Subscribe
So Obama is finally planning to make a visit the Middle East in an apparent effort to brush up on his foreign policy credentials, or lack thereof. Now, perhaps he can begin to speak intelligently about the improvements in Iraq. But this post is not about Obama and his minimal political experience. It’s about retired General Wesley Clark, who many believe to be Obama’s running mate in the 2008 Presidential Election.
No disrespect to the Army of course. I got much love for you and respect you all tremendously. In fact, while on active duty I spent considerable time in Fort Carson, Colorado and Fort Lewis, Washington training with several Infantry units.
But this punk, General Clark has the nerve to attack McCain’s military record. Here are some of his comments he made yesterday while interviewed by Bob Schieffer from CBS Face the Nation (video):
McCain had not held executive responsibility and had not commanded troops in wartime.…I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president … He hasn’t been there and ordered the bombs to fall as a wartime commander.
It was a weak interview indeed but what would you expect from the soft Bob Schieffer. Nonetheless, this is a clear example of another Democrat putting their party before their country. Don’t get me wrong, both parties do it; hence, one reason I am no longer a Republican. But Clark’s comments are way off base; and if I were in uniform walking by the decorated General, I would look the other way before I raised my hand to salute. Of course, Obama rejected Clark’s comments; and also praised McCain’s military service:
For those like John McCain who have endured physical torment in service to our country—no further proof of such sacrifice is necessary …And let me also add that no one should ever devalue that service, especially for the sake of a political campaign, and that goes for supporters on both sides.
Wesley Clark spent a gruelling six months in Vietnam and has the nerve to attack McCain? Now, I am no McCain apologist, nor do I think he is the perfect republican candidate, but this man has done what very few have ever done or will ever do. This man served his country in a time of war. He was almost killed on July 29, 1967 after an assault on the USS Forrestal. He tried to help another pilot when a bomb exploded and he was struck in the legs and chest by fragments.
He then volunteered for assignment with the USS Oriskany where he continued to fly combat missions until being shot down over Hanoi on Oct. 26, 1967. His crash injuries included both legs and one arm broken, and when he regained consciousness a crowd attacked him, crushing his shoulder with a rifle butt and stabbing him with bayonets. He was then taken to Hanoi’s main Hoa La prison also known as the “Hanoi Hilton.”
His captors refused to treat his wounds, and instead beat him and interrogated him for days and weeks. When they found out his father was an Admiral, they announced his capture and attempted to use him for propaganda. McCain never broke; no information and no recorded statements.
He was then transferred to a different camp on the outskirts of Hanoi where he spent six weeks in the hospital. He had lost 50 pounds and was in a body cast and his hair had turned white during this time. In March 1968, McCain was placed in solitary confinement, where he remained for two years. Two years … all by himself somewhere in the middle of the jungle. Still, McCain never broke.
Then, in mid-1968, McCain’s father was named commander of all U.S. forces, and McCain was offered early release. The North Vietnamese wanted to appear merciful for propaganda reasons, and also wanted to show other POWs that what they called “elites” like McCain were willing to be treated preferentially. McCain turned down the offer; he would only accept the offer if every man taken in before him was released as well. He wouldn’t play their mind games, wouldn’t harm his country even if it meant more torture and possibly death for himself. Still, McCain never broke.
In August of 1968, it got worse for McCain. He was subjected to repeated beatings, rope bindings and various other torture techniques; and at the same time as he was suffering from dysentery (an infection of the digestive system that results in severe diarrhea containing mucus and blood in the feces and is typically the result of unsanitary water containing micro-organisms which damage the intestinal lining).
After several days of torture and the denial of food and water, McCain made an anti-American propaganda “confession”. To date, he feels that his statement was dishonorable, but as he would later write, “I had learned what we all learned over there: Every man has his breaking point. I had reached mine.” His injuries left him permanently incapable of raising his arms above his head. He subsequently received two to three beatings per week because of his continued refusal to sign additional statements.
Altogether, McCain was held as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam for five and a half years. He was released on March 14, 1973; six months before I was born. (read the full account here).
I don’t agree with all of McCain’s policies. I don’t take the same position as he has in the past based on his voting record. Yes, he is boring to watch, he’s old … and he really doesn’t inspire me. But I’ll tell you what. I’ll take his experience, dedication, conviction, patriotism, decades of honorable service, courage, stamina and optimistic vision for the future of this country any time, any day over the alternative.
