Note to McCain campaign: Stop going to the empty well

With the assistance of a press corps willing to play along, the McCain campaign scored a hit yesterday, feigning outrage and manufacturing a controversy out of Wesley Clark’s questions on McCain’s presidential qualifications. It involved twisting the words of a four-star general a bit, and a pliant press corps willing to redefine the word “attack,” but the McCain/GOP spin machine was in high dudgeon and it got precisely the result it was looking for. Fine.

But sometimes, once a campaign has had some success with a given stunt, it gets greedy, and returns to the same stunt, hoping for another cheap score. This is just such an occasion.

Last night, Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) was on MSNBC, and was asked about the right’s flap over Clark. Webb thought this was much ado about nothing, suggested McCain “calm down,” and said it’s time to “get the politics out of the military.”

And in response, the McCain campaign is, once again, outraged by this “attack” on McCain’s military service. McCain spokesperson Brian Rogers told Greg Sargent:

“If you didn’t think this was a coordinated attack on John McCain’s credentials before, it’s clear now that it is. Barack Obama’s surrogates are telling the McCain campaign to “calm down” about attacks on his military record? Seriously? Now somehow Wes Clark’s attacks are John McCain’s fault? It’s absurd. If Barack Obama can’t control his own surrogate operation, how can he be trusted to run the country?”

I find it hard to imagine that Rogers even believes this nonsense himself, highlighting why it’s a mistake to keep going to the same well over and again. Not only did Clark not coordinate with Obama — the most controversial remark in Clark’s interview originated with Bob Schieffer, not the Obama campaign — but Webb didn’t attack McCain.

The whole response comes across as whining, as if the Big Bad Democrats aren’t being nice enough because they question McCain’s qualifications and believe McCain shouldn’t get hysterical over the subject.

Indeed, before the McCain camp had a fit over Webb’s mild remarks, it sent out a press release, complaining about Clark for a third consecutive day.

“Yesterday, Barack Obama’s campaign said he rejected Gen. Clark’s attack on John McCain’s military service. But last night, Gen. Clark admitted to speaking with the Obama campaign, and then went out and repeated his attacks. It’s clear that the Obama campaign isn’t telling Wes Clark to apologize, and are either encouraging or tolerating his attacks on John McCain’s military service.

The Obama campaign even said they were ‘glad’ that Gen. Clark ‘clarified’ a comment they supposedly repudiated. If this kind of wink-and-nod game is how Barack Obama wants to run his campaign, then fine. But spare us the empty talk of ‘new politics’ and raising the dialogue in this country. We just wonder: Will Barack Obama’s actions ever match his words?”

Honestly, what is it, exactly, McCain wants here? Obama rejected Clark’s comments, which in reality, weren’t especially noteworthy in the first place. This isn’t evidence of “encouraging or tolerating”; this is evidence of the opposite.

Note to the McCain camp: You scored a cheap goal. Be happy and move on. The whining is unbecoming.

Atrios had a great line about this that should become our standard response:

“Does the McCain campaign ever stop crying?”

  • Sen. Obama’s campaign encouraged this with its ridiculous “reject[ion]” of Clark’s original comment. There was nothing to reject or apologize for in the first place and doing so only gave the McCain side more to throw back our way.

  • I was once hopeful that Obama was going to stay strong as a liberal and progressive and not back down to stupid Republican attacks. But I think he’s drifting to right and hoping to play defense instead of offense. Please tell me that he will not become Michael Dukakis redux.

  • The McCain campaign needs to listen to Dick Cheney’s expert advice:

    “Get over it.”

  • “And in response, the McCain campaign is, once again, outraged by this “attack” on McCain’s military service.”

    I have to wonder how such a broken blossom ever survived the POW camp if he withers so badly just because mean Sen. Webb and mean Gen. Clark critisizes him.

  • I think it was actually Scalia who advised Americans to “get over it” (in reference to Bush v. Gore)..

  • The nazis just can’t stand it when they don’t control the message.

  • I think this is the part of the equation that Ohioan, Doctor Biobrain and others were leaving out of their political calculus yesterday in defending Obama’s distancing from Clark.

    That was the response the Rightwing Outrage Machine wanted, and giving it to them served as positive reinforcement to keep playing the outrage card – and right on cue, they do so today. It also got the MSM sensing some blood in the water, which encouraged them to continue to feed.

