I am also really surprised with Randi today (and yesterday, come to think of it). I mostly lurk around, but I listen to the show almost every day and I agree with Randi 90% of the time. This time is a huge exception. I have to wonder if she watched the entire clip. General Clark was totally fair and right in his comments.

I really hope she's not "falling in line" behind the Obama campaign, because they're dead wrong about this.

Not to mention - even if I agreed with what she was saying, it would still be overkill. Move on, for the love of GOD.

And for the record, I think the Obama camp shouldn't have done what they did. They need to stand up for something instead of looking weak. I don't want a redux of John Kerry's campaign.

Good grief.

Since when is Randi spending valuable time defending McCain?! He doesn't need it. Clark did NOT attack McCain. AUGHHH!

Sorry, just frustrated here.

I have to be frank, I am really disappointed in Randi's take today on what she thinks that General Clark said and what she thinks he should have said. I heard two people call the show today, and try to disagree with her, and she wouldn't even listen to them or try to reason with them. It was her way, or the highway......

All Clark said was that " Being shot down in a fighter plane and being held in captivity in a POW camp , doesn't necessarily qualify someone to be President of the United States"... What the heck is so hard to understand about that statement?????????? I happen to know someone that was a POW in Vietnam, and I wouldn't hire him to manage a McDonalds.. McCain has been running all over the country citing his military experience as essential for him to be ready on "day one" and the fact of the matter is that he wouldn't be ready on day one to run the country if he had a truckload of medals on his chest and had spent 40 years in a POW camp. He is indecisive, confused, and switches his story every other day.

What I am disappointed in about all this , is Obama's apparent willingness to immediately buckle and give into the opposition every time a subject comes up that is the least bit confrontational. That is not the way to win an election, but it is a good way to make people think that maybe you are a pushover..... I was discussing this with a friend of mine this morning and his comment was , " If that had been Hillary, she would have stuck up for Wesley Clark".

Just my 2 cents.

"The media driven notion that Gen. Clark somehow attacked Sen. McCain's military service is patently false. In fact, the opposite is true -- he praised it. This controversy was created and fueled by a media unwilling to live up to the basic journalistic standard of accuracy and thoroughness," said Karl Frisch, a spokesman for Media Matters.
"It is a fact that Gen. Clark praised Sen. McCain's military service while also saying that such service is not a 'qualification to be president.' The media have a duty not only to Gen. Clark but the public to correct the record."

Good god, Randi! Clark DIDN'T BRING IT UP!!
Can we pleeeeezz let this rest, now?

Bob 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-

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be President.


---------------

I wonder if Randi is listening to a different interview clip ... ?

General Clark wasn't even the one who injected military service into the conversation - BOB SCHIEFFER did! AND he never said it was the "wrong kind of military service," Randi. I want to see where he said these things. I didn't hear them.

*bangs head repeatedly on desk*

Edited because I can't spell.

You might be on to something.

It's gonna be tough to not cross the line.

WHY General Clark said it:

Because he was basically asked the blunt question about whether McCain's service meant he was more qualified to be President than Obama. Clark had to answer. The answer was no. It wasn't poor judgement to say so. It was good judgement.

DON'T FORGET... That Gen. Clark held the exact same opinion regarding John Kerry's service when Gen Clark ran for prez against him.

Basically the general's point is a correct one---that Gen Clark, being a General was more qualified than Kerry to be president because he outranked him. He also outranked McCain. As a General, he made more executive decisions than McCain or Kerry. These desicions are presidential qualifications.

BUT...since Obama has no military experience, the truth is you have to examine Obama's OTHER qualifications to be president. That was the point Clark made.

It is important to recognize that unlike any Generals of the Iraq War, General Clark won the Kosovo war without losing a single solider to enemy fire...and he won it far swifter than this Iraq War has been.

It is okay to honor service, but it is SWIFT-BOATING in a way to be so offended by this correct point of General Clark. Being shot down, and taken prisoner during war doesn't automatically mean McCain is more qualified than Obama to be President...and furthermore, John Kerry was "swift-boated" because his heroic action saving his fellow soldiers was HIM killing the enemy...and THAT was denigrated!!! What McCain did was allow the enemy to capture and torture HIM! From ANY general's point-of-view, the one soldier (Kerry) showed the sort of leadership that wins wars while the other (McCain) blundered in the sort of way that loses wars.

It is incorrect of Randi to defend McCain on this point. She should be defending General Clark.

Thanks, I needed that!

