Obama's campaign attacks McCain's military service.

Great Debates
1

Apparently Obama and his campaigners haven’t learned to keep their traps shut about McCain’s military service yet.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080629/pl_politico/11425

Questioning or attacking McCain’s military record is the worst possible thing the Obama campaign can do, short of a scandal being uncovered. We know McCain was an effective military leader, we sympathize with the sacrifices he had to make, and there is absolutely no question that the man is a ferocious patriot. The only thing attacks like this can possibly accomplish is to marginalize voters who are planning to vote for Obama, but still have great respect for McCain’s military record, like myself, most of my family, and most of my friends.

I honestly hope that Obama learns to knock it off about McCain’s military service. I’m afraid that if he doesn’t, he’ll just keep pushing a lot of voters away until they start wondering why in the world they should even show up to the polls.

2

Wesley Clark was acting as a “surrogate for Obama”? Sez who?

3

The quote would appear to be questioning McCain’s executive and management record in the military. McCain was a pilot, not an executive or manager. Looks like a valid question to me.

The quote does not appear to be questioning McCain’s courage or patriotism, which would be as egregious and filthy an attack as were the Swiftboaters in the last election. Nice spin to try to make it seem that way, though.

4

I missed the part that was an attack on McCain’s military record. Could you clarify that?

Wes Clark said two things relating to McCain’s military service:

  1. “I don’t think getting in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to become president.”

Clark’s right - McCain’s valor and endurance while a prisoner in Hanoi all those years ago doesn’t make him more fit to be President than he would otherwise be. But that doesn’t impugn McCain’s military service in the least.

  1. “That large squadron in the Navy that he commanded — that wasn’t a wartime squadron.”

Whether or not it was a wartime squadron is a factual question, and can be verified or contradicted. If Clark’s right, it’s simply true.

5

[QUOTE=Frank]
The quote would appear to be questioning McCain’s executive and management record in the military. McCain was a pilot, not an executive or manager. Looks like a valid question to me.
[/QUOTE]

In the Navy, pilots are managers. Flying is not their only job.

6

This isn’t even “news”. I posted the exact same quote (and then some) back on June 15th. I didn’t see anyone going overboard with nefarious allegations against the Obama campaign back then. In fact, it didn’t even raise an eyebrow, as not a single person even replied to it. It’s a legitimate argument to make against McCain’s “experience” to lead this country, especially coming from a General who knows what he’s talking about.

7

His leadership role did come as a formal official appointment, but rather in his role in the POW camp.

8

[QUOTE=Monty]
In the Navy, pilots are managers. Flying is not their only job.
[/QUOTE]
That’s got to be an interesting juxtaposition of roles. Who and what do pilots manage? How much time in their week is left over for managing, after they’ve done their flying, and handled whatever pre- and post-flight stuff a Navy pilot surely has to do?

9

In reading the relevant portions of the article, I notice there’s about two sentences of journalism scraped over about three paragraphs of text.

It says General Clark was “acting as a surrogate.” I missed the part in the interview when he said he was a representative of the Obama Campaign. He supports Obama, but the article didn’t even mention how Clark was associated with Obama except as a thinly veiled reference that Obama is Clark’s shadowy puppet master, or whatever. Acting as surrogate indeed.

It said that in this function he “took a swipe at his military service.” But I don’t really see either of those two things proved. Somebody with an agenda wrote that article, because I saw a similar interview, and neither of these two points appear to be true, at least to me. General Clark isn’t “taking a swipe” at Senator McCain’s service, but rather putting the McCain Campaign’s claims about the executive experience derived from that service into their proper context.

10

Hmm. Well, the thing is, Wesley Clark himself is vulnerable to some charges himself. He was unquestionably removed from his command in Kosovo early, and while some have tried to spin this as a personnel matter, his boss at he time, Hugh Shelton, said it was for matters of integrity and character, not going into details.

Partisanship, some would charge, except that Shelton himself is a Democrat - he advised Edwards during his run, endorsed Hillary Clinton after that, and is being talked up for a Senate run in the future.