    You don’t beat the bully by being nice to him, that only makes him think you are weak and shows him bullying works; you don’t beat the bully by shunning your allies eventually leaving you alone in the alley with the bully. You (with your allies) beat the bully by, well, beating the bully.

    Webb and Clark have a bluntness — a true straight talk — and the credentials to back it up that can be a real asset to Obama in this campaign. But if he is going to go all “I’m Ok, You’re Ok” and pass out flowers every time one of them gives McCain hell, they are useless. This is what has always scared me about his “make politics nicer” side. Neither this campaign, nor cleaning up after Bushie, are tasks for the wimpy or weak-kneed.

  • Simon’s right, “…get over it. This is so old already by now.” -Scalia

    I remember this because I find the wording sort of fascinating. It’s as if at some time it was discussed as to what to say if the “decision” was challenged. Probably pointing at a future timeline chart, “if we stick to our guns past 2003, it will be so old already, nobody will question us.”

    Meanwhile, John McCain is hiking up his pants and running, well sort of, to tell the teacher, “those Democrats are being mean to me, they’re all talking about me! And I know it was Barry who put them up to it!!!”

  • Our family knows a retired Navy pilot who actually flied with John McCain in Vietnam. He likes him, and he’s going to vote for him for president. But even he says that John McCain WAS a lousy pilot.

  • .
    On July 1st, 2008 at 2:48 pm, TR said:

    Atrios had a great line about this that should become our standard response:

    “Does the McCain campaign ever stop crying?”

    No, and in fact they’re in talks with John Boehner about his leaving his House race to become the official McCain Campaign spokesman.

  • Makes me wonder about the judgment of a man who doesn’t realize he is outranked and outclassed in a fight. Sometimes, it is best just to shut up and salute!

  • I just don’t get all of this about McCain being qualified because of his military experience. This was never brought up about Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al and their “military experience.” Dan Rather lost his reputation for bringing this up, AND offering inadequate documentation. So, what makes this at all relevant to this particular campaign? Obama has no military experience, but dare they bring this up, given the current administration’s dearth of military experience?

    This entire discussion is totally off the mark. Based on the current administration, military service is moot. So, what else does McCain have to qualify him for POTUS?

    I am committed to Oneness through Justice and Transformation

    peace,
    st john

  • In the early days of the primary campaign, I used to worry that Barack Obama couldn’t take a punch. It never even occurred to me that the baby whiner would turn out to be John McCain. His new slogan most definately should be “Vote for me or I’ll cry.”

  • As long as the media eats it up why should the GOP spin machine stop? I’m beginning to wonder who’s whining more. Spin always triumphs over truth the way we play around here. The only way to win is by constantly playing offense.

  • None of this matters until after Labor Day. The only thing that is important for Obama is to keep the media in his good graces. Nobody is paying attention to these media-invented feuds right now.

  • pfgr is absolutely right.

    Obama opened the door to this. He gave an inch, they’re taking the mile.

    Pretty soon he won’t have any potential vice presidents left.

  • Thanks Simon, you’re right. It’s so hard to keep the smarmy ReThug dismissals of the Constituion and human decency straight in my head; after a while they all run together.

  • Dear American Voters, reporters, media. professionals, political parties, and our hon. Presidential Nominees,

    Subject: Presidential Temperament

    Please talk about and “Compare And Contrast” the ” Presidential Temperament” of our Presidential presumptive nominees. I will also request and plead to the nominees themselves [ Hon. Senator McCain and Obama ].
    Our nation has been applying this yard and stick tor the appointments and confirmation process of our Supreme Court Justices nominees.
    Our Greatgrand Nation Foundations are as under:
    Family, friends, fellows, faith, funds, fun, with fairness & freedom And without fear, favor, and failure.
    It will be disgrace and shameful if the nominees and media will not look into this critical and crucial aspect under current challenging times and circumstances within our country and all around the Globe.

    America wake up and the discuss the ” Presidential Temperament” of our presumptive presidential nominee’s [ Hon. Senator McCain and Obama].

