation.
COLLINS: I don't agree.
AMOORE: He has not told, you know, people when to bomb or not bomb, or when to go or not go. And that's what he used. That's what Wesley used.
SANCHEZ: Quick question, yes or no, before we go. Does this make Wesley Clark less likely to be a VP for Barack Obama?
AMOORE: He won't be a VP for Barack Obama.
COLLINS: I think Wesley Clark is not the issue. The issue is -- is Barack Obama able to create the kind of honesty forward -- foreign policy that's necessary and had all tough issues. What we can really look at is the continued support by Senator McCain for a very unnecessary and unpopular war that's costing us millions of dollars.
SANCHEZ: We are going to leave it there because now you're getting into your talking point.
AMOORE: He sure is.
SANCHEZ: I won't let you do that here.
AMOORE: Thank you.
SANCHEZ: Steven, thanks so much..."
Recently Secretary of Defense Gates terminated the head civilian and
military leaders of the Air Force. Apparently this was not for any
misstatement to the media, etc. Air force pilots have led the Air Force for
many/most years. Apparently they are inclined to overspend on overpriced
fighter planes and neglect the other important functions of the Air Force.
In effect Bush's secretary of Defense came to the same conclusion that Wes
did, i.e. fighter pilots are not necessarily experienced in unbiased
executive decisions.
ideas of a fixed timetable to withdraw troops from Iraq within 16 months and on talking to world leaders without adequate preparation:
1) Morning Joe on April 3, 2008:
http://securingamerica.com/node/2895
General Wesley Clark on MSNBC's Morning Joe
April 3. 2008
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: "But he (Obama) has leaned toward saying he's trying to complete the withdrawal within 16, within 16 months.
Mika Brzezinski: Would you-
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: And I'm against, I'm against fixed timelines. I think it's just, I think it sets up false expectations and takes away some of your bargaining leverage.
Mika Brzezinski: I think it's fair to say that a fixed timeline, especially one of 16 months, may not be realistic. But also responsible withdrawal, I mean, it almost sounds nebulous, like that could mean anything. And I mean, what's the reality, that we will be there for how many more years, realistically, and can the Democratic candidates, including Hillary Clinton, maybe talk about that more realistically?
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, I think any, any talk about the future like this is always involved- it always involves speculation. But what she means by responsible is that this is going to be an extraordinarily difficult thing to pull these troops out of Iraq. On every side, there will be problems. The Al Qaeda, what's left of it worldwide, is going to say they forced us out. The Iranians are going to appear to be the big winners. People that we supported in Iraq are going to want us there. There are political forces in the United States that are going to say you're abandoning the troops, you're, you're not listening and, and approving of their sacrifices previously. There are going to be a lot pre- and any violence that occurs or spikes during the withdrawal is going to be blamed on the withdrawal. So, we can't underestimate the difficulty of this. So, that's why when Hillary says 'responsible,' she casts the broadest picture of it - new strategy, regional diplomacy, groups of nations working together, trying to bring outsiders in to help monitor the withdrawal, working with the Iraqi forces on the ground, trying to continue our training mission there..."
2) Morning Joe on March 17, 2008:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23674907#23674907 (07:22)
Iraq, five years later
March 17: General Wesley Clark breaks down the successes and failures of the war so far and the course of action that should be taken for the future.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23674907#23674907 (07:22)
Gen. Clark is also against Obama talking to world leaders without adequate preparation:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14640#comment-294901
Clark on Obama talking to leaders without adequate preparation:
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on April 2, 2008 - 11:11am.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/06/a-jfk-comparison-for-obama-that-is-not-a-compliment/
December 6, 2007, 7:33 am
A J.F.K. Comparison for Obama That Is Not a Compliment
By Mary Ann Giordano
"On Sunday, at a lecture and book signing at Congregation Sons of Israel, a synagogue in Briarcliff Manor, N.Y., Mr. Clark had ticked off a dozen reasons why he has endorsed Mrs. Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination, starting with the fact that they have known each other for 24 years. But he also reached back in history for a reason why he is not supporting Senator Barack Obama: John F. Kennedy.
