Wesley Clark Speaks Truth to Idiocy

Let's think about this for a minute -- Wesley Clark made the unremarkable observation that being a fighter pilot and dropping bombs on people (or, let's make it nicer, targets) doesn't really make you particularly qualified to run America's foreign policy.  This is somehow transformed into a gaffe and immediate cause of consternation among the DC media elite.  Jesus, Bob Schieffer practically had a heart attack at the notion that being shot down as a pilot does not make you more qualified to be a president.  Joe Klein gets the vapors of course.  Worse yet, the Obama campaign joins in the denunciation.

Please.  On what possible basis can McCain's experience as a pilot be deemed a foreign policy credential?  Hell, how does it stack up as more of a qualification than being a lawyer?  And I'm a self hating lawyer.  (How could I not be -- Dan Abrams is a fucking lawyer and seems to think we should give a shit.)

Let us further resolve that physical courage is a morally neutral virtue.  We would all like to think that those who are brave are somehow virtuous, but that is clearly not the case.  Members of the Waffen SS, the Japanese Imperial Army, the Army of the Confederacy, etc. all demonstrated impressive acts of bravery in war -- and all of those those acts were committed in the cause of political movements that were evil.

(It is interesting to note that the military statesmen of note have all been associated with the Army -- e.g. George Marshall, Dwight Eisenhower, Colin Powell -- I can't think of a pilot who has ever shown talent in this regard, but correct me if I'm wrong -- and no, Donald Rumsfeld does not count.)

Finally, would the press at least mention that Wesley Clark served in Vietnam with distinction and was severely wounded.   

Comments

[Joe Klein's conscience]

Sir Charles:
Don't forget MacArthur. For being a hard-righty, he was pretty liberal as far as how he ran Japan(Except for anything that would dare criticize him, of course). But then Mac was an Army guy too.

[Sir Charles]

JKC,

You know I almost listed him, but thought it might be too complicated to explain given his reactionary politics on the domestic scene. But you are absolutely right -- as regent of Japan he was more or less a liberal visionary. Weird really.

[Steve Balboni]

I can't think of a pilot who have ever shown talent in this regard, but correct me if I'm wrong

Duke Cunningham!

oh, wait...

[paperwight]

George McGovern was a B-24 pilot in WWII.

[karl]

I don't know if George H.W. Bush meets your standard of "military statesman," but he was a fighter pilot.

[Corvus9]

Eh. While Clark's statement, such as it was, was accurate, it was also politically tone-deaf and stupid, and the kind of thing that just gives the press the excuse to get the vapors for the next few weeks. It was ultimately dumb, and thus he deserves to get burned for it. And I don't really care how the Obama campaign responds to this. Their response, whatever it was, is probably one of the least problematic I will have with the Obama campaign so far. I am with Booman on this. When surrogates fuck up, they deserve to get burned. Not fucking up is the entire point of their being there.

[dm]

John Glenn? Though I don't know if he counts as a statesman as much as a hero, really.

Good call on McGovern.

You can probably add Carter, who commanded a nuclear submarine, and brokered the Camp David accords (though people probably think he mis-handled Iran).

[MR Bill]

I'm breaking my self imposed exile from the Blogosphere to note that, as the whole 'phony' documents kerning provided a cover to keep the facts of George W.'s Air Nat'l Guard service under wraps, ensuring no further digging, this is a preemptive warning to anyone who suggests McCain's military record needs criticism or even scrutiny. "How dare you disrespect the Military!!"
And the MSM will repeat "we're not in the tank for McCain..."

[Sir Charles]

I was thinking in terms of career military types, which is why I excluded Bush I and McGovern (although God knows McGovern's brave service got him exactly zero on the respect front) -- in so doing I wasn't disparraging the non-career types, it's just that I was focused on the mindset created by different roles in the military. John Glenn's role was a little different that McCain's I believe -- I think he did close ground support flying for the Marines. Being a general officer who has had to put troops on the ground and deal with coalition forces, etc. is experience with some relevance to foreign policy. Dropping bombs on people is not -- and may even be detrimental, if that's how you think problems should be solved.

Corvus,

I didn't think what Clark said was dumb really -- I actually thought it was something that needed to be said. Evidently the Obama campaign sees it as you do.

[Scott K]

I didn't think what Clark said was dumb really -- I actually thought it was something that needed to be said.

I didn't think that what Clark said was dumb either, however, I do agree with Corvus that it wasn't the smartest type of comment to make within the context... the political media is pretty much primed to jump on anything with the tiniest semblance to an "attack" or "controversy", and it gave McCain an opening to spin it into an attack on his military record. The media hasn't quite gotten to the point yet where they have adjusted to the new reality of McCain whoring out said record for all it's worth. The form of the resulting sound-bite was also not really phrased in a way that is easy to defend in a sound-bite fashion.