    Yours sincerely,
    COL. A.M.Khajawall [Ret].
    Disabled American Veteran
    Forensic psychiatrist, Las Vegas, Nevada
    Search News:
    Presidential Nominees

    Search the Web

  • Why don’t they go ahead and get a surrogate to attack McCain’s military record? It’s not like there aren’t already (RW) websites out there attacking every aspect of it (http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/).

    What was McCain’s standing in his graduating class from Annapolis? (fifth from the bottom!)

    How was his flying skill characterized? (he “learned to fly at Pensacola, though his performance was below par, at best good enough to get by. He liked flying, but didn’t love it.”)

    How many planes did McCain lose BEFORE he was shot down? (four)

    And that’s not even touching the BRAINWASHING / Manchurian Candidate rumors…

    The man’s father was Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Pacific Command during the Viet Nam War (68-72) and John Sidney, after giving up partying flying, has been determined to surpass his father’s achievements by becoming President. Haven’t we already seen this movie?

  • What the McCan’t camp got was the Obama campaign foolishly agreeing that Clark’s comments were ‘wrong’ (or whatever).

    Now McCan’t can claim any remark about his military service in an attack and one that Obama has already acknowledged to be ‘wrong’.

    Such is how stupidity is committed.

  • Wesley Clark certainly didn’t back down from his comments, but he struck a very “diplomatic” tone. what surprised me was how disdainfull of John McCain Jim Webb seemed. He was never mocking or insulting or loud and crass, but he was obviously disdainfull.

    Barack Obama has lauded John McCain everythime he has mentioned his name. I think he’s paid due respect. Now its time to take the gloves off. McCain certainly hasn’t shown an ounce of respect in return. Clark and Webb were right on the money. Obama needs them and hopefully in the future will not cave to the media and right wing scream machine.

  • Webb didn’t attack McCain. — CB

    But he said McCain ought to calm down. That’s suggesting that McCain is a crotchety old man. Ageism! Not to mention that it reminds everyone of McCain’s uncertain temper (ie: not the best person to answer that phone at 3AM). Personal attack!

    Just as Mary suggested — and illustrated — yesterday: take a kernel of truth (or something that resembles it), twist, sprinkle with MSM’s Magical Magnifying Powder, and there you are: clear through the mirror, where left is right, up is down and black is white.

  • I can imagine Colbert saying that Obama must show respect for a man who served honorably in the military by telling a retired general to shut up. When McCain says it, it’s just pathetic.

  • I ask, once again, how does one’s military experience validate him to be POTUS? When will the posters here address that issue? Please list those in the current administration with military experience, and when, where and how they served? I am a veteran ’68, Viet Nam. I was not shot down nor captured; does that disqualify me to be POTUS? I have medals that were awarded but not earned…I was “forced” to lie on the citations in order to qualify my “superiors” to receive their medals.

    What positions has McCain held that qualify him to be the CEO of the USA? Does he run his wife’s companies? They seem to have problems keeping track of their 7 properties. How is he going to keep track of the thousands of military contractors under his “leadership?” I just ask some of these questions, since Obama does not seem to be able to do it. Perhaps he is not qualified to be POTUS. So, then what?

    I am committed to Oneness through Justice and Transformation

    peace,
    st john

  • As a Vietnam vet, from what I read (if I have read all comments in context), Clark — and now Webb — are not impugning or besmirching McCain’s war service, or diminishing his brave time as a POW;

    Clark is simply saying that McCain has not served in the military in an executive capacity, directing men, etc., a la Eisenhower, a la Colin Powell…and as someone who has, Clark is qualified to make that distinction. The McCain camp, the media and others, are blowing things up…

    Webb is simply stating that we should take military service out of the political debate, because politicians go on about their service, like wrapping themselves in the flag, claiming the military support them, when the military vote and opinion is highly diverse, and also claiming to disagree with a pro-war stance is unpatriotic and against the military.

    Is it such a leap of gray matter or a deviation from love of country to say (or admit) that McCain’s military experience is not executive, not a generalship for example, and does not qualify him in that area.

    If this small feat of the mind is intellectually demanding, we need smarter newsmen. If it is heart rending to our patriotism, let us found love of country on a surer ground than blind affection that believes loving criticism is motivated only by evil intent. And let us be a smarter public who won’t buy commentary and journalism worthy only of recycling.

