June 28, 2008
The Importance of Wesley Clark (Bernie Quigley)
We’ve been hearing a lot about John Adams these days. All my Yankee friends who read books have enjoyed the HBO show, the David McCullough biography and the recent PBS series. But as one born and reared in New England, I’ve always preferred Thomas Jefferson.
Especially these days. As his father early on compared them to the father and son Adams presidents, I’ve long thought that George W. Bush modeled — or more likely imagined — his presidency after Adams, the second president of the United States.
What was troubling was the ease and confidence with which Bush would move forward on issues that were sometimes illegal and unconstitutional and duplicitous. The one historical perspective that resonates is the passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts by Adams, which stripped the public of civil rights and removed the constitutional basis for public life. Jefferson, the visionary who alone perceived the dangerous potentialities ahead when he signed on with the likes of Adams and Hamilton, felt Adams had destroyed his vision of a burgeoning American republic at its infancy and began to set a separate path for Virginia and the South.
Bush has always had the glowing and innocent self-confidence of one who has never really been successful at anything. Perhaps he felt that like Adams, he could not break the law because as president, he was above the law, and like Nixon, if he did, someone would come along later and pardon him. Someone would mop it up later. They always had.
In any event, he knew — and he was right in this — that if the current state of the republic is characteristic, over time people would prefer hagiography to history when crimes, malice and misdemeanors were suggested. The people would remember that the president wrote daily to his charming wife or spent the idle hours cutting brush in the Texas bush.
Since Bush came to office we have lived in a shadow world of deception and duplicity. We still don’t know the origins. We need to know. Our fate and future as American citizens depends on it.
In one of his recent books, Wesley Clark said that he had heard rumors of the Iraq invasion long before the attack. Many of us did. In fact, at one point it was quite obvious that the Bush administration was going to invade and that the tragic terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 had little to do with it. Before we go any further, let’s get back to the beginnings of this. Let’s have televised exploratory hearings. Let them be vast and if necessary let them last years and let them begin now.
Not to get all judgmental, but for myself, I’d like to see something a little less touchy-feely than the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission and something more akin to the McCarthy Hearings. Or better still, something like France’s war crime trials of the legendary and folkloric Vichy Swine, which took Time’s Man of the Year in 1931, Pierre Laval, and left him vomiting before a firing squad in 1945.
The Iraq war and foreign policy are now secondary. What is at stake here is the soul of America. How did Americans allow this to happen? We can blame the weakling courts, the Congress of Peeps and the appeasing and collaborating press for Gitmo, torture, the repeal of habeas corpus and this phony invasion, but up to 75 percent of Americans originally endorsed the invasion in a national fit of war fever. People may be tired of the war today, but Mitt Romney or Jeb Bush will be back soon, either as VP candidates for John McCain or as presidential candidates in 2012, to restore the Bush vision. Because what Bush has done is call for the establishment of an entirely new point of view in the American condition — one at stark variance with our constitutional beginnings — and the next step is to institutionalize it.
This is where I see Gen. Clark as important. You cannot abdicate your principles during the time of need then go back to them after the moral crisis has passed. If you do, they are not principles — they are talismans. The Iraq war was evidence that we as Americans are no longer guided by republican government and its principles. Like Sarko and the new Euro Bush Souls, we are collaborators.
We need to be redeemed. And we need to redeem ourselves.
It is in human nature to justify our failings. But little wars lead to bigger wars shortly after as they empower the citizenry to fight. The Mexican War led to the Civil War. World War I empowered Hitler and Germany to move again in the 1930s. We are now in the gulf between wars, perhaps, waiting for Mitt Romney to fulfill Bush’s great vision in the Middle East.
I saw only Wesley Clark as standing out in opposition at the very beginning. Others, like Howard Dean, opposed, but it is one thing when a northern New England governor opposes — we oppose everything — and quite another when a general with the status of Wesley Clark does. Clark was often alone in his opposition, but he brought forth a force of patriotic character in opposition that elected officials could rally around. Then by the ’06 elections, there was Clark and there was Jim Webb (D), the senator from Virginia, and the will of Congress and the people began to turn on the initiative of these two warrior-scholars and a sea change occurred.
We will need them again and perhaps now we will need them always in public life until we get our bearings back.
Up here in the Vermont region people have bumper stickers with the date of Bush's last day in office: 01.20.09. But you can't do that; you can't let them take it from you and just wait till it passes. If you do, it won't pass. You have empowered the bully and he will be back.
