Wes Clark and the risks of hardball
Did Wesley Clark really say what I thought he said? Did the retired four-star general and ex-NATO commander, in his role as Barack Obama surrogate, actually dare to suggest yesterday, on national TV, that Americans should re
Wes Clark and the risks of hardball
Dick Polman, Inquirer National Political Columnist
Did Wesley Clark really say what I thought he said? Did the retired four-star general and ex-NATO commander, in his role as Barack Obama surrogate, actually dare to suggest yesterday, on national TV, that Americans should refrain from genuflecting at the feet of John McCain just because he had been a POW?
He did indeed. The Clark soundbite on CBS: "I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president."
It'll be interesting to see whether the Obama camp puts Clark back on the air in the future. It's clear, on the one hand, that the Obama camp is fully prepared to play hardball, that it does not intend to accept the conventional wisdom (as expressed in most national polls) that McCain's war hero status makes him more qualified to keep us safe. Indeed, the Obama camp seems prepared to question McCain's greatest perceived character asset, in the hopes of fatally undercutting his candidacy.
On the other hand, such a mission requires a certain delicacy. It's arguably fair game to question whether five years in a POW prison automatically confers upon someone the wisdom to guide a nation's foreign policy nearly four decades later. The delicate part is figuring out a way to raise the legitimate issue without seeming to be dismissive of McCain's searing experience. Many viewers yesterday probably sensed only the latter.
Indeed, Team Obama sought this morning to distance itself from its own surrogate. On MSNBC, Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs said: "Obviously, those are comments of Wesley Clark, those are not the comments of Barack Obama."
Actually, Clark's remark doesn't seem quite as provocative when viewed in full context. On CBS' Face the Nation yesterday, he was asked to explain what he had meant, earlier this year, when he had called McCain "untested and untried." Clark replied: "I certainly honor his service as prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds 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 bombs to fall..." (Here, Clark was referring to his own role as a NATO commander during the '99 bombing of Serbia. It sounded like he was auditioning to be Obama's veep.)
At this point, host Bob Schieffer interrupted, pointing out that Obama has none of those experiences either, "nor has he ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down."
And that's when Clark retorted, "Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president."
Most Democratic voters are probably thrilled that Clark put this out there; Clark, in fact, is touted by many as a great veep choice, on the grounds that he can leverage his superior military credentials (West Point valedictorian, Rhodes Scholar, NATO commander) to legitimately question McCain's record.
And McCain has not been shy this year about trying to parlay his POW experience for maximum political gain; on his campaign website, his "Courageous Service" video begins with POW footage and returns to it repeatedly. Nor was he shy even in 1982, when he was first campaigning for Congress; seeking to fend off the (accurate) charge that he was a carpetbagger newly arrived in his Arizona district, he played the POW card during a debate, telling an opponent: "Listen, pal...I wish I could have the luxury, like you, of growing up and living and spending my entire life in a nice place like the First District of Arizona, but I was doing other things. As a matter of fact, when I think about it now, the place I lived longest in my life was Hanoi."
The question for Obama, however, is whether swing voters will respond favorably to the kind of frontal assault launched yesterday by Clark. The danger for Obama, of course, is that an ill-nuanced critique of McCain's war record (or at least the widely circulated soundbite) might look too much like bare-knuckled old politics, as opposed to the post-partisan new politics that Obama has promised.
On the other hand, if the Obama camp cools on using Wes Clark again, perhaps it might prefer to question McCain's national security qualifications by recycling this 1999 remark about the guy's war record: "It doesn't take a lot of talent to intercept a surface-to-air missile with your own airplane."
The guy who made that remark? John McCain.
-------
Meanwhile, remember the flap last week when McCain strategist Charlie Black was forced to rescind his contention that McCain would benefit politically if the U.S. suffered a pre-election terrorist attack? The remark was widely thought to be in bad taste - but it was nevertheless thought to be true, since, supposedly, most Americans would automatically rally around the Republicans, supposedly the enduring party of national security strength.
