Audio: Rand Beers on how McCain’s captivity left his national security experience “sadly limited”
posted at 12:40 pm on July 1, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
John Poor of BMI was there when Beers spoke and was kind enough to forward the audio. I wanted to reserve judgment until we had a fuller quote or a transcript; feel free now to judge away. As expected, his point is mainly a rehash of that obnoxious Times piece arguing, per McCain’s anti-Iraq vet colleagues in the senate, that he doesn’t grasp how difficult war is because he spent the Vietnam years merely being tortured instead of in combat. Beers (himself a former Marine and Vietnam vet) actually takes it a step further: Because McCain never got to taste the excitement of the “turmoil” here at home in the late 60s, that too limits his policy vision. Why and how are left unsaid, but do note the tacit contradiction between him and Wes Clark. Clark’s point is that soldiering, at least at the lower ranks, doesn’t qualify as “executive experience.” Fair enough — except that Beers seems to think that it does, at least as far as national security is concerned, and even seems to believe that not soldiering is a credential so long as you were home protesting at the time. By those lights, about the only experience that could have left you sufficiently cloistered to “sadly limit” your grasp of defense is … being a POW for five years. Funny how that works out. Just like it’s funny how prominent Democrats keep challenging McCain’s hawkishness with these thumbnail psychoanalyses of his wartime ordeal and how it’s supposedly left him with some form of diminished capacity. I wonder what the subtext of that is.
Note that the voice heard in the first half of the clip belongs to a questioner. Beers doesn’t start speaking until around 1:30.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Who?
Jaibones on July 1, 2008 at 12:45 PM
Oh, and Hussein got it by proxy by associating with weatherman bomber Bill Ayres. Fair enough.
Akzed on July 1, 2008 at 12:47 PM
McCain will have a long list of thank you notes to write, should he win:
Jeremiah Wright
Tony Resko
Wesley Clark
Rand Beers
Bubba
and on and on…
aunursa on July 1, 2008 at 12:48 PM
So wouldn’t the easy counter be that Obama doesn’t grasp the significant of the Vietnam war years, either, because he spent them being a child?
Blacklake on July 1, 2008 at 12:48 PM
Good Thinkin’, Rand! No one who wasn’t a ground combat soldier can be president. Military Juntas and justice for all!
trubble on July 1, 2008 at 12:50 PM
Barack was held captive and tortured by Reverend Jerry Wright for 20 years,
Does that count?
profitsbeard on July 1, 2008 at 12:50 PM
You mean McCain missed Kerry talking about how he and other officers cut the ears off of combatants, raped women, burned villages, much like Genghis Khan? Or do you mean the daily protests on the University campuses, that was educational…or was it this he missed.
Gee, McCain sure missed a valuable lesson…
right2bright on July 1, 2008 at 12:51 PM
.
So, apparently, one must have been a hippie to be qualified? Don’t think Obama qualifies, either - he would have been in diapers (red ones) at the time.
Think_b4_speaking on July 1, 2008 at 12:52 PM
Boy, what a squeak hole!
Blake on July 1, 2008 at 12:53 PM
No, Barry was just a kid at the time. And I’m sure his mommy was clinging to him, exclaiming, “You can’t have him, Lyndon Johnson!”
aero on July 1, 2008 at 12:54 PM
In Psych 101 you learn tht if you repeat a lie long enough people will begin to believe it.
(Kinda like evolution–sorry, couldn’t resist.)
davidk on July 1, 2008 at 12:58 PM
Another Clinton/Kerry retread signifying change.
Oh, glory awaits us.
JammieWearingFool on July 1, 2008 at 12:59 PM
Why be defensive about this coordinated attack by Democrats? Of course they’re going after McCain’s military service, it’s one of his strongest points. Obama has nothing and the Dems wish to reduce McCain’s experience to the equivalent level of meaningless. But why be so surprised by this tactic? Democrats attacking those in the military or having served in the military is nothing new, even for presidential candidates. They were, so far, worse on President Bush on his National Guard service than they are with McCain.
This tactic by the Democrats is a two fold attack. First it is what it appears to be, which is what I mentioned in the above paragraph. Secondly, It is an attempt by Democrats to get the attention off of Obama from his lack of qualifications and inexperience and recent run of gaffes. So far, it is working and, for the most part, the GOP and its supporters are being entirely defensive about it.