President Obama needs a bulldog. He needs someone who in his person represents us and our best instincts in our tradition. He needs someone who represents us as fair-minded and compassionate and patriotic and resolute in our opposition. Someone like Webb who brought a shrill voice to opposition when no one would listen; someone like Wes Clark who came back from Vietnam in a basket without complaint, hubris or public display.
Obama needs someone who can face the difficult tasks ahead with clarity and without bitterness or recriminations. Because this isn’t over. It is just beginning.
37 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
What is this, the "Bush Derangement Syndrome Manifesto"? The sheer hatred the author has for Bush is amazing, but does the "Bush is simultaneously stupid, criminal, and Machiavellian" meme need another support piece?
And who does he find to be the true hero? Why is the modern Ashley Wilkes, who had heard something before the war and was just SO DAMN courageous risking his…well never mind, he really wasn't risking anything, but he was still COURAGEOUS for speaking out. He'll make a fine VP by the way, you know all that MILITARY EXPERICENCE and everything, something the Messiah lacks.
In any case, I encourage everyone to read "Media Madness" by James Bowman that leads to this "Bush is evil" mentality in the face of overwhelming, but WAY too simple and unexciting evidence, that Bush truly believed there were WMDs in Iraq (remember Tened, "slam dunk" and all that?) and also felt that deposing a tyrant in the Middle East would be good for the US.
Comment by Igor R. — June 28, 2008 @ 8:34 pm
This post requires the willing suspension of disbelief.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — June 28, 2008 @ 9:52 pm
Now this shameful post makes sense: Ashley Wilkes was planning to attack McCain and his importance needed to be confirmed:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11425.html
Comment by Igor R. — June 29, 2008 @ 11:03 pm
I like this quote from another blog:
"At some point pubbies have to go on record as to the nature of Clark and the Clark/KKKlinton/Albright notion of the “good war’, i.e. bombing some totally innocent Christian nation into dust for eighty days and nights including Easter sunday for the benefit of narco-terrorists, savages, white trash, and a political organization which is basically a branch of AlQuaeda, and to take a believable rape allegation against a psychopath US president off the front pages of American newspapers."
Comment by Igor R. — June 29, 2008 @ 11:05 pm
Ashley exposed:
http://www.nationalreview.com/geraghty/geraghty2004020208
Comment by Igor R. — June 29, 2008 @ 11:06 pm
These are the freak Obama's real friends, not the wussified "warrior" Clark:
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/003764print.html
Comment by Igor R. — June 30, 2008 @ 1:22 am
The lying Obama can pretend to be a "good Christian man" but only those who are already inclined to believe his lies will trust anything he says. He even exposed himself in a NYT interview not so long ago, and yet now he is starting with his disinformation campaign. His fake "love of country" needs fake "patriots" like Clark in order to make people forget about what he himself said about his background:
“I was a little Jakarta street kid,” he said in a wide-ranging interview in his office (excerpts are on my blog, http://www.nytimes.com/ontheground). He once got in trouble for making faces during Koran study classes in his elementary school, but a president is less likely to stereotype Muslims as fanatics — and more likely to be aware of their nationalism — if he once studied the Koran with them.
Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully uncalculated (it’ll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.”
Comment by Igor R. — June 30, 2008 @ 1:29 am
W. Clark is the likely nominee for Vice President. Excellent choice for the reasons you elucidate.
Comment by Steve Shlafer — June 30, 2008 @ 11:04 am
"Obama needs someone who can face the difficult tasks ahead with clarity and without bitterness or recriminations. Because this isn’t over. It is just beginning."
I thought Obama was the "Great Messiah" to those on the Left. One thing you got right as outlined by your last paragraph (above) is Obama is in way over his head in what is transpiring world wide. Hell, we can't even control it within out borders, let alone the world. Beating it back with a big stick is the only way to keep it off our shores. Wesley Clark? Abdication without bitterness or recrimination. Right. It was easier back then to live in Thomas Jefferson's idealist world than the rough life in New England taught John Adams. Turn on your lights, turn up the heat, enjoy your Latte you picked up in your Prius. Pursuing Clarks path, as it would be Obama's if he selected him, will only hasten the day the lights go out. Isn't La La Land great while it lasts?