In any case, I’ve never liked Clark much - and criticism from him has little credibility with me. If that criticism came from Shelton, I’d listen closer - I never had an issue with him.

But I suspect that he won’t criticize McCain in quite this way. Doesn’t seem his style.

11

I don’t see it as an attack on his military service, per se, but if McCain is “untested”, what does that make Obama? And his comment that :“I don’t think getting in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to become president.” is definitely a cheap shot, since McCain has done a whole hell of a lot more in his life than that. Still, I expect things to heat up a lot more than this before November.

As for Clark being a “surrogate” for Obama, I would assume he was invited on Face the Nation to support Obama since he has endorsed him and is said to be on the list of possible VP candidates. “Surrogate” is probably too strong a word since it would lead one to believe that he is actually part of the campaign, which I don’t believe he is.

12

I’m sorry - why is being a squadron commander not executive experience? Why is it only executive experience if it’s in wartime? That part really confused me.

I think this is going to backfire, because if they’re calling McCain’s executive experience into question, that’s got to make Obama look even worse. I’ve asked about his executive experience before, and all anyone has been able to come up with is, “He’s running a great campaign! That’s executive experience.”

Except of course it’s not - that’s why you hire campaign managers. The candidate may or may not be involved in the day-to-day decision making of the campaign. But even if he is, don’t you think it’s a little weak to claim that Obama’s executive experience qualifying him for being president is that he’s doing a good job of running for president?

If Obama’s team is as smart as they seem, they’ll back off questioning McCain’s resume, because McCain’s resume makes Obama look like a schoolboy. Their best shot is to tie McCain to Bush, claim that he’s old, out of touch, part of the past, set in his ways, and will represent four more years like the last eight.

Obama should be turning his youth and inexperience into an asset, instead of trying to claim that he measures up to McCain. He’s the guy who represents change, new ways of thinking, freshness, vitality, and a 21st century outlook. Those are his tickets to the White House. If he goes toe-to-toe with McCain on resume, he’s going to lose.

McCain’s surrogate can retort: “So Obama doesn’t think running a Navy squadron is executive experience? I guess that would be compared to what Obama was doing at the time… Oh yeah, he was snorting coke and partying with the other kids in school back then.”

13

[QUOTE=Mosier]

Questioning or attacking McCain’s military record is the worst possible thing the Obama campaign can do, short of a scandal being uncovered.
[/QUOTE]

I’m glad at least someone questioned whether his service qualifies him to be President.

McCain is playing a sharp political game by trying to demonize people questioning his war record. I say it is open to debate.

14

It appears to be a bit slicker than even that, first he has to suggest that someone is, in fact, questioning his record, and then bemoan it.

15

[QUOTE=John Mace]
I don’t see it as an attack on his military service, per se, but if McCain is “untested”, what does that make Obama?
[/QUOTE]
Someone who’s not claiming that he has experience in these matters and is otherwise tested. The point here is that Obama and McCain are equally ‘untested’, but only one is claiming he isn’t.

16

[QUOTE=Lakai]
I’m glad at least someone questioned whether his service qualifies him to be President.

McCain is playing a sharp political game by trying to demonize people questioning his war record. I say it is open to debate.
[/QUOTE]

Do you have a cite to McCain saying that his military service alone qualified him for being president? I don’t recall anyone saying that. His military service is part of a long and distinguished resume which includes going to the National War College, the Naval Academy, being in the Navy for 23 years, CO of a Navy Fighter squadron, four years in the house, 21 years in the Senate, being the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, being the ranking member of the Transportation and Science Committee. Plus being member of a bunch of other committees. Author of five books.

What else? Oh yeah… Recipient of the Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.

Here’s Barack Obama’s resume:

Education: JD from Harvard
Professional Experience: Attorney, Lecturer
Political Experience: State Senator in Illinois from 1996 to 2004, U.S. Senator from 2005-2008. Author of three books.

