Wesley Clark and the Unbearable Banality of Campaign ‘08
Wesley Clark's awkward response to a question about John McCain's military experience began a new cycle of silly campaign arguments that churn up a lot of froth but not much substance.
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
It began the way these things usually begin — a statement or observation, inartfully made or, more likely, deliberately misinterpreted and twisted by one side or another. The innocuous words or phrase are fashioned into a weapon that for 48 or 72 hours on the internet becomes a spittle flecked, all out war of charge and countercharge until both sides exhaust themselves and go looking for another fake controversy.
One helluva way to elect a president.
This latest dust-up is perhaps even more inane than usual. In the Red Corner, John McCain — Republican Presidential Nominee, war hero, former prisoner of war, and a man that most non-partisan experts would grant a wealth of experience in defense and international affairs.
In the Blue Corner, Wesley Clark — former NATO Commander, war hero, former candidate for President, and currently auditioning for a role in the Barack Obama production of Campaign ‘08: The Musical. Clark would love to latch on officially to the Obama campaign and move up to the head of the line for a plum posting in any Obama Administration. Hence, CBS newsman Bob Schieffer welcomed Clark to the network’s Sunday morning gabfest Face the Nation.
Clark understood his role perfectly. As a former general, his credentials (so he thought) were unassailable. Clark was to venture into territory that few if any other Obama surrogate - and certainly not the practitioner of the “new politics” himself - could ever go; the careful but deliberate trashing of McCain’s national security credentials.
The rationale of the Obama campaign is simple. If the race turns on the economy and gas prices, he wins. If it turns on national security and terrorism, he might lose. With McCain’s huge perceived advantage in national security, cutting the Arizona senator down to size in that regard becomes paramount.
And who better to get the ball rolling in that direction than Wesley Clark, respected former SACEUR (Supreme Allied Commander — Europe) and the man in charge of the Kosovo bombing campaign. Clark began his deconstruction of McCain by praising him for his service and complimenting him on a lifetime of work in the national security arena.
But then the caveats started to pour forth:
In the interview, Clark said McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, was “untested and untried.”
When Schieffer asked to explain the comment, Clark said he was referring to McCain’s experience, or lack thereof, in setting national security policies and understanding the risk involved in such matters.
“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 who campaigned for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2004.
“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.
So far so good. Clark has carefully carved out a line of attack that acknowledges McCain’s heroism while blasting the idea that just because he was in the military, he is more qualified than Obama to be Commander in Chief. Whether the attack would resonate is another matter. But at least Clark hadn’t crossed the invisible line and tried to smear McCain by denigrating his service.
Until Schieffer asked the painfully obvious follow-up question:
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.
This is mostly true - if one were to simply take Clark’s words at face value and apply them to a reasonable standard of logic. Tragically for Clark, logic is the last thing anyone in this campaign is interested in practicing.
Clark’s valid point about military service not necessarily denoting experience that would be valuable for a president was lost in his incredibly clumsy attempt to downplay the one thing about McCain that can never be attacked; his 5 years of torture in a North Vietnamese prison camp. “The POW Card” is as valuable to McCain as the “Race Card” is to Obama. And the McCain campaign played this one to the hilt.
Rick Moran is PJM Chicago editor; his own blog is Right Wing Nut House.
| Comment |  Digg This |
 del.icio.us |
 |
 |
 PJM Home |
43 Comments
David Thomson:“If the race turns on the economy and gas prices, he wins.”
This may indeed occur—but it wouldn’t be rational. The economic policies of Barack “Barry” Obama would push the nation into a deep recession. The man is truly an economic illiterate. Also, the Democrats are mostly to blame for high gas prices. The radical environmentalists who dominate their party have prevented the building of new nuclear energy plants and the drilling for more oil within our own borders. It is very fair and logical to describe the Democratic Party “elites” as enemies of the poor. Unfortunately, the scam continues. Few people have any idea what I’m talking about.
Jul 2, 2008 - 1:53 am Ken Besig:I have watched Wesley Clark make faux pas after faux pas, stupid comment after stupid comment, and non sequitur after non sequitur, both during this campaign and the last one, and I have to ask, How did this clown ever achieve the rank of general?
