The naked truth behind Hillary Clinton's commander in chief test

Monday Howard Wolfson, the supreme spokesman for Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, issued a pronouncement by telephone conference call: "We do not believe," he said, "that Sen. Obama has passed that key commander in chief test."

This point was apparently made to disqualify Barack Obama from the No. 2 vice president job that he says he would never want and Hillary Clinton herself brought up last week and has talked about several times along with her husband but now they've decided the Illinois senator hasn't passed the commander in chief test that he's never taken and no one knows what it is anyway.

Which got us to thinking. What do you suppose a commander in chief test looks like? What do you have to know how to do to become commander in chief? And how, by the way, do we know whether Sen. Clinton has passed or even taken the commander in chief test?

Her campaign has not released Clinton's commander in chief test, which....

fits because she hasn't released her recent years' income taxes either or the vast volume of documents from her first lady days that she says constitute so many of those 35 years of valuable experience that qualify her to be commander in chief.

So the entire world is left to guess what exactly is on Hillary Clinton's commander in chief test. Which may be what her campaign wants. Because, in point of fact, if you think about it, Obama and John McCain are actually a tad bit closer to being the commander in chief since Obama leads in popular votes, states and Democratic delegates and McCain has already locked up the Republican nomination, unless Ron Paul really turns it on here in the next few weeks.

You can leave your own ideas in the Comments section below about what should be on a commander in chief test.

We'll just offer a few opening thoughts. First of all, shouldn't a commander in chief test be administered by an independent person, say, someone with the voters' interests in mind, not someone who's seeking the job of commander in chief herself and would know the answers to her own commander in chief questions?

Second, from what we've noticed about commanders in chief, there's a whole lot of things they don't have to know. For instance, they don't have to cook anymore. They don't even have to know how to open a door. There's guys and gals in nice suits with really compact machine guns under their jackets to do that.

They do have to know how to wave from a large airplane's door, both coming and going. And they've got to climb those metal steps with the eyes of the world looking for the slightest slip.

Shaking hands should be a really important part of a commander in chief test. But that's basically what modern campaigns have come down to, so after two solid years of shaking hands on the campaign trail by the time a commander in chief takes the commander in chief oath -- oh, that's another thing they need to know: how to repeat the oath after the chief justice says it first phrase by phrase -- any candidate should be in pretty good shape for the hand-shaking question.

The only tough part is at those foreign summits where you have to shake hands for, like, two solid minutes and make it look sincere for the photographers the whole time because you know they'll use the photo of that one insincere nano-second.

A commander in chief needs to know how to answer the phone when it rings, whatever the hour. And a commander in chief should know how to say, "Get me ___," whether the next word is pizza or Rumsfeld.

A commander in chief needs to know how to sign legislation with 12 members of Congress pushing and shoving for camera position behind him/her. Also a little tricky is understanding Harry Reid without a translator and knowing how to sign your name one time while using 12 pens to do it and handing them out to the eager members of Congress who will disagree with you as soon as they get outside to the cameras.

The Pentagon provides all the maps you'll need for invading other countries. And the little toy tanks and guns to mark the troop locations. You do need to bring a lot of hangers for all the championship team jerseys with your name on them.

Sadly, you do have to visit Pennsylvania and Michigan sometimes and pretend to like them. But, on the other hand, whatever you say, everyone nearby will agree with you. No more wondering if they're sincere.

Oh, and the dog. You need one of those to run across the lawn and greet you at the helicopter. But you never have to go out again and stroll with an ice cream cone or sit in a sidewalk cafe free of gawking crowds. No more of that stopping by Olive Garden on the spur of the moment and waiting for a table with that goofy flashing pager. What a relief, eh?

Your colonoscopy report will be shared with the entire world automatically. And your tax records. Your friends from second-grade will become local celebrities for making up stories about you for local TV crews. You'll never have to use a bathroom again without someone first checking all the stalls and then standing outside yours.

And at night you can look out the White House windows at those poor people passing by in their own cars with the tops down and the CDs playing. They're laughing and maybe singing because no one in the world would like to kill them. And they're going somewhere, or nowhere, just for fun.

And you'll know that, having invested years of your life campaigning and passing the commander in chief test, you'll never ever have to do that again for the rest of your natural life.

--Andrew Malcolm

Comments

[Robert S. Hoover]

Good article.

(Thank you, Robert. I enjoyed writing it.)

[Tannim]

Commander-in-Chief test:
1. Read and memorized the Art of War.
2. Served, preferably in combat.
3. Never sold out his comrades in arms.
4. Even-tempered.
5. Mentally comeptent.
6. Understands that war is the last option, not the first.
7. Smarter than the average houseplant.
8. No hole in the back for a hand, and no strings coming down from above.
9. Understands the links between economic policy and foreign policy.
10. Has the respect of the military.

