Retired U.S. Gen. Wesley Clark, a supporter of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, has questioned whether Sen. John McCain’s military experience qualified him to be commander-in-chief.
Clark – referring to McCain’s experience, or lack thereof, in setting national security policies and understanding the risk involved in such matters – said, “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 the armed forces, as a prisoner of war. And he has traveled all over the world. But he hasn’t held executive responsibility,” said Clark, a former NATO commander…
“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,” Clark said.
Schieffer noted that Obama did not have any of those experiences, nor had he “ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down.”
“Well, I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president,” Clark said.
Someone had to say it, sooner or later.
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
#67–patrick==don’t pussyout. Keep going. I’ll quibble later but being a CIC is nothing more than taking orders from above. You don’t think thats what the President does do you?
And what makes Wesley Clark qualified to even comment about who is qualified to be president. Just because he was a big f*king loser when he tried to run, means that he has ZERO credentials to make any kind of comment about who is and who isn’t qualified.
BTW, look at McCain’s entire service record (including his politcal career) and it becomes obvious that his qualifications are much more extensive than Obama.
The only thing Obama’s got going for him is that he can talk… too bad the American public doesn’t realize that.
#68 – I’m done. Unless, you have s/g to add to the list that’s relevant.
#69–Patrick==just a list maker huh? I indicated the quibbles would follow but giving items to a list maker is like giving heroin to an idiot. It is wasted effort without some conclusions being drawn.
#50, Bobbo, “You have the crucial elements already. Failed Policies vs unknown liberalism. Isn’t the choice clear even with all the unknowns?”
Now reread #67. Patrick clearly stated the current state of affairs.
Now reread my post #47, in particular the part “how they will get those issues passed through congress, and how congress is expected to act and react.”
As we have seen, Congress as much as the executive branch is at fault for the mess things are today. I wish to see how, if at all, the Pres proposes to work with congress.
I would argue that Wesley Clark isn’t qualified to make statements regarding who is qualified to be president.
He’s never been elected to office. WTF does he know.
That being said, I’m for Obama in part because I would like to see the troops out of Iraq in a few years (it sure won’t be 18 months).
#71–Ah Yea==still a cop out. Both will say they look forward to a bipartisan effort to fix what is wrong. What else has any candidate ever said? What else could they say? President goes to work with a new congress. In fact, no reason at all for Obama to be bi-partisan if he has a strong majority in both houses? Why work with anyone if you have them under your thumb? BushCo doesn’t even have majority power and still rolls over Congress because they are a fearful bunch of power seeking self-interested public befouling politicians. I wouldn’t work with them either unless I had to.
You sound like a wishy-washy intellectual, afraid to take a stand. “Lets wait till all the facts are in.” HAW!!!!
Gee, why don’t we make a list, and keep it up to date? Thats what Santa Claus and a few other do.
#72–HMyers==is that how you over read what Clark said? I would think a decorated General would be qualified to opine on what kinds of military experience lead to executive level decision making?
But in the main, he mostly said: ““Well, I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president,” Clark said.”
Since you don’t disagree with that evaluation, why put a smack down on Clark? I don’t think you are presidential material either, but probably would make a fine POW.
Both McCain and Obama are members of the Senate, so both have experience as politicians. McCain’s time as a POW was honorable, and might have toughened him a bit, but doesn’t make him any more qualified than Obama to be President.
Even though I’m a pacifist, I give respect to the military guys — especially since those who saw the horrors of real combat usually share my aversion to war.
Me and a war vet also share a scorn for these chickenhawk war mongers that have been running the GOP.
But, sadly McCain seems to have totally abandoned any wisdom his war experience might have given him making him indistinguishable from the Chickenhawks like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and nearly every right wing media pundit.
I seem to remember a couple of presidents in the past that were “shot-down” or under fire!
President Kennedy lost his PT boat, and Pres Bush Sr. was Shot in his airplane, parachuted down, and was picked up by friendlies.
I wonder what perspective that experience gave them when they became president?
Neither case was a “Qualifying” event, but I bet it beat being a general and sitting behind a desk for 40 yrs, and now drawing a massive retirement check.
#64, What the?
