Enough Already Abut Wesley Clark's Remarks!

@anniepa (27245)
United States
July 2, 2008 6:38pm CST
First, here is the transcript of the from General Wealey Clark's June 29 interview on CBS' Face the Nation about which Clark has been attacked non-stop 24/7 ever since as if he'd insulted Jesus: 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 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 untested and untried, General? 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 of millions of others in the 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 the 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" -- SCHIEFFER: Well -- CLARK: -- "publicly?" He hasn't made those calls, Bob. SCHIEFFER: Well -- well, General, maybe he -- CLARK: So -- SCHIEFFER: Could I just interrupt you? If -- CLARK: Sure. 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 -- CLARK: Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president. SCHIEFFER: Really? (End of transcript) Here are some examples of what various commentators and news anchors have said about this interview since Sunday. http://mediamatters.org/items/200807010001 OK, I know some of you aren't fans of MediaMatters but I didn't give that link because of any opinion they may have but because they gave the transcripts of the original Face the Nation exchange and those of other media members after Sunday's show. However, it's perfectly acceptable for one of McCain's surrogates, Orson Swindle, to say this about Clark: "General Clark probably wouldn't get that much praise from this group. I can't speak for them, but we all know that General Clark, as high-ranking as he is, his record in his last command I think was somewhat less than stellar." http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/01/gen-wesley-clark-critisizes-mccain/ Of course, we all know there was no problem with attacking John Kerry in 2004. We also know Bush's AWOL status while in the Texas National Guard wasn't even allowed to be alleged, Cheney was perfectly justified in getting all his deferrals because he had "other priorities" BUT Bill Clinton, on the other hand, was a no-good draft-dodger. Here's my opinion on this, for what it's worth - I certainly respect McCain's service to our country even though I don't support him for President. What he did then in that area of his life can't be taken away from him but it doesn't mean he's a man of perfect character and it doesn't make him qualified to be President. Wesley Clark didn't slam him for his service to our country, he simply stated his opinion which I happen to agree with. The fact that Obama never served in the military is even less relevant than it would have been in other cycles because there was no war going on when he was of the age most young people are when they join the military. That's no more his "fault" than what his middle name is or where he lived for a time as a child! Does anyone else think it's time to move on from Clark's remarks? Annie
2 people like this
6 responses
@ElaanR2 (277)
• United States
4 Jul 08
What do these conservatives and the Muslim fundamentalists have in common? They can say whatever they like about their opponents but when anything is said about them, they cry like hungry chickens. What Gen. Clark said is not even close to what the Swift boaters did in 2004. What haven't they said about Obama? You don't even have to go very far. Look at postings here from the 'mylot conservative attack machine' and you'll understand what I mean. As far as they are concerned, it doesn't matter whether their statements are true or not. For them, as long as it has a link on the net, it is fair game.
