Comments on: Who dares question the Supreme Allied Commander?

By: POWs in the eighteenth century : Historiann : History and sexual politics, 1492 to the present

Sun, 07 Sep 2008 15:32:09 +0000

[...] Did you know that John McCain was a P.O.W. in Vietnam? Me neither, until I heard it about 600 times at the Republican National Convention! (Someone, please explain to me exactly why Wesley Clark was wrong and was an ineffective surrogate for the Obama campaign.) [...]

By: Historiann

Historiann — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 02:20:26 +0000

Hi Steve–thanks for stopping by and commenting. It was the vile Bill Clinton who once said something like, “the people would rather follow someone who’s strong and wrong, than someone who’s right but looks weak.” What the hell did he know, anyway? (Except for being the only two-term Democratic President since FDR?)

You have to hand it to Republicans–they’re fiercely loyal, and they will take it to their opponents. If one of Bush’s surrogates had suggested that baby-eating was a reasonable solution to the global hunger crisis and was subsequently called out for it, other Bush surrogates would have taken to the airwaves to loudly complain about people who were soft on babies, and to insist that baby-eating was not only defensible, but principled. Ridiculous, but people would start nodding their heads and think, “well, maybe we should try baby-eating…”

By: Steve

Steve — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 21:25:05 +0000

Ah, yes. Seems all too familiar. Clark’s comments should be defended and elaborated by Obama not dismissed. Is there anyone in the Obama’s campaign leadership who reads Machiavelli and knows how to put the principles into action? Fight back! Don’t run away! Does anyone know what the hell they’re doing with respect to mass media in the inner circle? This is a struggle for ultimate power. WAKE UP!!

Here we go again — I can see it now — swiftboating version 2008. Death by a thousand small cuts. Each attack will shift a few more key centrist and ex-Hillary voters towards McCain. There will be more and more of these attacks. Can’t anyone figure out an effective counter strategy? Judas Priest!

By: Historiann

Historiann — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 12:41:25 +0000

Yes, it’s sure getting a lot of play here in Denver, and unfortunately, the media don’t have any wars, economic uphevals, or anything more important to report on. (That would take actual reporting and news-gathering! Let’s just ask politicians what they think of the outrage du jour!)

Happy 4th–hope you can enjoy some time off and a day to yourself.

By: SF

SF — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 00:15:38 +0000

Yes, Historiann, thanks for the fabulous post. Along the lines of media bimbo-ness, I’d like to bring up today’s news story about Rene Marie’s being skewered by the press for changing up the national anthem to reflect, heaven forbid, the black experience of this country. I saw the report on CNN today while eating lunch. Lots of airtime to Tancredo, and then the two anchors (both women) practically tsk-tsk-ing, making clear that she had “very little support.” Any clue from others as to why this is such an affront? For an excellent commentary on the national anthem, check out one of Laurie Anderson’s Personal Service announcements: http://youtube.com/watch?v=9cE6Pg2q3lI.

By: Historiann

Historiann — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:47:55 +0000

Hi Kathie! Someone once said very perceptively of Obama that he has great political gifts but nowhere near the same level of political skills. He’s had a bad couple of weeks, but it’s best to get them out of the way before the conventions, though.

I wish his campaign would get away from these stagey set-pieces for big speeches in front of pre-selected audiences. (Sound familiar to anyone?) He needs to get out and talk to people and hear what they have to say, and stop it with the speeches already.

By: Kathie

Kathie — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:29:15 +0000

I just wanted to say thanks for the original post and all of the responses. I’ve been sitting here uselessly yelling at my TV every time they rehash this ridiculous charge against Wesley Clark, who was simply stating the truth, and stating that only in response to a pointed and specific question! Give me a break. Now if we could just get Obama’s people to read and implement some of these suggestions for how to run a winning campaign!

By: Historiann

Historiann — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 14:23:35 +0000

Stuart–thanks for the new information about fighter planes versus bombers. I didn’t know that. McCain graduated near the bottom of his class at Annapolis, so perhaps it’s not surprising that he wasn’t the best pilot ever.

I think your analysis of and advice to Obama is right on. It’s not 1992 any more–if he were a real progressive, he could come out swinging if he wanted to. “But alas,” as you say…

By: Stuart

Stuart — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:47:56 +0000

I just couldn’t stay out of this one.

Well, as far as I’m concerned, the only thing Wesley Clark was wrong about was the part about a fighter plane.

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

That was great, and he’s stuck with it, good for him. But he should have said, “attack bomber.”

McCain flew A-4 Skyhawks, which do not engage in mano a mano combat like the connotation “fighter plane” suggests. McCain was bombing targets on the ground. Look, obviously no less dangerous. However, check out his horrible flight record. Clearly, any other pilot, not the son of a powerful Admiral, would have been discharged with a record like that. But that’s not the point. The McCain myth is that of the maverick in the sky, a modern day knight, fighting a chivalrous battle. When in all likelihood some of his bombs probably killed civilians.

Clark could be even more effective if he starts making the case even stronger, that democratic societies rely on the military only as an absolute last resort and we certainly don’t need any trigger happy war mongers with their finger on the button. Clark should keep making his case. They “swift boated” Kerry but they can’t swift boat the Supreme Allied Commander. Or can they? McCain is a joke, but a very dangerous joke.

Obama, stop throwing strong liberals under the bus and go back to tying the war in Iraq to the failing economy. The MSM could be rendered powerless this year if he just stopped playing into those false narratives. But alas, Obama never was a liberal.

By: Historiann

Historiann — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 05:02:26 +0000

Geoff–I agree with your analysis of what’s worked better for Obama, and what hasn’t worked so well. He needs to stop playing defense, and as you say, using into right-wing frames for reading him. And–it’s interesting to hear your comments on military service and fascism, since you’re much more of an expert on the topic than I am.

I’m glad to hear that I wasn’t the only one screaming into my radio tuned to Nice Polite Republicans Tuesday night!