Reading The Pictures: McCain's War Cred Goes Belly Up
At least in this case, context means everything.
Up until Sunday, this well-known October 1967 image of McCain being pulled from a lake near Hanoi was used without qualification by the Straight Talk Express PR division to convey heroism and elicit admiration and empathy.
By raising McCain's actual command experience as a campaign issue, however, Wesley Clark's weekend comments reframe the photo for posterity, highlighting the exact moment and event that deprived McCain of the chance to go on and prove himself, in combat (like Pop and GrandPop did), as part of the brass. Echoing Clark's point that McCain's heroism was based on his service as a prisoner, the photo -- up to now, liberally touted by Mac's campaign -- suddenly loses the pomp and ambiguity.
Simply, what the picture reflects is how McCain's heroism and military record is largely based on his going belly up.
Gen. Wes Clark on Face the Nation June 29, 2008 (YouTube)
"Attacking" McCain's Military Record: What Wesley Clark really said; how the press missed it (CJR)
For more of the visual, visit BAGnewsNotes.com.
(image: unattributed. Truc Bac Lake, near Hanoi, North Vietnam. October 26, 1967. Library of Congress, via Associated Press.)
Follow Michael Shaw on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bagnewsnotes
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
When it comes to evaluating someone's service or heroism there is only one person I listen to and that is my father. He has walked around with so many pins in his body since Vietnam that he has to be ex-rayed at the airport every time because the metal detectors go off. Now, my father after spending over one year in a VA Hospital on his return spent over a year on the streets walking with crutches on the side of the road trying to get to Arizona to see his mom and no one helped him. He was starving and about dead when a trucker picked him up to finally get him there. Now there is the back ground and I will tell you with out hesitation my dad says that McCain is a looser. Heroism, says my dad, is not being shot down and being held captive for 5 years. It takes more than that to be a hero, dad says being a hero is giving your heart and soul for this country or a cause you believe in, one thing he seriously doubts McCain has ever done. John McCain has always only been concerned with himself and his power.
Some one forgot to close the door and look what we have. Knuckle dragging repuglican conservative attack dogs swarming the place. Have you no shame? Cancel that, we already know the answer!!!
Mr. Shaw,
Your article is excessive, serves no purpose, and makes no sense. I see that picture and I feel sympathy for John McCain and I feel sympathy for the Vietnamese.
If you're trying to elicit support for Obama and Clark this is not the way to go about it.
Absolutely right! Michael Shaw's mocking of a U.S. service man in distress was uncalled for.
It seems that we have several people here using the right's favorite technique: if we repeat a lie often enough and use it liberally in the premises of arguments, eventually many people will accept it as truth.
The lie this time: General Wesley Clark denigrated McCain's service. Didn't happen. It's an outright lie. And anyone who says otherwise is dimwitted or a liar. Period.
Question then, nikus, why trot out a 4 star general? To validate McCain's service? Or to taint it by using a talking head like Clark who is pimping for Barack. The only thing Clark has is his rank and even that won't get him a drink anymore at any VFW post.
Funny thing is, it has probably backfired. It was probably aimed at those dimwitted middle class voters who voted for Hillary. Now the Obama campaign has spent gobs of time and energy responding to a stupid comment by Clark that was probably off the reservation and not approved by his handlers. Certainly its didn't get any traction with republicans.
What was stupid about it? You right wingers keep talking about this like it was wrong, but don't offer ANY reasonable counter argument.
The fact is Gen Clark has been saying this for months and the Republicans knew he was right. So the only thing you guys could do is misrepresent it to deflect attention from the real VALID point: McCain is not qualified to be commander in chief.
My only question is - were you on the conference call where they came up with this disinformation strategy or are you just parroting the right wing BS you hear or read in the MSM?
The only people getting excited by this military service bashing are the lunatic fringe on the left. Those people have traditionally held no respect for the military or the service members, they are the ones who spit on the soldiers and protest when a ship returns home, they are the ones protesting the Marines in Berkeley.
Technically what Clark said was correct, McCains time as a POW, in itself, does not qualify him. But those 5 1/2 years are not McCains only experiences in life. He was a Naval Officer, trained to be a leader. He has been a Senator for over 2 decades. McCain has a lifetime of experience to draw from, and like Hillary said, Obama has a speech.
You should let this one go, just quit arguing with these people, they will tire themselves out. They are too dim to understand that Clarks comments only made Obama look inexperienced.