As a corrective to that flawed assumption, I recommend today's mega-narrative in The New York Times, which is based on interviews with more than four dozen militarty and intelligence sources. It demonstrates in detail how the Bush administration's obsession with Iraq has made America weaker, more prone to attack from the terrorists who have reconstituted their strength where the war is really located, along the Pakistani border. (Regarding the Bush obsession with Iraq, let us remember that John McCain never questioned the specious rationales for invasion.)
Some choice story tidbits, among many:
"Current and former military and intelligence officials said that the war in Iraq consistently diverted resources and high-level attention from the tribal areas. When American military and intelligence officials requested additional Predator drones to survey the tribal areas, they were told no drones were available because they had been sent to Iraq."
And this:
"With (al) Qaeda operatives now described in intelligence reports as deeply entrenched in the tribal areas and immersed in the civilian population, there is also a view among some military and C.I.A. officials that the opportunity for decisive American action against the militants may have been lost....Leading terrorism experts have warned that it is only a matter of time before a major terrorist attack planned in the mountains of Pakistan is carried out on American soil."
This material alone would be fertile material for Wes Clark. Assuming that he is allowed to resurface.
"Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president." "It doesn't take a lot of talent to intercept a surface-to-air missile with your own airplane." Truer words have not been spoken recently about McSame. From vet, USAF Retired person...
I'm not sure what the blow back may be from Clark's remarks. However, this seems like this was a carefully calculated attempt by the Obama campaign to have someone with superior military credentials attempt to neutralize McCain's presumed national security advantage. It is very difficult for anyone without the equivalent experience to assail McCain with his POW experience and national hero status. AO— AnObserver- What qualifications does Obama have in comparison, especially as a starting point? I know we never read history any more but a number of military leaders have been pretty good Presidents.— sleepy
- What qualifications does Obama have to be anything more then a junior senator? He has no record to run on whatsoever, his campaign speeches and promises mean nothing if he's got nothing to back them up. What has he accomplished in his very brief experience in public office; next to nothing. Now he wants to smear a well respected war veteran and run against a Bush term rather then take McCain on directly. However, this is why he opted out of the public financing, he said to fight against the smear campaigns that would be coming. Sounds like his side is the only one smearing.— thelastRepublicaninPhilly
- Even Obama apologist Dick Polman can't spin the fact that he has never been to Europe, the middle east or the rest of the world. The guy thinks there are 54 state in America but he never gets the rap that he is dumb or inexperienced. Does not fit the Inky narrative— NJPinelander
- America gets who they deserve..right? Admittedly, Obama is a rock star with little experience. Some say experience is overrated.... perhaps...evidence may suggest as much as we only need look at the greatest composers, scientists, artists, and entrepreneurs to know that one's eureka accomplishments are mostly done at a young age. So perhaps voting in 70+ year-old leaders over 40-something leaders is not where we ought to place our bets. Personally, I vented long for a more seasoned leader than Obama, that he should have run 8 years from now. But here we're faced with but two choices, and I'm not really in love with either, but of the two, my vote coalesces around Obama on the grounds that McCain originally embraced the Bush administration to win over his own party (flip-flopper). And now because McCain's economic knowledge is incredibly WEAK, he's surrounding himself with Bushie types to help him out. hmmm...energy costs, education costs, debt, debt, debt, healthcare costs, faith in the Federal Reserve (bankers), devaluation of the dollar, housing/sub-prime mess --- these are fantastic reasons to embrace the economic teams of the Bush term, eh?— JeffA
- NJ Pinelander - this drumbeat to knock Obama on knowing the # of states, that talking about 54 or 55 races is equivalent to states is such garbage. we have 50 states plus Guam, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, District of Columbia, and Democrats Abroad...that's 55 by my count. Go take your disinformatzia to the Kool-aid drinking sites.— JeffA
Comment removed.- That's 55 Democratic primaries/caucuses - http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/primaries/democraticprimaries/index.html— JeffA
- I agree that the Clark comment will cause more backlash than good, but maybe it will incite a discussion of McCain's actual military record and why he crashed 4 times during his misbehaved career.— atp2007
- NJPinelander: Obama has actual relatives living in Kenya, where people like Hillary and McSame visit for photo ops.— p-diddy
- There are 56 states if you count the Pine Barrens.— jwad56
- McCain is tough, intelligent and he is experienced. But his positions are terrible.— p-diddy
- Relatives in Kenya is definitely a qualification for President of the USA.— jwad56
- Apparently Polman's never heard of self deprecating humor ("doesn't take a lot .....).Nor has he heard that career military men move around a lot (carpetbagger charge).As soon as I saw the headline I knew I would enjoy the spin.— Yankee Air Pirate 12
- Comment removed.