The grades:

Obama: Incomplete. 5 right, 4 wrong, 1 unknown
Clinton: Fails. 4 right, 5 wrong, 2 unknown.
Bush: Fails. 1 right, 9 wrong.
McCain: Fails. 1 right, 9 wrong.
Paul: Aces. 10 right.

Of the above list, which are annointed by the MSM as the frontrunners? Which is the incumbent?

The exercises are left to the reader.

[Figgins]

1. Have some personal knowledge of what it means to send young people into harm's way. Clinton, no; Obama, no; McCain, yes.
2. Have emotional stability in a crisis. Clinton, no - remember the tears in NH; Obama, who knows?; McCain, maybe - at least he's faced life threatening danger.
3. Give no BS answers to tough questions, and don't flip-flop. Clinton, no; Obama, no; McCain, maybe - at least you get a straight answer.

[sam]

Robert S. Hoover (frist comment) got all beautiful!

[Alan]

Brilliant, thank you.

I cannot inderstand why rank and file Americans allow absolute tossers, like the Clintons to bamboozle, con and bully them.

Being naive is one thing. Being stupid is a totally different kettle of fish and criminal to boot!

The Clintons are for themselves and, no one else! Power, power and the mis use of power solely for their convenience.

I do apologise. I really should be neutral, after all I am English!

Unfortunately, the wrong person being Commander in Chief in the Oval Office, doth not just affect myself and the rest of my country detrementally, in the case of the Clintons but, wider picture, the whole world.

Time to face up America. Prove you are the biggest and the best!!:)

Instead of fighting wars all over the world. Start putting money back into your own economy.

Farmers, ranchers mid west. Manufacturing in Ohio and the northern industrial states.

I am not a pacifist, ex British RN, done my time here and there. Just think of all the finance that could be released/invested in an American universal health/care package if you were not tied up in Iraq.

Of course that be a pipe dream. No way Jose, that American vested interest will ever allow that!!:):)

We be Billionaires, now we have to find a way to be Trillionaires!::)

Again thank you. An excellent, erudite commentary.

Alan

[Jay Johnson]

Great article. I loved it ! If George W. could pass the "commander-in-chief" test, everyone with a heartbeat is qualified. Hillary made a massive blunder regarding her vote to support the invasion of Iraq. She probably just saw the way the wind was blowing (as she always does) and went with the crowd. The fact that it could be a disaster never occurred to her. Bush was controlled by Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rove. President Hillary will be controlled by polls. She has no moral compass whatsoever. She's too hawkish when Americans are war-weary.

[Shami]

What about the test of unity, test of leadership, test of motivating people or test of winning hearts and minds of people? One cannot be a commander unless he/she can command people. Obama is a far better commander by bringing people together behind him.

[David]

At the very least, the Commander in Chief should be able to read at an 8th grade level.

Obama: pass
Clinton: pass
McCain: pass
Bush: FAIL

Maybe we need a No Commander In Chief Left Behind program.

[Steve Campbell]

Tannim, it appears to me that from your list, and the voting public on more than one occasion the results speak for themselves, and that perhaps your analysis of the questions in your test for candidates and the incumbent that you are in fact wrong, I guess that means you definitely fail the test !

[Noah]

Commander-in-Chief test:

1. Had tea with the wives of world leaders.
2. Redecorated the White house.
3. Voted for the Iraq war.

Clinton 3 / 3.
McCain 1 / 3.
Obama 0 / 3.

[sams]

Clintons campaigning stragedy seems to be based on discredditing Obama instead of telling the people what it is she can offer. It seems like this whole Clinton vs. Obama thing is to divide the mass population tired of Republicans and the Iraq war. Divide the people so McCain comes out on top.

[cherrycola]

I'm suspecting that one part of the test is timed, and requires the candidate to change from pajamas to full office attire before the person calling on the Red Phone hangs up.

Hillary can do this in six rings, but I bet it would take McCain at least eleven rings because of his wartime injuries. Not sure how Obama would fare.

[Wendy Brown]

Can Howard Wolfson please share with the rest of the us what exactly the Commander-In-Chief test?

Just curious what was George W. Bush score?

[Oregon4Obama]

Holy Mother Of God...Hillary Supporters, please listen, you have to be wondering who is this person whose corner you've been in.....First she wants Obama as VP, Bill wants Obama as VP and they talk about it for days and NOW, he hasnt passed the test.....Look past her potential to be the first women prez and find she wont represent what the first women president should look or act like.....you have to see that she is trying ANYTHING to win this.....she is behind by over 100 delegates. unless she wins all the remaining states by over 20% she will never catch Obama, she needs to step down gracefully and support the democratic party....right now Obama is in the best position, by support and polls, to beat McCain......If you are really a Hillary Supporter, you would recommend she step down and go with the one in front, Barack Obama.....the republican party is loving that the dems are divided, we need Hillarys Support, but only with her stepping down and getting behind the new hope....Obama 08

[karma geddon]

Commander in Chief should be an insomniac who lifts up the phone before it scares the sleeping children.