Jul 2, 2008 - 3:43 am Jabba the Tutt:General Clark was fired by Bill Clinton, but served the purposes of the anti-American Democrats in 2004 by having a General criticize the war. (The Copperheads were trying to re-create ‘64, uh 1864 with their Gen. McClellan for the new age.) They ended up with Lt. Kerry, the war and anti-war hero.
But Clark’s point is ludicrous. Ordering bombings is the requirement to be Commander in Chief? Listening to the Diplomats come and ask “what about your reputation?” is a requirement for Commander in Chief? This doesn’t help Clark’s candidate, because it just reminds everyone, what a callow, shallow nimrod, Obama is.
Neither candidate has significant executive experience (We’re Screwed ‘08 point #9). McCain at least has his family history, father and grandfather Admirals, his own military experience, his resistance to his captors, and his long service on the Armed Services Committee.
Barry has community organizing.
Gen. Clark is a profoundly unappealing person. He is so convinced of his own superiority, that he denigrates everyone, who doesn’t agree with him. It only took 2 weeks after announcing his candidacy for ‘04 and he was sinking. This time, it took only one appearance on tv and he’s looking for a new job.
And it does raise the question of how this guy became a General and that usually leads back to Clinton and Clark’s Arkansas roots. But even Clinton fired this guy.
Jul 2, 2008 - 5:01 am Radtop:You can try to spin it all you want, but any attack on John McCain’s military experience only emphasizes Obama’s lack of same. As to Presidential experience, whom should we should we choose? Someone who has been tested in the crucible of life or some pampered elitist who has had everything handed to him? Who can lead us and stand up for America? A true patriot, like McCain, or a “blame America first” Marxist,like Obama?
Jul 2, 2008 - 5:22 am asdfs:MOran defending Clark? What a jack ass, how does his service NOT make him a better choice than Osama?
Jul 2, 2008 - 6:31 am JOHN:Can anyone say “SWIFT BOAT”? Just wait till the witness comes out saying McCain was really a VC spy. I love how Nobama has someone come out to unfairly rip an opponent then denounces the attacker’s words (kind of). I cannot believe the idiot democrats actually elected this guy. I’m not a big McCain fan, even though I have no choice but to vote for him, but his service to this country is well documented. These jerks like Clark will have no shame in smearing him. They’ve already started with the old story about the USS Forrestal. You watch, they will say McCain was responsible and even though we know what happened some of the younger people don’t. After the accusations come out Nobama will say his people “shouldn’t say these things so unartfully”.
Jul 2, 2008 - 6:38 am asdfs:Moran defending a moron, how poetic… and pathetic.
Jul 2, 2008 - 6:51 am Frank Logan:“Well, I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president,” Clark said.
Neither did riding in PT-109 and getting blown into the water, but it didn’t seem to bother the Dims then.
Jul 2, 2008 - 7:00 am MarkD:Hmm, on it face, this is a fair argument for Clark’s comment being taken out of context.
First, nothing General Clark has to say interests me. His lack of judgement is well chronicled and resulted in his dismissal. I can’t think of any reason to value his opinion.
I’d be sympathetic toward Mr Moran if the other side weren’t doing the same thing. Does “in Iraq for 100 years” ring a bell, your partisanship? Complaining about the same tactics your side employs is futile.
I’m going to judge the candidates on their accomplishments and judgement and character. I’m not a fan of Senator John McCain, but he’s got my vote.
Jul 2, 2008 - 7:04 am Don:Clark is a self serving political, he thought his passive-aggressive insult would slip by and score points for him with his new sponsor. Instead his words are described as “inartful” . . .?
Mr. Obama seems true to form, when he must react to controversy he reacts in an ambiguous manner (not disavowing the message, nor the messenger, just the verbiage). Unfortunately we live in a world where the penalties for weakness and passivity is the death of thousands. OB has shown a consistent unwillingness to confront and diffuse controversies when they are “political” in nature, whether it’s Reverend Wright (X2) or any other situation he avoids making definitive statements (substituting his of-times used soporific . . . “Change”). What happens when a “leader” accustomed to reacting (late) in weak or ambiguous ways faces a real world situation where weakness kills? He is damned by his words and his (in)actions, and his people pay in blood.
