Email This to a Friend
Clark’s Smear of McCain Misses the Target
It's not about combat, Wesley — it's about character.
There are two walls of separation that the United States holds dear. The first is that between church and state, and the second is that between civilian control of the military and the military execution of war policy, which carries with it the Clausewitzian understanding that war is simply the continuation of politics by other means. A corollary of this guiding principle is that competence or genius as a solider do not predetermine those same qualities as a commander-in-chief.
Despite the fact that our own history abounds with presidents who were once war heroes, there are plenty of pertinent examples that vindicate the saneness of this view. The Civil War might not have been won by the Union had Lincoln not removed the hapless and megalomaniacal general-in-chief George McClellan, who at one point made the boast to his wife, which no general should ever be allowed to make, that all that was stopping him from becoming a dictator was his own “self-denial.”
As scandalous as Truman’s firing of Douglas MacArthur was at the close of the Korean War, few historians would now argue that the cease-fire that MacArthur stubbornly and unconstitutionally refused to allow prevented the disastrous spread of fighting into China.
And of course, more recently, George W. Bush’s replacement of Gen. George Casey with Gen. David Petraeus is widely credited with the tremendous reduction of violence and chaos in Iraq, a reduction that has surprised many members of the military establishment who would surely not have made the same staffing decision.
So Wesley Clark’s comments two weeks ago that John McCain’s experiences as a Navy fighter pilot and POW were not recommendations for his presidency should not have been, on the surface, controversial. Clark was speaking on Face the Nation in his capacity as an Obama campaigner, and however politically motivated or sneeringly phrased his remarks were, his very presence on that program was ample proof of his own proposition. Didn’t Clark himself try in 2004 to pass off his tenure as Supreme Allied Commander of NATO as the only real measure of his fitness for high office? And didn’t he discover the hard way that epaulets don’t translate so effortlessly into votes? Indeed, as we saw that same year with John Kerry, a presidential candidate who bolsters his candidacy with his past military credentials can and should be expected to have those credentials scrutinized or dismissed as insufficient for civilian leadership.
I don’t want to be accused of mischaracterizing the tenor or meaning of what Clark said about McCain on Face the Nation, so here is the relevant extract:
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 publicly?” He hasn’t made those calls, Bob.
Clark was then told by host Bob Scheiffer, “[Sen.] Barack Obama has not had any of those experiences either, nor has he ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down,” to which he gave the now infamous reply: “Well, I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president… But Barack is not — he is not running on the fact that he has made these national security pronouncements. He’s running on his other strengths. He’s running on the strengths of character, on the strengths of his communication skills, on the strengths of his judgment.”
Page 1 of 2 Next ->
Michael Weiss is a senior editor of Tablet Magazine and a culture blogger for The New Criterion. He also writes occasionally for Slate, The Weekly Standard, City Journal, The New York Daily News and Standpoint.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
31 Comments
1. John Samford:Much ado about nothing. This all part of a media campaign to distract attention from the fact that Ohhhhh……BAAMA is clueless. He never offers details for his plans because he has none. If pressed he changes the subject. The Left really doesn’t want the fact that this suit is empty becoming common knowledge, so their media slaves throw articles such as this one out as a sort of smokescreen to hide the real issue.
Jul 13, 2008 - 5:13 am 2. Fidel, MD:Which is Obama is legally a white man claiming to be black and that his policies are the tired ol’ Marxist ones that have failed so often in the past. Ohhhh,,,,,BAMA has pretty much been lying from the get go.
Oh, come now. What does weaseley know of honor?
Jul 13, 2008 - 6:18 am 3. Ted Lawrence:Clarke’s comment was that although McCain’s character was unimpeachable (He said specifically that McCain was a hero to him back then for what he had gone through) his actual time in the military didn’t include the history of decisionmaking that a lot of Republican activists were trying to make it out as. The comment was similar to William F. Buckley’s famous comment that although John F. Kennedy behaved admirably in the PT109 incident, bravery was not as important as judgement and in the end all he did was get his boat sunk by the enemy. A dumb comment, just as Clarke’s was, but not someting for anyone to get too excited about.
Jul 13, 2008 - 7:27 am 4. TomJW:Did Clark think that his being booted out of NATO command disqualified him from evaluating anyone for executive capabilities?
Jul 13, 2008 - 7:57 am 5. mockmook:““being uncooperative and a general pain the ass” — might do more harm than good in an occupant of the White House.”
And, it might do more good than harm, especially when dealing with Congress and the beauracracy.
Jul 13, 2008 - 10:58 am 6. Fred:Military experience is much better than no experience. McCain knows more about the world outside the US than Obama.
Obama knows more about the situation of the poor.
Jul 13, 2008 - 11:14 am 7. CharlesO:> “being uncooperative and a general pain the ass” — might
> do more harm than good in an occupant of the White House.
Yes, I can see why you have a site called “snarksmith” with that last note. You do realize that he was being uncooperative with the enemy, right? Is that such a bad thing for the commander in chief?
