i.e, the demystification of John McCain's military record. He graduated near the bottom of his class at Annapolis, was better known in the service for silly, irresponsible behavior, for getting preferential treatment due to his parentage, and when shot down lost his fourth taxpayer-funded jet. Yes, he survived the Hanoi Hilton (as did others), and for that he gets credit. But the credit he gets is for surviving the Hanoi Hilton, not for being a war hero or a leader of men. He and his handlers have transformed his meager record into a fanciful bronze horseback statue in the town square, which simply is not warranted. Wesley Clark has started the media on the road, hopefully, to a gimlet-eyed examination of who McCain The Hero really is. If I were McCain, I'd be very frickin' worried about that.

He was quite clear that he felt that McCain was a great soldier, and didn't he say something about McCain being a hero to him and many others? He simply said that McCain's service did not qualify him for President. I'm not sure that I agree that McCain's service would not be advantageous to him if he won the election, but I'm certain that what Clark said did not denigrate McCain's military experience. I don't recall any Republican being so cautious when attacking Kerry. I'm sure that the swift boaters will attack Clark, though, because as far as they are concerned, any progressive military man is a traitor, and they do not hesitate to say so.

He was quite clear that he felt that McCain was a great soldier, and didn't he say something about McCain being a hero to him and many others? He simply said that McCain's service did not qualify him for President.

Exactly. But unfortunately simple English gets lost.

The members of the media, one presumes, knows English, but they assume that their readers do not.

What happened to all those people who insist on "English only"?

George Orwell, eat your heart out.

The newsletter CounterPunch published this April an article by Doug Valentine headed "Meet the Real John McCain: North Vietnam's Go-To Collaborator."

Valentine suggested McCain contemplated suicide — something the candidate has written about, and attributed in part to his guilt at not withstanding torture — because he was a "war criminal" whose bombs fell on civilians.

McCain, who sought — along with Sen. John F. Kerry — to debunk claims that Vietnam still held American prisoners into the 1990s, has been attacked in similar terms by leaders of POW/MIA movement, whom he and Kerry cast as charlatans.

That movement has produced the most outlandish attacks on McCain, including widely dismissed and unsubstantiated claims that McCain was not tortured and a smear casting him as a "Manchurian candidate."

....

And Aravosis was unapologetic about his charge of "disloyalty," citing the similar charges levied at Kerry from the right in 2004.

"McCain is running for president of the United States, not the student council. He should stop feigning shock and outrage and start answering some very legitimate questions about his character and his experience," he said. "Well, the Republicans sported Band-Aids to mock John Kerry's medals from Vietnam. They mocked his injuries in war."

"McCain isn't being mocked, he's being questioned," he said.

For now, that is a minority view on the left. Democrats took from the Vietnam era the lesson that they should not attack soldiers' service, and McCain's Senate colleagues of both parties — including Obama — have expressed deep respect for his service and his suffering. He also worked after the war to heal some of its open wounds, winning the unexpected appreciation of some anti-Vietnam war stalwarts, who are now damping down the attempts to attack his war record.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11429.html

... and MediaCorp feigns reporting.

Standard Operating Procedure.

Clark carefully avoided actually attacking McCain's military record, and I really, really think it would be best if we treated his words not as a jumping off point for denigrating soldiers but as an opportunity to frame McCain's military service in a way that is not damaging to Obama.

Do you have any idea how petty it sounds to hold a soldier responsible for the plane he "lost" by being shot down on a combat mission?

You are a breath of fresh air in the War Room, and your blogs and commentary are so welcome!

And yes, it does feel like performance art.

Clark states the truth -- McCain served his country, but did not get "executive" experience during his military duty -- and it is perverted by the rightwingnuts.

They are sick masters at translating EVERYTHING they want to spin into anti-patriotism.

Criticize ex-military: You're AGAINST the troops, against the military, don't respect military service

Don't wear a flag pin: You're AGAINST America, not patriotic, don't love your country

That was the essence of swiftboating -- they managed to take a decorated veteran, and make HIM seem unpatriotic and unAmerican because he eventually questioned (rightfully) the unjust war in which he valiantly served.

Hell, they did it to poor Max Cleland -- man gives up his limbs for the military, and they question HIS patriotism.

WHEN will the Democrats, the liberals, and most importantly, the MAIN STREAM MEDIA wrest this whole dog and pony show back from the wingnuts?

How is it that anyone or anything that wingnuts disagree with, or any time wingnuts are under attack, is ALWAYS turned around toward accusations of anti-Americanism or being unpatriotic?

Why is this the trump card that ALWAYS works????

It's so pervasive that even Obama is rushing to backtrack, and it's ridiculous, because what Clark said was true, it wasn't attacking, it was an observation. But Obama is so scared of being labeled as anti-American that he's running away from Clark's statement too, which makes Obama look craven and wishywashy.

Why isn't ruining America's reputation abroad considered anti-American?

Why isn't ruining our economy considered anti-American?

Why isn't discrimination against fellow citizens -- gays, women, Muslims, etc., considered anti-American?

Why is it ALWAYS things LIBERALS do that are branded as "anti-American?"