His followers are wondering now about his breathtaking changes in direction(s) over the past two weeks, it’s easy when you stand for nothing . . . His strength for the far left is they perceive his weakness (hence his “malliability”). Perhaps that (seemingly) habitual weakness is becoming evident to all?
Jul 2, 2008 - 7:16 am rjschwarz:If General Clark appears again the McCain camp should pay to bring General Sir Michael Jackson over from Britain to talk on the talk show circuit. Let those who want the US to be loved around the world and peace for all hear from a British General how Clark nearly started WW3 and that is why Clark was removed from command. That would put an end to Clark intervening in the campaign for good.
Flying a plane, or being shot down, or even being a POW might not be job skills that help the Presidency anymore than getting your PT boat run over by a slower, less maneuverable Japanese destroyer. The point is they served. I give Al Gore credit for serving and being in Vietnam as an Army Journalist. He served and put his own neck on the line for the nation.
Anyway who would expect forty year old job skills to be relevant anyway. Character is important but the job skills, his stint in the Senate is far more important on that front.
Jul 2, 2008 - 7:17 am Pete:Wesley Clark, like Barrack Hussein Obama, is a slick opportunist willing to say or do most anything to win high office and influence. Those familiar with the military or its history know that you do not ascend to flag rank without knowing which way the political winds are blowing; there are exceptions but these mostly prove the rule. Perhaps that’s why the late David Hackworth, one of America’s most decorated combat soldiers, was moved to call Clark a “perfumed prince;” a corrupt favor-seeker and bureaucrat in the halls of power.
Obama himself has no military or foreign policy experience, so he gets an attack dog to go after McCain instead. Does he really think voters are that gullible? Apparently so. Clark apparently doesn’t realize he is being used, or does not care - as long as President Obama remembers their quid pro quo if/when he gets elected.
Incidentally, military service - while valuable - is not a pre-requisite for serving as President, nor should it be. In this case, McCain’s service record indicates less about his executive skills than his character, which is far stronger, not to mention less corruptable, than either Obama or Clark’s will ever be.
Jul 2, 2008 - 7:21 am Fidel, MD:Good thing weasely isn’t running - his experience ordering the bombing of the Chinese embassy, the attack on civilians, etc would not be good for international relations.
Jul 2, 2008 - 7:30 am gordo:I bet that many of Obama’s supporters actually have a disdain for the military and military service, maybe Obama does too deep down. What McCain’s military experience shows us is that he is a man of character. When things were really tough he came through even to the extent of refusing to jump the line to get released. Character counts in the White House maybe more than any other personal characteristic. The Obama generation has never had a war touch them, like WWII, Korea, and Viet Nam. They’ve had it easy because they did not need to sacrifice and therefore they really don’t know the value of people like McCain and all the others who fought bravely. My old man who was in combat in the south pacific for over two years would be shaking his head at Obama’s candidacy and the views of his true believers.
Jul 2, 2008 - 7:35 am Increase Mather:Yeah….this is the most insipid campaign in the history of American politics….blame the media.
The big nets CNN, NPR, and PBS are openly campaigning for Barry…Fox doesn’t have their heart into this one…..McCain is a liberal.
Time to take our medicine……four years of Barry out to restore conservative principle to the GOP.
We took Carter, we can take this guy too. But there will be a lot of damage.
Jul 2, 2008 - 8:24 am Lynn:To me he is just another in of a parade of retired military personnal the media marched in front of us to try and weaken our resolve in the War on Terror and War in Iraq.
Jul 2, 2008 - 8:30 am dirigible:“what a callow, shallow nimrod, Obama is.”
Huh? a “nimrod” is a hunter.
Jul 2, 2008 - 8:38 am Dave II:“But the attempt by both sides to score political points off of statements by one surrogate or another who “inartfully” make a point serves no purpose other than to churn up a lot of sound and fury that signifies nothing.”
Rick, don’t go concluding an article about an Obama supporter “dust-up”, and even including an Obama nutroot supporter’s diatribe, with a statement about “BOTH SIDES” who “inartfully make a point”…unless you can give an example of McCain supporters who have done the same and then MCCAIN dissing the WAY the message was given, but not the message! It really is NOT the same on BOTH sides!