Mr. Clark had argued in his lecture about the need for the United States to talk to its adversaries. That very issue of when to talk, and who should do it, has been a key disagreement among Democrats, with Mr. Obama coming under fire for saying that he would sit down for diplomatic meetings with countries like Iran, North Korea and Syria with no preconditions. Other candidates, like Mrs. Clinton, said direct talks with the president should be earned.
After the lecture, Mr. Clark said talking to adversaries can work when a president is “speaking with the voice of experience” — something he contends Mrs. Clinton has. But “when you have leaders meeting early without adequate preparation, you can get some adverse outcomes,” he said, referring to Mr. Obama..."
All of this credible documentation is taken from this post:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15196
Michael Ware called Obama's 16 month troop withdrawal plan from Iraq "ludicrous"
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on April 5, 2008 - 7:16am.
Could Obama throwing Gen. Clark under the bus have something to do with these kind of past public criticisms when he was supporting Hillary? I honestly do not know but it is something to think about in my opinion!
Well, he's baaaaack!
Dole Defends McCain, slaps Gen. Clark
Former Kansas Sen. Bob Dole said that retired Gen. Wesley Clark should have "stayed in bed" Sunday instead of telling a talk show that Sen. John McCain didn't have the experience to be president.
Clark, a former NATO commander, is a Barack Obama supporter. He said on CBS's Face the Nation that former Naval pilot McCain's nearly six years as a POW in North Vietnam after being shot down in 1967 was not "a qualification to become president."
Even Obama has disavowed the comment.
Dole, the 1996 Republican presidential nominee, said that Clark's statement was "beyond comprehension" and his "absurd remarks signal further erosion in our nation’s political discourse. He should have stayed in bed Sunday morning.
"It’s unfortunate that a former general who ran for the presidency on his own war record thinks it appropriate to attack a distinguished veteran and former prisoner-of-war in this way. Sen. McCain’s entire life has been devoted to public service. His achievement and experience constitute unparalleled qualification for America’s highest office."
These are only the quotes that I caught while I was doing my usual monitoring so it is probably not a complete list:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13098
Chuck Todd of MSNBC said about Gen. Clark: "worse presidential launch ever..."
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on August 23, 2007 - 9:22am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/12956
Paul Begala said "The ideal Wes Clark was even better than the candidacy..."
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on August 7, 2007 - 6:46pm.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/12270
MY RESPONSE: Dana Milbank, Ryan Lizza, Susan Page & Chris Matthews trashed Clark
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on June 1, 2007 - 3:35pm.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/12214
Cillizza compared Fred Thompson to Clark:"best day as a candidate was his first"
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on May 25, 2007 - 8:54pm.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13230#comment-237326
I'm going to get sick if I see one more comparison of Gen. Clark to Fred Thompson by the mainstream media "pundits:"
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on September 6, 2007 - 8:42am.
It also has to be noted that Chris Matthews made fun of Gen. Clark on Hardball as recently as June 12, 2008:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15789
Transcript & Video: Chris Matthews made fun of Gen. Clark on Hardball on June 12
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on June 13, 2008 - 2:28pm.
I remember it well during the General's campaign. Anytime Clark's name was mentioned by a guest, Matthews would act like he didn't hear what the guest said.
Back then, I was always waiting for someone to mention him during their roundtables, etc. and when they did, I would wait intensely for his response. Everytime...every single time, Matthews was silent. It was awkward, odd, and deafening. I could not figure out what his problem was with Clark.
To this day, it's the same. Purposely, I taped his show tonight just to see if he would acknowledge the General. I assumed he had to discuss him today - he didn't have a choice.
Well, I painfully watched the show and the story wasn't mentioned at all. Unbelievable.
Though I could care less, in regards to the election - Matthews did show his hand today. He doesn't want McCain to win.
Here's the quote:
Chris Matthews: "Let's never forget, by the way - this guy is ready to move against Iran. We had George Will sitting here saying that 'if you vote for him you've got a war in Iran.'"
Hardly. He ran as an anti-war, tough on national defense/security, visionary, knowledgeable, and progressive on domestic issues candidate.
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
Wes Clark -- Make America All It Can Be!
mouth in the morning:
"It’s unfortunate that a former general who ran..."