[Adevrx]

Good article. In a nutshell - to be a good public servant, NOT a self-servant. To listen, to rationally evaluate, to make clear-headed decisions and to inspire, motivate and bring people along as opposed to forcing one's will and mandates on them. It would appear that Mr. Obama clearly is better equipped than Ms. Clinton to pass my test. He has been, and continues to be, a public servant.

[Steve]

Hello, Everyone:

The "Commander in Chief" test is a fun and funny idea and great fodder for talking, but it ignores the reality of how we select Presidents. I'd argue that we've been doing the CiC test quite well every four years. It's called, "the election." As part of their voting decision, we all decide which candidate is "best" on a wide variety of dimensions.

Why do people think that there is or should be some set of external, objective criteria for picking leaders? I think our election process is just about the best system for picking leaders any one has developed in the course of recorded human civilization.

But, if I had to play the game, I'd suggest things more technical like knowing the current defense budget, capabilities of various weapons systems, general military history, etc.

[Steve Campbell]

Having the balls to stand up for what you believe and not be bullied by the idiots around you...

Bush: Pass
McCain: Pass
Clinton: Fail
Obama: Pass

Fighting a war that NEEDS to be fought and finished properly without knee-jerk reactions...

Bush: Pass
McCain: Pass
Clinton: Fail
Obama: Fail

Straight talking, do what you say you will do...

Bush: Pass
McCain: Fail
Clinton: Fail
Obama: Fail

Doing what no-one else has the balls to do...

Bush: Pass
McCain: Pass
Clinton: Fail
Obama: Fail

[Doc Owen]

It seems to me that the ability to INSPIRE would be the best test for a Commander in Chief. If Roosevelt had lacked that ability in the 30s and 40s where would we be now?

As for experience, if not for the inexperienced John Kennedy during the Cuban Missle Crisis, would we even be here to have a discussion on the topic?

I feel America needs a HERO at this point in history-not a HELLCAT.

[A. Grant]

1. Unite the country. I can think of two candidates (republican and democrat that can't even unite their party)

2. Stately.
(throwing cheap shots isn't very stately)

3. Not letting emotion overcome right decisions
(everyone was enraged about 9/11... but everyone knows you don't make decisions that'll affect the world when you aren't thinking straight and when you're furious)

4. Maybe not running out of money while campaigning. Replenishing a campaign becuase they have mismanaged money isn't very CEOish.
(which candidate left, to date, has been the only one to run a successful campaign in this regard?)

[Marcia]

Even temperament, even when provoked
Ability to assemble a team that can work together
Loyalty to the country and its citizens above loyalty to a particular class or industry or clique
High intelligence and fast learning curve
Health and stamina

I'm not going to do scores, but I believe Obama wins on all.

[JR]

Commander in Chief test:

1. Be able to kill all bad guys using other people's kids and equipment that costs more than five average families will make in their life.

2. A competent liar who can say the "truth" in a way that transcends over 300 million degrees of ignorance (give or take).

3. Someone who can eat the flesh of enemy babies and still come home and kiss their own children and tell them not to fight or cuss at school.

4. A solid dancer.

5. Someone who has read the Prince and realizes most lives are expendable (so long as you don't know them personally).

6. Puts cable television in every household and knows in their heart that being poor is worse than being dead (unless it's somebody else's welfare baby - at which point dead must be preferable).

7. Can jump rope for an hour straight without missing a skip.

8. Has never done anything questionable in their life that can't be covered up or explained by vague forgetfullness.

9. Simple enough to quantify the world into two separate classes: Jesus's children (good) and machine gun fodder (bad) - actual behavior is irrelevant.

10. Can blow a Hubba-Bubba bubble big enough to protect America from Death and find ways to blame any breeches on those who have things we want.

[George]

Clinton's Commander in Chief test is easy:

True or False:
1) I am Barack Obama

If you answered true to the first question, you failed.

We should believe Hillary on this, I mean it's not like everyone attached to the Kosovo and Northern Ireland diplomatic situations have no memory of Hillary actually being involved in anything even remotely like she's claiming.

[John Q Public]

If there's a Commander in Chief test, why do we have to have all this political campaigning? What a waste of money, time and energy. Bring on the CinC test! No Candidate left behind!

They should just sit all the potential presidents in a room for 3 days in uncomfortable chairs and administer the CinC exam, highest score wins.

It seems to me, that it's fair after all. Each candidate should be able to pass the minimum requirements testing for CinC before even thinking of running. You can't graduate High School in many states without passing a basic proficiency exam. What's the exam for what was the most powerful position in the world? I'd like to see no CinC left behind, but they need to post their test scores.

[Tara]

I think the question of who is qualified should be left up to the writers at Saturday Night Live. They appear to know more about who is ready to pick up the phone than anyone else. They keep on writing skits about it. Live this one where Obama wins and call Hillary for advice.

http://centerline.tv/2008/03/11/another-saturday-night-live-sketch-on-hillary-and-obama-at-3-am/