Obama surrogate attacks McCain
Wesley Clark ripped John McCain over the weekend attempting to discount his service to America.
Clark — “Getting shot down in a fighter jet does not qualify one to be president”. Maybe not the most eloquent way to say it, but I agree.
The problem for Clark and the rest of the messiah’s flock is they cannot provide qualifications for their candidate unless you count “he’s cool”.
What are B. Hussein Obama’s qualifications to be POTUS?
June 30th, 2008 at 9:30 am
General Clark said he honored his service and that being a prisoner of war is not a qualification of being president. Do you disagree?
June 30th, 2008 at 9:39 am
John,
What part of this statement in the post did you not get”
“Clark — “Getting shot down in a fighter jet does not qualify one to be president”. Maybe not the most eloquent way to say it, but I agree.”
Can you address the question asked in the post — “What are B. Hussein Obama’s qualifications to be POTUS?”
June 30th, 2008 at 10:00 am
As I have said in the past when you get past the spin McCain and Obama both have no real plan for Iraq other than more of the same.
HP-While most worldwide polls regarding America’s presidential race would make Barack Obama the victor were they to count for anything, it appears his support was a little shaky of late among some officials in Iraq.
According to Wednesday’s Washington Post, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari listened to Obama’s campaign rhetoric about the need to pull out U.S. forces from his country, and didn’t like what he was hearing. As he said to the Post’s editorial board, “we are just turning the corner in Iraq,” and so he told Obama in their recent meeting that he hoped the Democratic candidate would not sacrifice those gains if elected.
Zebari professes to have received a palatable, reassuring answer from Obama, to the point where the Post came away with the impression that Zebari now thinks “Mr. Obama might not differ all that much from Mr. McCain.”
If that’s true, and Zebari repeats such an opinion with any frequency between now and the election, it could prove a dispiriting blow to Obama’s domestic supporters, who look to Iraq as a principal point of distinction between their candidate and John McCain.
June 30th, 2008 at 11:23 am
bb: The case for Obama is judgment, communications, leadership, intelligence, temperament, and the ability to bridge the partisan gap (with all but the most rabid). And most importantly, all these things are the polar opposite of what we got with Bush.
June 30th, 2008 at 11:36 am
Lefty’s case for Obama:
- judgment - can you provide examples where his judgment is superior to that of his opponent?
- communications - I agree, he is a good communicator…at least as long as he has a teleprompter in front of him. McCain sux at reading speeches, but has a flair about him in town hall like settings. It will be interesting to see if Obama can/will stand before unscripted citizens to take questions.
- leadership - sorry Lefty, Obama has never been in a leadership position, specifically in the private sector. We have no idea if he is a leader.
- intelligence - again, don’t see how this trait has been proven.
- temperament - how do you know his temperament?
- bridge partisan gap - this couldn’t be more wrong. If anything, McCain is the partisan gap bridger of the two. Obama’s promised progressive, big tax, big govt. ideas will divide this country like no other time in our history. His presidency will assure GOP takeover of congress in 2010 and 1600 Pennsylvania Ave in 2012 and many years beyond.
Obama will indeed be the polar opposite of Bush except when it comes to spending. That is not a good thing.
June 30th, 2008 at 11:39 am
#5 was posted by me, not sure why it is listed as anonymous
June 30th, 2008 at 11:43 am
John,
Iraq is not the theme of this thread.
One of your heroes Wesley Clark made accusations that McCain is not qualified to be POTUS based on his getting shot down. He proceeded to promote Obama as if he is qualified (despite never serving in the military and having zero experience in the private sector).
Do you agree with Wesley Clark regarding Obama? If so, what are Obama’s qualifications to be POTUS?
June 30th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
I think qualification argument is a bunch of spin on both sides. The question all should ask is do they have a plan for Iraq. And both McCain and Obama fail in that category. All they have is a strategy that they both mainly agree on but no plan how to get out and keep the region contained without putting America into bankruptcy.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
In think Barr is going to start gaining momentum. The status quo has no idea of the anger and frustration out here in the real world. I think it would be a big mistake to look at Barr in terms of the “Perot effect”. This could become something completely different. When the “media” becomes part of the “establishment” and starts to play “defense” instead of finding out the facts, and starts to effect the outcome we’re talking about a bunch of confused collective morons.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
“I think qualification argument is a bunch of spin on both sides.”
Yeah, screw qualifications, let’s just find out who can surrender the quickest, build a big wall around the U.S. and isolate us from the rest of the world.