That's retired general, Bob...not former general. Please stop speaking before you're awake.
"Our public servants work for us - we don't work for them. We have an obligation, as citizens of this country, to always remember that - and to never let them forget it." - DeadMessengers
It’s unfortunate that a former general who ran for the presidency on his own war record thinks it appropriate to attack a distinguished veteran and former prisoner-of-war in this way." - Bob Dole
Gen. Clark DID NOT run on his war record. I remember being frustrated that he didn't send surrogates out to promote his military experience and victories. Also, I NEVER viewed photos of him in his military attire -(not in the media, and nothing strategic by his campaign people - only online by all of us because we were so proud). Even thought I was frustrated, I respected him immensely for it. What an honorable and humble man.
Shame on Bob Dole. I must respond to him in writing.
Somebody on the Obama campaign wasn't doing their homework and seems to have taken the MSM's interpretation of Wes Clark's remarks as "about patriotism". What Obama himself said has nothing to do with General Clark. I think the MSM is straining to make a connection and be able to use the phrase "under the bus" again.
What Obama said:
"Beyond a loyalty to America’s ideals, beyond a willingness to dissent on behalf of those ideals, I also believe that patriotism must, if it is to mean anything, involve the willingness to sacrifice -– to give up something we value on behalf of a larger cause. Now for those who have fought under the flag of this nation -– for the young veterans ... I meet when I visit Walter Reed; for those like John McCain who have endured physical torment in service to our country –- no further proof of such sacrifice is necessary. Let me also add that no one should ever devalue that service, especially for the sake of a political campaign, and that goes for supporters of both sides. We must always profess our profound gratitude for the service of our men and women in uniform, period."
We at CCN know that Wes expresses that "profound gratitude" often. And I hope he knows that we are profoundly grateful for his leadership.
Ber Ski
Wes Clark is making leaders of us all.
Obama is obviously trying to distance himself
from Wes's criticism of McCain. No straining
needed to see Wes under the bus. Maybe because
there are so many of us, it's hard to pick him
out, but make no mistake, he's here.
help and support. What Obama did to Gen. Clark today definitely shows a lack of gratitude and in my opinion was like a slap in the face to him!
Gen. Clark has more knowledge of foreign policy and national security in his little toe than Obama has all together. But out of what appears to be arrogance, Gen. Clark's wisdom is not something that Obama will stand behind or admit to and unfortunately the media is not holding him accountable for his own lack of national security experience:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13948
Obama said strongest foreign relations experience was living overseas as a child
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 21, 2007 - 9:17am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15328
AUDIO: Obama claimed to "know more" about the world than both Hillary or McCain!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on April 21, 2008 - 6:33am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15435
Howard Kurtz and Joan Walsh summarized how the media went wrong covering Obama!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on May 5, 2008 - 12:30am.
Senator Obama and his campaign are one and the same. The campaign threw Wes under the bus.
Separately, in a statement, Obama spokesman Bill Burton said, "As he's said many times before, Sen. Obama honors and respects Senator McCain's service, and of course he rejects yesterday's statement by Gen. Clark."
It would seem that Senator Obama did indeed do Wes dirty.
General Clark has been making a great case for why John McCain's foreign policy national security credentials are not as great as many people think they are. At the same time, General Clark has been very respectful of McCain's service to our country. I suspect at least part of the reason the McCain campaign is upset is that they feel seriously threatened. This is a winning case for Obama, and General Clark is one of the few people with the credibility and credentials to make it.
By rejecting the comments, the Obama campaign has made three huge mistakes. They have rejected this strong argument on behalf of Obama. They have looked like they don't have the backbone to stand up to the McCain campaign when it counts. And they have committed a major hostile act toward all Clark supporters.
Those of us who are supporting Obama in the general election on General Clark's behalf are going to find it a lot harder to do after this.
The bus is now equipped with MonsterTruck tires...
The wheels on the bus go round and round...
- even the monster ones!
"Our public servants work for us - we don't work for them. We have an obligation, as citizens of this country, to always remember that - and to never let them forget it." - DeadMessengers
Like Kelly said somewhere earlier - we don't need no stinkin' tires. With so many of us underneath, we can make it a people powered bus.
