GRR.  I recognize how this helps Obama; he is trying hard to build a centrist image, but if he keeps biting the hand that feeds him, soon it will be gnawed off.

Wish it wasn't necessary, but Clark was far off the reservation with the second half of his comment.  It makes sense when you read the quote, and is a valid point, even- but anyone with a knowledge of politics and the media could've seen the framing on this a mile away.

I think Hillary and Michelle are the only two people immune from getting thrown overboard at this point.  Maybe Kathleen Sebelius is safe as well.

I think Clark made a terrible mistake, and I'm not sure if I would have played it differently; the optics look horrible considering how close Clark is to Bill and Hillary.

Blowhard Rush Limbaugh is now pushing that joke "this is not the Wesley Clark I knew."  How long has Obama known Clark anyway, three weeks?

Obama (and/or his 'spokespeople) are either spineless or uninformed.  

Im just hoping and praying at this point that some more generals and "vetted" military guys as well as groups like VoteVets come out and get Clark's back for this.

I am sick and tired of the GOP owning the military vote.
We all know that the GOP is looing military votes hand over fist this year, so WHY WHY WHY is Obama buckling?

Clark was also the TYT pick for VP about two weeks ago. (disclaimer: His son Wes Jr. works for the show)

This is manufactured outrage, helped out by the media Heathers trying to turn it into "swiftboating", Clark has said this before, it is no less true now.

It will die down, and it could help with the Overton Window of changing how people think of McCain's service.

Normally i'd be against mentioning such things, but McCain seems to be basing his campaign on it.

accurate.

Keep it coming. We can still bring it up whenever we feel like it.

McCain is unqualified to serve.

Note the R's will trash Wes Clark endlessly, as IF the respect military service only if you are a Republican.

getting any attention today.

While I recognize the truth in Clark's remarks, my pragmatic side realizes that Sen. Obama is being attacked for "patriotism" matters and those remarks about a "war hero" can only hurt him in that regard in the view of the general public.

It wasn't appropriate.

Obama needs to distance himself from the statment but clark should by no mean stop saying it.

its true, being shot down doesn't mean you are qualifed to be president.

its sad that voters can't take a step back and realize that.

In the CQ poll, Hillary Clinton was beaten by Ed Rendell, so I'm not taking it as too big of a deal. What IS too big of a deal is that Obama went about this so clumsily. He needs to get his head in the game NOW. This is when the rules get made, and you can't afford to sit it out.

Spineless Obama. WEAK.
He can fight his own battles now.

There is no principled Clinton or Edwards to kick about anymore.

Some of you fail at the whole getting elected game

aliveandkickin you are so obvious.

If they are thinking strategically at all, they should now have Wes Clark keep repeating this, though do so "independently."

Should be interesting to read the reaction of the Obama supporting netroots. Clark is a hero to many online, me among them, and here he was doing the pushback that many in the netroots look for.

Obama looks more and more like what he is, a moderate, cautious, Democratic politician.

Cowardly move by Obama. All they had to do was say that he was sure Clark did not mean that there was anything dishonorable about being shot down and that he respects McCain's service. and they could have added "We wished Clark would be more aware of how such comments could be misused by some looking to disparage McCain's service".

That is all they had to say. They did not have to "REJECT" Clark's statement.

Clark got lured into the "trap".. and got caught.  Why wouldn't Obama distance himself from this?  I would think Clark would be wise enough to make the point that Obama has been emphasizing, that is that judgement is the most important attribute in choosing a commander in chief, without stepping on McCain's service.  Makes me wonder who Clark was trying to be a surrogate for.. Obama or Clinton.. RareFIDem

"I could no more denounce Gen. Wes Clark than I could my own grandmother."

I'm sorry but are you all new to elections in this country?

has no one seen how the MSM has treated clarks comments either time he said them? and how did you expect the average voter to get the context of clark's statment? the MSM wasn't going to give it to them.

once again we live in the age of soundbites, if the soundbite is bad it doesn't matter how much context you give them.