Comment by JEdgarSwoop — June 30, 2008 @ 1:04 pm
Retired Gen. Wesley Clark said Sunday on CBS's Face the Nation that "riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down" is not "a qualification to be president." Well, Wesley Clark, has crossed over the line that separates low life scum from the rest of society. Only true scum would have made a statement like that. Attacking a genuine war hero with a statement like that makes Wesley Clark look like an unpatriotic coward, and that's not really much of a qualification for any public office either. At least in this country.
And that leads to a further question. Why does Barack always surround himself with so many unpatriotic types like this? It makes him look unpatriotic. Personally, I'm sure Barack is unpatriotic and that as we move through the election cycle, he will prove it again and again.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — June 30, 2008 @ 1:06 pm
You got Igor's panites all in a bunch.
Wes Clark would be a great choice for VP.
Comment by Dwayne Mac — June 30, 2008 @ 1:08 pm
This morning the Obama campaign distanced itself from Clark's bashing of McCain's qualifications on CNN. Clark used the very things he doesn't think are relevant in McCain's case to advance Kerry's candidacy when he was running. The duplicitous, fired for incompetence Clark must be the default choice to augment Obama's military credentials after Webb dropped out for his Confederate leanings. Shameful! Perhaps Hams that supports Obama should supply someone more honest to augment these supposed credentials, maybe they can find some American-born militant.
Comment by Igor R. — June 30, 2008 @ 1:27 pm
Judging from the latest words from Wesley, …he must be deserate for a VP job…
Wesly Clark's dismissing commentary about McCains military expeience is rather similar to the horrific swift-boating applied to Sen Kerry during his run for Prez only 4-years ago.
I am sure Sen Kerry is sick to his stomach that the Dems have stooped to this level. If anyone know the damaging pain of such a low blow, he would.
Looks like the Obama campaign tore a page out of the swift-boaters plan book and handed it off to Wes…
That wasn't a very bright move. It certainly was a desperate move.
To me, it is very troubeling.
Comment by JFK-HRC — June 30, 2008 @ 1:42 pm
Lets see, the truth must hurt because Igor, RR, Jedgar and JFK all had nothing to say. As a Viet Nam vet, I think what General Clark said is correct. Getting shot down is not a qualification for President. I didn't read where you folk were upset when the GOP and Swiftboaters went after Kerry. I didn't read where you were upset went the right went after Max Cleland and I know you weren't upset when the GOP went after Gore. Gore, Kerry and Cleland all served honorably in Viet Nam and during the 2004 election, you mock Kerry with bandaids representing purple hearts. Don't get on your high horse now that your man's service is being questioned. When you had a chance to stand up, you mocked, now that legitimate questions are going to be asked about McCain don't cry now.
Comment by Mike Coleman — June 30, 2008 @ 2:00 pm
Mike, getting shot down is not a qualification, but refusing to go home when you could not to leave your buddies behind is a step in the right direction. Being friends with terrorists and going to the church of hate, and being friendly with its deranged pastor who claims that AIDS was invented by the US government to kill black people and that America deserved 9/11 should disqualify one from having a country board seat, let alone being in charge of the armed forces. The terrorist-in-training Obama is a menace unlike any ever seen by the US since the war of independence.
Comment by Igor R. — June 30, 2008 @ 2:56 pm
Dwayne, regardless of the state of my panties, Wes Clark is the token military man that the Democrats need to hide their defeatist tendencies and lack of patriotism. Using the same argument to dismiss McCain that he used four years ago to build up Kerry makes him a two-faced scoundrel. I've hear this joker talk a number of times, he had sold his soul to the Devil and now he has to defend the Democratic beast no matter what.
Comment by Igor R. — June 30, 2008 @ 3:00 pm
Spot on Coleman
Comment by Dwayne Mac — June 30, 2008 @ 3:03 pm
It's not a simple act of questioning someone's war time service. It's a question of simply equating it to a nothing event. John Kerry spoke out against a war he had served in and I believe the mud stuck because there was something to it. However, I simply think that anyone who would make such a statement where they were alluding to an incident where someone ended up enduring 5 years of torture in enemy's hands is scum.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — June 30, 2008 @ 3:03 pm
So, Robert Rosencrans, getting shot down IS a qualification for the Presidency? Is being shot any kind of qualification for higher office? I'm asking because Wesley Clark came home from Vietnam on a stretcher with bullet holes down the right side of his body. He's a war hero, too, so by what right - and using your standard - do you call him lowlife scum? And what "line" was crossed, exactly? Is no one entitled to ask how being shot down and held prisoner 40 years ago renders one eligible for the highest office in the land? You accused Clark of equating it to a nothing event. He did no such thing, and there you go again impugning the honor of someone who was himself severely wounded in battle. Why don't you point to the part of Clark's statements which equate McCain's experiences to a "nothing event"?