Obama will parse his words and attempt to explain away a “misunderstanding” about his supporter’s stance….while McCain will simply say “STOP IT!”, as he did with the Tennessee GOP ad.
The differences in the two responses could not be more stark! McCain takes RESPONSIBILITY while Obama equivocates, explains away, “distances” himself, and
then “disowns” them and throws them under the bus!
Simply put, McCain is PRESIDENTIAL in his response and actions…Obama is a south-side Chicago political professional hack in his responses!
The country needs the former in it’s leader, not the latter…
Jul 2, 2008 - 8:51 am Peggy McGilligan:The term: “loose cannon” refers to an uncontrolled or unpredictable person who is likely to cause unintentional [or intentional] damage. The term derives from an actual unsecured cannon aboard ship. Whether in battle or in heavy seas, such a cannon’s gun carriage could careen about deck, wreaking havoc at close quarters, as recently evidenced by proverbial four-star cannon Wesley “Where’s My Socks” Clark: http://theseedsof9-11.com
Jul 2, 2008 - 9:11 am Mabel:It’s obvious the author is just trying to downplay the significance of the Clark “faux paux” (a very well planned one I might ad). By playing good cop/bad cop, the Obama campaig is attacking McCain’s strongest credentials while pretending not to do so. The only point I agree with Moran is that McCain’s “military card” is similar to Obama’s “race card” with one gigantic difference. Obama’s color is no merit. He was born that way and it will work in his favor with liberals and against him with racists (the few still around). McCain chose to serve and his conduct in combat, while a POW and after his rescue shows the magnificent character and his judgment in extreme circumstances. No comparison with Obama. But in the new atmosphere of “change” we need to see the world upside down to make McCain’s credentials a weakness…too bad the American people seem to be buying this bs….
Jul 2, 2008 - 9:15 am Rachel Peepers:Let’s face it, B.O. put the general up to this.
Imagine, to win, B.O. would stoop to denigrate a real American hero.
In my opinion,
Jul 2, 2008 - 9:31 am Believer:B.O. STINKS.
This has just exposed Obama - once again - to be anything but the ‘different kind of politician’ he touts himself to be. Does anyone believe that anymore?
There were too many others in the Obama camp taking similar swipes at McCain over the past week for it not to be an orchestrated attack. I think this one might backfire. These games have become transparent and more than a little tedious. And Clark so overplayed his hand, one might wonder if he’s still on Hillary’s payroll.
As for Obama’s most sincere words following this attack: “We must always express our profound gratitude for the service of our men and women in uniform” — he could go a long way to proving he’s a different kind of politician:
He could tell us to support our troops and vote McCain. Period. Full stop.
Jul 2, 2008 - 9:37 am CaptJack:Wesley “Weasel” Clark is vile and disgusting. Any affiliation with him should be cause for alarm.
Jul 2, 2008 - 10:13 am Neo:Let’s get real here. They never really talk about the “issues” during the campaigns or the debates.
I still have a ringing endorsement of the Clinton health care plan by the American College of Surgeons bouncing around in my brain from 1992. If the plan was so good, why did they spend millions of dollars and hundreds, if not thousands, of man-days putting together the “rough draft” of the health care plan after taking office. Just what where those surgeons looking at ? Maybe they should increase their distance from the anesthesiologist.
The same is true this year. Just two months ago, a union backing Obama ran a commercial in Pennsylvania touting that Obama was going to bring “relief at the gas pump.” If you look at the Obama web site, his “energy” plan has no plan to address gasoline .. merely conservation and alternative energy. Just what we these union folks smoking ? Maybe they should keep their distant from the fumes of the gas pumps in their commercial.
It’s all BS.
Jul 2, 2008 - 10:42 am MikeO:I just heard General Wesley Clark talk about John Kennedy, and Clark said,
“Well, I don’t think riding in a little boat and getting sunk is a qualification to be president.”
Jul 2, 2008 - 12:38 pm MartyMc:Clark’s point is valid? Nice try.
Jul 2, 2008 - 12:50 pm wGraves:If McCain’s military and POW experience in no way qualifies him to be Commander in Chief, are you going to tell me the Obama’s community organizing in Chicago and Harvard Law Review editorship does? What a joke.