    Hasn’t recent experience (and even basic social studies classes) taught us that to criticize the president or our military men is not impugning the flag or country, just as critically discerning weak aspects of McCain’s experience does not discount or impugn his bravery and the merit he displayed; and that it isn’t a means to impugn the flag, the military, our war dead, etc., etc.

    We need more knowledgeable, brave and critical eyes all around us – in the press, the public and the military. If we had them in 2002 and 2003, the military might not have gone along with attacking Saddam and Iraq for Bin Laden’s evil deeds…for more about the need for military competence instead of “general” malfeasance, see my blog at http://www.wrathofmcgrath.com

  • I disagree…they didn’t score anything. Do you really believe that anyone besides the McCain supporters thought Clark’s comments were an “attack”?

    You fall into this trap that if the republican controlled media keeps repeating “outrage” that the rest of the country is buying into it. Only those already against Obama saw it that way.

    It was a mistake for the Obama surrogate, Bill Burton, to make that “he rejects Clark’s comments” statement because it implies that Obama agrees that military service makes one better qualified to be president. 10 to 1 Burton never even saw the piece on Face the Nation or heard anything but a sound byte before making the statement.

    One “reporter” made the comment to Clark that doesn’t McCain’s refusal to return home from being a POW speak to his character when a good response would have been “yeah, doesn’t getting 134 sailors killed on the USS Forrestal by hot dogging and showing off speak more to his character?”…now that’s an attack.

    Webb didn’t even effectively point out McCain’s hypocrisy over the GI Bill either. The republican controlled media says people were shocked and outraged by Clark’s comments…were you?…was anyone who watched it that didn’t already support McCain outraged…I bet very, very few. McCain has milked that POW hero deal for 40yrs now. It’s like blackmail to prevent anyone from scrutinizing his claim to being experienced on foreign policy, military affairs, or national security… Once and for all, dawning a uniform does not make you an “expert” or “experienced” on any of these matters…something Clark tried and did make clear and I’m proud of him.

    btw…didn’t McCain say he wasn’t proud of America until he became a POW?

  • Obama needs to get his PR operation up and running quickly. If not, McCain and his TV media slave minions will make mincemeat of him.

    case in point – Rep. Wexler. Great surrogate, the ONLY person to make the point that McCain broke the campaign finance law. And listed a few McCain flip-flops to boot.

    Obama needs to show respect for that kind of surrogate – one who merely points out the truth, and people can make the right conclsions.

  • I don’t want to sound like a broken record but it seems that CB is doing a disservice to Obama and the Democrats by never admitting that our side might be wrong or that the other side might have a point.

    Go to a site like Hillaryis44.com and see how absurd people can be.

    I would like thecarpetbaggerreport.com to be a site where people can go to find out about current events and come away being more inclined to support Obama.

    It seems to me that this site is in danger of becomming a site where someone on the fence might decide that Obama supporters are wacko and end up supporting McCain.

  • I love it when someone tells a Shocked, Shocked politician to calm down. After the circus of the past three days I am about ready to shut down all media and blogging until mid-August. Usually it’s kind of fun following every detail that less than one percent of the population care about. But lately it’s just giving me a headache. My brain needs a rest. Hillary who?

  • Hey Neil, what exactly should we be saying “our side” did wrong? Just curious.

  • What Scott H said @ 20 should be all over the lib blogosphere. McCain graduated in the bottom 1% of his class at Annapolis, yet got a coveted pilot slot because of nepotism, plain and simple. Then he lived up to the standards that his academic mediocrity would have suggested, crashing four planes before being shot down. Barring direct testimony from those who were there, the Forrestal fire rap will probably never stick, and those who might have testified might well be among those who died there. But it’s clear that McCain’s academic and post-college attitudes and accomplishments were eerily reminiscent of another privileged son who’s been a thorn in all our sides for nigh on 8 years now. The parallels are too striking to be ignored.