Comment by Carla57 — June 30, 2008 @ 4:13 pm
#14 To Mike Coleman
I personally loved Kerry and Gore.
McCain - he is my man NOW for the Prez seat, as I was a Hillary supporter until she lost.
Please don't drag me into your net of angry-hillary-supporters-b.s. I think the Obama team just made that up to make hillary supporters look weak.
I am an a healthy skeptic when it comes to Obama. I like the young fella. But, he is no JOHN McCAIN.
#18 Robert R.
Exactly, after J. McCain was imprisoned and tortured, he still took care of his fellow soldiers. he could have come back to the U.S. and never looked back. He chose to serve this nation. what more can we dream for?
I felt terrible for J. Kerry -the way they treated him… he to was another hero. Honestly, I didn't think a Dem would ever stoop that low… No Obama's team just did… They are doing the same thing they did to HRC, twisting facts into lies. With hillary it was Racism, Now with McCain, his heroism doesn't qualify him t/b Prez.??? what kind of brain thought that up? I wouldn't believe Wes Clark said those words if I didn't see it myself…
With that, I will find out if I can oficially change my status from Dem to Republican. I'm done.
Will they do anything to win?
But here they just did it to McCain — not very American is it!
Comment by JFK-HRC — June 30, 2008 @ 4:52 pm
I am 100% certain that Wesley Clark's attack on McCain was a pre-calculated move approved by Obama himself. Just like he pre-approved his wife's speech about not being product of her country for the first 40+ years of her life. Just like he sat for 20 years in a Trinity Church approving anti-US hatred. What a scum you guys selected as your nominee, Democrats!
Comment by Misha — June 30, 2008 @ 4:57 pm
To Igor, RR and the rest;
In McCain record, there are hundreds of missing pages that he won't release. He has touted his services as a reason he would be ready as CIC. I believe and I know that the GOP in 2004 wanted to see what was in Kerry's records and I want to see what is in McCains. If McCain claims that he was tortured for 5 1/2 years, I would want to know if he suffered form PTSD. Why? Becuase if does, he may flip out and do something that would not be in our best interest. Also, he flew 23 combat missions that equated to 20 hours in combat. How did he get the Silver Star, Legion of Merit, 2 Bronze Stars and a DFC. The Purple Heart I can understand. The Silver Star is awarded for Valor and getting shot down doesn't qualify. The award of the Legion of Merit really gets me because here is teh definition of teh award:
b. The Legion of Merit is awarded to all members of the Armed Forces of the United States without reference to degree for exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding services and achievements. The performance must have been such as to merit recognition of key individuals for service rendered in a clearly exceptional manner. Performance of duties normal to the grade, branch, specialty or assignment, and experience of an individual is not an adequate basis for this award. For service not related to actual war the term "key individual" applies to a narrower range of positions than in time of war and requires evidence of significant achievement. In peacetime, service should be in the nature of a special requirement or of an extremely difficult duty performed in an unprecedented and clearly exceptional manner. However, justification of the award may accrue by virtue of exceptionally meritorious service in a succession of important positions.
So just being a fighter pilot doesn't get you one and nowhere in his past would he or should he be awarded one. These, in my mind, are legitimate questions since he is using his status as a POW to state that he qualified to be President.
Comment by Mike Coleman — June 30, 2008 @ 5:02 pm
Igor #15;
Just say that you can't answer my question and leave it at that. Going off on your tangent about his church and blah blah blah doesn't do it anymore.
Comment by Mike Coleman — June 30, 2008 @ 5:07 pm
Correction, I meant "proud" not "product" in my post above when referring to Obama's wife.
Comment by Misha — June 30, 2008 @ 6:00 pm
Igor, you bring many good points to the table but you sometimes go off the deep end with irrational statements. Saying things like "terrorist-in-training Obama" and "being friends with terrorists" diminishes your credibility. It shows that you construe things based on your hatred verses any rational.