Qualifications…we don’t need no stinkin’ qualifications!!!
June 30th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Bill,
Do you actually trust someone who does a complete 180 on just about every single issue?
I like Bob Barr, supported him when he was an outspoken congressman. But I have to wonder about anybody who so radically changes positions in order to run for president.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Bart
One could make arguments on both sides. In the real world it is all about the plan and how you implement it. Debating talking points from both sides is worthless.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Bob Barr was speaking out about the issues with spending, Iraq, NAFTA Highway, Bush abusing the Constitution…. way before becoming a Libertarian or running for PRESIDENT!
June 30th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
John,
Talking points? A resume is not built upon talking points.
And both candidates do have an Iraq plan…McCain to win, Obama, surrender.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
The truth is both sides have not shared any long term plan. As I said the surge is a strategy not a plan.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Bart
One more thing!
You demonstrate my point about how both sides debate talking points not policy. The truth is the plan between McCain and Obama on Iraq is very similar even according to Iraq.
June 30th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
JohnKonop: It is absurd to claim that Obama doesn’t have a plan/strategy (I’m not sure what distinction you’re making between the 2 terms) for Iraq.
You think that anybody that doesn’t agree with Biden’s partition of the country (and that would include the vast majority of Iraqi’s) doesn’t have a plan/strategy.
June 30th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Lefty
Read post 3
June 30th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
bb
We’ve been through your talking points one by one over and over again. (Surrender” and “appeasement”) But you keep regurgitating the same stuff.
June 30th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
John,
You are the godfather of using talking points w/o facts to back up the statements.
Winning is the strategy of a good war plan…McCain at least has winning as the goal and will likely appoint good people to develop a winning plan.
Obama wants to lose so he will likely appoint losers to carry out his plan of surrender, pack up and come home. But it is still a plan albeit a less than desirable plan to those of us who still consider America as a winner.
June 30th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
John,
I omitted your other candidate from this scenario, so let me re-phrase the original question:
What are Bob Barr’s qualifications to be POTUS?
June 30th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
JohnKonop: Read Obama’s Iraq position on his campaign website—or any of his speeches over the past few years—and you will find a detailed plan/strategy for Iraq. One that is vastly different than McCain’s (especially on the issue of permanent bases).
You think that anybody that doesn’t agree with Biden’s partition of the country (and that would include the vast majority of Iraqi’s) doesn’t have a plan/strategy.
June 30th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Bill,
Don’t tell me you have Konopitis too (defined as the inability to carry on a rational discussion).
Show me the part of my reply to you (#11) that refers to surrender or appeasement. I asked a simple question based on factual data discussed by Barr on FoxNews yesterday and posted by me many times on this site.
June 30th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
bb
Even if you could characterize Bob Barr’s changes as “180s” he’s still a lot better than McCain even at his worst. So my only question is who do you like better than Barr. McCain or Hillary or Obama.
June 30th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Or maybe…
YOU’VE BECOME A RON PAUL SUPPORTER!! He could still get the Republican nomination you know. Stranger things have happened. You excited yet?
June 30th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Lefty
The fact is McObama gave Iraq the same Bush plan, we spend and they whatever!
June 30th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
Bill,
If I had a gun to my head and I had to choose between the three, Barr would get my vote…knowing how easily he changes his mind, it is quite possible he would backoff his current stance against the war on terrorism. In fact, if he would just drop that as his position, I could get on board with his candidacy as I have done in the past for him when he ran against John Linder.
As for Ron Paul, I am excited…he is back to being that crazy uncle kind of guy taking up time on late night CSPAN broadcasts as the only congressman giving floor speeches.
June 30th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
John,
You are just flat wrong. How can you say McCain and Obama have the same plan…it’s not even close.
What are Bob Barr’s qualifications to be POTUS (2nd try with full expectation that no answer wil be provided because it is not possible for John to get beyond standard meaningless soundbites)?
June 30th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Bart
What part of this do you not understand?
June 30th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
Sorry to butt in, but I understand that excerpt to mean that Obama says one thing in public to appease the far left and then has to backtrack behind closed doors so that the Iraqis don’t anticipate his surrender strategy.
June 30th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
JohnKonop: What part of this do you not understand?
Bringing Our Troops Home:
Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda.
June 30th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
John,
Who f’n cares…what does that have to do with Obama’s lack of qualification to be president? Or the fact that Wesley Clark is a dhead who purposely tries to discredit McCain’s service to this country. I’m surprised Clark did not suffer the very unfortunate fate of Pat Tillman considering his total lack of respect for those who serve in the military…what an asshole!
