I agree 100% with Gen. Clark - sorry Obama didn't make a distinction...

...between valuing McCain's service and assuming it gives him presidential experience.

Sometimes there's a fine line between pragmatism and ass-kissing!

of publicly avoiding any negative assessment of McCain's service, as a politician and candidate. There's no conflict here, and no hurt feelings behind the scenes--both Obama and Clark are playing their proper roles. Don't get so upset, people.

a military officer. Wes can say what he says, because of his unique status. He doesn't expect Obama to agree--I guarantee you that. This is how politics works.

Nothing Clark said was a smear/lie. It was all truth. It was honest. To disagree with the truth is dishonest.

I'll vote for Obama no matter how unhappy I am with him. He'd have to eat a puppy to be worse than McCain. No. Wait. I'd still vote for him over MacCain.

There are a lot of people out there who think it's absolutely wrong to condemn anybody's military service, even if what they are saying is true. Particularly if that person has never served in the military themselves, as Obama has not.

But Wes Clark is a retired four star general and NATO commander. That gives him the "right" (in the minds of these people) to criticize someone else's military record.

Obama spoke as a candidate, Clark spoke as a retired officer. Different circumstances, at least in perception if not reality.

Had he made this distinction.

...that it didn't add up to executive experience.

I like how newmajority put it... and I think Obama would have done well to say the same... and to follow up with something like... no one person in the world knows it all, that's why world leaders gather into their cabinets those with stellar experience...

...both for the sake of honesty, and also for future reverence.

Wes could only say what he did because he isn't running. If Obama said it or explicitly backed it up, with him being both the Democratic nominee AND not having a military history, he would be crucified for it. For weeks.

Once again, I for one appreciate that our candidate isn't a moron, and has avoided stepping on a landmine when he doesn't need to.

And he would have been KILLED for it in the press anyway. Wake up, you're not blind. You know how the press in this country operates. They're not going to explain to the nation the fine distinction between a legitimate evaluation of McCain's experiential qualifications for the presidency and "disrespecting his service". They'll just run panels of pundits for two weeks talking about "Was Obama out of line calling Mr. War Hero's Great Service And Sacrifice To Our Country into question when he never served in the military!?!?!? What do you think Pat Robertson and random McCain campaign spokesman?".

You know it as well as I do.

I'd like him to stick with that approach.

"Assume they're stupid sometimes" approach. That's how you win elections. You don't win them by OVERestimating the sophistication and intelligence of the voters, that's for sure.

This is not an issue where he has the personal standing and background required to take that approach.

He does things the way you want him to 100% of the time and you'll be ecstatic and jumping up and down and cheering him on... then wailing and gnashing your teeth for the next 4 years about how in the world Obama could have possibly lost an election he was supposed to have in the bag.

I'd like him to stick with the "voters can think" approach too... along with the honesty first approach.

I think he is pissing away a lot of voters who feel stabbed in the back.

I'll vote for him... even if I don't like him much by the end of this campaign. Eating puppies won't make him worse than McCain.

I've worked on the campaign since February, but this is the kind of thing that makes me think maybe I've done enough.

they can say what needs to be said, and the POTUS candidate can "distance" himself from the remarks.. but they are out there being discussed.

...but I'm much more behind Clark for veep than I ever was before.

and as you well know, I support both Wes and Barack to the hilts.

Please know that the General wanted what he said out there, and that is what has happened. Wes understands the media better than most(as he ran for Prez once before, and he has worked in the media for longer than his run lasted), and so I believe that Wes clearly understood that this could be happening, or something close thereto. Wes has made these statements several times before, so this isn't a new talking point; it is what Wes Clark believes (as he also said it when he was supporting Hillary Clinton).

From a strategic sense, for all concerned, including Wes......it is going to be up to Wes Clark to equalize that push of the envelope that he did by himself by clarifying his thoughts on his own comments and the media spin of them. It doesn't work to have a surrogate generate controversy (which Clark was well aware it might) and then have to have the campaign "explain" those comments for Clark. This is not a one day sting, and I believe that Wes understands this better than he is being given credit. So don't underestimate Wes Clark and the Obama campaign as to what is going on here. It is not about protecting Wes Clark, it is about the spychology of his statement and what it brings to the fore. Others will separate what Clark said from what the McCain camp said....and that will be useful.

That's what I'm coming up with for now.

...included the statement about "devaluing service" in his speech today ~ an obvious slap-down. Even though I know they're doing a classic GOOD COP - BAD COP move, it seems dishonest.

On the positive side, I'm more enthusiastic about Clark as veep now!

doesn't mean anything, as they are not the ones doing the choosing.

Also see VoteVet's commecing work on this: http://www.democrat icunderground. com/discuss/ duboard.php? az=view_all&address=132x6430559

Also, Wes Clark will be appearing on MSNBC I do believe.