The rational for the BDS as you call it completely different. It's based on abject failure after abject failure along with gross dishonesty and completely turning his back on working America. Disposing of tyrant that was no threat to us does not justify misleading the country into an ongoing war with no exit plan. Bush's crimes to the country (be them legal or not) should not be swept away or forgotten. When there's a man running on his coat tails and promising another 4 years of the same, I'll take my chances with Obama. The nonsense "terrorist" fear mongering you're spewing isn't selling anymore. I think the majority of America agrees with me.
Comment by andy42302 — June 30, 2008 @ 6:34 pm
To: Carla57- I didn't criticize Wesley Clark's war record. I am simply commenting on his attack on someone for political purposes only. The comment was over the line, and I think that making that type of comment for that reason alone does make him scum. As far as equating it to a nothing event, you're doing the exact same thing by even bringing it up and asking why it should qualify him to be President. Alone, it might not. It's not a question that should be asked as a stand alone question But it's part of a lifetime of experiences which shows his courage. You and Wesley Clark keep repeating this scum statement and see how far it gets Obama. There is no proof Obama floated this trial ballon, but the American public is smarter than he, Wesley Clark and you believe. Keep on telling them how John McCain was shot down and it doesn't qualify him. The majority of Americans will reject this type of unpatriotic pandering and Obama right along with it. If I were McCain I would start running an ad showing that downed footage once a week now. Then show Reverend Wright saying "God Damn America" with Barack saying he can't cut himself loose from the reverend. That's Barack's main qualifaction, along with his association with Bill Ayres.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — June 30, 2008 @ 8:25 pm
Andy, I personally do hate Obama. It would possibly be fair to say that I suffer from ODS if my hatred is irrational, but believe it or not hatred can be entirely rational. I consider it rational precisely because "being friends with terrorists" happens to be an actual fact (while "terrorist-in-training" is simply how I think of the guy with his South Side adventures, Koranic studies in Indonesia followed by claims of being a life-long Christian, and various questionable cousins in Kenya, and Hamas and Iranian gestures of support). Bill Ayers is a terrorist and Obama's campaign described their relationship as "friendly". There is no getting away from it. I don't have any terrorist friends, I doubt you do, I don't think McCain does, I am not even aware of any CURRENT Hillary's terrorist friends, and I consider it unfortunate that we have a candidate who, for whatever reason, has this particular association in addition to the Trinity Church, Pfleger, and Farrakhan. On top of it, I consider Obama's economic policies highly destructive and a step towards Marxism which I've experienced and hoped to never experience again. There is literally nothing I find admirable about the guy, other than the success of his campaign, he is pure poison and millions of young, idealistic admirers have no bearing on my opinion other a "here we go again" feeling. Hate-mongering, war-mongering, and fear-mongering are devices that the those on the left use to discredit opponents. Hating someone, fearing them, or supporting a war are not a priori bad things, no matter what the entire progressive America thinks.
Now on Bush. Nobody, including the recent congressional investigation, ever proved that Bush did not believe that Saddam Hussein was a great danger to this country. Additionally, I believe Bush thought that creating a democracy in the middle east by deposing a tyrant who HE thought was a danger, would be a positive step for the US. His critics believe that (a) he lied about the WMDs, in the sense that he knew for certain they weren't there but created an appearance of that (b) he started this war for some nefarious reasons such as helping his oil company buddies or avenging his father or finishing the work his father never finished. This is coincident with not considering him a legitimate President based on Florida 2000. All of this occurs in the environment where various NYT columnist, for example, can make any charge of high crimes and misdemeanors against Bush without any perceived obligation to provide evidence, because as "everybody knows" Bush deserves all that's coming to him and then some. There is a whole mythology that support BDS, and in my opinion it's truly irrational.
Comment by Igor R. — June 30, 2008 @ 8:41 pm
#22 Mike Coleman
Your quote - "…he is using his POW status as qualification for Presidency…"
I think not Mike. You know very well Sen McCain has refrained from exploiting his military background and never implied it as a qualification for Presidency. In fact he mixes little military with politics. He has the right idea. Military men should never trade their valor for a political party. I don't think McCain even consciously realizes that it would be a discredit to the services. Perhaps he does know it becaus he, to my knowledge, has never trespassed over another's military background.
True, his honorable military background is occasionally mentioned, but mostly brought up by his admirers on both sides of the political sphere.
However, I found it very poor judgement on Wesley Clark's part that he would (A) - fall for the the potential VP bate, and, (B)- I found it abhorrant he would exploit Sen McCain's military heroism and background during an opportunity to speak up for Obama.