However, I don't think that it was a completely dumb comment because it does at least bring up a direct rebuttal to the implicit argument that McCain is making, leaving Obama to continue to make the affirmative argument (being right). That is essentially the role of the surrogate, and Obama's campaign is going to reject his comments because he wasn't "on-message" for the campaign. This news cycle will wind down. I do have to admit that I would favor a scenario where Obama exercises considerable message discipline so there is nothing on the Obama side that the media can really jump on, which leaves them... oh, my, the McCain side? Hey, the media may love McCain, but they gotta report on SOME sort of controversy so the horse race is more exciting!

[drip]

Ted Williams was a pilot in 2 wars and came back and managed all those Washington Senators.

[Sir Charles]

Scott,

Your analysis strikes me as correct.

Which is not to say I don't find the media reaction completely annoying, but I suspect that both you and Corvus are correct that the Obama camp is playing it the right way.

[Sir Charles]

Drip,

Ha! And I'm so old that I actually saw him coach them at Fenway Park back in 1969. Ted got a huge ovation from the fans. Frank Howard hit a home run way over the Green Monster -- I believe it is still in orbit.

Williams was evidently a bit bitter about the second call up. I think he felt that he had more than paid his dues in WWII and that the Korea service was a bit gratuitous. To have accomplished what he did in baseball while giving up five years to war time duty is a pretty remarkable thing.

[Joe]

"To have accomplished what he did in baseball while giving up five years to war time duty is a pretty remarkable thing."

Yeah, pretty good for the second best left-fielder of all time.

[Sir Charles]

Joe,

Just curious -- who is number 1? I assume Bonds?

[drip]

Hub Bids Kid Bienvenu?

He had a great deal to be bitter about. He was a very good to great manager (the team you saw was terrible but he got them playing), he was a fine hitting coach and, as few seem to realize, the product of a mixed marriage. His mother was Mexican. Come to think of it, it may be time to de-ice him and run him for president. 4-1/2 years in heaven is easily the equivalent of McCain's turn in Hanoi.

I hope Joe was referring to Cobb. Because Williams is the best of them all IMO.

[Sir Charles]

drip,

That Updike piece on Williams is still one of the best pieces of sports writing ever.

I think I'll take Bonds over Cobb -- it ain't saying much but I think Barry was more lovable even with roid rage.

[Corvus9]

I always figured figured Obama had it right to compliment McCain on his military service before pointing out that McCain is wrong about every single issue facing the country. It keeps the campaign looking high-minded and magnanimous, and keeps the focus on the issues. It also reinforces the image of Obama as high-minded statesmen type not engaging in dirty politics (which is also the reason he shouldn't even mention Cindy), and gives him an easy response when McCain's camp does engage in this stuff ("This is exactly why we need change in Washington").

And this is also a good approach because, whether one likes it or not, attacking McCain's military record is a lost cause. It doesn't matter how poor his scores and discipline records are, or that he got shot down repeatedly, because the salient fact is that he spent five years as a prisoner of war. And being a prisoner of war is horrible. Anything that can be read as attacking someone for being a prisoner of war is going to come off as cruel and vile, and that is an edge that anyone who starts trying to publically criticize McCain's war record is going to be inching up to. And Clark fell over it. While the broader point that Clark was making might be sound, the way he chose to phrase it is just the worst possible soundbite. Not only does it appear to trivialize McCain's service, it can be read as actually blaming McCain for his imprisonment. (He got shot down! He was a bad pilot! He was asking for it!) And doing that would make you a real scumbag. And given the metrics of the press, there should be no reason to think the slightest rhetorical slip will be read in the worst possible light.

Regardless of whether or not he built his phrasing off of something the host said, Clark fucked up. And there are basically two options for dealing with Clark's fuckup: spend oodles of time arguing a more nuanced take on it, which the press will make sure you lose in the court of public opinion, or defenestrate him (more fun than throwing him under a bus). Since I don't really see any reason to preserve Clark's reputation or standing—he's always been fairly politically incompetent, and as a member of the elite he is of no personal meaning to me—I opt for that latter option. It leaves more time to be on the offensive, instead of arguing about how, no, really it's ok to insult the POW's service.

See, that's really what it is, insulting a POW's service. You can say that you aren't insulting the part of his service where he was a POW, but you are still going to look like a prick.

(BTW, unless anyone gets the wrong idea, let me just state that John McCain is a huge asshole. I don't want anyone thing I like the guy or something. Ewww.)

[Sir Charles]

Corvus,

You might well be right there -- so wise for one of tender years. (I'm preparing a veritable 80s musical barrage for you by the way.)

I want to be Secretary of Defenestrate. (It's sort of like you merged the Departments of Defense, State and a bit of Treasury.)

[Joe]

Scott Podsednik, of course.

(Just kidding. Bonds. He's the second best position player of all time.)

[Sir Charles]

Joe,

Steroids or not, Bonds was the best player I've ever seen. The way he could turn on a pitch was just extraordinary.

I like the fact that this has become a baseball thread. I had to look at the top again to see what the hell I was writing about.

[Joe]

Bonds is a lot like Ruth, in that he was essentially two elite players during his career -- Ruth was probably the greatest hitter of all-time, PLUS a borderline Hall-of-Fame pitcher (very short but very good pitching career).