Tags: General Clark’s comments about McCain, Wesley Clark, John McCain, military record, military service, Bob Schieffer, Face the Nation, CBS, gen wesley clark military service record, recent article about general wesley clark, what were wesley clark’s military injuries
UC,
I see no disrespect. Clark is being made a political pawn, and he is going to end up looking like an idiot. It is funny what length politician's will go to in order to find the best VP to get them elected. It does not even seem that they are looking for the right person to take over if the unthinkable happens, they are just looking for the person who is going to bring them the most votes.
And it does not seem to matter what side of the fence they are on. I have heard consevative radio saying that the only way that McCain is going to have a chance in this race is if he finds a female, hispanic, or black running mate. If he picks another white man, he had no chance. Some how we moved from the best people for the job to affirmative action.
I don't care what a persons skin color is, I just want a President that is going to get us back to small Government, and put the power back in the people's hands where it is suppose to be.
I'm with you UC I don't agree with many of McCains policies, but I do see him as having very stong leadership skills, and he will always he a HERO in my book.
This is Karl Rove attack tactics 101: Attack the perceived strength. It's as despicable as it is effective but we are playing hardball here. None of you had a problem with it in 2004.
This will seem like a love note once the 527s and the republican attack machine gets cranked up.
go back and READ or LISTEN to what was actually said. once again, you have managed to confuse what was SAID and what you heard.
exact quote:
"Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president."
nothing absurd there. no dishonor to mc cain or his military record. knock it off with the sensationalism. your headline here is irresponsible and non-factual.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200807010001?f=h_top
What Toe said above! Entitlement is not an adequate test of presidential caliber.
In hypothetical response to Clark...so what? At the very least, McCain has a significantly more intimate knowledge of how the military works than most others. He also has a great deal of experience in our government. Certainly far more on both fronts than Obama. But what really sets him apart from just about everybody (especially Obama) is that he has proven unequivocally that he is willing to sacrifice his freedom -- even his life -- for the good of the nation. Agree or disagree with his platform, you cannot deny that he'll do everything in his power to do what he feels is best for the country. Obama, however, has only his mentor's maniacal rantings as a measure of his character.
"Entitlement is not an adequate test of presidential caliber."
But Obama is entitled because he is black. That is what the left is saying. As noted in other posts on this site, voting Obama in as president is a sign to the world. As far as McCain's military record goes, if McCain isn't presidential material because he never led troops in battle, then Obama isn't presidential material because he never served in the military. Clark needs to look at what he is saying.
The real truth about the John McCain presidential bid is foretold in the MAY 15th PROPHECY which has been the only source that has been 100% accurate
Do a Google search of the MAY 15th PROPHECY and you will see for yourself
not any person that i know says obama is entitled because he is black.
no one. what you may have heard is the statement that IF obama is elected president, it would show that america is actually what it proclaims itself to be.
i understand that you want to read a whole lot more into that.
as for clark's statements- he said nothing untrue. if the facts are so objectionable to you, you can make up your own- it's never stopped you before.
@may 15th
good grief- you really need to get a grip....or back on your meds.
"To the world a black POTUS is a signal. It's a sign that things can be different."
That is not an if. If you read more on this sight there are many who say Obama must be elected because he is black, just as there are those who say the same thing all across the US. In the words of Sean "PDiddy" Combs at the BET Awards, "Obama or Die" I don't have to read into it any more than that. Or Susan Sarandon who said if Obama isn't elected she's leaving this country. Father Michael Pfleger has threatened the US with violence if Obama is not voted in as president and so has the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Al Sharpton said there would be riots if Obama is not elected president and Jesse Jackson said it would be 1968 all over again.
Ah yes, when in doubt bring in Rev. Wright. This is the silliest debate ever. I'll see your POW and raise you a four star general. Oh yeah, well I'm all in with Rev. Wright.
Questioning military service was put in play in 2004. The very term "Swift Boating" was coined then. It was fair game then as it is now. I would think a four star general's opinion on military matters would carry weight. I recall McCain touting support from military generals in one of his speeches. So what is it? Do generals matter only when they endorse? Can someone get to 4 stars and NOT know what they are talking about militarily? If so, that doesn't speak well for our military. If you honor McCain's service then respect the opinion of someone from the highest levels of that same service. You don't have to agree with him but he has every right to voice his opinion.