(snip)
HELENA - Barack Obama will be spending Friday, the Fourth of July, in Butte, CNN is reporting.
Obama is expected to take part in Butte’s Fourth of July parade.
see video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVLDDCKuzIU
Please feel free to open up the link below and tell Jack Cafferty what you think!
Remember that Jack Cafferty is very clearly in the tank for Obama and that he is openly a biased media apologist for him which means that any perceived "anti-Obama" comments may not pass moderation and get posted on his blog:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15054
Jack Cafferty of CNN, an Obama apologist, did a hit job on Hillary on March 18!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on March 19, 2008 - 4:13am.
http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/30/mccains-military-credentials-overrated/
June 30, 2008
McCain’s military credentials overrated?
Posted: 02:22 PM ET
FROM CNN’s Jack Cafferty:
John McCain’s military service doesn’t automatically qualify him to be president according to retired General Wesley Clark.
General Clark is a former NATO commander who backed Hillary Clinton and now supports Barack Obama. He says that performing heroic military acts is not a substitute for command experience. Clark says he honors McCain’s service as a POW, and calls him a hero. He credits McCain’s time on the Senate Armed Services Committee and his travel worldwide, but he points out that John McCain hasn’t held executive responsibility. General Clark says, “I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president.”
McCain was more than just a fighter pilot, though. After being a POW, he went on to become the commanding officer of the largest squadron in the U.S. Navy.
McCain’s campaign responded, saying Obama doesn’t stand for a new kind of politics, that he’s willing to do and say anything to get elected — including allowing his surrogates to “demean and attack” McCain’s military record.
Barack Obama has formally rejected Clark’s comments, with a spokesman adding that Obama “honors and respects” McCain’s service.
But, Clark isn’t the only one. The Politico reports that John McCain is coming under fire about his military service from critics on the left and right. Some accuse him of war crimes for bombing targets in Hanoi during the ’60s. One liberal blog is accusing McCain of “disloyalty” during his time as a POW since he participated in Vietnamese propaganda films and interviews. Others are asking for more detailed records from McCain’s Navy service.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11429.html
Here’s my question to you: Are John McCain’s military credentials overrated?
Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.
And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.
Filed under: John McCain
"General Clark DID NOT impune Senator McCain's service in any way, shape, or form. In fact - he said Mccain was one of his heros, as well as a hero to millions, for his service. What he did say was simple logic - that McCain's specific military service does not make him automatically qualified to be commander-in-chief anymore than being able to drive a car qualifies one to race at NASCAR.
Furthermore - I 've no doubt he would have made these comments no matter who the presumptive Dem nominee was. The comments have nothing to do with Obama. And - considering they have nothing to do with Obama, I'm saddened and, frankly, disgusted, that an Obama campaign spokesman would denounce General Clark's remarks.
There is nothing to denounce. Doing so smacks of political cowardice on the part of the Obama spoksman who issued the statement, at the very least."
(am officially a fan of cell ophones thatt type!)
"Our public servants work for us - we don't work for them. We have an obligation, as citizens of this country, to always remember that - and to never let them forget it." - DeadMessengers
--- by stating the obvious. By questioning whether McCain's honorable military service is a qualification for being president, the MSM instead distorts the obvious and turns it into a questioning of the service itself. That fact that you have to "explain" the obvious to CNN depicts the present state of politics. On the bright side, there are a lot of people who aren't buying the MSM crap and are recognizing that Clark has the right focus. Check out talkingpointsmemo.com for a great defense of the General.
Clark: Riding in a fighter plane not a qualification
June 30: Retired Gen. Wesley Clark questions whether John McCain's military experience qualifies him to lead as President. MSNBC's Mike Brzezinski reports.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/25456108#25456108 (04:54)
McCain: I'm proud of my service record
June 29: Responding to criticism by Retired Gen. Wesley Clark, John McCain says "I'm proud of my record of service." Listen to his entire response.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/25459713#25459713 (09:42)
There is no person or issue he would not compromise for political gain. I have not posted here since HRC's concession because I feel it is inappropriate to counter Wes's goals. This is just to blatant to ignore however. I simply cannot support BO in any way, shape, or form, sorry.