- Let's see. Back in 2004, Clark lauded the military experience of one John Kerry as being one of the primary reasons he had the experience to be president. He even gave Kerry credit for "fighting the peace" (Clark's words). Now, military experience is of no consequence in choosing a president. Four years ago Kerry and a lot on this site cried foul about the Swiftboaters, now Clark is doing the same thing and it is "hey, we need to scrutinize McCain's military record" where Kerry's was never scrutinized and he never allowed for his records to be released. Criticizing Kerry was considered mauling a hero, where McCain is concerned it is fair game. And you people are worried about the Republican smear machine? Seems you have a pretty good one of your own, since it is from the Democrat side that the only smears are coming.— tom - wilmington, de
- Tom this is why Democrats have no credibility. Unfortunate for them, they can't see the hypocrisy. Of course normal people do. It's why they can't understand how Bush could beat them. When they lose this election they are really gonna flip out trying to figure out what went wrong.— jwad56
- First Dick Polman writes a column that says Obama's flip flop on campaign finance is a good thing for him. Now he wants us to believe that Obama's total lack of foreign experience is a good thing too. Come on Dick, either get a job on Obama's campaign or at least try to give the appearance that you are impartial. It should be embarrassing for the Inquirer to be so blantantly biased in its reporting and opinion pieces/— NJPinelander
- To compare Swifties to Clark is a bit of a stretch. To be apples to apples, Clark would have to assail McCain's military record as a fairy-tale with accounts of 'what really happened' in the Hanoi POW camp from other POW's. Like the commentary, plenty of hypocrisy here, but let's keep things in perspective. These are NOT equivalents.— JeffA
- Nothing against McCain but I don't see what the fuss is about. In fact, in a cool headed way, I'd agree with Clark's statements. Getting shot down from a plane has nothing to do with being qualified for ANYTHING other having the luck to survive such a horrible affair. As far as understanding ones opponent and making sound judgements, well that's obvious. What seems to be at play here is whether or not these very 'patriotic' and militaristic deeds play into the way McCain would like to spin them as presidential qualifications.— will d.
"It demonstrates in detail how the Bush administration's obsession with Iraq has made America weaker, more prone to attack from the terrorists who have reconstituted their strength.." Prone to attack from terrorists who, for some inexplicable reason, have not attacked the U.S in almost 7 years even though we've been at war with them since 2001. This is one of the great mysteries of the universe.— jmc- Wow Tom, you could audition for the next Fantastic Four movie as Stretch. You showed your qualifications with that post. The Swift Boaters tried to make everyone believe that Kerry shot himself in order to get a Purple Heart and then strong armed his superior to file the paperwork. Hardly the same thing. In context you can see that Clark is tossing adulation on McCain and answered a statement with the same statement thrown back at Schieffer. Schieffer's phrasing caused a reaction from Clark. The guy is 300 years old and has been doing these interviews longer then we've both been breathing. He knew he would get that type of reaction from Clark and he got what he wanted, a nice soundbite to play over and over.— amg
- Yankee, Polman didn't call McCain a carpetbagger, McCain's opponent for the Senate seat did. And McCain was a carpetbagger who hadn't lived in the district as long as the others running for the office. The best irony will be if he selects Romney as his running mate. Romney had to win a court battle to run for Mass Governor because he was carpetbagging too. They would be perfect together.— amg
- So tom, saying that a terrorist attack on US would be good for McCain isn't smearing Obama. Or questioniung his patriotism? Or his religion? Nah, no smears there.— mike l
- During the 2000 Republican primary, the Bush camp started a whisper campaign about McCain's stay at the Hanoi Hilton. Remember "he may have been damaged" "Manchurian Candidate" They also played up his weakness for forgiving the Vietnamese... All of these things are much worse than anything Clark said, and hey Clark actually served in the military while other politicians his age logged false flight time-skipped mandatory military physicals, and went AWOL from a champagne unit. I just hope everyone crying here about Clark's "controversial" comments are equally angry with the current occupant and all his minions' dirty tricks.— pagoda