Now, Rev. Wright since you brought him up. If you were married to someone for 20 years and then got a divorce I imagine the woman you married is very different from the woman you divorced. Over 20 years of marriage you built a life, shared a bed, had children etc. but when it was time to cut ties you did. Oh not on the very first day you realized it was over but eventually you separated. Now let's say a year after your divorce your ex is in a same sex relationship. It happens. According to your rules of relationships that you apply to Barack and Rev. Wright, the person married to someone who turns out to be gay is gay themselves or knew their spouse was gay but stayed with them anyway or both. You are superimposing one spouse's traits onto the other. It's unfair in the marriage/divorce scenario which is much more intimate than a pastor/parishioner relationship.
Finally, electing Barack Obama would send a positive sign to the world. And I have news for you, electing McCain would send a message as well. America does not operate in a vacuum. In my opinion a McCain election sends a message of more of the same to our country and to the world. Barack's election would signal a new day. A country whose very history on race is diametrically opposed to the freedom and equality we espouse would be much more credible.
The Rove tactic of attacking the opponents perceived strength is now still too fresh to be used this year. Politics from 2004 is like trying to use the same playbook from last week in the NFL. Obama will take a huge hit in late October when he keeps this up and I think he will since those writing his speeches is the same group of people who tried to elect Kerry, Gore, Mondale, et al.
Obama is completely lost without the tele-prompter and his "advisors" Gen. Clark should be judged not only by his military resume but also by the company he keeps. I served in the mid-late 90's and had to take orders from both NCO's and Officers who were cut from the same cloth as this Clark. I didn't respect them and I don't respect him.
Retired military personel do not act as surrogates for indivifuals running for president, they run themselves! My guess is that Clark doesn't feel loved enough by the far left because the love of Bill and Hillary has faded for the Democrats.
NO ONE LIKES A FRONT RUNNER.
@toe
You are so full of it sometimes. That is an absurd comment in my opinion; and the quote I quoted is indeed accurate. How can my headline be NON-factual? It’s a damn opinion. No dishonor? I’m sorry, if you haven’t served, I don’t think can even fathom the concept of honor – and why do you keep inundating us with left-leaning content from Media Matters. That’s like me using Fox to validate everything I write.
And, if it wasn’t that bad, as you suggested, why did Obama reject the comments?
@may15
You're smoking waaaay too much crack to be on this board.
On the 527 ads;
Simonesdad is right... this is just a drop in the bucket compared to the attack ads that third parties (moveon.org, NRA, etc) are going to be dropping come October. Neither candidate is going to be able to apologize profusely enough for the attack ads that come from BOTH sides' camps.
Thunderdome,
"Retired military personel do not act as surrogates for indivifuals running for president, they run themselves!"
Oh really? I didn't have to go far to find this little tidbit. It's from Father Time's own site:
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/PressReleases/8313996A-5D94-4FD6-8CD4-43A9947AFD28.htm
And if you think in 2012 candidates will not be copying the unprecedented fund raising tactics of President Obama you're crazy. Whatever works is copied almost immediately.
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/
PressReleases/8313996A-5D94-4FD6-8CD4-43A9947AFD28.htm
The link was cut off in my last post. This is it. It is titled " McCain Endorsed by Over 100 Admirals and Generals" It is on McCain's official site.
@ simonesdad2008
"Finally, electing Barack Obama would send a positive sign to the world."
Oh here we go again. You only strengthen my position that we must vote Obama or else the WORLD will think something of us, what that is I don't know. For the record, among those around the world we will send a message to are all the terrorist groups who want Obama as president.
Again, I don't care who the world wants for president, especially not terrorist organization that want us all to submit to Islam and Sharia Law. The United States should NEVER vote for president based on what the world wants.
I never discounted what Clark said, I said he needs to look at what he is saying because Obama has no military record. Anything anybody says, who is running for President, needs to be looked at before it is counted or discounted. Just because a presidential candidate or hopeful vice-presidential candidate says something, that doesn't make what they say is true. I have no blind faith in anything McCain says, Obama says, Clark says, etc.