Let's hope you're right...

I am constantly astounded at the stupidity of the people and the willingness of the political crap slingers to take advantage of this. This is NOT a big deal. Clark simply said McCain's military experience didn't qualify him to be president and this was in reply to another comment. Why do we give this kind of stuff air time. Why do the news people even bother with it, except to feed the Republican political machine. Randy, why are you doing the same thing with this stuff. Just say it doesn't matter and is just being used and let's get on with the issues that matter to THIS COUNTRY instead of some egotistical "poor me, they think my military service doesn't qualify me to be president." The question is WHAT DOES QUALIFY YOU. Please please give me an intelligent president! We have tried the good guy that we'd like to have a beer with, and we see how that worked.

Randy, you say they are not talking about his service. McCain and his camp are always saying that McCain has military experience and Obama doesn't, so he is better qualified to be Commander and Chief .... it is always implied even when they aren't saying it outright. When are we going to start talking straight and saying, if you idiots want to pretend this is more meaningful than the condition of our country, then your values are misplaced.

Hate to be piling on, but I agree, Randi's off-base on this tirade.
If you're own listeners aren't agreeing with your point of view, don't beat the dead horse.

You guys really need to look at the politics of this.

That's what this is about. Like Randi said to a caller, we are not in flight training discussing who is best, we are in the middle of the most important presidential race in our lifetime. That's the bottom line.

I think, though, all this will wash out with a win for Obama. That's my opinion.

This is off the subject, because I don't know how to start a new one from this space ....

Can anyone tell me why people think the way McCain treats his wife is right. I have never seen him walk WITH her, only steps ahead of her. There is never an arm offered to her ... he just charges ahead and she just stands a little behind him like an abused woman. He acts like she doesn't exist. What is with that and why doesn't anyone talk about it. Women should be against him if for no other reason, than how he treats his wife and acts like she is not even there.

I have to disagree with you here. McCain, and/or surrogates allude to his military service as being a major defining difference between he and Obama in that it makes him MORE READY to lead the nation. It could be a direct statement, or a NAVY cap he was wearing the other day, or speaking before Vets, or HIS WIFE GOING TO VIETNAM LAST WEEK AND MAKING POLITICAL STATEMENTS FROM ABROAD (why did she go????) or whatever.

I agree that there are so many REAL issues to deal with, but this would not be the first time that someone embellished their resume experience in order to get a job, would it?? And is this JOB not really, really important??

Peace

Remember what Randi has always said, "DON'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING I SAY". I couldn't agree nore with her on this issue. The reason the media is focused on Clark is because they want John McCain as the next president. His corporate masters can't stand Obama and want NOTHING to do with him as president. The media doesn't have to focus on Clark, they could follow Obama around while he give speeches and play them back to us on the news at night but they won't. They can also follow McCain around and pay close attention to what he is saying as well but they won't because we the people may see just how fucked in the head McCain is and everyone will vote for Obama. So what does the media and Randi, who is the media do? They focus on a non-issue, Clark and five star general replying to a question. YET!!! McCains first ad shows him in a prison camp giving the viewers the impression that he is the Commander Guy because of his military service.

Randi and other progressives have to stop being so afraid of how the right wing wackos react to what we say. Gen. Clark's comments regarding McCain were clearly a result of Bob Schieffer's unprofessional tirade when Clark dared to criticize McCain. McCain's military record, like John Kerry's in 2004 should be fair game as long as the truth is told. We all must stop fearing the truth.

Well, I'm not mad at Randi, but for someone who is constantly touting how much research she does if she read the transcript she'd see that Clark didn't really bring up the topic. He's a military guy so those are the questions networks field to him. I can't really believe the way she's ranting and being wrong on top of it.

Here's the link she's looking for.

http://www.02rifik.com/

This is a tangled web. Last caller was very good.

Randi may have an inside view of Clark as Clinton supporter and Clinton's campaign tactics.

It's a contradiction though since Clark is saying being in the military does not necessarily make you qualified to be president. At same time Clinton was trying to use Bosnia to put her on same plane ( no pun intended ) as McCain.

Interesting Obama in news break doesn't support swift boat analogy to Clark's statements.

Randi, Randi, Randi:

You need to calm down on Wes Clark, take a deep breath, and ask yourself why you apparently read into Clark's remarks something he simply didn't say.