I am just totally shocked that people here are surprised that Obama had to distance himself from the comments,

we are 4 days away from the 4th of July do you REALLY think the Obama campaign wants to spend the entire week trying to contextualize Clark's statments while McCain and the MSM cry why is Obama attacking McCains status as a POW and a War Hero, because thats what they have done and thats what they will do.

seriously sometimes its like people don't understand how the MSM affects politics in this country.

it doesnt matter what the truth is if the Media wont cover it.

and notice how NO ONE is talking about Obama's speech today? no even HERE this is the top story, Obama doesn't want this to continue past today and over shadow his other speeches.

Obama needs to challenge the media to scrutinize McCain. He hasn't done that. Remember when Hillary challenged the media a few months ago to scrutinize Obama? It worked because she put them on the spot front and center. I mean McCain has so much dirty laundry that's not being aired. He's still out and about campaigning on the 'Straight Talk Express' and his flip flops are barely getting any mention. Can Chris Matthews finally end his sick love affair with McCain?

Well, gosh...telling the truth isn't popular is it. While taken as a personal assault it might be useful to remember that McCain's military career, while horribly interrupted by torture, was short.

Wes Clark's was 34 years.

McCain is always positioned as the leader for foreign affairs and national security largely because of his military history. Clark attacked that in a very direct manner.

Barack Obama may believe that you can run a campaign without telling the truth or attacking your opponent. I hope not or the attack machine on the other side will eat him up.

Wes Clark may have been working on his own. But there could be two or three agendas here.

As to VP: Clark is the best qualified of the bunch  and I don't think a single comment that he can easily explain is an 'eliminator'. He could bring foreign and military weight to the ticket like no one else. Will it happen? Who knows. Al Gore choose Ol' Joe. Duh. If that happened with the VP selection anything could happen.

I'm sorry why did Obama's camp bother commenting at all on this?

If it received alot of heat all they would have to say is that obviously a soldier doesn't make one a CinC but that all Democrats remarks don't necessarily speak for each other.  Clark is entitled to his opinion & Obama his own. Obama admires & respects the service of military men/women current & past including that of John McCain & Wesley Clark. Let the talking heads make this controversy happen! The DNC needs to learn how to circulate talking points that stay off of the candidate!!!

And something else...even though I was initially against Hillary as the VP I'm all for it now.  Hillary is one tough cookie and she'll kick anyone's ass. She also has a great way of framing issues. We need someone like her to go on the attack.  If Obama insists on taking the high road; fine. What we need is a VP who will go on the attack.

Clarke, the Obama campaign's and maybe the Democratic Party's best military spokesperson decided to take the fight directly to the GOP by challenging McCain's C-I-C  readiness: the former general/Nato commander says that getting shot down in a jet fighter doesn't automatically qualify you.

The Obama campaign just shot Clarke's legs out from underneath him, and just shot itself in the foot. I see the Democrats' balls problem (as in total; lack of) has now officially extended to the Obama campaign. First FISA and now this. It is becoming harder and harder to get enthusiastic about our nominee. Where's the 'effin beef here?

Let's backtrack...

President Bush on Monday criticized a commercial that accused John Kerry of inflating his own Vietnam War record, more than a week after the ad stopped running

The difference here is Obama did it faster.  Why?  Because he can't win- he lets it go, it goes from "CLARK attacks McCain's service" to "OBAMA attacks McCain's service".  Being that said service is the only thing McCain seems to think he offers, the sooner the conversation shifts back to his tax arrears the better.

Clark was off the reservation on this.  We should be discussing how preposterous it is that the candidate who claims the other is "an elitist" managed to forget about one of the homes he owns.

So, I watched this live and read it many times and I can't, for the life of me, find what was wrong with what he said.

Sorry folks, Obama lost the spin war and caved on this one.

Off the reservation? Please.