Jul 13, 2008 - 11:17 am 8. ronnor:A good assessment of who and what you are can be make from those you associate with and what you’ve done in the past. When I look at past friends and acquaintances and the experience of Barack and John; have to go with John.
Jul 13, 2008 - 11:41 am 9. Barry Dauphin:Well, Bill Clinton had zero military experience nor had he ever ordered bombing prior to becoming president (though he probably got bombed on doobies when in college). Yet. Clinton fired Clark’s sorry a##. McCain has much experience having been on Armed Services Committee, and he has much credibility with the military. He is more than comfortable with the military, and military folks are more than comfortable with him. No President makes decisions in a vacuum. It takes political skills to be President. Clark has almost none.
Clark is forgetting who he is trying to help. Clark’s comment is an implicit comparison of himself with McCain, which is why Schiefer made the comment he made. Clark isn’t running, and he forgets that at times. He also forgets why he isn’t running and why he would never be president. Narcissistic types like Clark always forget that kind of stuff.
Jul 13, 2008 - 11:46 am 10. Elroy Jetson:I disagree, Fred. Obama has no idea about the situation of the poor. When he went to church in Chicago, he saw votes, not humans engaged in a day-to-day struggle to survive and so desperate they were willing to embrace a bizarre pastor spewing black liberation theology.
Jul 13, 2008 - 11:48 am 11. Hale Adams:The poor are simply a means to an end and will join the swelling numbers under the Obama bus when it is their turn.
Michael,
“[B]eing uncooperative and a general pain the ass” might well be *good* things to have in a President. Can you think of a better way of dealing with our enemies in the world? And make no mistake, we *do* have enemies.
Obama, on the other hand, wants to play kissie-face with those enemies.
Now, if only McCain were less authoritarian, this libertarian wouldn’t have to hold his nose when pulling the lever for him this November.
Having to vote for the least of several evils (including the Libertarian Party) truly does suck…..
Jul 13, 2008 - 12:29 pm 12. william Elbel:Re: “spread of fighting into China?”
The UN Never crossed the Yalu into China but China did cross the Yalu into Korea!
Jul 13, 2008 - 12:40 pm 13. PersonFromPorlock:“…the Clausewitzian understanding that war is simply the continuation of politics by other means.”
A common misquote: it’s really “the continuation of policy.” Not so bad as the notion that it’s the continuation of diplomacy, though, which crops up all too often.
Jul 13, 2008 - 12:41 pm 14. Fidel, MD:LOL, Fred;
What exactly does Obama know about the poor? Has he ever BEEN poor? He was raised by white, Anglo-Saxon middle-Americans, attended ivy league schools and made LOTS of money after – mainly by taking advantage of poor people and their plight. Maybe thats what you’re referring to?
Jul 13, 2008 - 12:49 pm 15. Leroy Hurt:An important consideration for someone seeking an office in which he or she will send men and women into harm’s way is personal example. In that regard, the candidate needs to be able to answer the soldier’s question, “Where were you when it was your turn?”
Jul 13, 2008 - 1:13 pm 16. regmaxi:Obama does know more about the situation of the poor . And isn’t America in the poorhouse at the moment ???
Jul 13, 2008 - 1:32 pm 17. Bubba:And as far as anyone trashing McCains character , Rove did that well enough in 2000 .
You guys threw McC under the bus then , now his brand is as tortured as he was …
Suck it up and buck up mates .
America in the poorhouse? What damned rock are you living under?
Jul 13, 2008 - 1:48 pm 18. Derick Schilling:“As scandalous as Truman’s firing of Douglas MacArthur was at the close of the Korean War, few historians would now argue that the armistice that MacArthur stubbornly and unconstitutionally refused to allow …” This statement is not in accord with the chronology. Truman relieved MacArthur on April 11, 1951, the armistice negotiations began on July 10, 1951, and the armistice was signed on July 27, 1953.
Jul 13, 2008 - 1:58 pm 19. Michael Weiss:Charles O: “You do realize that he was being uncooperative with the enemy, right? Is that such a bad thing for the commander in chief?”
Yes, but the original quote from his memoir refers to his general tendency to be uncooperative and a pain in the ass. An honest self-assessment, as even McCain’s admirers — and I’m one — would have to concede. Of course these vices were turned into great virtues in Hanoi, but they can still be counted as vices in other circumstances, can’t they?
No snark was intended in my treatment of this passage, which is why I refer to McCain’s “superhuman bravery,” and why I argue that this attribute above all is what distinguishes his war career from any other — something Clark, in his attempt to separate the soldier from the politician, failed to appreciate.
Jul 13, 2008 - 2:32 pm 20. Allan Pratt:Do you suppose the McCain campaign will ever run an ad that says a president should not be judged by the color of his skin but by the content of his character?
Jul 13, 2008 - 3:08 pm 21. Eric:I’m not that fond of McCain the politician. His relentless searching for Sista Souljah moments has is natural allies wary at best, and his ego seems to play a larger part in policy decisions than any sort of ideology.
But I doubt there are many men who could do what he did in Hanoi. That requires a strength of character which is really very rare. I doubt I would have been able to refuse release from a place like that.