Bonds spent a decade or so as one of the top speed-and-power players of all time -- probably right behind Mays and Mantle on that pantheon. THEN, he had a 5+ year reign as probably the most dominating slugger ever. It would be like Frank Thomas coming back from his foot injury in 2002 and then having a 5+ year stretch where he was stealing 50 bases a year.

[Scott K]

Just for the glee of playing devil's advocate, Ted Williams was never considered a particularly good fielder. It was all about batting with him. I suppose Stan Musial is disqualified because he didn't play left field his whole career...

I must admit that I had a soft spot for Rickey Henderson, perhaps partly because he was in his prime during the time when I was following baseball fairly closely (Ted was before my time, and I don't really pay as much attention today). He didn't put up all the fancy batting numbers that Ted and Barry did, but pitchers would be afraid to get him on base and once he was on base, pitchers would always have that thought in the back of their head regarding what Rickey was up to... it is mighty nice to be able to affect a pitcher even when you aren't batting.

[bigbadwolf]

you kids get off my lawn. SC, i too saw frank howard hit a home run at fenway in 1969. how amusing. the real thrill was seeing ted about whom i had heard so much. the same year, having shown up early to watch BP, we saw the A's and Joe D, who was coaching for the A's. also exciting.

bonds was just a remarkable hitter, pre-and-post controversy. it has never been clear to me how steroids make one a better hitter; i suspect dave kingman on steroids would still be dave kingman, a .240 hitter with the occassional awe-inspiring long ball (.236, it turns out; i looked it up to make sure memory wasn't slandering him). bonds was an extraordinary baseball player

a difficult person to like, though. but, i have now rallied to him, at least metaphorically. prosecutors affect me that way; i never thought i'd be pulling for martha stewart either

[Sir Charles]

Scott K.

Rickey Henderson was a seriously good baseball player. Not quite as good as Bonds or Williams I think, but definitely way up there. Certainly one of the five greatest left fielders of all time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rickey_Henderson

I had the pleasure of seeing him in 1980 and he was mighty impressive.

Musial was pretty damn good too. Before my time too. He suffers a bit from having been in St. Louis all of his career. If he had played for the Yankees he would never be an afterthought.

[Gene O'Grady]

You guys want old? I'm old enough to have seen Ted Williams hit (at Seals Stadium in San Francisco, of all places).

And to top that, I remember growing up when Ty Cobb was a lovable local senior citizen whose daughter Shirley ran an absolutely fantabulous independent bookstore on University Avenue (since then a succession of restaurants, including the much regretted Palermo). She had mezzanine with high end art books and illustrated archeology volumes on it; it was like entering sacred space to go up there.

And, having seen a good bit of Bonds and McGuire, kudos to those who can figure out that steroids couldn't have had much to do with his eye work and bad speed (as opposed to force).

[Sir Charles]

Gene,

Always happy to have the grey beards join in -- anyone who makes me look young is always welcome.

You raise a great point about Bonds -- the hand eye coordination he had and the extraordinary bat speed are not something you get from muscle. The muscle helps once you connect, but there is no way it diminishes the skill level that Bonds demonstrated.

Are you familiar with the hysterical description of Ted Williams taking batting practice in the book "Ball Four:"
"I'm Ted Fucking Williams of the MFL (major fucking leagues to the unitiated) and I'm the greatest hitter who ever lived!"

[Scott K]

I think that when it comes to Bonds/Williams vs. Henderson, it depends on what scenario you envision. If you're looking to run up the score or make up ground in a hurry, naturally you would want Bonds or Williams in your lineup. However, if the game is close or a tie and you're running out of time, I think I would prefer to have Henderson in the lineup. The reason is quite simple-- if the opposing pitcher faces Bonds or Williams, assuming it isn't some bases-loaded scenario, he can just intentionally walk them. With Henderson, an intentional walk is probably not going to be any better than giving up a double (or even a triple).

[Sir Charles]

Scott,

Henderson was devastating on the bases and had a ton of pop in his bat -- I think he led off 81 games with home runs. Still, in the end, I think I would go with Williams and Bonds who simply got on base more than any human beings who ever lived and hit home runs at a prodigious clip. Of course, young Bonds actually looks a fair amount like Henderson -- a little more power and slightly less speed.

[Gene O'Grady]

Sorry to come in again after the long interval, but since I was asked a question I should say that I am old enough to remember when Ball Four was shocking and had to be hid from my mother (by my brothers, I was living away from home), and I don't think anyone who read that bit will ever forget it.

I'm also partial to Barry because when I finally got around to taking my wife to a major league ball game he hit the first of his two home runs in the game right where she would have a perfect view of it.

By the way, the beard, think as it may be, is still it's old red blonde color. It's the hair that's turning grey.

[Sir Charles]

Hey Gene,

I'm the opposite -- hair is still as dark as can be, the beard is getting to have the old dog muzzle look. I hate that -- I have to shave now or look grizzled.

I loved Ball Four -- it is still one of the funniest books I've ever read. I think it even influenced the way that I write. And I remember how controversial it was. I read it when I was twelve and it has stuck with me to this day.