Clarke has been saying this for weeks.  Clarke was taking the fight right to them and when Mccain's team punches back, the Obama campaign completely caves, leaving Clarke hanging. Pathetic. Wimpy. Embarassing.  

over the last 18 months, both Obama and Clinton used proxies to say things that they themselves couldn't.  On several occasions, nasty things were said by people who were leaving the campaign anyway.

If I recall correctly, David Geffen made his "Clintons are liars" comment as he was leaving the Obama campaign.  Billy Shaheen made his "madrassa" comment when leaving the Clinton campaign.  (I may have the details wrong here.)

So, that would mean that Clark as VP has already been discussed.  For all we know, Clark took himself out of the running and, thus, is available for a bit of dirty work on John McCain.

Along these same lines, Obama may be laying the ground work to put Hillary on the ticket in the VP slot.  Obama couldn't do it right after she conceded, given the hard feelings in his campaign.  He needed to acclimate his own supporters to political reality.  So he's drops a couple of bombs on his own supporters: FISA, public financing.  Now they've pretty much accepted what the reality of Obama as head of the party really means.  They've lived through the cold water treatment.  So now, they're prepared for Hillary as VP.

OK, its just a theory.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Obama did the right thing - Clark took things a step too far. In purely political terms, if you're going to use a Swift Boat strategy, it needs to come from an outside group, not a campaign surrogate.

Sure, Democrats should stand tough on military matters but when you directly attack McCain this way all it does is give him an excuse to play the sympathy card. Bad politics by Clark, who I otherwise like.

As a civilian who has had no military experience, I am grateful to General Clark.
Why?
Because John McCain terrifies me...his temper, his ignorance, his close association with the same corporate interests that brought us a war for oil while over 4000 young men and women sacrificed their lives and 10's of thousands more are serously wounded and suffering PTSD amd hundreds of thousands of Iraqis are dead and injured.

McCain promises to keep Americans safe, yet he enabled this terrible war and callously sings "bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" and thinks it's funny.

He has thrown his national security qualifications in my face to stop my public criticism because i would be called unpatriotic for criticizing John McCain.

But the truth is that there's been a leap of faith by the media and some in the general public that McCain is all he pretends to be.

He may be a war hero and clearly suffered terribly as a POW. But he's not qualified to claim a mantle of national security credentials.

Bravo General Clark!

I love your courage and your honesty.

John McCain is not well informed, he does not have good judgment, he is not offering this country the kind of policy that will help us get on a sustainable path. And now he cannot hide behind a military career used like a banner just like George Bush used "Mission Accomplished"

When did Bob Shrum take over the campaign?

woah.

Here's my theory. The Obama camp is weak in the knees when it comes to challenging McCain/GOP's national security chops. Just like the rest of the Dem party. One guy had the balls to stand up to GOP bs and the completely not-unexpected happened.

animated

What Clarke did was not Swift-Boating which is lying/distorting someone's military record. He told the truth: getting shot down in an aircraft while in the service of your country  makes you a hero,  but does not automatically serve as qualification to be C-I-C.

When Democrats stand up for themselves.
they show strength.  When Democrats are right about something as significant as McSame's lack of national security credentials, that's important.  

Standing by Clark was important because:

It would keep him as a viable VP pick
Show the media and Rethuglicans that they don't get to dictate the frame in which we talk about natinoal security anymore
Put Rethuglicans on notice that Democrats aren't going to sit back and play defence all the way to November
Obama let us down big time.

is thinking that "realignment" means that everyone suddenly agrees with MoveOn.org and the netroots.

VoteVets has a petition to support General Clark's statement.  Take a second to sign it!

Thank General Clark for His Straight Talk, Tell Him To Not Back Down

http://ga3.org/campaign/petitionclark

General Clark,

We the undersigned thank you for speaking up forcefully and honestly about what it takes to lead this nation, and the kind of judgment we must look for. You were right to say that Senator McCain has not shown good judgment, despite his extraordinary service to America. Just in the past few years:

- Senator McCain's service and experience, both as a POW and as a Senator apparently hasn't infused him with a dose of good judgment.

