Profile
Photos
Comments
Wesley Clark Means What He Says
HuffPost
Despite heavy criticism, Gen. Wesley Clark is standing by his statement this weekend that Sen. John MCain's military experience doesn't qualify him to be commander-in-chief.
"I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war," Clark said of McCain on Sunday. "But he hasn't held executive responsibility. That large squadron in the Navy that he commanded -- that wasn't a wartime squadron. He hasn't been there and ordered the bombs to fall."
That statement from Clark has come under withering criticism from McCain's campaign and was rejected by Sen. Barack Obama, both of whom (along with the media) distorted Clark's words by painting them as an attack on McCain's military service. (Notably, several U.S. veterans, including Iraq vet and VoteVets.org chairman Jon Soltz, and Lt. Gen. Robert Gard Jr. have come to Clark's defense.)
This evening, Clark issued a statement reiterating his respect for McCain's "courage and commitment to our country," as well as his belief that McCain's judgment on crucial national security issues has been deeply flawed:
"There are many important issues in this Presidential election, clearly one of the most important issues is national security and keeping the American people safe. In my opinion, protecting the American people is the most important duty of our next President. I have made comments in the past about John McCain's service and I want to reiterate them in order be crystal clear. As I have said before I honor John McCain's service as a prisoner of war and a Vietnam Veteran. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in Armed Forces as a prisoner of war. I would never dishonor the service of someone who chose to wear the uniform for our nation.
"John McCain is running his campaign on his experience and how his experience would benefit him and our nation as President. That experience shows courage and commitment to our country - but it doesn't include executive experience wrestling with national policy or go-to-war decisions. And in this area his judgment has been flawed - he not only supported going into a war we didn't have to fight in Iraq, but has time and again undervalued other, non-military elements of national power that must be used effectively to protect America But as an American and former military officer I will not back down if I believe someone doesn't have sound judgment when it comes to our nation's most critical issues."
