It is as it ever was
"America will believe that Democrats will defend America when Democrats defend other Democrats." - Wes Clark (years ago)
Obama did what he could do. It was not enough for me, while I realize somebody running for president has to make hard choices. But no mistake: Obama is wrong to let Clark go off into the business world at a time like this. Breaking McCain on national security is exactly what Obama needs doing and Clark was perfectly willing and able to do it.
It was a gift.
Wes Clark was always a gift to the country and to the Democratic Party. But it is as it ever was: Clark can defend every goddamned Democrat who walks the face of the earth, but nobody in the Democratic leadership steps up for him.
Not even Hillary Clinton.
I saw a comment in a UPI thread this morning, where someone remarks that Hillary Clinton is not involved in this. I say, yeah, that's the problem, isn't it?
Feh.
Not one National Democrat has defended an American hero of their own party who is being swiftboated by the Republicans and crucified by the collaborationist media.
Dems can be so pathetic, it's downright embarrassing.
I will never again mock the 'Netroots, I promise. At least they knew what to do. At least they stepped the hell up, as did veterans groups. At least the 'Netroots know the difference between a Republican war hero and a Democratic war hero, which is more than can be said for the Democratic Party.
Tad Devine, chief strategist for Kerry's 2004 campaign, said in the article below:
“Obama is handling this perfectly” by distancing himself from Clark’s comments but warned that “to cut Clark loose [would be] ridiculous.”The strategist’s view that “there is some context to be considered” is shared by many Democrats.
Then why the hell don't they say so?
Oh, for a Democrat like Paul Wellstone, with balls. Let's hope General Clark's leave of absence from the Obama campaign is a temporary one: Paul Wellstone is dead.
From Politico:
Wesley Clark 'moving on'Four days after his controversial “Face the Nation” appearance, retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark is taking a break from the presidential campaign — but many Democratic insiders think he has already been crossed off the list of Barack Obama’s potential running mates.
-snip
But now Clark is looking to put the remarks behind him. The former NATO supreme allied commander and 2004 Democratic primary candidate is “moving on,” said a close aide, who added that Clark can now “devote his time to the business affairs which pay the bills.”
The aide nonetheless revisited the remarks, saying that Clark was “asking tough questions and moving beyond sacred cows” and that Clark was “not auditioning for a post in anyone’s administration.” He added that Clark “doesn’t need anyone’s permission to stand up for this country or to challenge John McCain's fitness to be commander in chief.”
Presidential campaigns have been re-litigating the Vietnam War since, well, the Vietnam War, in which Clark served as an infantry commander while McCain was a Navy fighter pilot. Both were men molded by the baby boomer culture wars, and both the grunt and the flyboy returned to a nation in upheaval over the war and social changes.
Obama’s campaign has sought to transcend those culture wars, which have long been a losing issue for Democrats. McCain seized on the Clark comment to draw Obama into that same losing fight.
“It’s up to Sen. Obama now to not only repudiate him but to cut him loose,” McCain told reporters aboard his plane en route to Colombia.
Obama, however, has not gone that far. He said Monday it was “very clear” Clark’s “remarks don’t reflect my beliefs.” He took a less tough approach Tuesday, calling the remarks “inartful,” a word the candidate has often employed to step back from gaffes. His reluctance to go further may stem in part from Clark’s support on the party’s left, which dates back to his 2004 presidential run. MoveOn launched a petition Tuesday demanding the media “stop distorting Gen. Clark’s words.”
Clark has perhaps the most impressive defense credentials and highest name recognition of any of Obama’s supporters. “He does need credentialing [from national security Democrats] that Obama has the capacity, understanding and judgment to be president,” said Tad Devine, chief strategist for the 2004 presidential run of Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.).
Devine added that “Obama is handling this perfectly” by distancing himself from Clark’s comments but warned that “to cut Clark loose [would be] ridiculous.”
The strategist’s view that “there is some context to be considered” is shared by many Democrats
-snip
While Clark has served as a part-time national security surrogate for Obama, the campaign adviser insisted, “It’s not a wink and a nod with this campaign.”
“We could have gotten through the primary process a lot sooner and perhaps more bloodier if we played by those conventional tactics,” the Obama adviser said. But Democrats were hardly pleased to have to make that point.
Democratic strategist Jim Jordan emphasized that Clark’s comments were “fair” insofar as they were intended to question whether McCain would be “an effective president.”
“But Gen. Clark’s remarks were both clumsy and badly timed and, really, a gift to McCain,” Jordan continued.
Republicans take a different view, pointing to critiques of McCain’s military record from other surrogates — including the remarks of Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.) that having "dropped laser-guided missiles from 35,000 feet," McCain doesn’t “care about the lives of people" — to argue that the Obama campaign has purposefully engaged in this line of attack, whatever apologies are later offered.
Devine, who’s been on the other end of a debate over war credentials, having defended Kerry from attacks on his military service from the 527 group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, dismisses as "preposterous" any comparison between those attacks and Clark’s comment, since Clark’s remark was offhand and not part of an organized advertising offensive bent on the “distortion of John Kerry’s record.”
Perhaps because Kerry, whose first instinct was to respond immediately to those attacks — and is widely considered to have been damaged by them — was convinced to do otherwise, Clark aggressively defended his comments.
Now that the fallout is clear, he’s moving away from them, though still not apologizing.
“Obviously I wish we hadn't had the big brouhaha about this,” Clark said, choosing to begin a Tuesday CNN interview with contrition. “It has taken away from the message of the man that I’m supporting to be president.”
Source: Politico