- Senator McCain's experience hasn't led him to realize that the war in Iraq and it's continuance has empowered and emboldened Iran, and destabilized the region.

- Senator McCain's experience hasn't caused him to recognize that we're losing ground in Afghanistan, and Osama bin Laden is still out there, plotting.

- Senator McCain's experience didn't lead him to support the 21st Century GI Bill -- he opposed it. It didn't even make him feel the need to get back to Washington to vote on this -- one of the most important veterans' bills this Congress. He twice skipped votes on the GI Bill, to fundraise.

- Senator McCain's experience didn't help him empathize with troops are overstretched and overdeployed, when he voted against the bipartisan Webb-Hagel "Dwell Time Amendment," which would have given troops as much time at home as in the field.

We all honor Senator McCain?s service, as you said you do. But that does not mean that on matters of security, the military, and veterans that he is beyond reproach. Nor does it mean that his service trumps the poor judgment he has shown in some of the most important issues of our time.

Do not back down, and keep treating the American people like adults who can handle a real, honest, and blunt debate in these important times.

Utter nonsense. Obama is campaigning by good example. He can only neutralize the coming attacks against him by taking the high road.

And he doesn't need "surrogates" and "helpers" out there saying things which are off his message and forcing him to react.

And, as the front runner, neither Obama nor those who purport to speak for him should be attacking McCain on any kind of personal level. Smear campaigning is what losers are forced to do. Obama doesn't need to emulate Bush's rotten campaigns, nor Hillary's and McSame's.

I think they both (Clark and Obama) are merely being true to their own beliefs:  Clark believes that McCain's 5-time crashing of planes and getting shot down are not qualifications for the job -- he is correct to question it therefore.

But I think Obama believes that the mere fact that he wore the uniform is enough evidence of his sacrifice for the country and therefore it is not a point of contention.

I agree more with Clark than with Obama on this narrow point, but I think Obama's is the better course of action in the longer run.  He leads by example, the way in which he wants the debate to be conducted.  His premise seems to be that they are both fairly well qualified for the job, but that they have 2 very different views for where they want to take the country.  He wants the contest focused entirely on that one aspect...

And yea, I don't think that Clinton would be making these rookie mistakes, so there.

Wes Clark, you've been a bad boy!!!

Yea, because if miss DLC herself did something like this, it wouldn't be a "rookie mistake," it would be "tested campaign strategy."

But of course, we all know Hillary Clinton wouldn't do something like this, being such a liberal lion and all.

Your full of "I don't See"s. Couldn't control your addiction to your Queen. I tend to agree with you on the fact that Obama is moving to the right. As I look back I think he likes it there. I hate it and we know how wrong it is but to interject that Hillary wouldn't have swung Right is absurd on it's face. If you take an honest look back Hillary started on the right (ie War Vote) and was forced to move to the left! So DON'T TRY TO erase and Re-make history. Look to whom you are speaking!

I'm having trouble buying this argument that Clinton wouldn't have moved to the center.

One of the main reasons she lost the primary was because she was so confident that she moved to the center before she even needed to. She literally couldn't wait to do it.

Jerome, no offense, but you're sounding like the rookie here.  This is how the game is played.  Let the surrogates and Moveon do the heavy hitting while letting Obama take the high road.  Clarke is probably laughing meniacally right now.  He knows the game.  I'm a member of moveon, and completely understand Obama's distance from my posse.

Never have anything to with the guys swinging basebats in the middle of a cornfield.  C'mon, this is so blatantly obvious.

While I do think that his point about McCain not having any real EXECUTIVE military experience was valid, I think that he went to far in the soundbyte department.  That "..getting shot down" line compeletely overtook his point about mccain's experience and Obama had to distance himself.

