It seems clear to me that he is being VERY cautious regarding military matters.  I can understand the caution but you can't let it control the campaign.

"I'll kick the sh*t out of them."

I doubt McCain will extend the same courtesy.

He is not Hillary Clinton, and so he isn't and doesn't have to be in such a position. The way I see it, Obama has done nothing to cross that C.I.C. "threshold."

Obama's reaction was a mistake.

In the primaries, Obama ran a smart campaign. Ever since he's become the nominee, he has done everything to run a traditional, conventional wisdom-driven, careful, defensive campaign. This is not a winning strategy. Ask John Kerry.

Obama is reasserting Hillary's claim. And there isn't a rational person who could disagree that to McCain's four decades of public service, Obama's four years pale in comparison. (This is not counting his years as a community organizer and State Senate years.

But his record in the Senate reveals he spent much of his time climbing the ladder, discontent with the system, contemptuous of it. In a way it reminds me of Minnesota's Mark Dayton who complained "about basic facts of the job, such as his limited power in a chamber where authority derives from seniority."

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1183984,00.html

The difference is Dayton was an altogether too altruistic humanistic person with much less personal ambition. When he didn't roll with the party line, which was often, he got the cold shoulder. (Wellstone often had a similar problem.)

The Republicans never have to disavow any of their spokespeople, unless they're caught igniting a cross on somebody's lawn.

The irony is that General Clark has been saying exactly the same thing about John McCain for a few weeks now. It's only received national media attention in the current cycle. The further irony is that the statement is true -- and just for a direct comparison, Jimmy Carter's junior naval officer service (and more distinguished career at Annapolis) didn't get him cut any slack with the GOP.

So Obama has opted for unilateral disarmament on this issue, while as noted the Republicans will be enjoying their open season on Obama's slender résumé. While Obama may be currying favor with the Village Elders, the voters will be wondering whether he is willing to stand up and fight for anything.

Let's review the historical record:

Fighting Democratic Presidential candidates since the War:

Truman 1948, Kennedy 1960, Johnson 1964, Humphrey 1968, Clinton 1992 and 1996.

Gentlemanly Democratic Presidential candidates since the War:

Stevenson 1952 and 1956, McGovern 1972, Carter 1976 and 1980, Mondale 1984, Dukakis 1988, Gore 2000 and Kerry 2004.

Gore would have been a fighting Dem had he not been Shrummed and Braziled into a straitjacket. Hubert was arguably too nice a guy, but he almost caught Nixon in 1968 after being 15 points down with three weeks to go when he remembered that he was a latter day Happy Warrior.

Carter is pleased those unpleasant Clintons have been kicked to the curb.

Are John McCain's military credentials overrated?

I think Gen. Wesley Clark's statements are simply stupid from a political standpoint. Why would you want to bring up McCain's military service as an issue in the first place? The discussion hurts Obama much more than McCain. (1) Obama has no military service. McCain served in the Navy in a war zone. (2) Obama has no executive experience. McCain was an officer. (3) McCain is a U.S. Naval Academy graduate. Annapolis is probably one of the greatest leadership schools in the world.

John McCain's service alone does not make him qualified to be commander-in-chief. However, when combined with his years in the Senate, including as former Chairman and current Ranking Member of the Armed Services Committee, he has very reputable credentials.

This site supports Obama but not mindlessly, uncritically.  

And many of us who come here do not support the D Party process or the presumptive nominee it has produced...though some of us are lifelong Dem activists.

We are, however, still political junkies...so we come for dialogue and insight and sensible, fair argument without hidden agendas.

My understanding is that all he said is that getting shot down and being a POW ....  All by itself... In and of itself is not sufficient criteria.

In March, Hillary had to be her own surrogate, because the media wasn't giving much free media to her surrogates.  The only way to get coverage was to be her own surrogate.

One thing the Obama campaign is deft at is their use of surrogates.

The important thing is Clark's point is out there having its effect.  And Obama doesn't need to defend a subjective analysis of a subjective characterization.