BY TAYLOR MARSH

While I was away all hell broke loose.

In the last
twenty-four hours Wesley Clark called John McCain out on judgment, something that
is correct and a sound shot questioning McCain’s competence on national security.
But what everyone heard and reported was something else, with a little lunacy thrown in by a Hillary hater with too much venom to spare. What Clark said had nothing whatsoever to do with McCain’s
honorable military service, that much is clear if you take his statement in
its entirety.

“Mock outrage” is dead on. Just read the transcript for yourself:

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, I think Bar- I think Joe has it exactly backwards here. I think being President is, is about having good judgment. It’s about the ability to communicate. As one of the great Presidential historians Richard Newsted said, “The greatest power of the Presidency is the power to persuade.” And what Barack Obama brings is incredible communication skills, proven judgment. You look at his meteoric rise in politics, and you see a guy who deals with people well, who understands issues, who brings people together and who has good judgment in moving forward. And I think what we need to do, Bob, is we need to stop talking about the old politics of left and right, and we need to pull together and move the country forward. And I think that’s what Barack Obama will do for America. Bob Schieffer: Well you, you went so far as to say that you thought John McCain was, quote, and these are your words, “untested and untried,” And I must say I, I had to read that twice, because you’re talking about somebody who was a prisoner of war. He was a squadron commander of the largest squadron in the Navy. He’s been on the Senate Armed Services Committee for lo these many years. How can you say that John McCain is un- untested and untried? General? GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: 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 and millions of others in 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 Air- in the Navy that he commanded, it 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-’ General Wesley Clark on CBS’s Face the Nation with Bob Shieffer

Obama has distanced himself from Clark completely.

“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,” said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.

Well that was predicatable. “Rejecting” Clark’s statement is foolish,
unless this is some concocted good cop, bad cop routine. Because there is nothing whatsoever wrong with what Clark said, unless you parse
it, truncate it or are just looking for a faux fight, which is what happened, or you’re a politician ready to serve yourself up as
a paragon of patriotic perfection. Besides, Obama’s criticism simply serves up Clark to the press dogs. Is
that the intention?

But if you want to read something reprehensible, it’s not Clark. Stop over
to see Ben Smith’s
column if you haven’t already.

“A lot of people don’t know … that McCain made a propaganda video for the enemy while he was in captivity,” wrote Americablog.com’s John Aravosis. “Putting that bit of disloyalty aside, what exactly is McCain’s military experience that prepares him for being commander in chief?” “Getting shot down, tortured and then doing propaganda for the enemy is not command experience,” Aravosis wrote in the blog post, titled “Honestly, besides being tortured, what did McCain do to excel in the military?”

Not having Hillary to hate has obviously caused Mr. Americablog’s last wheel to come off. Joan
Walsh calls it. To add, this is the type of crap that makes people walk
away from being Democrats. It asks the wrong question completely, while taking valid points off the table because the track is so unseemly.

McCain isn’t beyond questioning just because he’s a military veteran, especially
since he backed the Iraq war, the surge, as well as comments like the length
of time he envisions us in Iraq, coupled with the reality he’s yet to mention Pakistan and Central Asia. Wesley Clark was on target. Somebody of stature had to say it and did. We simply cannot cede this ground.

“There are many important issues in this Presidential election, clearly one of the most important issues is national security and keeping the American people safe. In my opinion, protecting the American people is the most important duty of our next President. I have made comments in the past about John McCain’s service and I want to reiterate them in order be crystal clear. As I have said before I honor John McCain’s service as a prisoner of war and a Vietnam Veteran. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in Armed Forces as a prisoner of war. I would never dishonor the service of someone who chose to wear the uniform for our nation. John McCain is running his campaign on his experience and how his experience would benefit him and our nation as President. That experience shows courage and commitment to our country – but it doesn’t include executive experience wrestling with national policy or go-to-war decisions. And in this area his judgment has been flawed – he not only supported going into a war we didn’t have to fight in Iraq, but has time and again undervalued other, non-military elements of national power that must be used effectively to protect America But as an American and former military officer I will not back down if I believe someone doesn’t have sound judgment when it comes to our nation’s most critical issues.” – General Wesley Clark (retired)

Share

BY TAYLOR MARSH
–updated–

UPDATE from Obama camp sent to me earlier today when I was traveling:

“Senator Obama had a terrific conversation with President Clinton and is honored to have his support in this campaign. He has always believed that Bill Clinton is one of this nation’s great leaders and most brilliant minds, and looks forward to seeing him on the campaign trail and receiving his counsel in the months to come,” said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.

What will the rabble write about now?