What's sad is this whole stupid thing about Clark completely overshadwoed what I think was a great speech by Obama today.  Many on the netroots are too busy "dissing" Obama to realize what a great speech it was.  

After this past week, I think I'm gonna have to take a break from the blogosphere.  I'm new to the netroots game so all this handwringing going on here and elsewhere may be par for the course, but it's giving me a headache.  I gonna stick to Al Giordano and "The Field" and go back to lurker status for awhile, and only come back to catch up on news.

BTW, I know people don't really care what one person out of a thousand does, but whatever.

Regardless of where you come down on the validity or tone of Wesley Clark's comments on John McCain's fitness to be an effective C-in-C, Obama's speech today providing a true definition of patriotism will be looked upon as one of his best so far.

Its importance is comparable to that of his speech on race.

As far as whether Hillary would be making these kind of "mistakes", from what I can see, Obama's handling of this issue is superior to that of Dukakis, Clinton, and Kerry.

His swift and strong responses to challenges from those who brought you the Iraq War give his detractors no time to manufacture an image that he would be less effective as a leader on national security.

Simply brilliant.

As long as the Obama people keep making excuses for himself there is really no reason for his definition becoming any sharper. Who is Obama?? More and more a valid question! Obama's perfection is going to be his downfall. I see less and less humanity in him. He is like a droid whos frequency is altered to match the event. He has to be right or is he just moving to the right? Disappointing! I like Clark and what he stands for! To have Obama rebuke his statements on McCain's qualifications is nonsensical. Fisa all over again.

Ugh.  Also, I can see how Obama can lose.  

Hey, aliveandkickin is back. Hi alive!

Screw Obama & screw MoveOn. MoveOn I did so much work for in 04, & Obama- forget it.

Wes Clark is the gold standard of the Democratic party- end of the story.

Or any slam against Bill?

Or for that matter, on any salm against the civil rights original heavy-lifters who lined up behind Hillary?

Funny! When the McSame & Co use a surrogate to slam Obama and McSame denies what the person does, nobody on the left or the right says a Peep. When Obama uses the same tactic WE(the left) do all the attacking. Lets get real folks if Hillary did it Armstrong would be her most ardent supporter!

100% right.  Glad the primaries are over.

The measure he favors puts an end to all illegal spying. period. The measure does provide immunity for telecoms, if it passes, but that seems to be a netroots pet issue more than anything else.

And yea, I don't think that Clinton would be making these rookie mistakes, so there. But also, I don't see how Obama can possibly lose this election, so there too.

The Clintons have shat on the progressive movement and continued to shit on the progressive movement from the moment they were elected at the Presidential level in 1992 through Hillary's career in the Senate.

You're obviously engaging in some serious historical revisionism if you think otherwise.

It's pretty hilarious how Jerome is still only blogging about negative to neutral Obama stories. Not to mention this is seriously some rookie grade political punditry right here. Please ban me so I don't have to suffer through this drivel anymore.

Really, really weak.  Where's the Obama that wouldn't put up with specious GOP attacks?  That would punch back with the truth, and cut through their crap?

I liked Obama a lot better two months ago.

Clark screwed up.  Being a military brat, I was fairly shocked his line of attack focused on being shot down - I think it was inappropriate to go there.  McCain is a rich target full of other things besides "being shot down."

Oh, and Jerome, the primaries are over.  Stop picking at the scab, its trying to heal.  If Hillary can do it, so can we.  Don't harm her future or her legacy by going PUMA.

This is really very simple to me.

Obama is standing up to the wrong people.

He needs to twist his head back on before I lose interest in helping out at all with his campaign.

This concern trolling from once-respected members of the netroots community is getting a little old.

But setting that aside for the moment:

The entire point of this is so that the fight remains between Clark and McCain.  Not between Obama and McCain.

