ABOUT THIS ENTRY
This page contains a single entry by Richard Sammon
published on
July 1, 2008 11:25 AM.
When Flipping and Flopping Works was the previous entry.
Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.
Wes Clark is Half Right on McCain Jab
Wesley Clark, the retired general, former NATO commander and now an Obama backer, is catching all kinds of grief for questioning John McCain's claim to having broad national security and foreign affairs experience. His comments on "Face the Nation" about McCain's war experience caused a firestorm and probably cost him any remaining veep consideration. But was Clark all wrong?
The particular comment, in response to a question by Bob Schieffer about McCain on military and national security experience, was "I don't think getting into a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president."
That's true. Clark is right that McCain being a POW in Vietnam and earlier commanding a Navy air squadron during peace time does not somehow magically make him a tested leader in national security and foreign affairs. Sure, McCain's supporters point to his experiences and heroic behavior as proof of his qualifications to be a commander in chief. But while giving up so much for your country and even being a hero are noble, they are not the same things as leadership experience or evidence of sound judgment.
Clark, clearly seeking to downplay Obama's lack of national security experience and make the political test about diplomatic judgment, also said of McCain: "He hasn't been there and ordered the bombs to fall."
OK. Maybe that comment was a little over the top. It's like saying you can't be qualified to be president if you have not already been president. McCain may not have been calling the shots in the war room during a international crisis, but he does have volumes of foreign affairs knowledge.
There's a case to be made, in fact, that his Vietnam experience provided McCain a substantial and serious world view that he carries through to today. The roots of his foreign policy and military posture are seen extensively in his 1974 thesis at the National War College, detailed last month in a New York Times article.
Clark is right that being a prisoner of war is not the proving ground for becoming president. Neither is it of no consequence, though. McCain's behavior during those long years are a character trait that voters can and should weigh. But if they want to understand more about the foreign policy course McCain would set out and what the likely effects of that course might be, voters should look at McCain's record and words -- not his war record.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Wes Clark is Half Right on McCain Jab.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blog.kiplinger.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/198
4 Comments
Leave a comment
RECENT BLOG ENTRIES
MORE POLITICAL COVERAGE FROM KIPLINGER
OUR FAVORITE SITES
- The Hotline Blog
- Political Wire
- PollingReport.com
- New York Times Election Guide 2008
- P2008 (George Washington University)
- Pollster.Com
- The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press
- FactCheck.Org
- US Politics Guide.com
- First Read (MSNBC)
- The Note (ABC News)
- Politico.com
- National Review: The Corner
- The Huffington Post
- Peggy Noonan (Wall Street Journal)
- Mark Shields
- David Brooks (New York Times)
Clark would have been better off using President Clinton as an example of not needing military experience for the duties of president...afterall, didn't Clinton avoid the draft in Canada and still become a decent president? There is a lot of negativity from the press regarding McCain, but his military experience should not be one of them. If you can't see POW's experiencing leadership while mangled up in a cell..fine, but at least give McCain the credit for mental toughness. You would think as a veteran himself Clark would give some credit to McCain.
Wes Clark was and always will be a Clinton stooge. I remember serving on active duty in the Army under Clark's watch. He helped to preside over one of the largest personnel cuts in modern U.S. military history during the 90's. Thousands of servicemen voted with their feet because of deteriorating living conditions in housing, cuts to morale and welfare programs, and a lack of modernization to military equipment and weaponry. He kept mum over these issues, and did nothing to prevent the outflow. If there is anyone in the political arena right now who should be questioned about their military credentials, it should be Clark, not McCain.
Clark got himself into some hot water over this one. Frank Keating, the former governor of Oklahoma, fired back with his defense of Mccain today. Check it out: http://www.therelevantelephant.com/blog/entry/keating_shoots_down_general_clarks_comments_on_mccain
I'm glad someone has stood up for Clark beside himself. I'm no Clark fan but right is right and he was right to A) respond to the question he was asked B) his point stands up well - what are McCain's qualifications? McCain has strengths and weaknesses and let's debate those, not if Clark was right or wrong in raising it or what Clark did or did not do in his military career.