The Rove-ization of the campaign

[sleigh]

Here's an example of Rove-ian tactics, now that the McCain campaign has brought aboard a crowd of mini-me Rove-acolytes. Look at the howls of outrage that greeted Gen. Wesley Clark's comment last Sunday. From the volume of the screeching from the McCain camp, you'd think Clark had called McCain a coward who shirked his military duty.

But that's not what he said. The remark they're hopping on is this: "Well, I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president.” Clark did say that, but the comment is out of context. Clark was being interviewed on FACE THE NATION, and the interview went more like this: Clark was questioning McCain's actual experience to be Commander-in-Chief. He said: "I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war… 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."

Moderator Bob Schieffer interrupted at that point, saying that “Barack Obama has not had any of those experiences, either, nor has he ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down."

Clark responded: “Well, I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president.”

You see: Clark used the image that Shieffer put out there, and responded properly. There was no disrespect for McCain, and in fact, Clark made a comment that is perfectly valid.

But you'd think from the McCain camp that Clark had gone after McCain with a carving knife.

What's horrible is that the media rode the controversy -- just as they did with the Swift Boat ads. What's disturbing is that Obama caved almost immediately and 'rejected' Clark's remark rather than saying "Hey, that was a remark taken out of context, and there's nothing wrong with it. The truth is that getting shot down isn't a qualification to be president, any more than being black or being a woman qualifies you to be president. What qualifies you to be president are the ideas, the policies, and the vision you bring to the table."

Interestingly, you can see Rove-ian fingerprints all over the McCain response. The McCain campaign trotted out retired Col. Bud Day to froth at the mouth. He said: “This backhanded slap against John as not being a worthy warrior because he just got shot down is one of the more surprising insults in my military history."

As the NY Times column by Paul Krugman points out, this is the height of irony, since Day appeared in the '04 Swift boat ads questioning John Kerry's military service. Wow. Kettle, meet pot. That's ignoring the fact that Clark never said McCain wasn't a "worthy warrior" and had in fact a moment before praised McCain's war service.

Welcome to Karl Rove's third presidential campaign. Expect more of this crap. The question is: will it work this time? Will the media continue to just gleefully pile on whenever a misdirected and questionable 'scandal' erupts in the campaign? Will the Dems continue to respond as spinelessly as they did during the Kerry campaign when it happens?

Comments

Hmm...

[ysabetwordsmith.livejournal.com]

I don't think "riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down" is a qualification for being President. It is not, as was pointed out, executive experience. It does have some value for a candidate in that at least McCain has a sense of personal risk associated with war; if he sends other people out to get shot at, at least he knows what that is like. But that's not the same thing as a qualification, just some life experience that may or may not prove useful. Now if he were going up against someone who used rich family connections to avoid service, McCain might get some use out of the "you're a coward and I'm not" argument. But that's not a qualification either, really.

Qualifications amount to two main categories: training in the skills needed for a given position, or experience doing the same or similar things elsewhere. In that regard, McCain's qualifications for President amount to his educational and political activities; Obama, with a shallower pool of political experience, is running based on his currently demonstrated ability to unite and inspire people. Now those are some interesting qualifications for debate. McCain basically argues that he should win because he knows what he's doing; Obama argues that he should win because McCain's way of doing things is all wrong and we need creative new approaches. After the Tweedledum-Tweedledee politics of recent years, I'm pleased to have some sharp distinctions in this campaign.

Re: Hmm...

[sleigh.livejournal.com]

"fter the Tweedledum-Tweedledee politics of recent years, I'm pleased to have some sharp distinctions in this campaign."

I agree... and we'll see what the general public thinks soon enough. :-)

Re: Hmm...

[ysabetwordsmith.livejournal.com]

I will be pleased as punch IF the general public thinks.