Post Script: And just to add insult to injury, the McCain campaign hosted a conference call this morning, and “rolled out a leading surrogate named Bud Day — who was described merely as a fellow POW of McCain — who blasted such attacks. ‘John was slandered and reviled in the 2000 campaign in a way that denigrated his service enormously…it was absolutely important to face this issue right off the bat.’ But guess what — it turns out that this very same Bud Day was featured in the Swift Boat Vets ads attacking John Kerry in 2004!”
June 30, 2008
Media mischaracterizes Clark comments, Obama backs away
Posted June 30th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Following up on an item from this morning, the pushback from news outlets, the McCain campaign, and conservative activists against Wesley Clark has been pretty fierce today. In fact, Clark’s comments have already taken on an entirely different meaning.
Here’s how Time characterized the McCain campaign’s efforts this morning: “The presumptive GOP nominee’s campaign launches a “truth squad” Monday morning in the wake of Gen. Wesley Clark repeating his stark criticisms of McCain’s war record Sunday.” That matter-of-fact analysis has been common all day — on Fox News, Molly Henneberg asserted that Clark “seemed to attack [Sen. John] McCain’s military service.”
But that’s just it — Clark didn’t criticize McCain’s war record or military service at all. Not once. Not even a little.
If you missed it, I posted the entire video clip this morning, but Clark actually praised McCain’s war record and military service, saying, “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.”
What Clark actually said was that McCain has never held “executive responsibility.” McCain led a Navy squadron, but it “wasn’t a wartime squadron.” The line between McCain’s service and his presidential qualifications is incomplete: “I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president,” Clark said. The point, which is pretty obvious to anyone who saw the interview and heard the remarks in context, is that McCain’s service several decades ago is not entirely relevant to his presidential qualifications now.
I realize we’re not accustomed to hearing anyone say this, but it’s not false, it’s not a personal attack, and it’s not criticism of McCain’s war record. The media and the right are manufacturing a scandal here that doesn’t exist. They want people to believe that a high-profile Obama backer attacked McCain’s service, despite the fact that this never happened.
Given the freak-out, I guess it’s not too surprising that Obama has started to back away.
Time reported:
In a speech on patriotism in Independence, Missouri, Obama honors McCain’s “physical torment in service to our country.” Also implicitly criticizes Gen. Clark’s comment Sunday disparaging McCain’s accomplishments in Vietnam.
“No one should ever devalue that service, especially for the sake of a political campaign, and that goes for supporters on both sides. We must always express our profound gratitude for the service of our men and women in uniform. Period. Full stop.”
Shortly thereafter, Obama campaign spokesperson Bill Burton added, “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.”
Now, it’s possible that everyone is just playing a part here. Clark takes on one of the pillars of McCain’s campaign pitch, it gets lots of attention, and Obama distances himself from the remarks, nevertheless pleased that Clark inserted the argument into the public discourse.
The problem, though, is that the Obama campaign’s response implicitly accepts the criticism offered by the media and the right — that Clark was attacking McCain’s military service, despite the fact that never actually happened.
Josh Marshall had a good item on this:
The McCain campaign’s angle here is to not to prevent attacks on the integrity of McCain’s war record (which Clark explicitly did not do) but to make it off limits for anyone to question that his war-time experience means he has the temperament and experience which make him the better qualified candidate to be president.
The McCain campaign’s claim that there’s any attack here on McCain’s war record is simply a lie — a simple attempt to fool people. This is an essential point to this entire campaign — does McCain’s military record mean that even the Democrats have to concede the point that he’s more qualified to be commander-in-chief of the US armed forces, that his foreign and national security policy judgment is superior to Obama’s? It’s simply a fact that McCain has a record of really poor judgment on a whole list of key foreign policy and national security questions.
This is one of those moments in the campaign where the nonsense from the chief DC press sachems is so palpable and overwhelming that everyone who cares about this contest needs to jump into the breach and demand that they answer why no one can question whether McCain’s war record makes him more qualified to be president and whether he has good foreign policy and national security judgment.
Four years ago, Republicans said John Kerry’s military background didn’t necessarily mean he’s right about national security, and doesn’t necessarily make him qualified to be president. Yesterday, Clark made the same argument about McCain.
The feigned, coordinated outrage here is transparent. Why the media is buying into the outrage, and exaggerating it, makes me wonder if the McCain campaign will have to report today’s coverage as an in-kind contribution.
Post Script: And just to add insult to injury, the McCain campaign hosted a conference call this morning, and “rolled out a leading surrogate named Bud Day — who was described merely as a fellow POW of McCain — who blasted such attacks. ‘John was slandered and reviled in the 2000 campaign in a way that denigrated his service enormously…it was absolutely important to face this issue right off the bat.’ But guess what — it turns out that this very same Bud Day was featured in the Swift Boat Vets ads attacking John Kerry in 2004!” |