Seriously, every time Obama’s campaign turns this into a debate about resumes, Obama is going to lose. There’s absolutely nothing about his resume that says, “this guy is qualified to be president”. Has hasn’t even fulfilled a full term as a U.S. Senator, and he’s spent most of that term campaigning for President. He has no military service at all - not even National Guard or Reserves.

In fact, that’s all McCain’s team has to say in response to Clark - “Wesley Clark thinks being a C/O of a Navy squadron doesn’t count as executive experience. May we remind him that Barack Obama has no military service at all? Do we really want a commander in Chief who has absolutely no experience with the military life and traditions? And no other executive experience, either. He is an academic who practiced law for a few years, lectured in college a bit, then went into government. We’ll be happy to compare Senator McCain’s resume against Senator Obama’s any time. Here, we have handouts…”

17

This is smelling less and less like teen spirit and more like Norwegian Brown, as in rat. There is nothing the McCain people would love more than for Obama to sneer upon McCain’s military service (assuming they can’t unearth pictures of him and Jane Fonda spitting on troops…) and nothing less likely for Obama to be dumb enough to do. So they got this stuff all ready, waiting for the first hint of dis…and they let fly at the merest hint, since that was as close as they were ever gonna get.

So Clark is a “surrogate”, designated so by whoever wrote this. And then its just a short hop to “Obama says…” and then from there to “Obama hates our heroes, thats why he never wears a flag pin when saying the Pledge while boinking his Baby Mamma…”

And the shit aint even starting yet…

18

You mean an O-10 explained the responsibilities of an 0-6? Why, the nerve.

19

[QUOTE=elucidator]
This is smelling less and less like teen spirit and more like Norwegian Brown, as in rat. There is nothing the McCain people would love more than for Obama to sneer upon McCain’s military service (assuming they can’t unearth pictures of him and Jane Fonda spitting on troops…) and nothing less likely for Obama to be dumb enough to do. So they got this stuff all ready, waiting for the first hint of dis…and they let fly at the merest hint, since that was as close as they were ever gonna get.

So Clark is a “surrogate”, designated so by whoever wrote this. And then its just a short hop to “Obama says…” and then from there to “Obama hates our heroes, thats why he never wears a flag pin when saying the Pledge while boinking his Baby Mamma…”

And the shit aint even starting yet…
[/QUOTE]

You think Wesley Clark is a rat? Like maybe an angry Clinton supporter who’s torpedoing Obama? I think that’s unlikely, but I guess it’s possible.

More likely is that the Obama team figured Wesley Clark would be their point man to try to knock down McCain’s military record a bit. Obama can’t do it, becauuse McCain can just pummel him with, “Oh, I’m sorry. Where did YOU serve again?” But Clark is a bona fide General, which gives him the gravitas to go after McCain on military matters. They know they can’t get him on courage or dedication, so they’re going to attack him on competence. Clark will ask why he only made it to Captain after 21 years. They’ll question his role in the Forrestal fire. They’ll claim that he seems to have a knack for losing planes and getting people killed. That sort of thing.

I just think if they try that, they’ll be making a tactical error. McCain long ago got the respect of the American people for his military service. Obama’s team has to try to deflect that whole issue entirely and claim that this election is not about resumes but about vision and change. That’s Obama’s strength. He needs to get elected in spite of his resume, not because of it.

20

[QUOTE=Sam Stone]

Seriously, every time Obama’s campaign turns this into a debate about resumes, Obama is going to lose. There’s absolutely nothing about his resume that says, “this guy is qualified to be president”. Has hasn’t even fulfilled a full term as a U.S. Senator, and he’s spent most of that term campaigning for President. He has no military service at all - not even National Guard or Reserves.
[/QUOTE]

Maybe if they poke enough it will create enough doubt about McCain’s resume that this campaign might actually be about who has better ideas for the country.

I doubt it will work out that way, but there is no harm in trying.

That being said, it appears that Obama doesn’t have much to do with this attack.