And I don't worship any candidate like Obama is worshipped. Never have, never will. They all have flaws, they all have lack of true character, they all lack integrity, and none of them can do the things they promise they will do on their own. They have to battle Congress and the House and Senate first. The more promises a candidate makes, they less he/she understands the office of the president. It is not all powerful like they think it is.
your headline:
General Wesley Clark’s absurd comments about McCain’s heroism and military record
clark was very complimentary and honored mc cain's service:
"In the matters of national security policy making, it's a matter of understanding risk," Clark said "It's a matter of gauging your opponents, and it's a matter of being held accountable. John McCain's never done any of that in his official positions. 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."
your headline here says otherwise.
the comments were neither absurd nor untruthful. i had no doubt that clark's remarks would send you flying to your keyboard...my question is, why now? this is not the first time clark as said this.
furthermore, your statement that if you have not served, you have no concept of honor is not just plain stupid, it is absurd..
regarding media matters, they go after all political sides, all netwarks and cable "news" media, all candidates. for you to call it "left leaning" reflects your inability to hear the truth- where ever it may lead.
@ May 15th Prophecy,
Looked at that site. The Bible says to watch out for false prophets, go look in a mirror. Alexander the Great was the Son of Satan? Then what was Hitler, his brother? As far as Jesus returning, the Bible says no man knows the day He will return, so this prophecy of yours is null. Also, really got lost about the part about the Bible, the Pyramid of Giza, and the Stars all saying this is so.
Combining the Bible with anything else is stepping on God's toes as far as he is concerned. Interesting view though. I'll have to re-read the prophecy parts now.
Wade,
Do you know what out of context means?
"And I have news for you, electing McCain would send a message as well. America does not operate in a vacuum."
My point being that American elections reverberate around the world regardless of who is elected. What don't you understand about that? You are hyper sensitive to the suggestion that a black president for the sake of a black president is a viable reason to vote for Barack. Some people think a white president is our only salvation and will vote accordingly. Yes, Wade, really they will....and just for your benefit, I'm instructing the world to ignore the results. It's none of their business anyway.
Domer,
You went a long way for that surrogate point. Who would be surrogates for each of the candidates in your opinion? This is a serious question because you have me thinking now.
simonesdad, as far as I'm aware, those who will vote for a white feller because he's white are extremist fringes, while those who will vote for Obama for his color a little more common. Case in point, all those saying that there will be riots in the streets if Obama isn't elected are talking about the people who are voting based on race.
Since we're on McCain, anybody have any input on the McCain Songbird controversy that I've only heard about from a commenter on a leftist blog? Strikes me as pretty damning if it is true, but since I haven't even heard about it from the left until now, I'm not too sure about it.
For those not in the know, it pretty much said that McCain received preferential treatment (though still brutal) in Hanoi because he was regularly regurgitating state secrets, and he went unpunished for that crime due to his father's clout while others were put through the ringer for speaking out against the war after they were released from POW camps.
The comment Comment by Jonathon Nierengarten
"You're smoking waaaay too much crack to be on this board."
My response "that stupit comment let me know you do not know the Word Of God"
The comment by Wade Moline
"Looked at that site. The Bible says to watch out for false prophets"
My response "while you are watching out for false prophets, I hope you can walk and chew gum at the same time"
"because you just may run into a real prophet like you did today"
@ by simonesdad2008
I know America doesn't operate in a vacuum and I am fully aware that who we elect president affects the entire world. But that is not the reason (how the world is affected) we should chose a president. No other country that freely elects a leader elects that leader based on who WE want. Therefore we have no obligation to do the same. If we elect our leader based on what the world wants, THAT IS NOT A FREE ELECTION! WHAT WOULD BE THE POINT?
If this were the case, let's kick George out now, throw in Obama and leave him in there for the rest of his natural life, because that is what the rest of the world wants, and let's do it without the vote of anyone of us. Let us dissolve this nation, get rid of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence because we MUST vote the way the rest of the world wants us too. Thus, there is no point to freedom at all. Dam our forefathers forefathers for defeating the British Empire anyways. What were they thinking?
My two favorite quotes, both by Patrick Henry.
"Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!"
"When the American spirit was in its youth, the language of America was different: Liberty, sir, was the primary object."
@ Prophecy
"because you just may run into a real prophet like you did today"
And those who declare themselves prophets are not prophets but the ones who God says to look out for. None of the prophets from the Bible declared themselves prophets, they simply said that they were spreading God's word as God spoke it to them. They were humble. It is their followers that declared them prophets.
