GENERAL Clark v. POW McCain

Finally, someone with some credibility has said it: being shot down doesn't qualify you to be Commander-in-Chief.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/29/clark.mccain/?iref=mpstoryview

General Clark could be a real asset to this campaign. His experience as a NATO Commander leading the military action against Serbia, in which NO American soldiers died in combat, clearly trumps McCain's credentials of poor pilot and (possibly privileged) POW.

I don't think Clark would be the best choice for VP, but since he is an ex-HRC backer, I am pleased to see him come out speaking against McCain on behalf of Obama. Now I hope the Obama campaign will finally get the attack machine revved up. They need to go on the offensive, soon -- like yesterday.

Update: McCain campaign calls on Obama to condemn the comments. LOL. What's to condemn? Condemn the truth? I hope they make the most of this.

Additional Update: From the original article: "...retired Admiral Leighton 'Snuffy' Smith criticized Clark's comment. If Barack Obama wants to question John McCain's service to his country, he should have the guts to do it himself and not hide behind his campaign surrogates..." So the McCain surrogate whines about the Obama surrogate. Boo-hoo.

And what surrogate does McCain choose to roll out to whine about Clark today? None other than Bud Day, an original cast member of the Swift Boat Veterans for "Truth". I guess it's OK if you're a Republican.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/30/mccain-truth-squad-defen...

What's disappointing here to me is that Obama's camp failed to point out the differences between the original swift-boat attack and what Gen. Clark said in the context of the interview on Sunday (i.e. the small matter of TRUTH). In fact, Obama's condemnation of Clark sounded as though Clark had questioned McCain's service or his patriotism. The incompetent wording of the Obama response play's right into McCain's hand. It makes me worry.