When going after the left, you have to attack their assumptions and premises. Otherwise, any response is an acceptance of the Dem’s terms and conditions of the argument and they win regardless.
Weebork on July 1, 2008 at 12:59 PM
This is offensive. Put a fork in me because I am officially DONE with these attacks on McCain’s military service. It is good to know that going on vacation in Pakistan, being a community organizer ™, attending school in Indonesia and smoking pot at Punahou makes BO more experienced and qualified to be CIC.
HawaiiLwyr on July 1, 2008 at 12:59 PM
National Security Adviser to the Kerry campaign. He huffily resigned his job with the State Department in, oh, 2003 or so and the Kerry campaign snatched him up.
see-dubya on July 1, 2008 at 1:00 PM
No no, you see, Hussein was a little nodding chanting madrassah “student” in the 60’s, but Bill Ayres wasn’t, he was doing patriotic stuff like bombing America, so his 60’s cred rubs off on Hussein like chalk.
McCain of course, having dropped explosives on Bill Ayres’ allies, is ultimately fine in my book.
Akzed on July 1, 2008 at 1:01 PM
I admit I find all this disrespectful talk about McCain’s Vietnam experiences quite obnoxious.
However, I have to ultimately agree with the essence of their point (much as I did during the Kerry fiasco).
What does flying a plane, dropping some bombs, getting shot down and being tortured, have to do with qualifying for POTUS? These experiences are not insignificant, and in some cases speak to the character of the individual, but none of it can be pointed to as qualification for the chief executive office.
What are the necessary ‘qualifications’? Can you get a degree in Presidentiality or a masters in Hobnobbery? Are there criteria listed on the whitehouse.gov site - “Minimum 5 years skull’n'bones ass-whipping”
All this talk about what doesn’t ‘qualify’ an individual for this job, and very little about what does.
LimeyGeek on July 1, 2008 at 1:01 PM
.
I disagree to the extent that the dems current line of argument is so ridiculous that it is actually driving conservatives back to McCain, IMO.
Think_b4_speaking on July 1, 2008 at 1:02 PM
The left believes the real tragedy of John McCain’s imprisonment and torture is not what he endured, but that he missed out on the opportunity for enlightenment that those at home enjoyed.
What else could explain McCain’s lack of ideological purity?
JiangxiDad on July 1, 2008 at 1:04 PM
If I am not mistaken Sen. McCain flew 25 missions before he was shot down. Are they choosing to ignore that fact now?
JeffinSac on July 1, 2008 at 1:10 PM
I have no doubt that, all things being equal, a Commander-in-Chief ["Commander-of-Chief" if you're Obama] with combat experience is superior to one without. The decisions to wage war are heavy decisions, and I would prefer that a Commander-in-Chief ["Commander-of-Chief" if you're Obama] with combat experience make said decisions.
Moreover, having served in combat translates into “national security experience” - per se.
These Obama apparatchiks attacking McCain are simply perverted.
OhEssYouCowboys on July 1, 2008 at 1:15 PM
Jeffin,
The Dems are trying to get a narrative about McCain where anything having to do with the military does not equal executive experience. Extensively, this also applies to POW and their experiences. It’s purpose, in part, is marginalization. The Dems are using an Eastern axiom that has to do with going after something’s strongest point. If you can defeat its strongest point, like the strongest link on a chain, the rest is easy. I’m not saying it’s effective –time will tell for that– but that’s part of their tactic.
Weebork on July 1, 2008 at 1:16 PM
LimeyGeek,
And no one has claimed that the experiences themselves are specifically reasons to vote for McCain. How he reacted to them, what he learned from them, and what they demonstrate about his character and integrity are why they should be considered.
Just like with Kerry’s military service. It is not the service in and of itself that was significant, it was what it demonstrated about his character and integrity that was significant. (And “it” includes his recollections of events, and how the nature of those recollections provided insight into Kerry’s character and integrity.)
exhelodrvr on July 1, 2008 at 1:19 PM
So let’s vote for Obama who’s foreign policy expereince is winning at RISK when he was 14.