I guess that you'll be voting for McCain now. Going out and door belling for him each Friday night.
Don't you get it? Wes, like the true patriot that he is, took one for the team. This will be the talk of the newscycles through the Fourth.
If BO full heartedly agreed with WKC publicly there would be no drama for the 'electorate' to talk about over the BBQ.
Give Wes and BO some freaking credit. They KNOW what the eff they are doing. You don't think that this wasn't planned?
Let go of your ego and work toward the REAL goal. Like Wes does.
"I ain't often right but I've never been wrong. It seldom turns out the way it does in the song."
Wes Clark is worth way more than 1 million
Obamas. Wes is the one with integrity, speaking
truth and not backing down. Obama is a weasel,
afraid of his own shadow and not fit to lead
a parade, let alone a country. He abandoned
Wes, who was his greatest asset. Is Obama
preferable to McCain? In what way? Do you
believe anything Obama says? I don't. From
what he's done to Wes and in reversing himself
the past couple of weeks, I'd say anyone would
be a fool to count on him for anything. It's
more like, if he's promised it, you can be sure
it won't happen. No fight in the man.
So, I guess that you will ignore the command that General Clark gave us to support the Democratic Presidential Candidate? Then you, Phyl, are a traitor.
Yes, Wes would be a far better POTUS than BO. But that is not what is going to happen. What is going to happen is we get to decide what type of Supreme Court we will have, if we get out of Iraq in our lifetime, if we invade Iran, if we have to whore ourselves for fuel, If we can make a private phone call, if those poor suckers in Gitmo have a fair day in court, if the rest of the world will ever respect us again.
This is bigger than you, me Wes or Obama, it's about taking our country back.
Blood fuels liberty. Just be glad that it's only the blood of our egos for now.
"I ain't often right but I've never been wrong. It seldom turns out the way it does in the song."
What is this? The GWB model of public
discourse? If I'm not for you, I'm
against you?? Look, if you have any
reason to trust Obama, I'd be willing
to listen. Otherwise, I repeat myself,
Obama has not shown any inclination at
any time to stand up for anything. If
the Repubs in the Senate don't like his
SCOTUS nominees, he'll find some they will
like. If they won't vote for his health
care plan, he'll change it until they like
it. Anyway, the supreme court has the votes
now to do any damned unconstitutional thing
they want. Thanks to the current DEM Senate.
"..his [McCain] judgment has been flawed _ he not only supported going into a war we didn't have to fight in Iraq, but has time and again undervalued other, nonmilitary elements of national power that must be used effectively to protect America." - WKC (today)
"I ain't often right but I've never been wrong. It seldom turns out the way it does in the song."
"..his [McCain] judgment has been flawed _ he not only supported going into a war we didn't have to fight in Iraq, but has time and again undervalued other, nonmilitary elements of national power that must be used effectively to protect America." - WKC (today)
Didn't the Obama campaign come out and reject Clark's statements? How dare anyone criticize McCain.
McCain himself said, "If that's the kind of campaign Sen. Obama and his surrogates and supporters want to engage in, I understand that. But it doesn't reduce the price of gas by one penny. It doesn't achieve our energy independence or make it come any closer. Doesn't make any American stay in their home who's at risk of losing it today. And it certainly doesn't do anything to address the challenges Americans have in keeping their jobs, homes and supporting their families."
Now look at what McSame said... nothing. Total non sequitur. There is no one home in there... just the answering machine.
Come on, don't give up on the Dems... this one will be easy to win.
"I ain't often right but I've never been wrong. It seldom turns out the way it does in the song."
What is this? The GWB model of public
discourse?
No, it's calling BS when I see it. To be honest, I don't trust ANY pol. (ok, maybe Wexler and Finegold, maybe. and, I hate to say it, Inslee (preppy little SOB)) But we have to try to steer this Nation the right way. That means sucking it up and doing everything we can to get OB in. Otherwise get off this site, twist the big knob on your radio to O'Rush and start hating gays. It suxors but that is where we are at now after eight years of BushCo. This country is in serious need of over-steering to the left.
Don't you get it? We're trying to get Shooter and gang off the helm. Can you afford 4-8 more years of oilmen running this country?
