Wesley Clark spoke with the Huffington Post this week, and was unrelenting in his criticism of John McCain. “I know he’s trying to get traction by seeking to play to what he thinks is his strong suit of national security,” Clark said. “The truth is that, in national security terms, he’s largely untested and untried. He’s never been responsible for policy formulation. He’s never had leadership in a crisis, or in anything larger than his own element on an aircraft carrier or [in managing] his own congressional staff. It’s not clear that this is going to be the strong suit that he thinks it is.”
Clark went on to dismiss McCain’s worldview on national security altogether. “McCain’s weakness is that he’s always been for the use of force, force and more force. In my experience, the only time to use force is as a last resort. … When he talks about throwing Russia out of the G8 and makes ditties about bombing Iran, he betrays a disrespect for the office of the presidency.”
This morning, Clark appeared on MSNBC, where he was challenged to defend his rather scathing assessment. I thought he did extremely well.
First, notice the incredulity from the on-air “journalists.” The notion that McCain lacks credibility on national security issues is completely foreign to them because, well, he’s John McCain. Clark wore four stars on his shoulder, and doesn’t much care about the media’s preconceived notions.
Second, when the on-air media personalities noted that Obama, like McCain, has not been in a position to make leadership positions in a military context, Clark responded with the obvious point — Obama’s not the one making the claim.
Also, as my friend Alex Koppelman noted, Clark went after McCain’s inconsistencies. Clark referred to McCain’s “personal courage,” citing his years as a prisoner of war, but said, “On the other hand, he’s changed his position on torture … So what does John McCain really believe? Who is he? … Is he just a guy who wants to be president and he’ll say what’s necessary to get the job?”
I’ve already talked a bit about Clark as a possibility for Obama’s ticket — in general, I think he’s a fine choice — and I noticed that the subject came up briefly this morning. Clark’s answer was the right one, noting that it would be “presumptuous” to even speculate.
I mention this because Time’s Mark Halperin offered a series of dos-and-don’ts tips for those who want to be VP. They include:
* “Go on TV … [and] display message discipline and a controlled ego.”
* “Show you can be an attack dog — with a smile! — against the other side.”
* “Demonstrate your experience in an area the nominee will need”
* Don’t “openly campaign for the position or look like you covet it.”
Now, consider these tips against Clark’s appearance on MSNBC this morning. Pretty solid.