Clark did not denigrate McCain's service record in the least. Just the opposite. And he certainly didn't lie about it -- which is the very definition of 'Swift-Boating'. As one caller tried to point out, McCain is the one who has made his military record Exhibit A of his claim to national security chops. Clark simply posits this: Does that military record really make McCain uniquely suited to the presidency? Like you, I have a pretty good military record myself, including the obligatory 'I love me' wall full of plaques in my den. Does that make me particularly suited to the White House? Or you?

Do your loyal fans a favor and read -- or re-read -- Glenn Greenwald's Salon post of today.

soonerguy55

http://www.drudge.com/news/106692/author-m...fe-cunt-trollop


This should answer your question.......

Welcome...yeah you would have thought McCain's clip would have topped Rev Wright's! let alone the subtleties you are hitting on.

May need to reach number of posts to post a topic or go to top of forum heading.

The MSM is all about Mcrazy, so they will exploit any attack on him and use it to their so called advantage, even tho' they are more out of touch with MSA than anyone on the planet. Obama is doing damage control, because he is trying to raise the bar of discourse, plain and simple. Gen. Clark is using his freedom of speech RIGHT, when did that become illegal? WTF?

Randi, you are wrong wrong wrong. All I hear from the McCain bunch is he's a POW, he's running on that record. Ask him any question and he looks confused and answers "Did I mention I was a POW?"

Just because he was captured doesn't make him fit to be President, in fact, it might just make him suspect.

If he was tortured, and he is certainly promoted as having been tortured, why is he supporting torture? HOW can he support torture? Do rape victims support rape? That's offensive. He is ex-military, why doesn't he support our veterans? None of this makes sense and these things have to be aired, Clark started the conversation and I'm glad he did. Clark spoke to one of the McCain things that bothers me. We need the conversation, we need to go there.

That does it. If Randi doesn't denounce and reject and denounce her shorts, I'll be forced to vote for Bob Barr.

I was a little irritated today when I called the show to comment. First the screener asked me what I wanted to talk about, and I told him that I disagreed with Randi and wanted to discuss it. He then asked me to hold on, and I did up until the break at the top of the hour which was about 10 minutes. About four minutes into the break, the line was disconnected. I have been a talk show host in the past, and I know what they did, they dumped the call because she didn't want anyone else to disagree with her, but wanted to continue her rant on the subject. I felt like I was dealing with a Limbaugh or O'Reilly rather than a Randi. Not a good way to have an intelligent debate with your listeners, in my opinion.

Exactly. That's the other thing I don't understand about Randi's position that McCain isn't using POW status esp after how he's treated the guy that helped him in Vietnam and how he treats other POW families. He's supposed to be special?

I think this will pass but there are alot of questions. She's right this does open a can of worms.

personally i have been saying this for WEEKS as Clark......"Being shot down in a fighter plane and being held in captivity in a POW camp , doesn't necessarily qualify someone to be President of the United States"...

thank GOD someone finally said it and got it out there in the MSM.

why would we put someone in charge who has minimal military strengths, was shot down and caught by the enemy and has been tortured as a POW and who knows what else.

God bless him that he survived....but we have already had a freak in the WH who was "tortured" by a screwed up mother and family.....lest we forget....

i agree with the person who said a friend of theirs was a POW and they wouldn't put him in charge of a hamburger stand. geezzz.

i think i am glad that i haven't heard what RR said today...I just can't stand being shit on again when i try to listen again to let her back into my life..you know Randi WE who listen are not STUPID...

well maybe i will listen for a few minutes....I hope you get back on track Randi...we need to keep Bush 2.0001 out of the WH.....

Isn't that what YOU want too?

Ok...now she hit it..."it's so Rovian" and "stinks" after Clinton kiss my a** comment.

I don't see it but if this is true Clintons are trying to SABOTAGE Obama's campaign!

Randi, Randi, Randi:

Again, what is it with you and Clark today? Now you're implying Clark was somehow in cahoots with Bill Clinton to sabotage Obama because he gave an interview "interestingly enough" from Little Rock. Perhaps you've forgotten, Clark is FROM Little Rock.

I really dont think that there are too many more risky statements to be made. IMO, the McCain machine will collapse under the weight of its own weaknesses. At least I hope so.

I still disagree w/ her but I don;t think it's that far fetched. The Clintons never give up and they teamed up with Rove and McCain in the primary.

I am very disappointed with Randi today ...... the idea that speaking the truth is not recognizing Mccain's war record is asinine. Mr. Clark was responding to a question about Barack's experience which I don't think falls under the umbrella of bashing McCain.

OK . . . now it's too much.