Wes is a PATRIOT! He would gladly fall on this (Sunday-talking-point) grenade to save us. Don't let his sacrifice be in vain!.
THINK people! This is not high-school. Shake it off and keep fighting the good fight for the Democrats!
"I ain't often right but I've never been wrong. It seldom turns out the way it does in the song."
So far Obama appears to a typical opportunistic politician. The waters are muddy on his stance on Nafta, troop-pull out in Iraq, illegal wire-tapping, Telcom Immunity, public financing etc...
He ran on and likely defeated Hillary and the other candidates based on his "differences" and change on this major issues yet we find out he is the same.
His campaign deep sixed Hillary and Bill with the race card and claims of bitter bible/gun clinging white people, yet the bitterness seems be on his side.
This guy seems like a fraud to me at this point.
You Joe, are full of crap. Obama will be no more able to exit Iraq until the conditions allow it then any other potential president.
Our democratic leadership had an opportunity to hold the line on torture, wiretapping, telcom immunity, and they caved. Obama is about to vote for a bill that covers the Administration and Telcom's @$$es.
We consume 8.4 billion barrels of crude oil per year in the U.S. and the rest of the world is gaining on us. Solar and Wind and bio-fuels are great but it will take decades for them to provide a fraction of our energy needs.
Best case estimates are maybe 20% of our power by the year 2050.
Nuclear power has to be put back into the equation.
Off shore wind power has tremendous potential but we have had top democrats fighting just such a project up here in Massachusetts for political reasons for years.
The potential energy in offshore wind in the U.S. is tremendous. If properly tapped, there is enough energy to produce more power then all of our conventional electrical power plants combined.
...by backing Clark, thus owning the issue about McCain, have served him better than trashing his best national security surrogate? The issue is leadership. Obama blew this chance to show some.
Agreed. BO blew it (or a staffer did.) If the world was perfect we wouldn't have GWB!
"I ain't often right but I've never been wrong. It seldom turns out the way it does in the song."
Because he is not the GOP candidate. Because Wes asked us to. Because Hillary asked us to. Because we would like this war to end.
"I ain't often right but I've never been wrong. It seldom turns out the way it does in the song."
I have not nor will I expressed support for McCain. I have worked for Obama to be my Senator. That has turned out to be a disappointment, a mistake I will not repeat. Wes is a Democrat and as such feels a need to work for the team. I used to be a Democrat until they proved they are not democratic. It has nothing to do with my ego, it is about this country and the direction they would take it. This is about Obama's ego however, nad that is his driving force.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/06/30/1176377.aspx?
"Our public servants work for us - we don't work for them. We have an obligation, as citizens of this country, to always remember that - and to never let them forget it." - DeadMessengers
"Our public servants work for us - we don't work for them. We have an obligation, as citizens of this country, to always remember that - and to never let them forget it." - DeadMessengers
on Morning Joe earlier today. Right after his good answer, the subject was changed on him (see about 03:05 into the video for the beginning of this dialogue):
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/25457003#25457003 (10:18)
The Obama effect on the youth vote
June 30: MSNBC political analyst Harold Ford, Jr. joins "Morning Joe" to discuss how Barack Obama's campaign is exciting young voters and using new tactics never before seen in elections.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/25457003#25457003 (10:18)
"Oh, please- McCain has sullied his own military service (which Clark went out of his way to praise) by refusing to support the new GI Bill. McCain of the Keating 5, Vicki Iseman, crash test dummy & Bush clone simply cannot be taken seriously in matters of national security, as patriot General Wesley Clark- who would make one hell of a President, I might add- correctly points out. McCain's military experience, in & of itself, has not prepared him for the presidency.
Unfortunately, and in all seriousness, the torture McCain endured is probably a contributing factor in his seemingly endless ability to endure the torturous machinations of the Republican Party & their minions.
Wes Clark is a national treasure. And he is the gold standard of the Democratic Party. McCain is a washed up caricature of himself. " -blue
And the openning paragraph is blatantly wrong!
