WHY Wes Clark should be Obama's VP

[Avalux]

Remember the dust-up a few weeks ago, when Clark called McCain on his Commander-in-Chief credentials and Obama backed away? Clark has been a scarcity on the MSM circuit ever since.

Was that a trial balloon?

This guy makes an excellent point:

Wasn't Wes Clark right? Following Bush strategist Karl Rove's practice of attacking an opponent's strength, retired general Wesley Clark went after McCain's readiness to be commander in chief. "I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president," Clark said.

Instead of rejecting Clark's words, Obama should've said the general is entitled to his views. Fact is, McCain has no special preparation to be commander in chief. The Naval Academy? He finished 894th in a class of 899.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/07/17/campaign_musings/

Yes - McCain finished 89th in his class at the Naval Academy and crashed a few planes. Clark - graduated from West Point as VALEDICTORIAN and many years later (after being wounded in Vietnam) went on to command NATO's European theater with great success.

If anyone has the right to question McCain's qualificiations, it's Clark and he WAS right in what he said. McCain's military career did not give him executive experience or commander-in-cheif experience.

A few little-known facts about Wes Clark that I find interesting:

1. During his time at West Point, participated heavily in debate.

2. Wrote a thesis as a student at the Commander and General Staff College that was the precursor to the Powell Doctrine.

3. Appointed White House fellow to the office of Management and Budget - one of 14 out of 2307 applicants.

4. Approval has been granted for the construction of a new street to be named "General Clark Court" in Virginia Beach, Virginia

For anyone not familiar with Clark's biography, please go here and watch "American Son":

http://securingamerica.com/taxonomy/term/31


Of course there are negatives to anyone on the list for VP and if Clark is picked, we will hear about them. But that's the case for anyone. I think Clark's positives would outweight any negatives. Remember - he's already run for president, so there shouldn't be anything in the closet that hasn't already been brought to light. He's also been working his butt off via WesPac to get Democrats elected in local races. He was just here in Texas campaiging for Rick Noriega (Cornyn's opponent). He is a giant advocate of the grassroots.

The more I think of it, Clark fits the Obama campaign MO perfectly and ideologically, he and Obama are very much alike.

As far as his 'attacks' on McCain's qualifications as Commander-in-Chief...McCain must be attacked on this because it's his only strength. Clark is the ONLY person who can get away with it. Of course the Goopers will cry and the MSM will fuss, but they certainly can't say Clark doesn't have the experience to know what he's talking about.

[DFW]

1. It wouldn't break my heart!

[tuckessee]

2. We need fewer military hacks in our civilian government. n/t

[Avalux]

3. I disagree. Our military/foreign policy is controlled by a think tank.

A bunch of idealogues who have never served a day in their lives. Those in the WH are a bunch of chickenhawks who, if they'd had military experience, might have thought twice about invading Iraq.

[11cents]

4. Really? How many are there now?

Who in the high levels of the Bush regime are retired high-ranking military officers?

I don't think that being a retired general or admiral necessarily gives you the experience or credibility to hold civilian office, nor should it be a disqualification. At any rate, it's clearly not career military people, retired or not, who are to blame for what's happened in the last 7 years.

[Sparkly]

7. Exactly -- it's the CIVILIAN leadership in this adminstration that's to blame.

They set the policy, and they're the ones to blame.

[wmbrew0206]

5. Here is the problem with what Wes Clark said, he set the bar to high for "executive experience"

There is no doubt that Wes Clark has the executive experience to make national security decisions. He has been served to several wars and been a Combatant Commander in charge of another one.

The question is what are the qualifications for "executive experience" for National Security decision and who else has that type of experience?

McCain did twenty odd years in the Navy and had command of a squadron as a Commander. He never had an At Sea command as a Captain. Was he going to make Admiral? Depends on who you believe, but I doubt he would. After getting out of the Navy, McCain sat on the Armed Services Committee since @ 1988.

If Clark is saying that McCain does not have "executive experience" to be Commander and Chief, who does in his opinion?

Does Clark think Obama does?

Clark went out and set the bar so high for "executive experience" to be Commander in Chief so high, he ruled out pretty much everyone except former VP's and former Combatant Commanders.

[Sparkly]

6. He didn't say McCain "doesn't have the exec. experience to be CiC."

He said the main theme that McCain is running on -- that his experience in Vietnam makes him a foreign policy expert -- is wrong. His experience in the military doesn't include the kinds of decision-making or other work that would, on its own, make him qualified for president.

About Obama, he's always said, "But Obama isn't running on that -- McCain is. Obama is running on judgment."