I’m sure you were no doubt fauning over John Kerry’s proud military experience 4 years ago, not mentioning his fake memory of being in Cambodia, using minor flak injuries and Purple Heart qualifications, and slandering his fellow soldiers in Congress.
The Democrats always go to their few members who once served honorably, whenever they need something done dishonorably. They think that will cover them. Too bad they have to resort to clowns like Haditha-hyping Murtha and Foot-in-mouth Clark.
So Clark had the courage to sit in a fuhrerbunker under SHAPE headquarters and order some poor guy who happened to be riding in a airplane over Serbia to do the deed. LBJ used to take the bombing target list for Vietnam into the john with him like a racing form. Only targets he personally approved would get bombed. Then McCain got to do the job. Who was the coward? Who exhibited leadership here?
Jul 2, 2008 - 1:09 pm JOHN:I hope they keep on attacking McCain’s military record because it will show how the Dems really feel about the military. Also congratulations to Columbia on getting the hostages back. Hmmm, McCain was there at the same time. I’m sure there’s no connection but it is kinda ironic in a way.
Jul 2, 2008 - 2:09 pm John Samford:This is all a smoke screen for Ohhhhhh…….BAAMA to hide behind. So long as the silly twits in the MSM are blowing air time on this sort of nonsense, they have an excuse to avoid checking out Ohhhhhh…..BAMA in any depth. That is very much to the NObama’s benefit. The man’s past and some of his shadier deals will not stand up to scrutiny.
Jul 2, 2008 - 4:07 pm in_awe:So look for the MSM to exercise their gatekeeper function to avoid scrutinizing NObama’s past.
Ohhhhh…..BAMA is depending on ignorance to get elected. His campaign motto should be; “I can fool some of the people all the time and all the people just enough to get elected”. Only anything piercing that veil of ignorance is a danger to his chances. So the gatekeepers will try to prevent that.
Here are the elements as I see them:
Comparing the candidates on issues such as:
- personal courage
- maintaining commitments
- standing fast on principles
- selflessness
- years of service to the nation
- executive experience (read about McCain taking a 400 person squadron that repeatedly received failing performance ratings and turning it around to receive exemplary ratings under his command)
The distinctions couldn’t be more stark. Obama crumples under pressure like cheap cardboard. He initially states a position based on his firmly held principles, only to shift positions a week or so later. His unwillingness to take personal responsibility. etc. etc.
Obama’s cheap attacks on McCain run counter to his self declared “new way” of campaigning. He knows that one cannot “unring a bell” that has already been rung. So, he feigns displeasure with what his campaign serial smearers do, but he inwardly gloats that he is achieving his goal of besmirching McCain.
Try as he might, he cannot take his character and judgment off the table - and in both areas Obama is a loser.
Jul 2, 2008 - 4:25 pm Dave Surls:We have one candidate who risked his life and fought for this country.
We have another candidate who belonged to a church who’s leader calls on God to damn America.
As an American, I’d feel a lot more comnfortable with choice # 1.
Jul 2, 2008 - 4:48 pm Hal:When I contemplate the energy used to upload the number of words typed–not to mention the 1/1,000,000,000,000th of a volt of electricity used by tens of thousands of right-wing brains–regarding GEN (Ret.) Wesley Clark’s statements about John McCain’s impeccable “service,” I begin to see how America, which has been run by the right-wing for six of the last nine administrations, ended up weak, soulless and completely under the thumbs of Islamic oil-producing nations and Red Chinese capitalists (who hold one trillion dollars of our Treasury Notes).
Thanks a lot, guys. Keep wasting energy.
Jul 2, 2008 - 8:11 pm Rino:Character plays a critical if not central role in being commander-in-chief. Lincoln, FDR, Truman and Reagan have proven their mettle as commanders-in-chief primarily on the basis of character. And what are the key qualities that shaped character? Moral Courage. John McCain possessed this in abundance as was proven during his years as a POW, something Barack Obama could not claim. So yes, McCain’s military service makes him eminently qualified to become Commander-in-Chief because among others, his POW revealed his moral courage.
On the other hand, this Obama is really something. he first creates the atmosphere that he is going to be a victim of Republican dirty tricks so every subsequent attack on him, legitimate or not, becomes presto - dirty tricks! Then his military supporters attacks McCain’s services and he conveniently “disowns” their statements. This tells two things about Obama - Either he could not control his supporters or he let them do the real dirty work so he could look “above politics.”