Prophecy- you're burnt.
When asked by the National Journal in 2003, "Do you think that military service inherently makes somebody better equipped to be commander-in-chief?" this politician answered, "Absolutely not. History shows that some of our greatest leaders have had little or no military experience. ... I have advised [a presidential candidate] that I'd be very careful about how much you talk about that, because you don't want it to sound self-serving." The person who said that was John McCain, and the presidential candidate he was talking about was John Kerry.
people's memory are short, aren't they.
General said the truth: Being a mere captain, McCain would not pass the highest standards for being the Commander-In-Chief.
and General Clark has just spoken the truth: Low-ranked soldiers are nothing but war pawns, just like McCain in his younger years.
General Clark did not humiliate McCain: Clark only speaks of how lowly he values the patriotism of those soldiers active, inactive and died in battle. For Clar, they are nothing and they are just lower form of animal at the bottom of hierarchy.
Clark has no understanding of the following values that an ordinary soldiers:
1. Die for your country. Selflessness is the most important requirement for a Good President. Many Presidents failed because they forgot that they should think not of themselves but for their people.
2. Respect for institutions. Soldiers think of their officers as institutions. If a President lack the respect of the institutions established by all Americans, living or dead, he or she will never give value to the Constitutions and the wisdoms established in almost 300 years that make this country great.
3. Christ-like Leadership. A good shepherd dies for his flock (selfless leadership). A good leader is a good servant (servant leadership).
Sadly, undermining rank-and-file soldiers came from a General himself.
Clark's attempt for political correctness is one of the saddest day in the modern history of America.
McCain has been saved. This long services to American People as legislator gave him sufficient experiences almost all areas of leadership.
Definitely, age is a factor of this election and basic gauge of experience and track records.
Yes, definitely, McCain as soldier in Vietnam doesn't give him much credence as Commander-In-Chief, especially in terms of War.
But the SURGE strategy, the need for greater deployment in Iraq until Iraqi Government succeeds, and so on...
Surely General Clark didn't think of that. Because he is Pro-Obama now... who flip flops agains that he is not essentially "not anti-war" while in his 2002 speech he championed against Iraq War all indicated that he is anti-war in all forms.
I was initially one of those who admired Obama, but reading that speech made me conclude that Obama is not just anti-war, he is Anti-American and a pawn of socialists whose major policy platform is to promote America that has not capability to go to War!
Obama is among those communists hiding in Democratic Party!
Wesley Clarke knows what the MAY 15th PROPHECY has declared about John McCain Presidential
If you do a Google search of the MAY 15th PROPHECY you will see what is about to happen
@ seeker
A mere captain? Have you ever been in the military? Being a captain is not mere, that rank carries much responsibility. It appears the general needs to get off his high horse.
@ prophecy
Are you saying that John McCain is the next son of Satan? Enlighten me, please.
okay,
There was no legitimate attack on McCain's military record, just on his ability to lead. Anyway,
"McCain had not held executive responsibility and had not commanded troops in wartime.…I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president … He hasn’t been there and ordered the bombs to fall as a wartime commander."
How does that attack his service? He acknowledges that he has served, just questions whether that service has given him the knowledge to command troops in war-time, a legitimate concern.
And one does not become a general just like that. This guy was supreme NATO commander, obviously knows a thing or two about military command.
And UC, you would turn the other way???????? Oh, so we only recognize military service if we agree with their ideas. GIVE ME A BREAK, this is the second instance of you demeaning someone's service just because you don't agree with them. Its laughable.
@ heathenhater
I admit at this point I am confused about this issue now. I understand that just because someone served in the military doesn't mean they can be commander-in-chief. I think what Clarke is saying that McCain's level of military service doesn't mean he can lead the nation. Simply put, he is no Eisenhower, therefore based on that alone he is not entitled to be President.
Am I in the ballpark?
No, he was merely commenting that his military service was not something he should use as his qualifications for being commander in chief, not that he was not qualified.
Wade Moline you said "Are you saying that John McCain is the next son of Satan? Enlighten me, please."