One thing is a proven indicator of landing a solid punch and hitting the opponents weak spot is they scream like banshees and throw a lot of dust in the air. John McCain has made political hay out being shot down and that alone does not make him qualified to be president. He has conflated being shot down as a badge of leadership and it is clearly not that. Ergo Clark pointing out the obvious has triggered a lot of screaming and tossing dust in the air by Republican henchmen all to obscure the truth.
If I were Obama I'd hit him again and again on the same weak spot. Because it plainly hurts McCain.
copernikus, you are absolutely correct.
However, no amount of facts or logic will persuade the right wing cheerleaders.
They are content to repeat the lie from the thought-free echo chamber.
There are an awful lot of comments attacking both McCain and Obama's credentials to being POTUS.
Pray tell, just exactly what was Dubya's credentials - and he served 2 terms!!!
That would be Americas foremost 'Liar in Chief'!!! Actually precedent setting!!! Commonly referred to as 'The Texas Wonder Boy'!!!
"By raising McCain's actual command experience as a campaign issue, however, Wesley Clark's weekend comments reframe the photo for posterity, "
Wesley Clark should be ashamed. Service members expect civilians to not understand or be able to articulate their lack of understanding of what it means to be away from family, wounded, sometimes hated by your own media and politicians, and then forgotten. Servicemembers do not expect to be politicized and stabbed in the back by a shameless general.
Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows that being a general doesn't mean you have anything to add, being a lawyer doesn't, being a POW doesn't. But, denigrating the service or importance of a POW should cause outrage from the right and the left...all patriots. Clark's comments meant more than those of any MSM talking head. He is supposed to watch the back of his fellow servicemembers, not stab them. He is a opportunist of the worst sort and if there is any consolation it is that he will be seem for what he is...a panderer and pimp for the left.
Do you think the question of McCains war experience would have been asked if McCain wasn't pimping his 'war record'? If he is going to use his record for political gain then HE has to expect that others will comment on it. Fact of life, deal with it!!!
General (retired) Wes Clark has his own war record, he is mature enough to know that if he uses it in politics then others will also address it.
Did you defend John Kerry and his war time experience when he was viciously attacked in 2004?
No, you're the one that should be ashamed. GENERAL CLARK DID NOT "DENIGRATE" McCAIN'S SERVICE, AND YOU'RE A LIAR FOR SAYING HE DID!
It's this kind of right wing BS that should cause outrage.
General Clark has become a political opportunist. He could have taken the road of Powell and been an asset to the country, no matter who the president is, but he chose a side and has become a tool.
What Clark did was disrespectful, perhaps only a fellow service member can fully understand.
FirstShirt,
Wesley Clark did not disparage John McCain or his service in any way. Being a veteran, serving in a war, or being shot down in an aircraft do not by themselves qualify one to be president, and that is all General Clark said. If you watched the interview, he praised John McCain. By your own words, you condemn General Clark for allegedly denigrating John McCain, even though he did not. You then give an extensive condescending opinion of Wesley Clark. This is a direct contradiction of your own words proscribing criticism of one veteran by another.
Here’s a shocking fact. Many veterans are liberals, and our service and our opinions are just as valid as yours are.
This is only partly about McCain playing the victim, which is pretty pathetic. The main thing is that they are grabbing at excuse to bring out the actual SwiftBoater slime machine again to "defend" McCain from these "attacks."
Um...I am sorry but these attacks on McCains service are just horrible and a complete turn off.
McCain does not and has never claimed that he is qualified to be pres because he was a POW.
His service and actions during the war WERE and ARE honorable and do say a lot about his character.
To attack him on this, try to belittle it....for the sake of boosting Obama...is despicable.
Stop it.
I did not see any attack, Clark answered a direct question. John McCain puts his record out there for personal and political gain, are we all supposed to fall down and do obeisance to it?
He was not disrespected by this interview, Clark made a statement that you may disagree with but others will find is based on fact, besides it is true. Getting shot down in combat does not qualify one for POTUS!!!
Maybe Gen Clark should come clean about his actions as head of NATO in the bombing of the Chinese Embassy. http://www
I wonder why the Chinese government didn't ,well, just didn't, when their embassy was bombed. Wars have been started for much less.
The funny part of the cover up is the lie is stupid, we had old maps, anybody buying that.