2 people like this
@anniepa (27245)
• United States
4 Jul 08
You're so right! There was an anti-Obama discussion here a few weeks ago where the original poster posted a link about some outrageous allegation about him. I forget which one it was at the moment there have been so many! Anyway, the poster said to one doubtful responder to "prove me wrong". I'm still trying to figure out why anything Clark said would be taken as an attack. One thing I have come to realize is that to McCain supporters or even those who aren't that high on him as much as they hate Obama, the fact that he was a POW and served in Vietnam makes him immune to any criticism about anything else he's ever done in his life. His military service alone makes him a man of great character and nothing - not adultery or coming home and dumping the wife who had waited for him all those years and who had been disfigured in a horrible accident while he was gone - will change that. He's a war hero and that's all that matters, right? Now, Kerry's service meant nothing, he even "faked" his injuries to get a Purple Heart, because he had the audacity to come home and speak out against the Vietnam war. Forget about the fact that Kerry may have saved some lives by raising awareness about that horrid war. Annie
1 person likes this
• United States
5 Jul 08
Hello ElaanR2 and anniepa . It's so nice so read your posts. Sometimes I feel like I'm one of the few who see the hypocracy of the right wing. But now I'm seeing more posts like yours that remind people how the Republican attack machine derailed John Kerry's presidential campaign. And now they cry foul when we attack back even though we tell the truth. General Clark didn't say anything that wasn't true. No one on the right ever comments on the Swift Boaters questioning John Kerry's service to our country. He served our country, with dignity. Saying he faked his injuries to obtain a Purple Heart is a terrible accusation. I'd like to thank you both for sticking to the facts and debunking the lies from the right. Let them whine while we prepare our country for a change for the better. Keep up the great fight and I'll be here to support you and our country. Happy holiday. Lloyd
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13923)
• United States
5 Jul 08
Lloyd, the swiftboat crap happened 4 years ago. I don't even think mylot was around four years ago so I don't see why you keep bringing that up. We are dealing with the current election not the 2004 election or the 2000 election although that one will keep getting brought up by sore losers that can't accept the fact that Gore lost. That said, I have yet to see a single conservative on these boards say they agree with the swift boaters. They don't even bring it up. I brought it up once when similar lies were being said about McCain a few months ago (not the Wesley Clark stuff) and I brought it up only to explain that the attacks on McCain were just as stupid and lacked credibility as much as the swiftboaters. Now what Wesley Clark is saying is his opinion. Opinion is not fact or truth. It's his opinion that McCain's military and senatorial experience is meaningless and in no way makes him qualified to be president. He's entitled to that opinion but what he failed to do was explain what makes him support Obama when he has no semblance of qualifications if you ignore his senate record the way he's choosing to ignore McCain's. That's why I've been calling it an attack and calling Clark a hypocrite. Some say Obama is a better candidate say so because they agree with his stance of various issues, most notably the war in Iraq. That's fine. That's why you should vote for someone. Clark won't say what in his eyes qualifies Obama to be president. Maybe he's just into candidates who are young and use the word "change" alot.
1 person likes this
• United States
3 Jul 08
All the hoopla about General Wesley Clark's is nothing more than a right wing attempt to cover up the fact that John McCain brings absolutely nothing to the table. They are trying to attach Clark's statement to Barack Obama even though Clark was a adamant Hillary Clinton supporter. To be honest, I'm glad that some people on the Democrat side are using the same "Swift Boat" tactics that the Republicans used against John Kerry. Now they know how it feels to have a military hero smeared even though he served his country honorable. While Senator Obama is busy formulating concrete plans to deal with the problems that plaque America, John McCain plays musical chairs with his campaign staff amid mounting Republican concern at his inability to compete with Barack Obama. It seems like John McCain and the GOP only strategy is to take aim at Obama's character. The America people have already rejected that and will continue to do so. Finally, the GOP seems so "thin skinned". How can the party that worships Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Neal Boortz, Glenn Beck, Mark Levin, Bill O'Reilly, Jay Mundy, Jim Quinn, G. Gordon Liddy, Bill Cunningham, Melanie Morgan, Mike Gallagher, Laura Ingram and others ,who spew venum on a daily basis, against not only Barack Obama but the Democrat Party whine so much when a military General questions John McCain's abiltiy to lead the United States as President. I guess the truth really hurts. Lloyd
@Taskr36 (13923)
• United States
3 Jul 08
I'm with Cheesehater on that. Besides, Obama made a vow to not participate in such mudslinging, yet he sent an attack dog to do his dirty work. It's just sad.
1 person likes this
• United States
3 Jul 08
This is not the politics I want to see, but its the kind of politics that doomed John Kerry in the last election. Just think how different things would be if John Kerry would have been President. I think the "Swift Boat" crowd affected that election. I didn't hear many Republican supporters speaking against those attacts. Instead George Bush was elected again and now we are paying the price for his incompetance. Lloyd
2 people like this
• United States
3 Jul 08
The reason I posted that comment is because the Democratic Party has paid the price for not reponding to the tactics of the GOP in the past. Look at all the things they've done in this campaign to smear Barack Obama. They've circulated emails throughout the internet claiming that Barack is a Muslim. They've spread rumors of Mitchelle Obama calling people of other races derogatory names. What are we supposed to do? Just sit back and be beaten over the head again. We learned the game from you and now you are mad. Lloyd
2 people like this
@MntlWard (880)
• United States
3 Jul 08
This isn't a smear at all, and it's not even close to the level of what's being slung at Barack Obama.