Clinton campaign chairman Terry McAuliffe assured CNN’s Candy Crowley that former President Bill Clinton and presumptive Democratic nominee Barack Obama will be discussing Clinton’s role in the campaign within the next two days. “I believe that in the next 24 to 48 hours they will talk and off we will go,” McAuliffe stated on Sunday’s Late Edition…. McAuliffe: Bill Clinton and Obama to talk within 48 hours

We’ve been through the blind quotes and anonymous sourcing many times before.
But who exactly benefits from postulating that the former POTUS has an ax to
grind with Senator Obama? The mind reels. Something tells me that the former President of the United States has better things to do than pout. Seriously, if Hillary can come out so strongly and graciously to support Barack Obama, who thinks her husband cannot?

Answer: only those who want to undermine the power of Hillary Clinton and her president husband.

It’s really been a disgrace lately, with far too many hack “journalists” speculating about what is surely spun for political fodder. Obviously, people either have too much time on their hands. Are too interested
in spinning news out of whole cloth. Or they just don’t want Obama and Clinton
to get along. You choose.

As for me, I’m at 39,000 feet again, so you all will have to ponder
it by yourself for a while. I’ll check it when I can.

For now, consider this an open thread. Try not to hurt each other and don’t mess up the place.

Share

guest post by Linfar

Hillary supports Barack because she wants women’s rights. And so does he.

Should the state control female sexuality? Should the government control a woman’s ability to reproduce? Or should the woman control her own body? This issue defines our era.

Both Islamic Fundamentalists and Christian Fundamentalists may go to war over whose God is supreme, but there is one subject on which they both agree: state control of a woman’s body. From Osama bin Laden to George W. Bush, throw in the warlords of Afghanistan, Pope John Paul II and the mullahs of Iran—if you are a woman, they all want control–of your body. And now there is another man clamoring to join the club. All together now: it is John McCain.

Because McCain will continue Bush policies with regard to women’s rights, lets take a quick refresher. In 2003 George W. Bush cut off funding for a highly praised AIDS program for refugees from Africa and Asia because one member of the non-profit consortium running the project was also working with a UN program that was accused, falsely, of colluding with China’s policy of forced abortions. Who suffered? The poor in Angola, Congo, Rwanda, Somalia, Eritrea, and other poverty-stricken areas around the globe.

Bush also cut off all U.S. funding to countless family planning services in the poorest regions of the world. This ban applied to any clinic that so much as mentioned abortion as an option to its clients, even if the agency itself did not provide abortions or referrals – – and even if the woman had been raped or she might die in childbirth.

Clinics were also cut off, if its workers took part in lobbying campaigns to secure legal abortion in their countries. Many of these clinics provided the only maternal and post-natal care available for millions of destitute women and their children. They were the only place where the world’s most downtrodden and uneducated women could receive information about reproduction and birth control, or treatment for AIDs, genital mutilation and rape.

All across Africa and Asia, these clinics closed. How many thousands of women and children died needlessly? Bush made America an ally in the war against women, and in the quest for state control of women’s bodies. To this end the Bush administration regularly formed alliances with Iran, Sudan, Saudi Arabia and other repressive states to derail treaties on women’s rights.

Bush’s war on women

Now listen to the words of John McCain:

If I am fortunate enough to be elected as the next President of the United States, I pledge to you to be a loyal and unswerving friend of the right to life movement.

[Statement by Sen. McCain read by Sen. Sam Brownback at the March for Life in Washington, DC, January 22, 2008.]

The rights of the unborn is one of my most important values.

[Transcript, Hardball with Chris Matthews, April 15, 2008.]

I’m proud that we have Justice Alito and Roberts on the United States Supreme Court. I’m very proud to have played a very small role in making that happen.” McCain explained further that he “will try to find clones of Alito and Roberts” to fill future court vacancies.

{[Transcript, Republican Presidential Candidates Participate in a Debate, May 3, 2007 and Carl Tobias, On judges, don't doubt McCain's conservatism: He pledges to appoint clones of Alito and Roberts, Christian Science Monitor, February 11, 2008.]

On the Federal Abortion Ban, Sen. McCain said:

Today’s Supreme Court ruling is a victory for those who cherish the sanctity of life and integrity of the judiciary. The ruling ensures that an unacceptable and unjustifiable practice will not be carried out on our innocent children. It also clearly speaks to the importance of nominating and confirming strict constructionist judges who interpret the law as it is written, and do not usurp the authority of Congress and state legislatures. As we move forward, it is critically important that our party continues to stand on the side of life.

[Press release, April 18, 2007 (accessed February 4, 2008).4/18 press release

Sen. McCain said that he has supported

the rights of the unborn for 24 years without changing, without wavering.

[Michael Finnegan, Republicans Enter the Ring in Iowa; At a Key Party Dinner, Frontrunners for the Presidential Nomination Take a Beating From Lesser-Known Rivals, L.A. Times, April 15, 2007.]

When asked about whether he supported supplying condoms to Africa to assist in the fight against HIV/AIDS, McCain had the following exchange with a reporter:
Reporter: “What about grants for sex education in the United States? Should they include instructions about using contraceptives? Or should it be Bush’s policy, which is just abstinence?”
Mr. McCain: (Long pause)

Ahhh. I think I support the president’s policy.