The US and NATO had old maps that did not show the location of the Chinese Embassy that had been there since 1995? So when we dropped two precision guided JDAMs they hit the wrong building by mistake? Yet Gen Clark, George Tenet and Bill Clinton told this lie over and over. Why not just say we were aiming at a building down the street and something in the Chinese Embassy screwed up the guidance on the bombs. Oops. sorry about that China but what can we do you guys were messing around with our stuff and got stuffed. Nope, we have maps that show something else is suppose to be there not the Chinese Embassy, just think today the could use Google maps.
As someone who's followed the news for a lot of years, please be advised that many servicemen through the years who were captured and tortured and made to speak against their country (in the Korean War, e.g.) were indeed villified - and not by the lefties. No, no, this would have been by the arm-chair patriots who gather around the beer kegs of America. So this ridiculous notion that the left is somehow villifying Senator McCain for his capture just doesn't hold water. Period.
Right. Jane Fonda was a Republican then.
Do you ever read this blog?
If I were a democratic strategist I would be having a fit right now. Swift boating McCain is not smart in so many ways. Many Obama supporters who are independents or crossover republicans are watching how his campaign will reflect the real candidate. Obama's disclaimers are just more of the same spin. He uses surrogates to do the dirty work and then, once the dirty deed is done, he disclaims it. Wesley Clark was on a short leash...co
WOW! "He uses surrogates to do the dirty work and then, once the dirty deed is done, he disclaims it". Who would have ever thought of anything like this before? Shades of 2000, John McCain has an illegitimate black child. Ever heard stuff like this before?
All you conservatives do your dirtiest work and when it comes back at you you howl like a scalded cat!!!
BTW, what part of Clarks answer do you find is not supported by common sense, getting shot down in combat may hold military honors but does not qualify one for POTUS! Very simple to understand!
Ironic you should use the term "swiftboating," since thereby you admit that it is a synonym for "smear" and ignore the fact that one of the original swiftboat veterans for truth who smeared Kerry is standing up right next to McCain. Are you going to condemn McCain for any and all smears coming from his "surrogates" who "must all be on a short leash"? And do you think a four-star general is about to let himself be put "on a short leash"?
General Clark made the observation that being shot down and held prisoner doesn't speak to executive ability. Even McCain himself has agreed with that. When Clark further remarked that leading a peacetime squadron doesn't indicate executive ability, I think he was wrong, and he certainly was "inartful". You might notice Obama didn't apologise for him, or ask him to, or "cut him loose", having not asked McCain to cut Charlie Black loose for "inartfully" saying a terror attack would benefit McCain.
You are believing what you want to believe, independent of verification.
FirstShirt, you falsely accuse General Clark of “Swift boating McCain.”
You go on to say that no veteran should ever criticize another, mostly by using inflammatory language to make personal attacks on the character of General Clark.
Do you not realize that you come across as a flaming hypocrite for doing exactly what you falsely accuse General Clark of doing?
If only Republicans are valuable & untouchable as war veterans,
then Democrats should not sign up. Repubs want perpetual war
and want all the "glory", all the time, without debate. Let them do it then.
Repubs do not honor and respect Dems anywhere. Stop helping them.
If the 2006 elections showed anything, it's that the military is full of Democrats in leadership positions and that they are not warmongers by any means.
It's chickenhawk civilians like Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Wolfie et al and ad nauseum - the guys who were too precious to serve in Vietnam - that I've come to see are the real warmongers.
We should require our leadership to have military service.
I agree 100 %! Let all the YOUNG REPUBLICAN'S sign up to fight the war they back. Last clip I watched of one of their meeting they were supportive of Bush and his war but they really didn't think they would be signing up any time soon to go fight it.
Except the McCAin boys have served in Iraq......
"Repubs want perpetual war and want all the "glory", all the time, without debate."
This is such a ludicrous statement that it cannot be allowed to pass without comment. The only thing I can assume is that you have never worn the uniform. If I am wrong, my apologies. If I am right, then join the ranks of the absurd. You are legion.
Do you deny that they wanted this Iraq war?