Here from the Chi Sun Times:
“I loved teaching,” Obama told the Sun-Times. “But when the opportunity came [to run for U.S. Senate] I took it. I think some of the public speaking skills I developed in the classroom — stay on your toes; don’t make my answers too long — I’m using on the campaign trail.”
Professor David Straus, the only teacher with higher ratings than Obama in his last year at the school, said, “The students thought he was great. He thought about things in unconventional ways.”
Professors at the law school — which is ranked among the country’s best — employ the “Socratic” teaching method of Professor Kingsfield from “The Paper Chase,” cold-calling students to catch them off guard. Obama ditched that approach for a more informal conversation with students.
“Some professors are just kind of going through the motions with you,” Janis said. “He actually seemed to take everyone’s point of view seriously.”
And, although it’s a lower pay grade of experience, being a State Senator for a decade earns Mr. Obama some experience points, too.
Ok, Bobbo. I’ll take that one on.
I’m voting for Obama unless he makes a huge log in the punchbowl.
Here is the logic. I worry about some of Obama’s domestic spending plans, but at least he won’t get us into any more trillion dollar wars.
So how’s that for taking a stand!
#60 – TommieB
>>You just defended his flopping?!?!?
Enumerate. Or STFU.
TIA.
Paddy-O
>>You never saw the TV interview where he said
>>that the DC gun ban was constitutional?
I don’t generally watch TV. Especially not interviews with politicians. Please provide an on-line link.
#62 – Mr. iNova
>>His prisoner of war experience was not “military
>>experience” but it does give him a perspective from
>>that point of view.
I guess he must have really enjoyed his time in the Hanoi Hilton, give his recent flip-flop on torturing illegally-held “enemy combatants” at Gitmo, and extreme rendition.
#62
>>“Swift Boating” has become a new political verb:
>>To engage in the nastiest of campaign smears.
And Swift Boat Liar has become a new political noun: to be a scum-sucking liar who will resort to anything in order to paint a false negative picture about one’s opponent; to have absolutely no ethics or morals.
This just shows what a tool Wesley Clark is. I don’t think anyone is suprised.
This just shows what a tool Wesley Clark is. I don’t think anyone is surprised.
#81–Ah Yea==my faith in you is restored. TAKE A STAND! Now you are in the best position to flip-flop if his performance is as you expect. aka–flip-flop is a sign of intelligence on new facts.
Still, your emphasis on “tax” is a bit odious, as in repuklican smear thinking. Don’t criticize anyone for taxing to pay for what they spend, criticize the spending. Otherwise, you are just a dupe, as most conservatives are, and sadly, too many Dems.
So, what programs other than the corporate welfare ones would you cut as Presnit?
#82,
>>You just defended his flopping?!?!?
> Enumerate.
Read #59 where you defended him by saying, “the guy’s got to be an asshole on something, right? Nobody’s perfect.”
You refuse to consider he’s just as bad about the things you harp on other people about. Why aren’t you calling him a flip-flopping, lying bastard? You love the guy, admit it. If he wasn’t already married, you’d be begging to have his kids.
#83, You should perhaps know what Curious George is saying in public then if you plan to defend him against all comers.
Have you even been keeping up on current events? I find it hard to believe. I think you are just fed up with the current administration and are looking for anything to cling to. Unfortunately, you picked the name most spouted by the media.
MM, I urge you to do some research and find out what is really wrong with this country. It isn’t Bush. It isn’t McCain. It is the entire system. Everybody you spout hate about is part of that system. And so is Obama — he didn’t get elected by himself. He had the entire democratic party and all of its baggage behind him. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you’ll be the same old lovable MM that we all remember.
> Or STFU.
It’s easy to get in somebody’s face when you can’t see it, huh?
@Bobbo
“HMyers==is that how you over read what Clark said? I would think a decorated General would be qualified to opine on what kinds of military experience lead to executive level decision making?”
WTF? Clinton dodged the draft, Bush never had any sort of military duty in a combat zone. Hillary, Edwards, Obama never were in the military. Gore was an army photographer or something like that.
Franklin Roosevelt was never in the military, so he was qualified to be president?