RobCon on July 1, 2008 at 1:26 PM
Flying into downtown Hanoi to drop bombs, and getting to live with the enemy and resist their propaganda efforts everyday could give one a unique perspective, I would think. McCain and the other POWs were beaten for refusing to meet with the traitorous “peace” delegations that came to visit. In light of that, one could say that McCain had a very “hands-on” experience with these political issues.
After McCain returned to the states, he spent a year at the national War College studying the Vietnam War and writing a thesis.
Also, his father was CINCPAC, and in that role was the one who had to actually dispatch the planes that bombed Hanoi while his son was there.
juliesa on July 1, 2008 at 1:28 PM
Dear Mr. Beers,
Thank you for your help in ensuring Republicans retain the White House.
Regards,
Republican National Committee
TheBigOldDog on July 1, 2008 at 1:29 PM
I guess that, now, it’s out of the question for the Democrats to bring up Obama’s “foreign policy experience”? You know, in the tub, when he was 6, and had a fleet of plastic ships waging war amongst the suds.
OhEssYouCowboys on July 1, 2008 at 1:35 PM
RACIST DISTRACTIONS!!!!!
RACIST DISTRACTIONS!!!!
On a brighter note, Newsweek’s taking a nice turn on this:
tree hugging sister on July 1, 2008 at 1:38 PM
This is the “Hey, we know our candidate’s unqualified. But so’s yours!” strategy.
Wethal on July 1, 2008 at 1:47 PM
McCain never said that bombing commies or being captured by them is requisite to being POTUS. But when you look at how candidates have served their country, and one was a commoonity activis and the other was a bomber pilot who was captured and tortured by the enemy, score one for the jet jockey and move on to the next item.
Akzed on July 1, 2008 at 1:56 PM
Same view just another way of saying:
http://boblonsberry.com/writings.cfm
Bambi on July 1, 2008 at 1:56 PM
Yeah. Right. Nothing against the scrambled eggs and the oak leaves but the idea that ‘lower ranks’ don’t have executive experience is a hoot. If by executive you mean sitting around a board room and deciding unit A goes right while unit B goes left, both supplied by C, and overwatched by D then you missed the part where some Buck5 or Gunnery Sgt are eating, breathing, swallowing and crapping all that executive experience that is pointing the way! Doesn’t matter if you are running a six man fire team, a twelve man squad, forty-four man platoon, or 120 man company you have more on your plate then some community organizer. Those ‘lower’ ranks, Captain on down to private, are what make all the branches operate. All the brass does is point. The ‘lower ranks’ end up making all the decisions on how to get the job done.
Screw Clark and his riding crop buddies. Screw Beers and his promotion boards packed with REMFs and backstabbing RACK BUILDERS. Neither one of these clowns would dare try to dress down a FIRST SHIRT. They’d end up in a Medivac for a quick trip home.
Limerick on July 1, 2008 at 1:59 PM
Translate for us civilians, please?
Wethal on July 1, 2008 at 2:02 PM
It’s with this bit that, regardless of how much I may dislike McCain’s policies, I can’t help but honor the man for the GINORMOUS example of testicular fortitude he possesses (or, possessed, if anyone wants to take that tact).
When compared to Barack Obama, McCain dramatically, overwhelmingly eclipses the good Sir Hopenchange on the level of character.
I may hold my nose in November when I punch the ballot (or, as in Chicago’s 49th Ward, the alderman punches it for me); but, at least I’ll feel comfy in knowing that I will have voted for the better person.
yo on July 1, 2008 at 2:06 PM
Can’t wait for the next poll. I’m hoping it shows a significant swing of independents toward McCain, based solely on how offended and annoyed they are by this line of attack (and/or their dawning realization that there’s simply no contest between these two when it comes to experience).
aero on July 1, 2008 at 2:08 PM
I’m eagerly awaiting the party split when decent Democrats will no longer associate with this kind of underhanded crap.
Well, “eagerly” implies I expect it to happen. “Hopefully?”
Merovign on July 1, 2008 at 2:09 PM
Rear Escelon Muther (you figure out the F)
RACK BUILDER…these are the fellas who put their racks (ribbons) above your life (or career)
FIRST SHIRT….line company First Sergeant
Sorry….spitting nails right now…..