2 people like this
@anniepa (27245)
• United States
4 Jul 08
Short but sweet and SOOOOO right! Thanks! Annie
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13923)
• United States
3 Jul 08
My biggest issue is that he discounted all of McCain's experience in the senate and military as meaningless while somehow supporting Obama as a better candidate. It's complete and utter hypocrisy. Aside from that it's the same type of mudslinging Obama vowed he wouldn't be part of. Sending an attack dog to make these remarks because you don't have a leg to stand on is shameful and cowardly. Obama's minions won't care about any of this, but the independent thinkers who think for themselves can see this attack for what it really was. And for the record, I was just as vocal about how stupid the attacks on Kerry's record were. Those of course were completely fabricated and proven false.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27245)
• United States
3 Jul 08
It's good to learn how you felt about the attacks on Kerry and for the record I felt the same way about the attacks on McCain in 2000. As for Clark, I still don't see what he said that was so wrong and I don't believe he was told to say it by Obama especially since he'd said something similar back when he was still supporting Hillary. Annie
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13923)
• United States
3 Jul 08
You know, I really thought about everything he said, and it's not the words, it's the context. If Clark was running for president against McCain, his remarks would have been acceptable in that he would be saying his military experience better qualified him for the job than McCain. As someone who is merely a supporter of Obama however, his own military experience is irrelevant since we are comparing candidates and the other candidate has no military experience to compare.
1 person likes this
@ElaanR2 (277)
• United States
4 Jul 08
When the Swift Boaters were attacking John Kerry, whose military experience were they comparing John Kerry's to? Or, were the Swift Boaters running for president? Secondly, Clark neither discounted McCain's military service nor his senate work. He merely said that his military experience does not necessarily qualify him to be president. Why do Americans always tell immigrants to learn the English language when they themselves find English comprehension so tough?
2 people like this
@ElicBxn (60892)
• United States
3 Jul 08
Obama is a FIRST TERM senator, gee, while Hillary Clinton (who I also don't like) has been in the know in Washington more than that! I'd rather have someone running who has more experiance than Obama in politics/running anything.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27245)
• United States
3 Jul 08
In a way you helped make a point I've wanted to make. Your view is that one Senate term isn't enough to make Obama qualified to be President, right? Even as an Obama supporter I don't take that as an attack on him, it's simply your opinion. To some people his lack of Washington experience is a plus. My point is everyone has their own point of view but that doesn't mean they're "attacking" the person they're not for. In the case of Wesley Clark's remarks about McCain's military service not qualifying him to be President, he didn't say McCain didn't serve honorably, to the contrary he said several times McCain had been one of his heroes. We all have our own opinions of what constitutes being qualified to be President. I agree with other posters who have said POTUS is a job that nobody is automatically "qualified" for because it's basically something you learn on the job. Nobody has the "experience" necessary to be President if they haven't BEEN President since it's a unique position. Throughout our history we've had Congressional representatives, Senators, Vice Presidents and Governors go on to become President as well as Generals with no previous political experience. Since our Presidents are elected we all have the right to decide for ourselves what we personally consider to be the necessary requirements. For myself, since no other job actually prepares anyone for this one, I base my vote on the issues. Annie
1 person likes this
@underdogtoo (9599)
• Philippines
3 Jul 08
I love discussions and the more involved, the more heated they are, the better it is for everyone concerned. The best thing about discussions is that you are able to present your side and this should be done succinctly, clearly and briefly. I hate repetitions and when things get repeated often enough my brain turns off and goes to sleep. I like to hear both sides of any discussion. Cheers!!