“It doesn’t take a lot of talent to get shot down. I was able to intercept a surface-to-air missile with my own airplane.”–John McCain

Duros: However, none of that is a prerequisite for becoming President.

Nor is it necessarily good training. A President has to have more than the military mindset, has to be able to consider other options (diplomacy, sanctions, etc etc) and appropriately weigh them.

Plus, what does military experience have to do with dealing with economic or social issues? What will military experience add to one’s ability to understand what should be done about gas prices, environmental issues, stem cells or any of the huge number of things the president has to make decisions on?

Nor even relevant, from where I’m standing. My experience of eating peanuts doesn’t make me a good CEO of Jiffy.

However, none of that is a prerequisite for becoming President.

Verbal slap? The “qualification to be President”? That was the topic under discussion, Jay.

Clark may not think it is a qualification to be President, but somebody show me where John McCain said it is.

You’re really straying from the point–or deliberately misdirecting. No one pretends Mr. Clark was refuting a claim by Mr. McCain. He was responding to Mr. Schieffer:

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 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 untested and untried, General?

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 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 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” –

SCHIEFFER: Well –

CLARK: — “publicly?” He hasn’t made those calls, Bob.

SCHIEFFER: Well — well, General, maybe he –

CLARK: So –

SCHIEFFER: Could I just interrupt you? If –

CLARK: Sure.

SCHIEFFER: I have to say, Barack Obama has not had any of those experiences either, nor has he ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down. I mean –

CLARK: Well, I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president.

SCHIEFFER: Really?

but he most certainly did question the value of McCain’s war record as a qualification for the presidency.

Baloney. Show me where.

Actually, the SPECIFIC words Clark said were:

“Well, I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president.”

Now, some have excused what Clark said because he was merely repeating the words that host Bob Schieffer said, but he decided to add the little verbal slap at the end. Clark may not think it is a qualification to be President, but somebody show me where John McCain said it is. Schieffer was merely asking about wartime experiences. Clark may not have questioned McCain’s service directly, but he most certainly did question the value of McCain’s war record as a qualification for the presidency.

You’re correct here, Jay. Mr. McCain does have more time in the military, service as an officer, and combat experience.

Mr. Clark conceded this and even said this experience is noteworthy and praiseworthy. However, when it was put to him directly, Mr. Clark said that this experience does not translate into a qualification to run the country. Was Mr. Clark correct? I’ll take no position here. Instead, I’ll redirect your attention to the various reports that Mr. Clark somehow attacked or impugned Mr. McCain’s military service.

It simply isn’t so.

It’s a little sad that the party which had representatives at its national convention in 2004 goofing around with FUCKING PURPLE HEART BAND-AIDS and which had media surrogates suggesting John Kerry’s war wounds were self-inflicted can whip itself into high dudgeon over an otherwise REPSECTFUL questioning of McCain’s capacity to run large scale policy based on a war experience that consists of getting shot down one time.

Oh, and, what michael said.

Here’s the problem with that Rheinhard. McCain has not run on that issue. The fact that is part of his biography is that he was a POW for 5 years is merely a fact. And guess what? The fact that he was in the military, the fact that he was an officer, the fact that he was a fighter pilot and the fact that he did fight in a war gives him…..oh, I don’t know…..a TON more experience in that regard than Barack Obama.

It just seems a little funny as well that the same people who swooned when John Kerry said, “Reporting for duty” and saluted during his acceptance speech in 2004 is getting up in arms that McCain actually has a story to tell about his military service.

so obama has to accept the rules he appears to have set for opponents and drop the victimology (i left the church because of media scrutiny, not the person i’ve known…)

How about:

But what about when the Vietcong tried to release McCain early so he could go back to destroying US fighter jets and blowing up aircraft carriers?