Limerick on July 1, 2008 at 2:09 PM
‘Zactly.
tree hugging sister on July 1, 2008 at 2:10 PM
Please please PLEASE, God, let them keep making these comments about McCain’s lack of executive experience and foreign policy experience! It only makes things all the more ironic and amusing when that light gets turned back on Obama’s “experience!”
Beo on July 1, 2008 at 2:12 PM
So what exactly is the Democrats political “strategy”? Just make it up as they go along, and spend so much time backtracking that the sheeple drive off the cliff with them?
kirkill on July 1, 2008 at 2:30 PM
McCain gets slammed for 28 YEARS in the service and Kerry got praised for what? 90 DAYS? Got three scrathes to get out on a technicality?
roninacreage on July 1, 2008 at 2:38 PM
So that lazy McCain wasted his Nam years lounging in a plush bamboo cage when he should have been out getting some realworld leadership experience like passing out at a Cream concert and swallowing a lit joint.
whitetop on July 1, 2008 at 2:43 PM
I’m surprised Beers didn’t refer to McCain’s own admission that McCain had missed out on the turmoil in the US while imprisoned in North Vietnam and that McCain’s knowledge of significant cultural trends during that era is sadly lacking.
Coming in a Dem ad near you??:
Of course, in 1969, Obama was….
Wethal on July 1, 2008 at 2:53 PM
Still trying to work out how on earth besmirching McCain’s military career helps Obama? Is it some kind of deranged notion of payback for the swiftboat affair?
Truly strange behavior.
Ares on July 1, 2008 at 2:56 PM
I am just astonished at the poor judgement that Obama is showing by trying to make THIS a defining campaign issue when the deck of cards is stacked against HIM on the issue. What an idiot!!!!!!! I also believe most fair minded Americans see this for what it is and they will end up migrating toward voting for McCain because they perceive these attacks to be so unfair and so distasteful.
I have gone from thinking Obama was an excellent orator, to going wow, look at him beat Hillary in the primaries, to not liking him not so much, to now completely and totally discounting him as a decent human being. He is a troll. I feel nothing but disgust for him when I see him on the tv now. WHat an arrogant SOB.
karenhasfreedom on July 1, 2008 at 2:57 PM
Mind blowing! And the dems blasted Bush for “ditching out” on his service. Exactly what type of military service will satisfy them?
One thought. It will be nice when McCain is elected that noone will make that stupid “why don’t you send your own kids to war” argument that has been levelled at Bush.
I was very lukewarm to McCain, but these attacks really make my support for him a lot stronger.
redshirt on July 1, 2008 at 2:57 PM
I think I agree with this twink, on the surface of it. John has a strange idea about national security when it comes to the southern border. His Stockholm syndrome has something to do with it but being in the pocket of the greedy, open borders globalists explains it better.
Christine on July 1, 2008 at 2:58 PM
After all, John is a member of the ruling elite.
Christine on July 1, 2008 at 2:59 PM
You mean the “Beers was most closely associated with the disastrous aerial crop fumigation program the U.S. introduced in southern Colombia. The State Department hired DynCorp, a private military contractor, to fly crop dusters at high altitudes over the rainforests of southern Colombia, spraying a chemical cocktail that includes a stronger version of Monsanto’s popular and controversial herbicide, Round-Up, over suspected coca fields. Beers was the public face of the fumigation program, defending and advocating for it in Congressional hearings and in the media.”..and then did a mcclellan, and said he was misinformed.
Maybe it was because this attempt to curtail drugs from Columbia, wound up wiping out food crops and sickening rural people…that was “collateral damage” in his assessment. You mean THAT Beers, who was promised a top spot in the Kerry Adminstration if there had been one?
PatriotPete on July 1, 2008 at 3:00 PM
I recently posted…
With that thought in mind I would, given the opportunity, posit the following quires to Senator McCain.
Would you prefer to have Senator Lieberman present before you answer any or all of the above?
J_Gocht on July 1, 2008 at 3:02 PM
Agreed. Well said. Open borders and national security are mutually exclusive concepts. Kind of like rich and Communist. But, come to think of it, there are plenty of rich, Communists in D.C.
I think that I need to think about this some more.