This really only hurt Clark. I think Clark lost credibility. A military guy that could be so care-free and trample over the valor of another soldier's heroism is rather dumb. Well, Clark has fulfilled his usefulness for Obama by blurting out the akward soundbite.
I imagine Sen. McCain swallowed hard when he heard about the exploitation.
Well, no real harm done, all it did was give Obama another opportunity to glow while he publically lambasted Wesley Clark and publically distanced himself agian on some abstract moral basis.
It was another staged event w/ another stunned victem: General-deer-in-the-headlights-Clark.
As for you Mr Coleman, why don't you get a job w/ the CIA to figure out your dopey swift-boating conspiracies. There is no place here for you. Remember every day you breath the fresh air, and eat the fresh fruit of this Land, and pray to your God freely, it is because of guys just like MCCain, Kerry, and yes, Clark.
Not perfect but real mortal men with honor.
Comment by JFK-HRC — June 30, 2008 @ 10:01 pm
andy42302, #25. Please, take your chances with Obama. His patriotism is unquestionable and his knowledge of Koran is quite good as well. After all, he quit his favorite church (for now) to have a shot at the White House (soon to be painted purple with red basketball hoops near each door) to bring us a change we can believe in, or for illegals "Sí, se puede" (we don't need no stinking Green Card in English).
Comment by Misha — July 1, 2008 @ 2:39 am
RR #26;
John McCain has constantly touted his status as a POW as a reason to vote for him. Remember this was a man, born to a 4 star Admiral and grandson of a 4 star and he ranked 894 out of 899 in the Naval Academy. He lost 4 plane via accidents and a fifth via being shot down. When captured, he gave up more than his name rank and serial number.
http://www.usvetdsp.com/mcainmdl.htm
There are reports that he helped his capturer in making of films and other media projects:
http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd59.htm
This is why an honest look at John McCain's records are vital to this election. If there is something amiss, we should knwo now instead of later.
Comment by Mike Coleman — July 1, 2008 @ 10:06 am
Before I leave, here is more about John McCain's time in Hanoi. List to the tape of the caller, you'll be shocked by what you hear.
http://www.forandagainst.com/articles/McCain_s_Military_Record_Shows_He_Is_Unfit_To_Be_President
Comment by Mike Coleman — July 1, 2008 @ 10:15 am
Mike Coleman: You are one lame individual.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — July 1, 2008 @ 12:21 pm
RR;
Awww did I hurt your image of McSame? Good, tell me what is lame about the posts that I did. Just saying that I'm lame isn't good enough, refute me with facts, otherwise I'll conclude that I'm correct. Cheers.
Comment by Mike Coleman — July 1, 2008 @ 1:23 pm
Not shocked by what i hear abt mccain i will be shocked when his real war record is discussed by main street media. To nmbr 22, if bush really thought that bringing democracy to the middle east then why didnt he just say that? Why lie about wmd's if all you wanted was democracy for Iraqies? Your willingness to continue drinking the kool aid is comical. people like you dont really love this country you just like hating others.
Comment by robbe p — July 1, 2008 @ 7:32 pm
Barac Obama has given Wesley Clark his script to spew evil to anyone who will listen to him, trying to besmurch John McCain's military service and his service to the government as Senator. My God, the man must be desparate, to pit one military man against another and both officers is quite an accomplishment. Clark must be broke to be that far down on his knees.
Comment by Sherry — July 2, 2008 @ 5:28 am
Sherry;
General Wesley Clark doesn't need a script from Obama to called them like he see them. John McCain's military record consists of crashing 4 planes due to pilot error and getting shot down and captured in a fifth. There are hundreds of pages of his military record that we can't see. During the 04 election cycle, you and many like you pick Bush over Kerry. Bush went awol from teh Air National Guard and at teh republican convention, your folks wore purple heart bandaids. Now you want us to take McCain's heroism at face value. I think not, his whining makes me want to see what is in his records. Remember, he was, allegelly tortured for 5 years. People who have been tortured suffer from PSTD. If his medical and debriefing records show that, then he is not fit to be POTUS.
Comment by Mike Coleman — July 2, 2008 @ 11:43 am
JFK;
McCain has used his status as a POW to get where he has gotten. Also about his medical and military records, you probably haven't seen this:
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/election08/189
So there is no conspiracy that he is hiding something, it is a fact.
Comment by Mike Coleman — July 2, 2008 @ 5:27 pm