Are You Experienced?— no, wait: Killing Floor

OBAMA WON’T be “ready” or “experienced” enough to be president until Hillary is dead; that’s why she wants him to be her vice president.

“If Sen. Obama can’t be seen to be commander in chief against Sen. Clinton, how can he possibly expect to be seen as someone who can win the commander in chief question against Sen. McCain?” top Clinton strategist Mark Penn asked during a conference call with reporters.
[Houston Chronicle: Democrats’ feuding is music to GOP hopes]

If your own top strategist Mark Penn calls it like that, what chance does even a Clinton-Obama ticket possibly stand against the steely, war-tested and resolved Grillmaster?

None of these three with their reprehensible militaristic attitudes should be commander in chief. But that is not important, in certain areas, (like imperial militarism,) there is no choice allowed. What is important to the household voter is this: All animals are “seen as” commander in chief, but some animals are more “seen as” commander in chief than others.

Wait, maybe there is an area where a Clinton-Obama ticket would outshine the other…

While he may be the best suited to beating the drumbeat of war out on his manly chest, McCain isn’t so cut out for filling up the war chest in the first place. Time for some clever marketing and some daddy-child coddling:

…now that Mr. McCain, of Arizona, has vanquished his Republican rivals, his campaign hopes to tap some of the big donors who had supported them.

The McCain campaign will also try to give incentives to its fund-raisers by bestowing them with honorary titles, each coming with new perks and levels of status, in much the same way the Bush campaign did by naming its biggest fund-raisers Rangers and Pioneers. One proposal that has not been officially announced calls for dubbing fund-raisers who bring in $100,000 Trailblazers, those who bring in $250,000 Innovators, and those who bring in half a million dollars co-chairmen of the campaign.
[New York Times: McCain Uses Breathing Room to Focus on Coffers]

This is what it comes down to. Being seen as the bestest EVAR nation-killing martial nutjob on the market, and raising teh moneys.

Play Stump Lane’s “Seen As” Commander In Chief game below the fold…

Match the candidate with their Ongoing Iraq Occupation Policy:

1. Take some troops out of Iraq, stay in Iraq as long as Al Quaeda is there, work toward stabilizing the Middle East.
2. More troops to Iraq, kill them until they are stable, even if it takes 100 years.
3. Develop a plan to begin removing troops from Iraq in the future, insure there is stability in Iraq.

A. John McCain
B. Hillary Clinton
C. Barak Obama

Your Montag says: #2 is the most honest forecast of WHAT WE WILL DO IN IRAQ NO MATTER WHO IS ELECTED, though they all cop to the same thing in their own way. Here is the telling paradox:

• Our military is a major de-stabilizing force in the Middle East.
• We propose to maintain a military presence in Iraq to bring stability to the region.

And let’s not forget additional promises to increase the size of the military by hundreds of thousands, as we consider what choice we have and what changes we can hope for in defense spending and foreign policy.