Again, what are Bob Barr’s qualifications to be POTUS?
June 30th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
Agree or disagree General Clark honorable served our country as did McCain. As far as qualifications Gore had the most of any candidate in my like time but I did not vote for him. It came down to issues.
Also it comes down to execution and if they do what they ran on. That is why Bush is the worse vote I have ever made in my life time!
He ran on “humble foreign policy” and became a cowboy
He ran as a fiscal conservative and lost his veto pen while debt ran out of control.
He ran upholding our laws while illegal immigrants ran wild
He ran on being a competent manager and Iraq was the most poorly implemented plan ever. Not to be topped by Katrina which was repeat of the gang that could not shoot straight?
I could go on and on……
June 30th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
Aubrey
You are right and McCain does the same thing as well.
June 30th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
LeftHook
You hear and read what you want.
June 30th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
Wesley Clark Stands By McCain Criticism
June 30th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
“Obama has never been in a leadership position, specifically in the private sector. We have no idea if he is a leader.”
Yeah? And your point is?
When I look at corporate CEOs these days the last thing I think of is “leadership”. The first thing I think of is… “how many employees were laid off to pay for the CEO’s annual bonus?”
I’ll take Obama over McCain simply because Obama’s personal experience is more closely aligned with most Americans. I want someone leading us who has a clue what the average American is faced with.
I don’t need the husband of an heiress, who made her millions by way of inheritance, leading our nation.
McCain also had a chance to prove what he would do when faced with lobbyists seeking his support in the halls of Congress (S&L scandal). He failed to protect the taxpayers’ best interest. Americans paid hundreds of billions for his inability to see a con job coming. Thanks for being asleep at the wheel. If Congress was a private enterprise, McCain would have been fired in the 1980’s for incompetence.
July 1st, 2008 at 1:28 am
JohnKonop: Ha, #35 is pretty funny. You disregard years and years of Obama’s writings, speeches, and policy statements—and those of his foreign policy advisers—in favor of a single, third-hand, translated, unsourced, and utterly unspecific quote (what exactly was said to the Iraqi, oh yeah, you have NO idea). A quote with absolutely no corroboration.
And I’m the one reading and hearing what I want to!?!? Whatever you say.
July 1st, 2008 at 6:59 am
John,
You repeat liberal soundbites well when describing Bush, but Bush is not running in 08 and he did not create the problems that will be on the desk of the next president, specifically entitlements.
In fact, Bush tried to make minor reforms to SS but was rebuffed by your dem friends and liberal GOPers like McCain and the gang of 14.
I take it you see Barr has no qualifications for the job since you will not answer the question.
July 1st, 2008 at 7:10 am
Bart
Calling this liberal shows why the GOP is lost!
July 1st, 2008 at 8:46 am
John,
Bush IS NOT RUNNING…time to move on.
I could refute every single one of your points, but who cares…Bush is wrapping up his term.
July 1st, 2008 at 10:02 am
Bart
Do we have a 9 trillion dollar debt and growing?
July 1st, 2008 at 10:56 am
John,
No we don’t. But if we did, who would be the most qualified to address the root of the debt problem — ENTITLEMENTS?!
What will either of your boys do - Obama, Barr - to reform SS, Medicaid, Medicare, welfare, food stamps, etc. — these are the programs causing debt accumulation no matter who is president. Blame Bush all you want, but that solves nothing.
July 1st, 2008 at 11:31 am
WOW! It took 42 posts for John to use his patented “9 Trillion Dollar” debt talking point. That has got to be a record!
July 1st, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Even more interesting Mac is that this is the 45th post and only one has attempted to address the question posted to start this thread.
One could draw a conclusion that either all the Obamaheads on this site are stumped by the challenge or just flat embarrassed about their messiah.
July 1st, 2008 at 3:18 pm
9 trillion dollars and growing is not a talking point it is the truth!
July 1st, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Bart
Your Obama comments have no affect on me because I am not voting for him. I only comment when you have your facts wrong as usual.
July 1st, 2008 at 6:19 pm
If you “only commented when I had facts wrong” we would be spared any Konop comments.
July 1st, 2008 at 7:57 pm
John,
Still waiting for your version of Barr’s qualifications to be president…
July 1st, 2008 at 7:59 pm
Mr Konop,
RE: No. 33 above, next time take the easy way out and actually listen to what Democrats are telling you.
That way, you won’t make the dumb mistake of voting for GOPers ever again.
.
——————————–
If you aren’t outraged, you’re not paying attention.