Because in the matters of national security policy making, it's a matter of understanding risk, it's a matter of gauging your opponents and it's a matter of being held accountable. John McCain's never done any of that in his official positions. I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands of millions of others in the armed forces as a prisoner of war. 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 wasn't a wartime squadron. He hasn't been there and ordered the bombs to fall. He hasn't seen what it's like when diplomats come in and say, `I don't know whether we're going to be able to get this point through or not. Do you want to take the risk? What about your reputation? How do we handle it publicly?
I don't know if he realizes it or not, but McCain's resume is a little more extensive than Barack Obama's. Did he really think its a good idea to go after McCain on points where Obama has no advantage? Neither of them has executive experience. McCain has lightyears more experience in Congress on foreign policy committees. Meanwhile, Obama has been too busy campaigning to hold hearings for the one subcommittee he chairs.
Comparing their careers outside of Congress doesn't help Obama much either. Obama registered voters and hung out with radical leftist groups like ACORN in his early days, then spent a few years at a public interest firm in Chicago. McCain returned from Vietnam and was in charge of a fighter squadron, then spent several years on Capitol Hill as the Navy's liason to the Senate.
Basically, Clark's line of attack would mean something if his candidate actually possessed some of the qualifications Clark says McCain is lacking. Since Obama doesn't, all he's really doing is helping to highlight what he thinks are deficiencies in both candidates, not just McCain.
I agree with the spirit of what you're saying about Clark's attacks, but again -- "Meanwhile, Obama has been too busy campaigning to hold hearings for the one subcommittee he chairs."
McCain hasn't voted in the Senate since April either and he had his nomination wrapped up.
Posted By: J.D. Dunn (Registered) on June 30, 2008 at 01:29 PM
Nobody was under the impression Obama has military experience. Pointing out McCain's shortcomings has no bearing on that. And nothing you wrote changes that this election is all about the economy, which McCain has admitted he's not qualified to fix. I don't care how "extensive" a resume is if the most needed qualification is grossly lacking, and neither will voters in November. To put it succinctly, no one gives a s*** about Iraq or terrorists when their house is about to be foreclosed on.
Posted By: Shockmaster (Guest) on June 30, 2008 at 01:45 PM
It appears Clark would like a VP consideration from Obama. And he's right-being a war prisoner-though celebrated with honor-does not automatiically qualify anyone for being the best at war planning, etc.
Posted By: Guest#8062 (Guest) on June 30, 2008 at 01:58 PM
I never said being a POW did. But to highlight the experience issue is a stupid move because it is a losing issue for Obama.
Posted By: Chris Connolly (Registered) on June 30, 2008 at 05:25 PM
STAY CURRENT