No I am not saying John McCain is next Son of Satan, but if you would have read the latest post of the MAY 15th PROPHECY you would know with 100% accuracy what will happen to John McCain presidential bid
Bennett won't do it, Hannity barely entertains it, but I will profess that former (thank our Creator) General Wesley Clark is an idiot. I should know. I served under him in Germany during my overseas service from 1992-2003. During this period, I not only spent time in the desert, but also defended Bosnians and Turks, while our good buddy Wes did nothing but curry favor with former President Clinton. This guy was planning a political career long before he pinned on his first star...something any good officer would not even consider while in uniform.
We learn from day one in the military that sacrifice is our greatest contribution to the nation that we love and respect. Do not fool yourselves, there is no greater honor than that which John McCain endured. Now some of you who align with the wanna-be Prez Clark, want to assert that spending years in the Hanoi Hilton is not a prerequisite for the highest office in the world...I agree. But placed side-by-side with the contributions made by the Obama, anyone with more than a thumbnail full of gray matter should surmise that Mr. McCain is more capable of running the most powerful nation on Earth than a second-rate, egocentric guy like Barak Obama.
I respect the libs out there who want anyone but President Bush...I do not agree with you, but I at least respect your opinion, and leave it up to posterity to prove you wrong. But aligning with the most radical leftist, dare I say, Marxist in Senate history is not going to bring our country to a new level of PATRIOTISM and INDEPENDENCE.
On the eve of the single greatest day in American history, I ask that each of you review our founding documents and spend more than a minute assessing what got us to where we are today.
Yesterday, today, and for days to come, I love our nation. I respect our citizens. Most of all, I thank God for blessing the United States of America.
Have a blessed Fourth.
@ Rick,
Well said and thanks for serving our country. Have a great 4th.
You stupid f**king weekend Pogue!!!
Are you really that stupid? If you can't see what the General was saying then you have some serious problems. You were a Marine apparently....do you think your CO, a lieutenant colonel (or Navy Captain) is qualified to be President? We are talking here about a Navy Captain who had endured unbelievable torture and stress as a POW......but the truth is that is not enough to be considered qualified to be president. Does that diminish his service record?....absolutely not! But unfortunately that period in his life is being used as the selling point in his campaign. The same way in which "America's Mayor" spat out 9/11 and terror when ever he could - look where that got him (1 delegate?) If Mccain was smart he would focus his campaingn on his Senate experience and proven record of getting things done.
If anyone knows just what executive responsibilities mean and its possible consequences on this country and others around the world, it is the former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO - General Clark.
@ yankee452
"You stupid f**king weekend Pogue!!! Are you really that stupid?"
Yeah, that really convinces people to come to their senses and see your point of view. Name calling always works. Hey, I'm convinced. simonesdad2008 and I may disagree on every point we make to each other, but at least we haven't gone and done this towards each other.
Debate 101, if you really want to get your point across, don't resort to calling your opponent names. It not only make your opponent tune you out, it makes those watching the debate, but not participating, sympathize with your opponent, especially those aren't sure of which side they want to take.
Have a great weekend and stay safe yankee452.
My thoughts on rank and leadership,
Just because someone was a Supreme Allied Commander doesn't make him more qualified to be president over a captain. It is about how you use and carry that rank. Did your men respect you? Did you respect your men? Let me put it this way;
I am a 25 year veteran firefighter and a captain. Since my 7th year as a firefighter I have been an officer. I respect my men and I ensure their safety every time we enter a burning building. My philosophy is this, captain is first in, last out. First in to assure that the way is safe for my men to work and do the task/s I've given them. I ensure their safety while they are working. I am their eyes and ears and I am their safety alarm to warn them when things go bad. I am last out no matter the conditions to ensure ALL my men get out.
I would NEVER ask them to do something that I would not, or could not, do myself. I would lay my life down for any of these guys so that they get to go home to their families. When mistakes are made I never chastise them in front of their coworkers. I take them aside and privately ask them what happened. I get their side of the story. Then I explain to them what they did wrong and teach them the right way.
I have a core group of firefighters who will follow me anywhere anytime. They know I have their backs at all times and won't cut and run when the situation is FUBAR. Is this what Clark was like? Is this what McCain was like?
Whether Supreme Commander or Captain, rank is not a qualifier, it is the leadership while in that position that is the qualifier.
Anyone who seriously thinks military service does not go hand in hand with being President should go read my Blog on the subject from earlier this week at http://www.barnhartblog.com
therelevantelephant.com has an interesting interview from former governor of Oklahoma Frank Keating on this subject.
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
http://www.theweeklyvice.com