Please kindly go over there and kick their asses. Thank you very much.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/06/clarks-clunker.html
"Our public servants work for us - we don't work for them. We have an obligation, as citizens of this country, to always remember that - and to never let them forget it." - DeadMessengers
"Our public servants work for us - we don't work for them. We have an obligation, as citizens of this country, to always remember that - and to never let them forget it." - DeadMessengers
McCain plays into the Republican fear card game, although he does so in a more subtle fashion. Note how he "distanced" himself from his lobbyist advisor Charlie Black when he said that a terrorist attack would "help" McCain. What Clark has done is placed a big question mark on what the MSM has always considered McCain's main strength. The argument will continue in one form or another, and McCain will be on the losing end.
Exactly!
This is what everyone will be talking about over the 4th.
"I ain't often right but I've never been wrong. It seldom turns out the way it does in the song."
This whole day has just made me sick. I can't stand to see all of this crap thrown at our General, a real American hero.
And then to have Obama's campaign just out and out "reject" Wes' remarks without so much as a halfhearted attempt to correct the mischaracterization or an at least somewhat kind remark about Wes. Just ugh!
At least when Kerry's campaign "distanced" themselves from Wes' "controversial" remarks about W, his National Guard service and the Swiftboaters, (and I was rippin' mad when they did) they did throw in a little comment sort of in defense of Wes and his reasons to be angry before declaring he didn't speak for Kerry. The Obama campaign couldn't even see fit to do that much.
Ugh! Just ugh! I feel like I'm being punched int he stomach all day today. Ugh! again. :(
"She hopes to open shadowed eyes on a different world...." Robert Smith, borrowed from Penelope Farmer
At least now I won't have to stomach trying to support Obama.
We learn. We change. That's progress. If we don't do that, well, we're GWB.
Not you too, shortie! Chin up solder and back in formation!
Just because the brass is dumping on our leader is no reason to quit the war!
Stop your whining solders and let's show them what this army is made of!
"I ain't often right but I've never been wrong. It seldom turns out the way it does in the song."
The army has been ambushed...by the one The General recently endorsed, yet. So the army has a more pressing mission -- to stay at The General's back.
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
Wes Clark -- Make America All It Can Be!
Stan:
I will throw WKC, you, and all the rest of us here under the bus if that is what it takes to rid our nation of the evil that is controlling it. I love Wes. I've shook his hand and thanked him for his service. But let me make it clear: This is a war we can not lose if we ever expect the our Nation not to fall into ruin.
Two words: Supreme Court.
We need to fight while we are still able. I fear that this is our last chance.
Now if you want to take your ball home because some dick on our side said something stupid, then I guess that your ego is more important than saving our Nation.
"I ain't often right but I've never been wrong. It seldom turns out the way it does in the song."
And what type of SCOTUS would we have if McSame is elected?
Roe v. Wade?
Fsck you all! I was out in 04 standing on street corners holding a Clark sign. So I say what needs to be said and you throw me under the bus?
I'm no great OB fanboi but I can see the wind and what we have to do to keep this Nation halfway sane.
If this is just a pity-hug-group then maybe I need to leave. I though that we were solders for the Democrats. No some cult of Wes. WKC is a great leader. Does he really want you to throw away this election cycle?
"I ain't often right but I've never been wrong. It seldom turns out the way it does in the song."
John McCain can say whatever he wants to right now in order to please his activist base to try and get their votes but reality in my opinion is that McCain could probably never get another nominee like Roberts, Alito, Scalia, or Thomas through a Democratic controlled Senate and that would be especially true if it was to replace a liberal justice!
Democrats in the Senate would probably shut down the Senate before that would ever happen. McCain would probably be forced by Democrats in the Senate to appoint a swing vote nominee like an Anthony Kennedy or a Sandra Day O'Connor whether he likes it or not!
If Democrats gain a few more seats in the Senate which is what is what even many Republicans expect, then there is no way I can see how McCain can force another ideologue nominee through like how Bush did when the GOP had a firm majority in the Senate:
http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/gop_elections_2008/2007/11/19/50699.html
GOP Facing Huge Losses in 2008
Monday, November 19, 2007 9:02 PM
By: John Mercurio
"Republicans in the Senate and House are in such deep trouble that they may not only see their numbers decrease in next year's election, they may even find the Democrats with a veto-proof majority in the Senate, a Newsmax survey finds..."
