In article ,
George M. Middius wrote:
Jenn said:
This is exactly what is wrong about our political climate. Clark
didn't
day anything that needed an apology. Clark should stand by it because
he's right, and Obamba's camp shouldn't reject Clark's comments.
Why do say he's right? I thought McCain is offering his experience in the
Senate as his primary qualification. Did I miss something?
Clark was right. He didn't show disrespect toward McCain's military
experience. He simply said that being a fighter pilot and being shot
down isn't a qualification for the Presidency. He's right.
Well, unless McCain claimed getting shot down *is* a qualification, Clark
made a gratuitous snot-attack. You're against those, right? Suppose Hannity
or some other talking head said being half-black isn't a qualification to
be President. Wouldn't that be gratuitous snot? When you use the phrase
"not a qualification" in the proximity of a candidate's name, the
implication is clear. If Clark thinks McCain isn't qualified, he should say
why he believes that instead of making snide comments like a third-rate
political operative.
A fuller context explains it better:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200806300004?f=s_search
SCHIEFFER: I have to say, Barack Obama has not had any of those
experiences either, nor has he ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot
down. I mean --
CLARK: Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot
down is a qualification to be president.
--
Stephen