I think that this debate is a good thing to be had.....nice and early.

It will leave many thinking about this meme that McCain service somehow makes him better qualified to become President. At the end of the day, that was the whole point, wasn't it?

Just remember that this is just one day out of the campaign.

Choosing McCain is as dumb as choosing Bush. (Bush the war Prez.)

Obama's job is to keep positive. Clark can keep it real.

Obama has often prefaced his critiques of Bush-McLame military policy errors with statements of respect and gratitude for Senator John Sidney McCain III's military service. That was one thing I admired about him during the debates. Obama would begin by thanking JSM III for his service before challenging particular national security policies and decisions, like JSM III's votes against increasing veterans' benefits. I thought that was a great approach and still do.

I think Obama HAD to do what he had to do and so did Wes Clark.

Clark said what we've all been thinking, some of which has been posted in this very forum. I'm still glad that he said it but I certainly understand O's need for distance.

Clark did not attack McCain service, he said that it was irrelevant to the race. I did not hear Obama say it was relevant to the race and I did not hear Clark attack McCain's service.

So, explain to me where they differ?

...because people assumed he was slapping Clark down.

There was no devaluing that service in what Clark said. Clark spoke the truth. He pointed out errs in the thinking of some people who assume McCain has all this combat leadership experience.

"Separately, in a statement, Obama spokesman Bill Burton said, "As he's said many times before, Senator Obama honors and respects Senator McCain's service, and of course he rejects yesterday's statement by General Clark."


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080630/ap_on_el_pr/obama;_ylt=As9GGyjqJkFaCzhLL5R6gX9snwcF

We don't know how the VP search will go. Clark was just including language spoken to him, but care always needs to be taken to include a softer landing when taken out of context.

just right. They played it exactly how they wanted to, how they intended to from the beginning. The surrogates attack, get the notion out there, and then the candidate pulls back. This is how it's done. This is politics, people, not a game of Go Fish.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Something tells me you've yet to lift a finger.

I'm the Obama Precinct Captain. I put in hours and hours on the phone. I put in hours and hours at the Obama offices here, 1 in Englewood and the other in Colorado Springs. I knocked on so many doors and met so many people that I can't keep them straight anymore.

We raised turnout in our caucuses by 600% over the last caucus turnout. So don't tell ME I haven't lifted a finger. In addition, I have made personal sacrifices in order to donate money to the campaign, over and over again.

And, I'll say again: Obama and Clark played it just like they wanted it played.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

from your cafepress site, in which case, pissing on Obama isn't the best sales strategy I've ever seen.

He won a lot of us over because of his honesty...

I'll vote for him, no matter how tightly I have to hold my nose.

Honest to christ I will never understand it. Obama specifically stated that McCain's policies are wrong and it's the policies that we have to defeat. McCain has experience and it's stupid to deny it. His experience hasn't led to good judgments, and that's where we win. You may call that ass-kissing, I call it being a smart campaigner.

Honesty is the best policy... Obama keeps fucking up in the honestly department and it's not setting well with those of us who have given him kudos in that regard.

Same bunch of sour grape idiots that have fucked up every election for god knows how many years.

Seems to me there are a lot of hard-core Obama supporters who have been on his team since the beginning who are really disappointed by the dishonesty.

That's rhetorical ~ I can guess.

Think about it...a day after Clark planted the seed of doubt and the media started attacking Clark, Obama comes out in Independence with a major speech on patriotism and takes the high road. Obama has someone chosen for VP and it isn't Clark.

These people aren't stupid.

However planned or unplanned this was, however well played or poorly played the follow up has been, we should agree on this. There is nothing stopping the netroots from watching Wes Clark's back on this one. He took a hit for the cause. We don't have to attack Obama over this, but we do need to support Clark.

Go to this thread. Sign the petition, rate the thread up and pass it on:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6430559#6430816

Obama cannot say it, even if it is true. Wes Clark can say it for two reasons (he isn't running and isn't really even connected to Obama's campaign since he was a Hillary supporter early on; and, of course, he had the stars on the helmet). Forget eating our own again, lets just agree with Clark.

because if it is turned into that, we do no service to either Obama or Clark.....who both want to see a Democratic White House, just like we do.

...it didn't add up to executive experience ~ which is the truth.

It's crazy how some Americans seem to think that being in the service automatically makes you presidential.

The credentials he gives himself that he would be a good foreign policy prez because he was a P.O.W and a vet, is. There are many P.O.W.'s and many vets, doesn't mean they can be great presidents because of it.

Thats exactly what he wants us to do. Make this election a reform on his past military service. Anything done to belittle it will hurt us.

Clark's assertions that McCain's military experience does not amount to executive experience, eventhough true, are not going to help Obama.

I think that it does.....and there will be plenty of time for voters to think about that.