As a card carrying independent voter, I would say this: If you want Obama to lose, by all means, continue attacking, belittling, and generally trying to dismiss or undermine McCain's military service. There probably are few things left that could galvanize the Right, while at the same time repulsing the independent voters, than returning to the old stereotypes hoisted upon the Left by Right Wing pundits. After all, according to Republican talking points, the Left hates old people and hates the military, correct? Doing everything possible to live up to those stereotypes will only help McCain in the long run. So my advice, as one who is still on the fence about November: Stop It! John Kerry ran one of the most disastrous campaigns in modern history. Forget the Swift Boats, Kerry and the Democrats completely botched what could have been an easy win in 2004. Don't repeat the mistake. Take the high road. Because like it or not, every sneer and snort at a man's service in our country's military, no matter how it is validated, will come back to haunt Obama in November.
Yeah, lets cowtow to everything they throw at us instead of fight every point... McCain is going to trumpet his POW/service throughout his campaign so you have to have some sort of respectful response that gets your point across. McCain graduated 894 out of 899 at Annapolis, should he have even qualified to pilot a plane, let alone not be compared to Bush??? Didn't Kerry, the uncharismatic robot, take the high road? He lost because he got outsmeared.
You seem to forget what Bush and Co said about McCain in 2000 as they fought in the primaries. Google it...
If you try to fight every point, you will lose the war. Not to insinuate that campaigns are wars, but since you used the term fight, I thought I would point out that every successful military campaign involves choosing your battles carefully. This is a battle that the Democrats can't win. And every time someone comes out against or in any way critical of McCain's service, it allows him to bring his service into play in juxtaposition to one of Obama’s weaker points as a candidate. And in a war, where brave men and women are dying, trying to swipe at a veteran's service (in the context of politics, where the political drive for doing so cannot be ignored), is just wanting to give votes to McCain. Think about it. Find battles you can win, and fight those.
And no, Kerry didn't take the high road. He lost because he ran a disastrously inept campaign. Another tip for Democrats: Stop blaming everyone else. Sometimes it's the fault of those trying, and in Kerry's case, he lost because he ran a horridly incompetent campaign that allowed the Republicans to sit back and laugh all the way to the White House.
I agree. There are way too many issues we can attack McCain on. I don't think McCain should run on being a former POW (use it in ads, bring it up constantly, etc.), but I also feel the Democrats shouldn't go after that record in any way. I know Clark's point was simply that McCain doesn't have military leadership experience he could use as the President, but I just don't think we should even go down that road.
You're no independent. If you were truly independent, you realize that no one attacked McCain's military service. That's a flat-out-r
Nevertheless, like it or not, each time his record is questioned, mocked, or marginalized; it's a feather in McCain's cap. Go ahead and slight anyone who does questions the Democrat strategies, and you will go a far way toward ensuring the very thing I have a feeling you wish to avoid. If the Democrats would have listened more in 2004 instead of swiping away anyone who brought out concerns about Kerry’s campaign strategies, the last four years may have been very, very different.
And yes, I'm an independent.
Attacked, belittled, reduced, mocked, poopooed, I could go on and on. You people are what you are. Read the DailyKos, FireDog ect. See what your more kooky brothers are saying.
You people are so in love with that self promoting, self serving Wes Clark, you thought he could do your dirty work. Do yourself a favor and ditch him and lay off McCain's military service unless you want to spend the next five years locked up and beaten on a daily basis. That might help you ponder a few things as I'm sure it did McCain
Since when are the comments of Wes Clark reflective of the Democratic party? How do detractive remarks about McCain tie automatically to the Obama campaign? Cold facts: Clark is a general who remarked on what he knew about the much touted McCain heroism. This is America. He's entitled to his opinion. Clark has infinitely more experience when it comes to battle, so his opinion isn't taken lightly. We can be objective adults and take them into considering without taking them out of context in order to understand how McCain's experience does or does not impact his views on the war in Iraq in general and the support of the troops in particular. There are enough veterans (Clark among them) with more intimate (up close and personal killing) experience in war who take exception to McCain's approach to both. One thing I do agree with is that being a POW doesn't automatically qualify you to become president.
Amen. Your comments needs to be a HuffPo Favorite!!
Lots and lots and lots of people served in that war, got shot down, and survived. That does not qualify you to hold the highest military office in the land.
Paperless voting-machines, however, make such quibblings irrelevant. The computers click and grind. SQL UPDATE statements are executed. And the results are in. Whatever you want them to be. Just like that.
Ballot-box stuffing has never been easier.
UPDATE BALLOTS SET CANDIDATE_NAME = "McCain" WHERE CANDIDATE_NAME = "Obama"
Since he became Obama's military advisor.
In my last post change the word agree in the first sentence to disagree.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
