June 30th 2008
As If Wesley Clark Weren’t Enough
S
o Wesley Clark diminished John McCain’s war record, dismissing him as inexperienced. (Who is that pillar of experience you’re working for, General?) That’s nothing compared to where the howlers of the Left are taking it.
Salon’s War Room columnist, Alex Koppleman was able to keep the foam in his mouth:
I can appreciate the fact that Clark’s comments might seem intemperate, but the reaction is more than a little over the top.
First, there are no similarities between Clark’s remarks and the Swift boat attacks. Clark never said, and wouldn’t say, that McCain lied about his service, or won medals he hadn’t earned.
Second, did Clark say anything that was, you know, false? To be sure, McCain served heroically, and endured torture and abuse that I can hardly imagine as a POW. The nation will always owe him a debt of gratitude for what he endured. But Clark’s point is that this service, four decades ago, does not necessarily constitute a presidential qualification today. We don’t hear that often, but that doesn’t make it outrageous.
I could quibble and snark, but why bother when Koppleman represents a voice of reason compared to the real foaming fomenters of the loony Left. John Aravosis of the mis-named Americablog, please step forward:
Yes, we all know that John McCain was captured and tortured in Vietnam (McCain won’t let you forget). A lot of people don’t know, however, that McCain made a propaganda video for the enemy while he was in captivity. Putting that bit of disloyalty aside, what exactly is McCain’s military experience that prepares him for being commander in chief? It’s not like McCain rose to the level of general or something. He’s a vet. We get it. But simply being a vet, as laudable as it is, doesn’t really tell you much about someone’s qualifications for being commander in chief. If McCain is going to play the “I was tortured” card every five minutes as a justification for electing him president, then he shouldn’t throw a hissy fit any time any one asks to know more about his military experience. Getting shot down, tortured, and then doing propaganda for the enemy is not command experience. Again, it’s not nice to say say, but we’re not running for class president here. We deserve real answers, not emotional outbursts designed to quell the questions.
“He won’t let you forget” … “play the ‘I was tortured’ card every five minutes” – You know, it’s hard to avoid McCain projecting his experience as a prisoner of war every time you see him. Not being able to lift his arms because of Viet Cong torture kind of does that. The worst injury Aravosis has probably ever experienced is a bruised ego.
As to the charges of the torture film (Where is it, by the way? Try to find it on YouTube.), Aravosis seems to miss the point that those who didn’t comply with VC demands to go on camera didn’t survive to run for president. They died – horribly – on the spot, which is why the military no longer requires captive soldiers to disclose no more than “name, rank and serial number.”
Rick Moran at Rightwing Nuthouse writes on Aravosis and his vile dig:
QUESTION: Why did John McCain make a propaganda film for the enemy?
ANSWER: Because if you didn’t, the enemy would torture you until you died.
Those “agrarian reformers” and “peace loving socialists” that Aravosis’ ideological brethren were calling the the North Vietnamese back then were not very nice people. Every single prisoner who fell into their hands endured unspeakable degradation and torture until they cooperated. Aravosis makes it sound as if giving in to pain is a character defect. He cannot imagine in his safe little world – a world that allows him to peep into Republican bedroom windows to catch his political foes in a homosexual act and then out them against their will – the kind of mind numbing, excruciating, pain that causes grown men to cry like children and call out for their mother.
Besides running Americablog, one of the foulest and loathsome of the leftyblogs, what claim to moral superiority over McCain does Aravosis have?
Well, let’s see, he founded Stop Dr. Laura because he wanted to shut down her first amendment rights to discuss the downside of homosexuality. He organized Matthew Shepard Online Resources to turn an event that had nothing to do about homosexuality into a celebration of bias against straight people. And, as Moran linked, he loves to destroy people who would just as soon be private about their sex lives.
Lying, homo-totalitarian slimeball that he is, Aravosis has pretty much disqualified himself from participating in any discussion of qualifications for president … except Obama’s qualifications, of course. As a Constitution-trampling agent for “social change,” he’s just the guy to speak in support of the socialist organizer from Chicago.
Posted in 2008, Left, Leftyblogs, McCain | 1 Comment » | |
Trackbacks/Pings
Leave a Reply
[The "Comment Box" is WYSIWYG except that you have to double space between paragraphs!
Type it the way you want it to look -- Just remember to double up those line spaces.]
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Comments
June 30th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
I know it’s just me, but I feel that surviving five and a half years in hell with your spirits and intelligence intact, and with the overwhelming respect of your fellow prisoners, is in itself a testament to the man’s abilities, leadership and otherwise. Also, being a fighter pilot is not a job for little mice-like people. It takes courage, sounds instincts, a certain amount of aggression, intelligence, analytical abilities, and a whole lot more positive adjectives I can’t think of at the moment. As for Obama, let me see: student, political activist (read: left wing lobbyist), college teacher, and compulsive, boastful autobiographer. Yup, I can see the leadership, courage, and analytical ability points just piling up there.