OhEssYouCowboys on July 1, 2008 at 3:07 PM
After all, John is a member of the ruling elite.
Christine on July 1, 2008 at 2:59 PM
Wethal on July 1, 2008 at 3:08 PM
Obambi had to kiss the asses of the Daley democratic machine in order to even get into Illinois politics. He reminds you of a post turtle. When you are in the country and you see a turtle on a fence post. 1) the turtle doesn’t know how it got there 2) the turtle sure don’t know what to do while he is up there and 3) you have to wonder who the dumbass (Daley) was that put him up there
volsense on July 1, 2008 at 3:45 PM
Pithy insight from NRO Corner:
Wethal on July 1, 2008 at 3:58 PM
These Democrat idiots can only attack him on these specious, foolish things. They can’t attack him on domestic policy issues because they are too close to what their own marxist buffoon candidate wants. And since Obama is making noises of coming around to something approaching common sense on Iraq, they can’t really attack McCain on that, either.
Kinds sucks to be a Republican these days… It would totally suck to be a Democrat; You have to prove that you and your party are complete idiots in order to say anything negative about the opposition candidate.
I’d bet that 80% of the members of both parties would jump at the chance for a complete ‘do-over’ of this election season. They both ended up nominating the biggest detriments to winning that they could have, short of picking random inmates of a super-max prison.
LegendHasIt on July 1, 2008 at 4:16 PM
J_Gocht on July 1, 2008 at 3:02 PM
I think since we’re posing questions for the candidates to answer it would be more important to hear your Marxist crack smoking homo of a candidate why he has associated with enemies of the state for so long?
elduende on July 1, 2008 at 4:26 PM
Well my dear “genie” did you find them tarnished words by gazing into your rusty lamp?
J_Gocht on July 1, 2008 at 5:28 PM
J_Gocht
this was my rusty lamp:
http://larrysinclair0926.wordpress.com
elduende on July 1, 2008 at 5:41 PM
Genie, are you certain Larry’s “pay pal” account doesn’t go to some Delaware Attorney from Nigeria?
Seems to me an honest man for truth; would do this pro bono?
J_Gocht on July 1, 2008 at 6:15 PM
J_Gocht on July 1, 2008 at 6:15 PM
pro bono huh? seems to me an honest man for truth would not do this at all, but there he is, warts and all, and whether his paypal account goes to Nigeria or not the allegations are there and there is no amount of money he can generate from paypal that will ease the public attempts by the leftists to destroy him. yet there he is.
Its funny, when there were allegations against McCain about an extramarital affair they made the cover of the New York Times, obviously turnabout is not fairplay.
True or not there is no arguing with the 3 dead gays that knew Obama from Trinity United Church.
I’d like Obama to explain himself. You know kinda like how Bush needs to answer for his many crimes and all that.
elduende on July 1, 2008 at 6:53 PM
Now there’s a “dead ringer” if I ever
heardread one…!J_Gocht on July 1, 2008 at 7:05 PM
J_Gocht:
Actually there are a lot of things your crack smoking Marxist needs to answer for.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/27/grim_proving_ground_for_obamas_housing_policy/?page=full
elduende on July 1, 2008 at 7:06 PM
Jamie Kalven, a longtime Chicago housing activist, put it this way: “I hope there is not much predictive value in his history and in his involvement with that community.”
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/27/grim_proving_ground_for_obamas_housing_policy/?page=full
I wonder how much his paypal account is worth?
elduende on July 1, 2008 at 7:08 PM
J_Gocht
Love all the clever and nuanced leftist retorts but you are not serving your master well, trying to discredit Sinclair based on his paypal account is akin to dismissing Gore for cashing in on an “Inconvinient Truth” an honest man for truth would have done it pro bono huh?
elduende on July 1, 2008 at 7:19 PM
J_Gocht
yeah I think this boy has a lot of splainin to do…
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/group/MarxistsSocialistsCommunistsforObama
elduende on July 1, 2008 at 8:03 PM
Can’t we just as easily say that our Democratic Representatives and Senators have a dangerously limited perspective on the potentially evil nature of our enemies because none of them have been locked up and tortured for five years?
Dr. Charles G. Waugh on July 2, 2008 at 1:27 AM