Being a fighter pilot and getting shot down is NOT a qualification for being president. Nor does it make you a hero. Serving your country honorably is worthy of respect and thanks. I think anyone willing to do so is heroic. I think it is sickening to discount someone's service to our country for political gain. However, suggesting that service in the armed forces is by itself a qualification for the office of president is laughable and silly. We've had presidents who served in the military who were not good (bush) and we've had presidents who didn't serve who were great (lincoln).

dailykos has this old post discussing in some greater detail mccain's service record. while the veracity of all the claims can be rightfully debated, one point stands out pretty clearly: Wes Clark was correct in suggesting that such experience is not the type of large scale strategic level thinking that is required of the president. While his personal courage and character shouldn't be questioned, his judgement certainly can and should be. If the 'Forrestal Fire' story has ANY element of truth to it then his judgement would be seriously under question.

I still think Mccain is just plain wrong on most of the big issues and can be defeated on that alone but I don't think it's somehow out of the question to point out that his military service (which he uses to deflect any criticism of his foreign policy platform) is not by itself a definitive qualification for office and beyond reproach simply because he was a POW.