Even right now with just a slim majority, Democrats in the Senate like Chuck Schumer would never allow another Alito or Roberts to replace a more liberal justice:
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jul/07073002.html
Monday July 30, 2007
Schumer says No More Judges for Bush
By Peter J. Smith
WASHINGTON, D.C., July 30, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - "President Bush can expect to make no more Supreme Court judicial appointments "except in extraordinary circumstances" according to Senate Judiciary Chairman Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY).
"We should reverse the presumption of confirmation. The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance," Schumer said Friday at the American Constitution Society convention in Washington. "We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito."
Schumer and other Democrats fear that another justice like Justice Alito could presage the demise of Roe v. Wade and lead to a decidedly 6-3 conservative court, instead of the current 5-4 court, with Justice Anthony Kennedy often acting as a wild card..."
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0707/5146.html
Schumer to fight new Bush high court picks
By: Carrie Budoff Brown
Jul 27, 2007 05:33 PM EST
"New York Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a powerful member of the Democratic leadership, said Friday the Senate should not confirm another U.S. Supreme Court nominee under President Bush “except in extraordinary circumstances.”
“We should reverse the presumption of confirmation,” Schumer told the American Constitution Society convention in Washington. “The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.”
John McCain right now is in the same political position that Rudy Giuliani was in when it comes to trying to win over voters in the religious right who do not trust him:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14031
Questions on judges not asked of Rudy Giuliani yet that may harm his campaign!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on December 4, 2007 - 4:07am.
McCain can say whatever he wants to right now just like how Giuliani did in the primary but reality in my opinion is that even if McCain wins, he cannot appoint ideologue justices if he cannot get the Senate votes to confirm them!
If there is a Republican majority in the Senate under McCain if he wins like how there was under most of Bush's first 6 years, then Democrats would have good reason to worry about another ideologue nominee being confirmed but I do not see that as being the case right now!
Also, many ideologue Republican activists such as Mark Levin are still very angry with McCain for presiding over the "Gang of 14:"
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjUzOGY0ODA1YzBmNjFhOWE5NWU0OTY5NTZiOGNhOGQ=
January 11, 2008 12:00 PM
The Real McCain Record
Obstacles in the way of conservative support.
By Mark R. Levin
"McCain also led the Gang of 14, which prevented the Republican leadership in the Senate from mounting a rule change that would have ended the systematic use (actual and threatened) of the filibuster to prevent majority approval of judicial nominees..."
"Now if you want to take your ball home because some **** on our side said something stupid, then I guess that your ego is more important than saving our Nation. " - joe
How can you say that you respect Stan in one breath and personally insult him in the next.
Stan deserves better than this.
He has put his heart and soul into helping the General over the years.
If I'm not mistaken, I believe that Stan was in the service and I'm sure is quite aware of the importance of 'saving our Nation.'
I know Stan can defend himself, but I needed to say this - because personal attacks of this level should not be tolerated on this blog.
Yes. I respect Stan and would hope that he expects me (or someone here) to call him out when he is wrong. The General wants us to help the Democrats win this election cycle. All Democrats. I'll be helping Darcy boot the sheriff out of Congress here in Western Washington. I know that Stan will be VERY active in his local Democratic races.
I was in the service too (USAF), what does that have to do with it? Because of that I understand why BO didn't serve: there wasn't squat going on in the early eighty's. The only reason I went in was because I was in the hell-hole known as Yakima during the Reagan years. Had I been living in Chicago, I'm sure I could have found something better. Even the cold-war was winding down by then. Service back then was kinda boring.
"I ain't often right but I've never been wrong. It seldom turns out the way it does in the song."
I know the feeling. The Viet Nam war ended in about March of '73. My destroyer squadron was scheduled to deploy for WestPac in May. The war ended, we didn't deploy, and the Navy quickly became an in-port maintenance Navy instead of an at-sea operating Navy -- very little ship-driving and lots of paperwork.
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
Wes Clark -- Make America All It Can Be!
I appreciate that beyond words. And yes, I did my term as a Naval officer in '71-73.
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
Wes Clark -- Make America All It Can Be!
Good for you keeping all this documented!!! thanks!