If it becomes an argument between Obama and McCain on military service, Obama loses (in the media).  Obama's statement didn't specifically refute any of the statements, so the story will stay out there and be Clark vs. McCain.  And the media won't be able to question Clark's credentials because they're impeccable.

This is how good cop / bad cop is played.

I am freaking PISSED at the Obama camp right now.

All they had to say was "SBVT called Kerry a liar.  Gen. Clark called McCain his personal hero, but not necessarily qualified to be president.  There is no disrespect in the General's comment.  I think being a POW neither qualifies nor disqualifies someone from being president, and this is a fair point to make, since my opponent has made this entire campaign about his POW experience."

Political malpractice.  This is classic Shrum.

As dumb as the Petraeus/Betray Us ad, which from the moment I saw it I knew was going to backfire.

To ask McCain exactly what it is about his time as a POW makes him qualified to be Commander in Chief.

Since he's so fond of mentioning it as a  central piece of his resume, turn it on  him.

"And yea, I don't think that Clinton would be making these rookie mistakes, so there. But also, I don't see how Obama can possibly lose this election, so there too."

Yup, I get it, Obama weak, but good enough. Clinton MUCH STRONGER.....

Funny, THAT is exactly the mindset I see on the day after election day?

After the big Obama win, all the STILL BITTER Clinton supporters will diary something like:

"Senator Clinton would have won EVEN BIGGER!!!"

Amazing how these people even bother to post on blogs, if I had their powers of precognition, or viewing alternative realities, I would have hit it big in the stock market or won the lottery by now?

Well, in a way, Obama is vetting these VP possibilities with these one-off speeches.

Clark is now out, obviously....and I can't imagine that Biden, Richardson, and some others on the list might get a similar Republican reaction when they likely bumble here or there.

Love her or hate her, Clinton seems to be rising from the ashes again.

First off, I think Obama should have been much more supportive for General Clark, and not hanging him out to dry on the comments (which I'll admit, made me cringe a bit, even if I did understand where he was coming from).

That said, I think that in the back-and-forth about Obama's comments, not much has been said that the real rebuke here was against the approach and messaging. Obama is deflecting the potential charges against him by criticizing the very framework of "who is really patriotic". Part of the problem is that progressives have been beat up on messaging so often in the past several cycles that some have been willing to use the same tactics and framework to fight back.

I don't think he is trying to move "toward the center" as much as he is trying to the manage the messaging of his campaign, along with the framework of that messaging. While his delivery was flawed, I think his strategy is intentional--if he is to stay the course with his messaging, then he has to hold others to that same level of accountability.

Even still though, he shouldn't have left Clark out to dry and needs to make a strong, unequivocal public defense for his record of service.

Just sayin'

Obama is moving to the center because its what presidential candidates do once they have the primary wrapped up.  I do not blame him one bit.

Once he is elected, his policies will be what matters.

"I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president."

TRUE! TRUE! TRUE!

I don't see the issue here. Fake outrage.

Re: Jerome's point that its Obama's first general election ever. Thats absolutely true. What seems to me the bigger tactical problem for him is that he's running in a 2 candidate race, where the dynamics are different.

His primary selling point, both in his 04 Senate run and in the early primaries this winter, was that he was not a political hack and thus different from the rest of the crowd (in IL in 04, it was Hull, Hynes, and a fourth candidate I can't remember) and in January, it was the entire Democratic field.

Its very hard to be "above the fray" in a 2-candidate race because if you don't answer back, you just get beat. The successful way to do it is to introduce a third target to attack, other than your opponent. If his campaign comes to this realization, they are in luck because the biggest, fattest, most unpopular and easiest to hit target in modern American history happens to be the incumbent President of the United States.

COuple of points:

1.  I voted for Clark for Pres in '04, even after he dropped out.  I LIKE the guy.  I have served in the military.  I like his brash brand of Democratic politics.  But it did NOT get him more than Oklahoma, so...