- Answer these questions Tom.... Do you think being shot down over Vietnam and being held as a POW automatically qualifies a person to be president? Do you think that an intelligent person running for president has to have foreign policy experience? I would say no to both. I would call McCain a war hero but his policies of wanting to continue this Iraq war indefinately and making permanent the upper-class tax cuts make it impossible to vote for him. I admire McCain but I cannot vote for him. Obama will have advisors to brief him on foreign policy and more than two months between the election and january 21st 2009 to bring him up to speed. I don't think it matters whether or not a 'candidate' has this experience.— James TL
- In a new book published by noted historian Otis Cromwell, we learn that McCain actually landed in Hanoi and met with Ho Chi Minh to discuss war plans against the Americans. It seems that McCain actually does have commander-in-chief experience, BUT IT'S AGAINST AMERICAN TROOPS! There ought to be an independent investigation that lays these allegations to rest. We can't afford to have a Manchurian Candidate for president. I'm looking out for you, my fellow Americans.— p-diddy
- Seems like just about everyone hates McCain's war service. There was Sen. Rockefeller all but calling him a war criminal, words which undoubtedly brought tears of joy to the hard Left. There's the equally lunatic hard Right calling him a collaborator and a possible "Manchurian candidate". Then there was the despicable & bigoted cartoon that ran in Rolling Stone with stereotyped Vietnamese "torturing" McCain. All of this is just awful & a sign (as if we need one) of how poisoned this process is, and how much our soldiers are truly hated.— WIJG?
- Character matters. McCain's time as a POW demonstrates his character. The only reason Obama and his minions seek to denigrate the importance of character is because their candidate has yet to demonstrate any. (McCain stood up to the swift boat veterans for truth in 2004. Sadly, neither Obama nor the Democratic party seem to have McCain’s class.)— bon
- Soldiers are most certainly NOT "truly hated". Please, please, PLEASE stop repeating this ridiculous premise! It's the weak, cowardly, silver spoon-fed, administrators receiving this hatred. And deservingly so.— pagoda
- Character matters and McCain's is best? Hmmm, really? I guess you would consider it good character to use your influence to cover up your wife's felonious acts? Or good character to get in to a fist fight on the Senate floor? Or good character to run around in a flight of fury because your Senate committee didn't vote your way? Or good character to marry in to a wealthy family in order to finance your political career? Well, if that's what's called good character, then McCain has it in spades. I could go on of course but I don't think it's really necessary. No candidate is perfect. Both candidates have made decisions that appear to lack character. Let's move on already.— amg
- good one jwad56, brilliant— sendhelp
- Comment removed.
- Dick really has a sharp political ear, so he knows when Obama's team makes a mis-step - like not floating Wesley Clark out on an iceberg. As such, it's pretty valuable analysis, even though he clearly favors Obama, he doesn't have the political blinders of the Kos kids.— Scholes
- amg-You're right,it wasn't his quote but he attached the (accurate)so he's certainly on board.Was he equally offended when Hillary moved to New York ?— Yankee Air Pirate 12
- Glad to se the pollman continues to use the Inquirer as the voice of the democratic party. Clark would be the perfect military man for the liberal elite, academic. Yet he was a failed (miserably) presidential candidate, no one remotely considered him before. I bet Dick Pollman has more international experience than Barack. But as all media, we just want to make sure he's coronated. Dick remember fair and unbiased reporting? Oh wait columbia... yeah. Liberal and for the sake of being liberal. God forbid someone question a less than one term senator with a hard core straight party alignment voting record.— stevejones
- I think Clark failed to mention that McCain was a FIVE YEAR PRISONER OF WAR who was tortured and imprisoned. Additionally, McCain had the option of being freed early BUT CHOSE NOT TO until his fellow soldiers were also released. If that doesn't speak to character for our president, then geez I really don't know what does. Obama has no record of military service whatsoever. On this particular issue, sorry Obamatrons, McCain wins hands down. Let's debate other issues instead.— chrissmith
- If anyone can speak of what it takes to be unqualified to be POTUS its Barack Hussein Obama. I'm still waitng for someone, ANYONE to list for me ONE accomplishment, ONE legislative initiative, heck, one original thought this joker has ever had. Apart from being friends with a domestic terrorist and a race-baiting anti-American crackpot preacher, what else is there? I'll wait....— bcsk
- Comment removed.