For the thousandth time, to both Randi and the current caller: CLARK DID NOT ATTACK MCCAIN'S SERVICE RECORD! Jeez!

these are the ones you watch for.....

these callers like this lady....

I can't believe how many times I've heard "Clark attacked McCains service record". He DID NOT attack McCain. He even stated that McCain's service was admirable. All he did was say being a soldier was not a qualification to be president. Being a cop is admirable, you put your life on the line every day, but it doesn't make you presidential. I think all of this chatter is mock indignation from the right because thats all THEY have. Let's not play into it.

You are right, they are either shills for McSame or Hillary, in all probability.

I wouldn't be surprised to hear Randi's show being quoted on Fox Spews tonight as proof that Clarke is stupid, and even the liberal media thinks so.

What the point is that Randi is trying to tell us all is this, its a derailment of the facts. Obama is a smart man, he addressed this issue so its in the past. Clark is bringing it back up again, Obama wants to get to the real meat and potatoes of what is hurting America. He does not want to go into personal crap, but what is really the needs of America at this point and time. Remember the last Hillary Obama debate and what a sham it was, Obama was the only one that looked at the media clowns and told them, "I want to address the issues, this is nonsense, lets talk about the issues!"

I'm sure you're right that they'll use it. I'm so disappointed that Randi is giving them this kind of ammo.

All this commotion about what Wesley Clarke said seems entirely like your standard Politics for Dummies, and Obama's caving into the McCain camp's stupid spinning of what Clarke said by denouncing it, instead of explaining it, is just disappointing. The fact is that these politicians, Obama in particular with all his pandering and flip-flopping, expect us to be stupid enough to take all this distracting spin and superficial nonsense seriously.

It would be nice if the "news" networks and blogosphere would focus on Iraq, Darfur, the REAL causes and beneficiaries of skyrocketing gas prices, global warming, the deficit, etc., etc., etc., and it would be nice if journalists would investigate and educate, and politicians had platforms, instead of PR campaigns.

No worries though, they can keep the media and public occupied with this drivel till the entire thing comes crashing down around our ears.

Let's put this into a context that everyone can understand .......................

It's late September in 1960. Someone loosely associated with the Campaign of then Vice President Richard Millhouse Nixon makes the following statement .....................

......"Being sunk by a Japanese Destroyer and being stuck on a desert island for a couple of weeks, doesn't necessarily qualify someone to be President of the United States"...

I believe that if such a statement had been made at that time, then President Richard Millhouse Nixon would not even have the number 37, next to his name in the history books. The number 35 would have been right out. The late and Honorable Mayor Daley would not have had any worries at all about his party's chances in the Presidential elections that year.

Go ahead, give us Conservatives a verbal club to beat you Progressives with.

As Elvis would say ............. Thank you veury much ....................

Best,

It's possible. Let's see, since I've been listening to Randi, how many times has she been wrong?

(Now I'll go hide under the covers.)

Lol, yeah - that's exactly the same thing. You're taking a some liberties with the actual words Clarke said to get this analogy, aren't you. "He hasn't held executive responsibility. … I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president."

I was in the military, so was my dad and all 4 of my brothers. I was born on a military base . . . . those things alone, don't qualify me or anyone else to be president.

I'm there with you..oops!

I'm officially confused at this point. The Rovian instincts run true except for Schiffer which she's getting into now.

I am in complete agreement! I think Randi has gotten so spun up that she can't hear the validity of the remarks which offer a different perspective on Gen. Clarke's remarks.

Joy

To everyone (which can't be that many people) who agree with Randi: Read the transcript and then say Clark brought up the issue of McCain's service.

http://securingamerica.com/node/2993

Clark clearly starts by talking about Obama's leadership and communucation skills and is political rise. Schieffer brings up McCain's military service and starts off with this comment: "you're talking about somebody who was a prisoner of war.". Prior to Schieffer's comment, Wes Clark said NOTHING (in the interview) regarding McCain and the military. My feeling is Scheiffer was trying to get Clark to say something inflammatory about McCain, because he had done so in the past. It's "gotchya" interviewing and is a Fox News tactic sort of along the line of "how long have you been beating your wife". I've lost respect for Randi for not picking up on this.

I just listened to Randi read the transcript and she repeated the words Schieffer said. He brought up the riding in a fighter jet and being shot down as if that qualified one to be president.

Now she's saying Clark's comment about lack of executive experience was the wrong thing to say.

I think Randi blew this one.