2.  Clark is a soldier.  Sometimes you have to doa  tough, insane job.  How the hell could anyone else have commented BETTER on the question?  Wes IS a 4 star...that means that even though there is SHOCK over this, people are now talking about it.  Does being a POW make you a good CIC?  Being a War Hero is good for the service, but is it good for the country.  I see this issue that WAS being built as a shield being turned into a DISCUSSION.  I am waiting to see someone ask McCain directly at a town hall "Do you think that being a POW should be a qualification for being President?".  ONLY Clark could get this extreemly touchy bomb off into the land of discourse instead of "poor McCain is being attacked".  And I see it happening BEFORE the 4th as being a positive thing as again, it will be discussed.  

3.  Now add in Obama's speech on patriotism, which is coming DIRECTLY from him.

4.  This will not kill Clark's chances at being VP, this is not vetting, this is taking Repub. sacred territory and turning it into debating terrain.  And MUCH more smoothly than what was done trying to get W's record into the light...

5.  Clark's comments are also initially being misconstrued.  If this thing does have legs, more info will come out and... Clark might be vindicated; ...might make the MSM look really stupid on how THEY handled this, ...might also give McCain serious heartache over this subject (He had to organize a TRUTH SQUAD?  Do they know how STUPID that looks?  Is McCain so weak he needs DEFENDING?)

6.  Obama CANNOT go after him directly on this and MUST MUST MUST keep this ata  distance from himself because Obama DOES NOT have a Military Service record.  Sad that his COmmunity Service record does not count equally in the eyes of the electorate, but it just does not.  So a good military man has to go out and do his duty for his, if you will pardon, commander.  Soldiers who respect their commanders do this GLADLY.

7.  This also opens up a lot of discussion that can be taboo in the military, speaking badly of a fellow soldier even if he does seem to be using his record to inflate himself.  Nothing pisses off the rank and file more than a HERO (in this case used as a derogitory; those who have served know what I mean.)

Finally, it is nice to see this topic has Bill Bennet on CNN looking squemish attacking Clark. :)

Obama wants to control his messaging. He doesn't want freelancing 'surrogates' taking him places he doesn't want to go and knocking his campaign off message. His big patriotism speech got buried by a soundbyte today that did not come from his campaign.

He's not 'throwing Clark under the bus,' he wouldn't have used those words or that line of attack and he doesn't want Clark's words put in his mouth. General Clark is entitled to say whatever the hell he wants however he wants but Obama's campaign is not obligated to let him define the debate for them.

One minute diarists are complaining that the Obama surrogates don't have enough message discipline then they are screaming that Obama is not getting behind Clark. Is Clark calling the shots now for Obama's campaign and how it should be taking on McCain?

As to Jerome's cheap shot that Hillary would not be making these rookie mistakes. The only reason Obama is the nominee is that Hillary made lots of mistakes and Obama used most of them to his advantage. He would not have had a snowball's chance in hell if she hadn't made some grievous strategic errors giving his better planned campaign a huge opening.

Clinton helped Obama a lot. Obama is no longer a rookie thanks to her. Obama backed Rev. Wright and for his trouble Rev. Wright stabbed him in the back. He can only hope Rev. Wright stays quiet until after the general election.   He distances himself from Wes Clark because he has no idea what Wes will say next.

Clinton had lukewarm responses to Geraldine Ferraro's racially charged attacks on Obama and I don't think that helped her.  Eventually, Clinton had to distance herself from Ferraro, but the damage to her reputation was done.  

Obama does not need to court the vote of progressives and liberals. He already has them. A vote for McCain is a vote for more Iraq and a conservative supreme court for the rest of your lifetime. He has pragmatically decided to move to the center. Whether that helps him or not, we shall see.

You're right, the Clintons would never have thrown Clark under the bus after a statement like he made. They would have stood there with him and repeated the same thing. Yeah, what a rookie :P

After spending the primary supporting the DLC candidate, we now attack Obama for not being "progressive".