- so, to all you socially and economically conservative folks, did the next president's predecessor have a credible record of military service which, when in your crosshairs, made the difference, when you pulled the lever for him over first al gore and then john kerry after him? i'm partial to chrissmith's comment, "let's debate other issues." this particular issue isn't materially significant in determining either candidate's credentials to lead this nation.— josefbreuer
- Truly despicable commentary from Mr. Clark.— Patrick M
- Looks like Polman got the orders from DNC headquarters to do the McCain's-service-doesn't-matter article today. The other surrogates like Ashley Clark were out this weekend, now it's his turn. Can Will The Shill Bunch be far behind? It's very hypocritical of Clark because four years ago he was telling us we SHOULD vote for John Kerry because of his service. But now that Baraq Hussein Obama has neither experience nor service, neither matter.— MiddleNameHussein
- I think the "retired USAF vet" should be placed in a jet, made to shoot down a SAM missle and then have a medical team check to see if his underwear was still dry and white. No matter who you back, there is no call for these comments just to push your own agenda.— Bob1
Maybe this doesn't matter to anyone, but what Clark said is accurate. I'm not questioning McCain's patriotism, or his service record, but if serving in the military were the only requirement for the office, we could run "Beetle Bailey for President."— Hutch- I was struck by the pomposity in Bob Schieffer's tone. Where does this notion come from that certain things automatically qualify one for the office of Presidency ? And that we dare not question them ? I agree with Clark, that McCain's service does not automatically qualify him for President. McCain and Obama have to earn and persuade us for us to give them our vote. So far, Obama is winning my vote. No one is questioning McCain's service unlike what the Republicans did to Kerry. Clark is merely saying that military service does not give someone an advantage. Now of course if one thinks McCain's service important then put a check mark in the Vote for McCain column. Frankly for me, McCain lost any credibility when he voted to support torture and now too that he follows in Bush's footsteps and will give us 100 more years of war. Gee just what we need. As if we haven't done enough harm already to the people of Iraq. Our own soldiers. And trillions of dollars wasted. And the Republicans now say we don't have any money for OUR roads or bridges or people or schools, etc. - well it's no wonder. And McCain wants to cut more taxes ? Gee, ok ... There are far more reasons to not vote for McCain then there are to vote for him. And there are far more reasons to vote for Obama then there are to not vote for him.— Marchus
- I find it odd that Wes Clark brought this issue up. You see he was "relieved for cause" as Commander and Chief of NATO. That means fired to all of you civilians out there. He was then retired from the Army. If Obama finds it necessary to seek the advise of General Clark it gives all of us plenty of reason to question his qualifications to be Commander-in-Chief of the Military. Clarks real problem is self agrandizement and ego. Sadly it is always the Dems that raise the issue of swift boating. Comments like this show how low the state of the election will go. The gloves come off. By the way General Clark and Obama recognize McCain has spent alot of time in Congress much working on Foreign Policy and Military issues. McCains POW experience demonstrated his character and sense of duty. By the way, he quitely worried has his son a US Marine Served in Iraq. But I guess Iraq isn't an issue any more.— vc bear
- to marchus - nicely put! articulate and to the point. excellent!— josefbreuer
