Wes' Point

Whether Wes Clark's comment on the lack of Commander-in-Chief justification inherent in John McCain's military service hurts the Obama campaign or helps undermine that side of the McCain candidacy, we do not yet know. However, it has surely disqualified him from the Vice President slot, recalling to mind Sen. Jim Webb's reaction when a reporter asked, a month ago, about Clark as a choice. Webb seemed surprised, saying that it would seem like an unlikely move to pick someone who had never won elective office.

Here's Clark saying something very true, in a very tone-deaf way:



For the Web-video challenged, it goes:

After 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," he added that these experiences in no way qualify McCain to be president in his view:

"He has been a voice on the Senate Armed Services Committee. And he has traveled all over the world. But he hasn't held executive responsibility. That large squadron in the Navy that he commanded — that wasn't a wartime squadron," Clark said.

"I don’t think getting in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to become president."

What's interesting here is the response, with the Mainstream Media calling it an attack on McCain's service record (which it clearly wasn't), McCain himself unleashing his "Truth Squad" lead by one of the same Swiftboaters who smeared his supposed buddy John Kerry's record, and several notable military men coming to Clark's defense.

There are two main reasons the right is going hard after Clark, and why he needs some wingmen to back him up. For one, if McCain is running on anything, it's his service and sacrifice to country. Being buddies with Joe Lieberman sure as hell ain't bipartisanship, not in 2008, and he sure can't run on his judgment. The other reason is that Wes Clark is phenomenally popular as a Democratic foreign policy and military affairs spokesperson:

No one in the entire country is more important to Democratic credibility on foreign policy than Wesley Clark. No one. And this isn't just my opinion, it is the opinion of Democratic congressional candidates who requested him...

Imagine if the top issue in the mind of the electorate was energy and global warming. Imagine if, as a result, Al Gore become the most requested surrogate in the country by Democratic congressional candidates. Then, imagine if the right-wing began attacking Gore in an unfair manner for a benign, true statement. And then, imagine if the Democratic nominee condemned Gore for that statement. Now, you tell me, would dumping Al Gore for the rest of the campaign season be strategic in that case?

Taking out the leading Democratic surrogate on national security would be a huge victory for Republicans.

To his credit, even though Obama has had to (justifiably, in my mind, to keep his campaign consistent) distance himself from Clark's comment, Clark isn't backing down. And good for him because, as noted above, McCain's judgment is lousy now, was lousy on Iraq, and was -- admittedly, by McCain himself -- lousy back then:

On my last mission in Vietnam, having survived several mishaps that could have but did not cost me my life, I wasn't as acutely aware of the danger to my own well-being that the mission entailed. Instead of interpreting my previous experiences as evidence that things can and often will go wrong when flying, particularly in dangerous and stressful conditions--an awareness that should have made me more heedful of the danger--I had developed a false sense of my own invulnerability. And that characteristic of my ego, which I felt no need to check, discounted the danger I personally faced. I placed too much faith on what was beyond my knowledge or control: luck. And my luck ran out that day. When I heard the warning tone that an enemy SAM battery had locked onto me, I was moments away from dropping my bombs on target. I thought I had enough time to do my job and still evade a missile I knew would probably be coming my way.

Click on that link above for a fully explanation of how this plays into McCain's overall recklessness, including his attempt to drop Secret Service protection. If Obama is able to stick his good judgment theme, if he's able to keep consistent on not attacking his opponent's character but rather his policies, I believe he will be our next President.

So thank you, Gen. Wes Clark, for speaking the truth.

Sorry it had to come at the cost of proving Sen. Jim Webb right.

Get It Together

If the Democratic Congressional leadership doesn't get it together soon, they will really have blown their one opportunity to take control of the public discussion on all these major Bush crime issues facing the country, like getting us into the Iraq War and using the war to gut the U.S. Constitution.

But even The New York Times is telling them they should have let the Republicans filibuster on the Webb Amendment to save our soldiers (you know, what they pretend to call "Support Ze Troops"); hell, they should have made them do it:

The current Republican leadership, now in the minority, has organized its entire agenda around the filibuster. In July, the McClatchy newspaper group reported that Republicans were using the threat of filibuster more than at any other time in the nation’s history.

Remember, this is the same batch of Republican senators who denounced Democrats as obstructionist and even un-American and threatened to change the Senate’s rules when Democrats threatened filibusters in 2005 over a few badly chosen judicial nominees. Now Republicans are using it to prevent consideration of an entire war.

Josh Marshall has some similar reactions from smart readers, with this being my favorite:

TPM Reader AC:

Politics is the art of the possible. And when nothing concrete is possible, that leaves theater. I am baffled at Democrats' continual willingness to concede the stage. Veto or no veto, making the GOP filibuster a bill like Webb's is not pointless. It puts vulnerable GOP moderates on the hot seat, it puts the blame for obstruction on the minority where it belongs, and it may force a series of unpopular high-profile vetoes from Bush.

Bag news Notes boils it down to a photograph of Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) after he's been thrashed -- even though his party had a simple majority:

Although I can feel the reflex rolling around in there, I'm decidedly not going to feel Jim's pain. Instead, I'm going to appreciate ... no, relish the fact that Jimmy learned something yesterday -- a hard lesson about what it's like to seek compromise with people who feel nothing.

And Keith Olbermann put the focus back where it belongs -- squarely on the "President", who seems more and more like a poltergeist from a previous century, like maybe the Tenth.