Wesley Clark is a certified idiot.
Gen. Clark used to be the NATO/EUCOM commander (hence the NATO podium). This is a very old picture of him when he was on active duty. Apparently the duty uniform of the day was cammy BDUs.
It does inspire those old comments about banana republic dictators in full green camouflage taking pictures in front of white stucco homes.
Gen. Clark didn’t have the best people person reputation on active duty. His staff used to call him King George and his wife would carry his rank as if she were nominated General. Very spiteful and mean woman.
#91–HMyers==what gives. Your response is completely inane. Must be some sort of knee-jerk reflex action cutting off the ability to follow a thought?
What word was it HM–? aka How does listing a bunch of people who were NOT generals have anything to do with whether or not a general is in a position to opine on whether or not subordinate military positions carry executive decision making experience?
Gee whiz==you aren’t even close.
#92–RMR==you’d be hard pressed to find any General and Spouse described any differently. Sense of entitlement.
#80 “What the?”
He blew it on a basic Constitutional question.
Two choices:
A) He doesn’t understand the Constitution.
B) He doesn’t want to follow it.
Pick one.
Wes Clark has McCain beat, he wasn’t shot down, he was just plain SHOT, multiple times even.
How many generals these days can claim actual battlefield injuries.
Oh and he also ran that NATO thingy for 8 years, but he has no diplomatic or leadership experience according to the GOP.
Bobbo, I am all too pleased to take a stand. I have always liked Obama’s character, and it doesn’t hurt that he graduated magna cum laude from Harvard.
As a nice bonus, I bet he can say “nuclear”.
#96–Ah Yea==yes of course which is why I gave a kudo. So, rather than go around the track once more, whats with the taxes? The real alternative is to deficit spend unless you are willing to cut programs===so I ask you===what programs are you willing to cut or do you prefer deficit spending so you can label the other more responsible party the one who will pay for what they get as opposed to the repukes who push it down the road to our kiddies?
More of an honest vs dishonest approach don’t you think? Stand up for the tax issue.
Swift Boating means engaging in the nastiest of political smears? You mean campaigns were all nice and cuddly and high-minded until the Swift Boat Veterans came along?
Shouldn’t the definition include something about people who know you from long back?
#94: Constitutional question. We all have been forced to re-evaluate certain operational concepts based on the march of technology. When is the last time you literally “dialed” a phone? When is the last time you put ice in the “icebox?” As technology advances, the meaning of previously enumerated nouns changes character.
It probably takes a constitutional scholar to weigh the differences between what the founding fathers knew as an “arm”, meaning firearm, and the current manifestation of that as an 18-shot semi-automatic pistol so easily operated that a child could do it. And they do.
In the shorthand of a political campaign response I think that the Supreme Court chickened out by not defining the ancillary responsibilities that major easily-applied death machine ownership entails. They made a minor pass at it by noting that a well-organized militia enrollment was not a prerequisite to the basic self-protection that gun ownership provided, but they said zip about the responsibility and criminal consequences a gun owner might be liable for if they didn’t protect that gun with their life.
On that basis, not the basis of sheer ownership, I have big questions of my own about the practical consequences of unbridled semi-automatic handgun distribution in high-density urban settings (another noun that would seem foreign to the founding fathers).
A little more guidance from the Court would have been a blessing.
#84: McCain’s suffering is terrible and regrettable, no question there. But it wasn’t a President Building Experience, per se.
Just to be clear, what Clark said negative to McCain wasn’t well considered or even smart. Technically, neither of these candidates has Commander In Chief experience. Which is the usual case.
What I don’t want is another Republican pushing me around with the F word; Fear. And so far, the only candidate that is leading, instead of pushing, seems to be Obama.
#22: Dvorak’s wondering at the image that leads this story is major irony.
“My question. Why is Clark wearing camouflage at the podium giving a speech? Is he expecting people to be shooting at him? Or is this all the clothes he has?”
His personal Blog is so delegated that it mystified him where the image came from. As if Clark was wearing it during his irrelevant babble. He was in a business suit. John should have asked Eideard first.
See, John, the lead image and headline DO count as part of the communication. It even got you this time!!