Perhaps the best judgment of Barack Obama, and quite ironic given the bitter Democratic Primary, is that this so-called candidate of change is actually the Slick Willie of his generation
Jul 2, 2008 - 8:53 pm EMD:Obama’s denigration of McCain’s military experience comes at the same time that Obama is moving to the right and annoying the Kos-kooks. Since the Left hates the military, the pointless attack on McCain’s military background is really an attack on the U.S. military. How far a leap is it from demeaning McCain’s bombing of Vietnamese targets to criticizing America’s involvement in Vietnam in the first place? Not far if you’re an America-hating Leftie. And did you see how the nutroots took to the attacks on McCain with a predictable, sickening relish? They entertain every theory and fantasy as they attack McCain (in the process looking like the half-wits that they are). I’m sure this military bashing provided some balm to the wounded egos of the anti-American Left. It might have even served as a distraction from the Obama rightward tilt. Isn’t it easier (and more fun) to promote the loony conspiratorial rants about McCain than to admit that your beloved candidate cares no more about your issues (FISA, guns, etc.) than he does about you?
Jul 3, 2008 - 10:27 am SAF:So here comes a guy who was tortured by the North Vietnamese for 5 years and rises to become the republican party’s presidential candidate without a whiff of personal vindictiveness to his previous captures. A man who has had the courage to buck his party (not that I agree with lots he’s done) go his own way.
A man who knows the horrors of war first hand. A man who took what he learned in the field and became an effective senator, whether you agree with him or not.
Choosing Wesley Clark as a team member for Obama also speaks of character.
Jul 3, 2008 - 10:36 am surf66:no one “rides in a fighter plane” unless you pay to do so.
The media which produces “he rides in a fighter plane” shows the mindset of todays journalism. That McCains experience was some isolated movie snippet and an aircraft commander is merely some actor going through his lines.
The military bearing , qualifications, and officer training that precludes and continues through a military career. The discipline necessary as well as the decision-making used throughout one of the most disciplined and structured organizations in the world, the United States military, are incomperable when dealing with friend and foe alike.
Herein lies the reason , above all, that McCain is indeed qualified to lead the country.
Add to that: Combat, the stress of combat tours, the battle and survival, then years of torture and capture: give a perspective to a presidential canditate that is unassailable.
Kennedy didn’t ” ride in a PT boat “. Eisenhower didnt ” ride in a jeep” Bush didn’t “ride in a torpedo bomber” ….the military is no “ride” ! what it does do is eminently qualify one to lead, organize, maintain balance through historical perspective and negotiate in the light of tested knowledge.
Jul 3, 2008 - 12:29 pm roy in nipomo:Clark’s attack on leadership/managerial experience would have worked better if Clark was supporting Romney (the Devil doesn’t have snowshoes yet, does ne?), but certainly not Sen Obama (unless Sen Obama was a secret CEO that just hasn’t come out yet).
Since Sen Obama has many fewer leadership roles on his resume, drawing attention to what Sen McCain does have seems like a loser.
But what do I know? I’m afraid that I’ll have to vote for McCain as the lesser of the two Democrats on this election.
Jul 4, 2008 - 6:00 pm misanthropicus:Clark’s remark was a job, and a poor one for that matter, and the Glibama HQ should keep a better track of the assignements on the morning jobs clipboard. They forgot that (gen.) Tom MacPeak was assigned to take a jab at McCain’s record a few weeks ago - in COMPLETELY IDENTICAL TERMS (I got it from LA Times), with same consequences - sympathy for McCain.
Jul 5, 2008 - 2:26 pm HillaryforPresident:Crappy job, dirty democrats - as far as Clark’s prospects at DOD, I’ll use Madeleine Albright’s admonishment: “Wesley, what are you doing here? Go back in your bunker! Now!”
Democrats have already been indoctrinated of this matter.
POWs are morons and should have killed themselves when captured. No problem of USA. We will just given then coffins and proper burials. McCain being last in his class is also a moron.
But now, I am already free of this moronness and idiocy and “un-love” of my American soldiers whose business is to protect me.