Jul 13, 2008 - 3:27 pm 22. regmaxi:Yo Bubba we’re in debt to China to the tune of almost a trillion … Go suck on a bud and swat some skitters .
Jul 13, 2008 - 3:28 pm 23. radical_moderate:“Obama, on the other hand, wants to play kissie-face with those enemies.”
==========
You mean like Bush played “kissie-face” with North Korea?
I am getting tired of all the partisan hue and cry over some of this stuff.
Democrats need to stop talking about McCain’s Vietnam experience and acting as if it were no big deal. Conservatives need to stop saying that economy is not that bad…it is for millions of Americans, and some Republicans living the high life like Phil Gramm need to pull their head outta of their arse long enough to realize it. McCain was right to kick Gramm to the curb.
The facts are these, McCain and Obama as not that different despite the MSM’s daily reminders of how different they are.
Both are politicians willing to compromise themselves and their beliefs to win; McCain has been just as guilty of it as Obama. McCain 2000 is a man I would have voted for, McCain 2008 is not.
I wish that we had a viable third party to vote for, but we don’t. I’ll be voting Obama in Nov, but with less enthusiasm than I had originally hoped.
The issues that I care about: the loss of our Freedom, much of it snatched by State and Local Governments, rarely gets play in the MSM, and other than the 2nd Amendment, the Candidates aren’t talking about this “death by a thousand cuts,” the chipping away at our Personal Liberty by legislative increment. From The taking of private Lands for the public “good,” & the Draconian Drug Laws that allow the Government to invade our privacy unfettered, to the bans on smoking, cell phone restrictions, etc., are hammering at our Liberty and most of the sheeple have no clue.
BTW, My new Idol is Mickey Edwards; any one interested in Modern Conservative ideology, and getting back to it’s roots, should read Edwards new book on the subject.
Jul 13, 2008 - 3:41 pm 24. Dan E:Clark was merely pointing out that serving in Vietnam does not make one qualified for the Presidency!
We already KNEW that!
Jul 13, 2008 - 5:23 pm 25. Don Meaker:In addition to not paying income tax for 5 years, during those 5 years, McCain practiced medicine without a license. Further, he broke the arm of his roommate, Bud Day.
Obama: The only guy he knows who has put a bomb on target is Bill Ayers.
Jul 13, 2008 - 7:56 pm 26. Harrison:There is no friggin’ “wall of separation between church and state!” It’s only an opinion of ex-Klansman and Supreme Court Justice Huge Black in 1947. Ya’d think conservatives would have this down pat by now.
Jul 13, 2008 - 8:23 pm 27. jerry:Attacks on Republican Presidents’ and candidates’ military records are a normal part of the Democratic Party’s playbook. Think back to 1992 when a few proto-moveon.org types called Bush 41 a war criminal because he may have strafed Japanese survivors in the water. Then in 1996 Democrats hinted that Bob Dole’s service in WWII was over-rated. Of course they were more forward in their attacks on Bush 43’s ANG service because they thought that flying an F-102 was like riding a bicycle. McCain is the next candidate and so they now attack him as unfit because of his heroic service. The Democrats are the anti-military party and they will continue to nominate candidates who not only haven’t had military service but hate the military and its members. They attack the military records of their Republican opponents to compensate for their own lack of service.
Jul 14, 2008 - 6:02 am 28. JOHN:It has allot to do with character so I have to ask. What would Obama have done as a P.O.W.? For that matter what would I have done or you? McCain has proven his strength of character and love of country, Obama has proven nothing. So I’ll add that to McCain’s resume along with his quality of leadership shown by not bowing to his party line or the polls and doing what he believes is best for this country. Isn’t that what we really want to have in a president?
Jul 14, 2008 - 7:10 am 29. kabud:Michael Weiss:
how honest are you?
McCain is one of those who made an effort to hide the truth about our POWs in soviet gulag
McCain is not even touching the most ipmortant issues
The both look like they play a game
The is a deadly game not just for themselves
but for all of us
Yes i know that James Woolsey is in his camp,
but why they dont trust the American People?
Jul 14, 2008 - 8:20 pm 30. Danny Vice:Wesley Clark trips all over himself every time he says anything, and does nothing more than make his liberal cohorts look like the power lusting, lying, manipulative flip floppers that they are.
Last go around, Clark crowed endlessly about Kerry’s service, and how horrible it was that anyone would doubt Kerry’s integrity. He held Kerry up as a hero and ABSOLUTELY advertised his service as a reason why Kerry was fit to be commander in chief.
Now he flip flops right on his face – as he usually does.
Conservatives flip flop from time to time, but they don’t throw any vet under the bus unless that vet is out there denigrating our troops – like Kerry did.
They are two peas in a pod.
Clark is a disgrace to the uniform and it’s a tragedy our soldiers and vets had to listen to him denigrate their service in such a way.
Danny Vice
Jul 17, 2008 - 11:45 pm 31. deguello:http://www.theweeklyvice.com
Wsley Clark is aliving,breathing incitement to fragging.
Jul 18, 2008 - 6:24 pm