The Democratic attacks on John McCain's military service has now become too frequent and well-chronicled to be brushed off as coincidence. Yesterday, Wesley Clark drew the ire of the McCain campaign (and likely many supporters) for questioning whether McCain's service qualified him to be president. As National Review's Jim Geraghty writes:
After statements by a half-dozen high-profile Democrats and Obama surrogates, you cannot persuade me that there is not a concerted effort on the part of Obama Democrats to criticize McCain on his war record. George McGovern, Jay Rockefeller, Tom Harkin, Democratic congressional candidate Bill Gillespie, Ed Schultz, Tony McPeak, and now Clark. Way too many to be coincidence.
And the attack umbrella extends beyond Democratic politicians. Highly influential AMERICAblog's John Aravosis says McCain accomplished nothing while serving in the military, other than being tortured and throws this low-blow in for good measure:
A lot of people don't know, however, that McCain made a propaganda video for the enemy while he was in captivity. Putting that bit of disloyalty aside, what exactly is McCain's military experience that prepares him for being commander in chief?On one hand, these attacks come from partisans not to be confused with objective observers. On the other hand, these are many of the same people who have loudly complained about John Kerry being "swiftboated" in the last campaign.
![[RSS]](http://67.192.49.194/templates/images/rss_icon.gif){kind=icon}
Post A Comment