1. Small soldiers matters.
2. Small soldiers are heroes.
3. Soldiers captured in battle indicates how lucky I am as an American; instead of them, I should have been in their position.
4. Soldiers are not pawns. They are my protectors.
Clark only indicated how abase and lowly he thinks of the small soldiers like McCain. He forgot that any other soldiers, my protectors, America will always honor McCain for his valor and courage and tenacity. These are 3 essential elements of President who served America as a soldier.
Good luck Mr. Clark. You don’t even deserve now to be called General. Because you humiliated your own service as a soldier.
Jul 7, 2008 - 4:21 am Rachel Peepers:The below is another smear directed at Obama. English no longer has a right to be the official language of the United States. Obama feels we traditionally are a melting pot, and that our language should reflect this fact. Plus, I doubt “a retired Colonel” wrote this pap. It appears to come directly from the McCain dirty trick campaign. True, Barack did sign the Bill. It’s because he feels language is a wonderful way to say to immigrants both here legally and legal by desire that this country welcomes you with open arms. The American people are a kind compassionate people who empathize with your struggles. And gladly will provide the structures you need for a better life, like free health care, admission to school with no questions asked and no need for proof of citizenship to get driver’s licenses. Obama and the people of the United States are wonderful, compassionate people. If we need to hire more teachers and doctors who are bilingual, we will, paying for it through the end to the Iraq war, and a gradual reduction in spending for a aggressive military that just serves to spart tensions abroad. Barack Obama represents change for people’s welfare. Change we can all believe in.
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 11:15:24 AM
Aug 12, 2008 - 11:46 amSubject: the colonel and lincoln
|TAKE A FEW MOMENTS AND READ THIS LETTER. THESE ARE STRONG, POWERFUL AND
COURAGEOUS WORDS COMING FROM A RETIRED COLONEL, |
|AND READ WHAT LINCOLN HAD TO SAY AT THE END. WOW!
|
|
|
|
|
|33 Senators Voted Against English as America’s Official Language on June 6,
2007. |
|
|
|On Wed. 6 June 2007, Colonel Harry Riley, USA, Ret. wrote:
|
|
|
|Senators:
|
|Your vote against an amendment to the immigration Bill 1348…. to make
English America’s official language is astounding.|
|
|
|On D-Day, no less, when we honor those that sacrificed in order to secure the
bedrock, character and principles of America,|
|I can only surmise your vote reflects a loyalty to illegal aliens.
|
|
|
|I don’t much care where you come from. What your religion is. Whether you’re
black, white, or some other color…male or |
|female……Democrat, Republican or Independent……. But I do ca re when you
are a United States Senator representing |
|Citizens of America …and Vote against English as the official language of
the United States |
|
|
|Your vote reflects Betrayal. Political Surrender.. Violates Your Pledge of
Allegiance. Dishonors historical |
|principle. Rejects Patriotism. Borders on traitorous action and, in my
opinion, makes you unfit to serve as a United |
|States Senator…impeachment… Recall……..Or other appropriate action is
warranted, or worse. |
|
|
|
|
|Four of you voting against English as America’s Official Language are
Presidential Candidates: Senator Biden, Senator |
|Clinton, Senator Dodd and Senator Obama.
|
|
|
|Four Senators vying to lead America, but won’t, or don’t, have the courage to
cast a vote in favor of English as America’s|
|Official Language when 91% of American Citizens want English officially
designated as our language. |
|
|
|This is the second time in the last several months this list of Senators have
disgraced themselves as ‘political |
|Hacks’….. Unworthy as Senators and certainly unqualified to serve as
President of the United States . |
|
|
|If America is as angry as I am, you will realize a backlash so stunning it
will literally ‘rock you out of your |
|socks’……… And preferably totally out of the United States Senate.
|
|
|
|The entire immigration bill is a farce… Your action only confirms this
really isn’t about America… it is |
|about self-serving politics……despicable at best. It has been said: ‘Never
Argue with an Idiot….They’ll drag you down |
|to their level!’
|
|
|
|PRESIDENT ABRAHAM LINCOLN SAID: ‘Congressmen who willfully take actions
during wartime that damages morale and |
|undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, quickly tried and
hanged!!!’ | |