Randi just read the entire Sheifer/Clark exchange.


I must say, that the more she talks about what really was ACTUALLY said on Meet The Press, the more she proves how utterly wrong she is about her interpretation of Gen Clark's statements.

Yes, Clark started off by saying that McCain is untested with regard to military decisions at the EXECUTIVE level.

He didn't say Obama wasn't untested too...he made the (excellent) point that McCain is EQUALLY as untested... And this is in response to all the myraid of ways McCain claims he is MORE qualified than Obama on Military issues. (That's why Clark urged us to look at Obama's OTHER qualifications that make him superior to McCain.)

And Genral Clark knows this because he IS an General and KNOWS better than anyone in the world what those qualifications are. Bob Sheifer registered surprise because he DOESN'T really know what thos qualifications are.

We must NOT think of Bob Scheiffer's astounded reaction as if that's was a correct response. It just wasn't. It only reveals Scheiffer's ignorance of the military decsions that are made at a General's level.

I hope Randi will correct herself tomorrow about that she said about General Clark today. He is NOT trying to cause Obama to lose because of some nefarious Bill Clinton plot.

And I think the more people reflect upon General Clark's interbiew on Meet The Press, the more they will praise Clark for his honesty and CORRECT perception of the issue.

I was outraged when I heard about McCain's "c" word comment about her. It seemed so in-character with his rage issues. But suszrae I had never connected your incisive observance regarding the body language of the McCains. Now that you point it out, it is SO obvious. Maybe he picked that up in Asia - you know the whole "walk 5 steps behind me" in the old culture. She does act like a smack might be coming at any time if she strays from the talking points and "little woman" position.

Thanks for your insight!

Joy

Here's how I see it. When I saw Clark on Face the Nation, I was surprised when he spoke the truth that being shot down in battle does not qualify a person to be president. Then, it seemed to me that Bob Shieffer exploited the issue shamelessly. I wasn't surprised that he did, because we are accustomed to elevating military servicemen to heroes, who are beyond legitimate comment. They shouldn't be. It is TRUE that the fact that McCain served in Vietnam, got shot down, captured and became a prisoner of war does not make him presidential material.

I don't think Clark said that McCain's service was not the right kind of service. He said that the kind of military service which makes a commander-in-chief is the kind that requires decision making for the lives of others during battle. He did not attack McCain's service per se, he just would not automatically accept that being a POW makes him presidential material. Clark did praise McCain's service, but he contrasted McCain's poor judgement to Obama's superior judgement. Good point.

However, once the whole thing was blown out of proportion, it did occur to me that Clark's performance was suspiciously unhelpful to Barack. Then I recalled Clinton's recent "kiss my ass" statement and the unflattering comments that Clark had made about Obama in the past. So I had considered this may have been an act of sabotage on Clark's part as a favor to the Clinton camp. It was too slick and well-delivered on Clark's part to have been spontaneous. And, as Randi said, it was decidedly Rovian. Now Clark has been instrumental in some people feeling that the Democrats have insulted McCain and disrespected his service. Yet Obama did no such thing. It feels now like Clark may have given this blow to Obama as a gift to the Clintons. It was very cleverly done and most likely not an accident on Clark's part. He knew that question was going to come up and he had thought out his reply in advance. If Clark were speaking for the Clinton camp and Hillary was the nominee, I think Clark would have tread much more carefully, not wishing to turn servicemen against the nominee.

But, having said all that, I hope this will be the end of this "tempest in a teapot". This mini-controversy only serves to alienate people, create animosity and distract from the positive ideals Obama is trying to project. I don't think most Americans care a whit about this non-issue. But those who do will hold this unfairly against Obama. It's a lose/lose situation. Hopefully, we can all move on.

I'm w/ you Eyes; gone through same process...time to move on.

Why does Randi insist on giving the impression that Clark came onto FTN with guns blazing?! He didn't bring up the point about McCain and when he was asked about it he gave HIS OPINION! He didn't go on there and lie, he didn't drag McCain through the mud. He simply stated that being shot down doesn't qualify you to be a world leader. For God's sake--look what the republican's did to Kerry's service! I'm not sure I would even call John McCain a war hero. Audi Murphy was a war hero. He saved American's lives. General Wes Clark was a war hero. He rapelled down a bluff in Kosovo to rescue Americans from a vehicle that was in the process of exploding from overheated ammunition. What did John McCain do that was heroic? Maybe Randi would be more comfortable campaigning for McCain because it sure seems that way after hearing today's show.