[Avalux]

8. You got it right.

Rove's playbook - attack your opponent on his strength. That's what Clark did - McCain's "war hero" persona is the core of his candidacy.

[wmbrew0206]

9. You make my point about Clark setting the bar to high in your won post:

"His experience in the military doesn't include the kinds of decision-making or other work that would, on its own, make him qualified for president."

You are right, McCain is running on his National Security reputation. That includes more than being a POW that everyone associates McCain with. McCain had a squadron command and then made Captain.

By Clark's definition, an 0-6 (Colonel or Captain) doesn't have the decision-making experience to be POTUS. Then what rank does that come at? What rank do you have to have and what command level gives you the military experience to qualify as executive decision making experience?

FYI, here is a list of US President with military services:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Presidents_by_military_service
With one or two exceptions, the best Presidents never made it above Colonel.

You are right, Obama is running on judgment, but he'll also have to convince a lot people that he has what it takes to be Commander and Chief, especially now.

Clark comments can be turned around and used against Obama, ie "If McCain doesn't have enough experience after 20+ years in the Navy and 20 years on the Armed Services committee, what makes Wes Clark think Obama has the experience?"

Personally, I think case Clark was trying to make with that argument was why Clark should be Obama's VP. He is the only person that meets his own definition of "executive decision making experience" that has been seriously mentioned as Obama's VP.

[Sparkly]

10. No -- apples, oranges, and pears...

Not to mention "plumcots."

There are many different backgrounds that can add up to "qualified to be president" or "qualified to be Commander in Chief," specifically. Military service isn't necessary. But if that's the rationale that's supposed to prove a specific strength, it had better add up to that specific strength. Not all military experience is equal.

John Kerry's service showed many things about his character, his patriotism, his physical courage, and later, his conscience and honesty. John McCain's service, too, may say things about his character, patriotism, and courage, but it's the peg on which he hangs the totality of his presidential bonafides when it comes to understanding of foreign policy, military strategy, "supporting the troops," and general preparation for the job. This while *everything* he's running on, policy-wise, has been proven WRONG (and while questions about his "character" remain untouched).

Could he be where he is now simply as a senator from Arizona, without having been a POW? How much of his persona -- his aura, his benefit of the doubt that he just understands military matters -- is based on that? A great deal, I think.

General Clark has said that Barack Obama has the "decision-making experience to be POTUS." Obama, as Clark has said, isn't running on (or falling back on) a military record -- he is running on judgment. He's shown that judgment in the past, and he shows it in his proposals and ideas about what he'd do as president.

Some may have military experience and good judgment (like Clark); others may have no military experience and still have good judgment, and the capacity to be a fine CiC (Clinton, Obama). Some may have no military experience and be clueless (Chimpy); others may have some military experience and still be clueless (McCain).

It cuts various ways, but the main point is that "military experience" is NOT all equal. Not all military experience confers the Great Powers of Understanding McCain's persona is deemed to have.

Obama has shown greater judgment without military experience -- he has his own background, and there's not a thing wrong with it. General Clark, imho, has it ALL -- but that's another matter!

:hi:

[wmbrew0206]

21. You are pointing out the problem with Clark's comments in your own post

From your post:

"General Clark has said that Barack Obama has the "decision-making experience to be POTUS." Obama, as Clark has said, isn't running on (or falling back on) a military record -- he is running on judgment. He's shown that judgment in the past, and he shows it in his proposals and ideas about what he'd do as president."

I have a lot of respect for Wes Clark, but lets face it, his experience is in military issues. When he says, based on his military experience, that a guy with 20+ years in the military and 20 years on the Senate Armed Services Committee doesn't have the national security decision making experience, and another guy, with no military experience, who has only been in the senate for four years does, he ends up looking foolish.

This is the equivalent of Jim Baker saying that Joe Biden doesn't have the foreign affairs experience to be President but Leslie Graham does because of his proposals and ideas.

Like I said before, I think Clark was trying to make the case that the only person who could challenge McCain on national security issues was him and that is why he needed to be Obama's VP. The OP seems to agree: "As far as his 'attacks' on McCain's qualifications as Commander-in-Chief...McCain must be attacked on this because it's his only strength. Clark is the ONLY person who can get away with it."

[eshfemme]

12. Clark was making a point about McCain's general strategy of using his POW status as a shield

for when he's faced with awkward questions. Haven't you noticed how McCain always goes "I was a POW in the Hanoi Hilton!" for stuff that doesn't even seem to be relevant. Clark was trying to say that for most of the stuff that McCain is claiming credit for, his experience being a POW doesn't qualify him for it. Yes, surviving the POW experience was heroic of McCain and Clark doesn't question it but just because McCain went through that, it doesn't mean that he automatically showed the judgment necessary in a Commander-in-Chief.