Reporter: “So no contraception, no counseling on contraception. Just abstinence. Do you think contraceptives help stop the spread of HIV?”
Mr. McCain: (Long pause)

You’ve stumped me.

[Adam Nagourney, McCain Stumbles on H.I.V. Prevention, The New York Times, March 16, 2007.]

I do not support Roe v. Wade. It should be overturned.

[Ann Althouse, Rudy & Mitt Hem & Haw on Abortion, The New York Times, February 24, 2007.]

Sen. McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign website states that he believes

Roe v. Wade is a flawed decision that must be overturned.

[John McCain for President 2008 campaign website, On the Issues: Human Dignity and the Sanctity of Life (accessed February 4, 2008.)

mccain issues

progress ohio

Contrast these statements with those of Barack Obams's on women's rights:

A woman's ability to decide how many children to have and when, without interference from the government, is one of the most fundamental rights we possess. It is not just an issue of choice, but equality and opportunity for all women. I have consistently advocated for reproductive choice and will make preserving women's rights under Roe v. Wade a priority as President. I oppose any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's ruling in this case.

obama defends choice

Obama has received a 100% score from NARAL ProChoice.

I believe that few women make the decision to terminate a pregnancy casually; that any pregnant woman feels the full force of the moral issues involved when making that decision… I fear a ban on abortion would force women to seek unsafe abortions, as they had once done in this country. I think instead we could agree on ways to reduce the number of women who feel the need to have abortions in the first place.

[From The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p. 197-198 Oct. 1, 2006.]

Obama has received a 100% rating from Planned Parenthood.

To learn more about Barack Obama’s committment to women’s rights: women’s issues

Now I ask you? Can anyone who supported Hillary for President in good conscience support John McCain? I don’t think so. Supporting McCain is like slapping her in the face while ignoring everything she has stood for her entire political life. Hillary knows what is at stake. And it isn’t only the rights of American women. It is millions of women all over the globe who are counting on the USA going back into the women’s rights business.

Share

Guest post by Scan

Simply a great song from a great band. From the masterful 1984 album Reckoning, here’s “So. Central Rain (I’m Sorry)” by R.E.M.

Open thread. What’s shakin’ out there in the internet tubes?

Share

Guest post by Scan

…and this graphic illustrates why.

Despite winning the nomination in a year when any Democrat should win the general election in a cakewalk, despite Clinton’s impassioned endorsement of his candidacy on June 7th, and despite the fawning media coverage that continues unabated…according to Gallup, it’s been a dead heat this week. We just shouldn’t be seeing a graph like this. Not this year.

Granted, the polls are all over the place, and it’s hard to know exactly where things stand. If I had to guess, I’d say Obama has about a five-point lead. That’s all well and good, but Kerry’s lead after wrapping up his nomination didn’t last once the Republican attack machine was through with him, and assuming the same thing won’t happen this time would be a terrible mistake.

I know there are a lot of doubters out there, but if the object is winning, I have to think Obama has to seriously consider adding Clinton to the ticket. Obama will get plenty of independents no matter what, but having a completely unified and enthusiastic Democratic base is even more important. Plus, having the Clintons dispatched across Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida and Michigan for months would likely shore up those states and ensure an electoral landslide. And then there’s Arkansas.

After the event yesterday, I know I’m not alone in my thinking that Obama/Clinton would be a no-brainer. If they could work it out and make history together…well, that would be something. And it might just be a necessity.

Share

Guest post by Scan

It’s good to start the day off with some laughs.

What’s going on this weekend?

Share

Guest post by Scan

It's the story of the week. If you haven't watched it, here's your chance.

In her speech, Hillary's commitment to the country she loves was obvious. It was the reason she was on that stage and the reason she has held nothing back in endorsing her former opponent. She knows full well what's at stake, and the continued havoc that would occur if another Republican managed to find his way into the Oval Office. It's not about her, its about the cause.

I was struck by Obama's facial expressions and body language while he was watching her speak. It sure looked to me like he was humbled and moved that such an incredible candidate was backing him so completely after a rough, prolonged primary battle and narrow defeat. His admiration and respect for her was obvious in his speech as well. At one point, inspired by an enthusiastic Hillary supporter in the crowd, he went off-script to say simply that “she rocks”.

Indeed she does.

My favorite part of the event, which summed things up as perfectly as you could want: Spontaneous chants of “Obama! Obama! Obama!” during her speech, followed immediately by spontaneous chants of “Hillary! Hillary! Hillary!” by the same crowd. And there was Barack sitting behind her, gesturing with an imaginary “Hillary” sign…joining right in.

Beautiful.

Share

Guest post by Scan

Could be. They looked and sounded quite good together today. More importantly, it would be landslide victory if the two of them could find a way to make it happen.

Just what I think. What about you?

Open thread.

Share