  • McCain has a very selective case of military respect…

    …a more telling example may have come more recently, when McCain found himself campaigning against one of the few Iraq War veterans who was running for office. In 2006, the Senator appeared at a late-stage but crucial fundraiser for Illinois Rep. Pete Roskam, who was being challenged by Democrat Tammy Duckworth, a veteran who had lost both her legs in Iraq. The nail-biter campaign for the open seat, which was won by Roskam with 51 percent of the vote, was marked by heated rhetoric over service and war. Roskam, who won the endorsement of the organization Veterans of Foreign Wars, accused Duckworth of wanting to cut-and-run from Iraq. McCain held his fundraiser shortly thereafter…

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/01/mccain-hasnt-always-toute_n_110231.html

  • We’re never going to win an argument if we push that McCain wasn’t an outstanding pilot. It’s hard to believe many people will care about where he graduated in his Annapolis class or how much trouble he got in. a) Joe Six-Pack just luuuuuuuved Bush with his gentleman C’s, alcoholism, etc, claiming it was later experience that formed him, and b) it really sounds petty to pick holes at a guy who resisted torture while serving his country.

    My point is, NONE of that is really germane to whether he’d make a good president. It doesn’t indicate whether or how he’d be a success in leading the country (Wes Clark’s perfectly valid point). His service is a mixed record about his *temperament*, but if we’re judging that we’ve got plenty in the public record and of more recent vintage, without reaching back to what he was like as a young man.

  • They really don’t want anyone getting too close to McCain’s service record. The crashed planes, being ultimately barred from flying, not making Admiral etc. McCain believes in preemptive war. And his biography is all he ahs, really.

    Plus, they want to get the media nopt paying attention to Obama’s speeches and initiatives.

  • Kieth Olbermann’s most recent special comment raised a good point on this, and while it was directed specifically at Obama, it applies to all democrats.

    The GOP will try to smear us no matter what. So we might as well give them something to *really* cry about.

    These statements, dismissing McCain’s military service as not a valid criteria for being President, obviously get under their skin. Democrats need to start really pushing this line of attack, as a partner to the “100 more years” attack.

  • It’s one of the few goals they’ve had in a while so they are milking it for all they can.

    Pretty pathetic.

  • So McCain and his surrogates think being a prisoner of war makes him qualified to be president? To be sure, his ordeal was heroic, but… are they now admitting the all the prisoners of war held at Guantanamo are qualified to be president of their respective countries? I mean, after all they were tortured too, right? I think they’d all go batshit crazy if THAT suggestion was ever made, even though they are making the exact same argument.

  • Is it just me, or did Mr. Brian Rogers simultaneously accuse Hon. Sen. Obama’s campaign of coordinating these faux attacks and being unable to ” control his own surrogate operation?” That’s I pretty nice trick.

  • Notice how every time the McCain campaign whines about something, whether it be declining taxpayer dollars for campaigning, or Clark’s noting that McCain’s particular military service is not overly important to the executive office (a matter of opinion).

    They never offer a substantive rebuttal – which is a clear sign that this is really like an Italian soccer player feigning painful injury on the pitch when the opposing team just ran close to him.

    With the campaign financing, it’s just “he gave his word” with no explation of anything substantively wrong with Obama’s de facto public financing. With the Clark thing, they don’t actually address what Clark said. They don’t come out and say how McCain’s service is particularly relevant to the presidency. Instead, just like Bush, they cry foul for the sake of crying foul, hoping to get a free penalty kick.

  • Note to McCain campaign: Stop going to the empty well

    I must disagree.

    I want them to keep going to the empty well. I want them to keep digging the hole, deeper and deeper, until they hit molten rock, burn to a crispy ash, and secure the first annual 50-state blowout of a GOP presidential “candidate.”

    Keep on digging, Johnneh. You’re not imagining things—it really is “getting warmer….”

  • Actually, if I’m a Democratic strategist, I’m quite happy to have McCain continually going to empty wells.

    McCain has a stronger reputation on all things military than Obama. Yeah, yeah, you can argue just how big a hill of beans his military experience adds up to, let’s just acknowledge it’s there.

    The problem for McCain is that this year – as has happened before – it’s the economy, stupid.

    And McCain doesn’t get very high marks for either fiscal literacy or responsibility. I exaggerate for effect, but basically McCain is strong on the things people are less concerned about and weak on the things that they are more concerned about.

    If McCain is going to have a prayer come the election, he has to present himself as capable economist, not just a credible Commander-In-Chief. Like I say, I should imagine democratic strategists are only too happy to have McCain spend his time defending and expounding on a subject that’s not going to get him elected.

  • Comments are closed.