Also, please quit buying the MSM bullshit hook line and sinker. After the way they fucking aided and abetted in the Bush administration's deception of the American public into the Iraq war without even questioning any of it when at least half of us ordinary Joes knew it was fishy, I don't let them frame the question. I do my own research.

Clark was NOT talking about McCain's rank at all but calling McCain on his BS whenever he used his being a POW as a reason to escape some tough questions over what McCain's abilities as Commander-in-Chief would be. Obama's already faced and stood up to some tough grilling that McCain's never been put under simply because he was a POW, which Clark was trying to point out.

[Sparkly]

18. Excellent points!!!

Media Matters has documented exactly what you're describing -- McCain-as-POW is used as a shield against anything and everything, no matter what it is. The media seems to have adopted the RNC's fax on that, such that various criticisms, however tangential, lead to the question: "Is there a coordinated attack on McCain's military record from Democrats?"

Good points! :hi:

Edited to add: http://mediamatters.org/items/200807030012?f=s_search

[wmbrew0206]

22. If Clark was trying to point out McCain's use of his POW status as a shield, he did a poor job of it

I don't argue that McCain uses his POW status and military record as a shield and to go after other candidates that haven't served. Clearly he does.

The problem was that Clark did not articulate that. Worse, he gave the right wingers a quote to use against him that allowed them to saw that he was trivializing McCain total service and his Vietnam service in one sentence.

[eshfemme]

23. He did a poor job of it because of the MSM's habit of being hysterical drama whores.

Anyone who had any modicum of common sense would know what sort of point he was making. Also, it's been pretty obvious that the MSM has been making considerable effort to prop McCain up just to keep the race seem "even" or neck to neck.

[Zomby Woof]

11. If I was Clark

I would ask the mayor of Virginia Beach to cease and desist on the cul-de-sac naming. Clark should be insulted. If you have ever been there, you would understand why.

(Disclosure: I once lived in a Va Beach cul-de-sac named for Dale Earnhardt - I rest my case, lol)

[Clark2008]

15. Clark has a cul-de-sac named after him?

I knew he had a road named after him in Huntsville, AL.

Who knew? :shrug:

[elleng]

16. Its a done thing, sorry, zomby.

And I don't know that the mayor had much to do with it; a Clark fan was head of the development!

[Zomby Woof]

19. Their mayor is a joke anyway

In all seriousness, the developers do get a lot of leeway in naming rights as you say. I lived next to a subdivision with the coolest street names in the entire US (which is amazing, considering how conservative the area is). Hendrix Drive, Allman Court, Ellsberg Lane, Dylan Drive (intersecting with Zimmerman Court and Baez Court), Simon Street, Guthrie Street (intersecting with Woody Court and Arlo Court), Nader, etc. The subdivision is called Brandon, and was built in the mid-70's. I lived next to it behind what is now Brandon Middle School (was a junior high in my day). I voted on Super Tuesday 1988, hours before Pat Robertson, with whom I shared the precinct. He lived a mile down the road, where the Regent University (formerly CBN) compound is located. Missed my chance to "salute" him on national news, which showed him arriving later that day. It was the first time I got to declare my party affiliation at the polls, as I cast my vote for Paul Simon.

In any event, I still feel bad for Clark that a street in that hellhole is named after him, lol. ;-)

[KaryninMiami]

13. I'd be thrilled with Wes Clarke as VP- K&R NT

[CitizenPatriot]

14. Clark is the one who said "use force as a last resort"

He is a diplomat...who knows how to strategize for real (unlike being shot down in a plane and saying you know how to "win wars" -- mc cain never even gets the irony of that statement) so he can avoid using force if possible. he also knows the cost of war and is heavily invested in avoiding it unless there is no other choice. then he can go in and kick ass, as he has PROVEN throughout his long 30 year career. He is not only a military guy -- read his bio and see all the diplomacy work he's done very successully.

Clark is a GREAT choice. My first!

[Tesibria]

17. I'm SOOO hoping it's Clark

I've been rooting for Clark as VP since .. well - since before we knew who the Presidential nominee was. I think he'd P-e-r-f-e-c-t for the job.

[flamingdem]

20. He is a Clinton ally

how does that play into this scenario? I think he would be the most interesting of the picks, but I do not see him as safe.