- Seymour Hersh reports in the New Yorker that Democratic leaders in Congress have given the Bush administration approval to expand U.S. operations in Iran. This includes Barack Obama, who has said he favors diplomacy and talks.— p-diddy
- McCain has done his duty, he has courage, he has character, he's been around a long time, but despite all the smoke being blown up the collective voter a--hole, much of it here, the country needs to allow the Repubs to take a presidential election cycle off. We can't survive more of their experience. Look around, chumps.— Djoko Pritza
- " It's arguably fair game to question whether five years in a POW prison automatically confers upon someone the wisdom to guide a nation's foreign policy nearly four decades later." INTERESTING COMMENT. WELL I RATHER HAVE A MAN WHO SPENT FIVE YEARS AS A POW, DEMONSTRATING HIS TRUE CHARACTER AND HEROIC LEADING THIS COUNTRY, THEN A CLOSE-MINDED BIG CITY LIBERAL LIKE OBAMA, WHOSE ONLY EXPERIENCE IS AS A STATE COUNCILMAN AND LESS THAN 1 TERM SENATOR LEADING THIS COUNTRY.— vhhn
- Clark's comments were taken out of context...end of story.— Lehigh Philly
- McCain's POW experiences prove he has the qualities of toughness & resiliency --- at an impressively high level. This experience did not show that he has the qualities of an intelligent executive administrator. Judging by the quality of the decisions he's made while running his campaign (& the overall way he has run it), he still has yet to show them.— yobill626
- Why does "war hero" clark get a free pass for bombing the former yugoslavia from 30,000 feet? All you liberal war protestors were quiet when Clark led the attack on a country that was absolutely no threat to us. I love how Polman sarcastically points out "Americans believe Republicans are the party of national security strength". We believe that because its true. I live in the UAE, the country that tried to give us bin laden but the clinton gang didn't believe we had reasons to hold him!! JeffA you think Obama's economic knowledge is superior??? Raising taxes in slow economy will cause a depression. Obama is an empty suit with too many close ties to radicals like Acorn, the weatherman and rev wright.— philly3t0
- So much bull, where to begin. First, someone noted McCain flip flops. They evidently missed the NYT article about Obama and his recalibrations, such as eliminating the cap on SS taxes during the primary, now only eliminating them on income above $250K, or about not voting to condemn MoveOn.org for their General Betrary Us ad, and yesterday criticizing them for it. Not to mention his stance on FISA. See...recalibrations, not flip flops. As for what amg posted (isn't it neat how liberals always criticize someone then say "let's move on"?), what a crock. I could find nowhere the Swiftboaters trying to say Kerry shot himself. I did find where they questioned him on his record, which he failed to release. And if talking about Obama's wife is off limits, why keep talking about Cindy McCain and her "felonious acts"? Now, if you want to talk character, then the person who posted about McCain not leaving Hanoi without his comrades and standing up to torture is character. What has Obama ever done to show he has character, besides get an earmark for Father Pfleger (sic). As for Marchus, someone called that articulate? McCain never promised 100 years of war in Iraq...read the quote and stop posting from otehr posts. Funny how he listed no reasons to vote for Obama...what are they? The fact he has yet to take a position and stick to it...is that a good reason to vote for Obama? Clark's comments may have made more sense if he had not said Kerry's service qualified him for President, as he did his own service during his brief campaign.— tom - wilmington, de
- Comment removed.
- I honor McCain's service as a vet and as a POW, but that in and of itself doesn't qualify him to be president. I won't be voting for him because (1) our nation can't afford to continue to run up the deficits that we have seen recently, and I don't see this getting any better under McCain's positions on Iraq and tax cuts; (2) I don't want to see Justices Stevens and Ginsburg replaced by more Scalia clones; and (3) I'm tired of Republican incompetence and corruption in DC. It's time to see what the other side can do.— johngilb
- Character is an overrated quality in a President. Both Jimmy Carter & George W. Bush ran on their character & both are generously rated as below average Presidents. Carter was a micro-manager & Bush won't hold people accountable. Great Presidents must create a vision for the future that the citizens feel they need, be able to effectively communicate that vision & lastly, motivate others to help push his vision through the behemoth that is the Federal Government. Obama looks like he has the first two qualities, whereas McCain has shown he understands the third one only.— yobill626
- Tom, I think you're the one who needs to get his facts straight. The swift boaters made reference to alleged "self-inflicted wounds". This is the exact phrase used in their book. Basically, they were saying Kerry shot himself to get a Purple Heart. Check your facts.— p-diddy
- Apparently getting soldiers killed along with innocent civilians in a war to obtain Iraqi oil that was entered into based upon a lie denotes 'character' Apparently someone who wants to continue these lies and this course of action has character. Can't see the logic frankly. If you want to change this course you only have one choice: Barack Obama. He's not perfect but his vision is far better for this nation as a whole( not just for military suppliers and the extreme rich).— James TL
- Philly3t0 - I just hate it when people put words in another's mouth. I never said Obama was a Nobel Laureate economist or even strong on the economy. Point I'm making is McCain is embracing the very worst economic policy choices available to us. America is in a real economic pickle. Few, if any candidates, want to own up to the truth because it's the result of decades of mismanagement. For no better reasons than the one's stated by yobill626, I believe Obama will be the better steward of the direction of this country than McCain. If McCain would even attempt to embrace the center on economic issues and Iraq, he'd probably get a 2nd look. Sadly, he's not.— JeffA
- why is that the people constantly asking about Obama's accomplishments never seem to list any of McCain's? I know McCain has been around for a long time but I would be lying if I told you I could name 3 significant legislative accomplishments on his resume. Can any of the Obama bashers do better? Probably not because they would be voting for McCain if Hitler was his great uncle simply because he's running against a half black, "big city liberal" who hasnt been entrenched in Washington for decades. Lets not act like anyone cares about McCains ideas or accomplishments. He is merely getting support because he is the "safe) (i.e. older, experienced white guy) candidate. Many here have said that being stuck in a POW camp shows McCains character. How does changing your position on many critical issues in order to appease the Republican base fortify his character? Also, people need to learn the meaning of bias before calling Polman biased. everything he said in regards to Clark's comments is simply common sense. It has nothing to do with being pro Obama. Its about time someone asked a simple question about how being a POW makes you qualified to be president. Clark did not disrespect McCain in any way but the reaction just shows how McCain has been skating by on his military record without having to answer any tough questions. This idea that service experience should make McCain immune to any criticism is nonsense.— syj
- Tom, it took me a paltry seven seconds to Google "swift boat john kerry self inflicted wound" to come up with thousands of sources. I chose this one since it's from a non-partisan site: http://www.factcheck.org/article231.html. Now, if you really wanted to try you could have found this for yourself. I guess you're just too lazy to seek the truth. As for my comments on Cindy McCain, just like you righties are doing with Clark's comment, you're taking mine out of context. Her actions were felonious but only secondary to the point. The main point goes to McCain's character. He used his political influence to keep her from getting charged with anything at all. It's not attacking her when what she did would land you or I in jail. It's attacking her husband for using his influence to keep her out when he wouldn't do the same for either of us.— amg
- NEWSFLASH. I got this from a reputable source. It seems one of Obama's relative, a Mr. Raila Odinga, Prime Minister of Kenya, covertly agreed to enact Sharia's Law in Kenya, in exchange for support for his election. This goes to show Obama cannot be trusted. If you what to read more about this, just google Odinga.— vhhn
- JeffA, not putting words in your mouth, your comment implied Obama has a better economic plan than McCain, correct? Obama is proposing a tax increase, which is far left economic policy not center. Obama has zero experience being a steward of an economy and his redistribution of income policy is marxist. On Iraq, there is no center, you are either for pulling out-Obama or finishing the job-McCain, pulling out now would be a huge mistake and create a bigger mess in the mid east, regardless of your feelings ab the war we cannot pullout now and despite what the liberal media tells you, things are improving on a daily basis there.— philly3t0
- I'm thinking if McCain picks Romney as a running mate he'll have any concerns about economic issues covered. I think picking Romney will help ease the concerns for those concerned about the economy and jobs.— thelastRepublicaninPhilly
Cited by the Columbia Journalism Review as one of the nation's top political reporters, and lauded by the ABC News political website as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation," Dick Polman is a national political columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer. He is on the full-time faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as "writer in residence." Dick has been a frequent guest on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and the BBC. He covered the 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential campaigns.
ARCHIVES
All commentaries posted before April 18, 2008, can be accessed at www.dickpolman.blogspot.com.
- American Spectator
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- The Daily Caller
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Obit
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Politics Daily
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Atlantic Wire
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
