Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Obama's Veep Vetting Enters New Stage

Barack Obama's vice presidential vetting process has moved into a new stage in which a larger than previously reported group of candidates is being exposed to a "deeper dig" into their backgrounds -- in the words of a source familiar with the process.

The hard vetting involves follow-ups to lingering questions about candidates' backgrounds and clarifications of their stands on issues. While the process is intensifying, the fact that the number of potential candidates still being considered is larger than generally believed, suggests that no decision is imminent, just 26 days before the opening of the Democratic National Convention.

It also runs counter to much-publicized comments by Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine Tuesday that "there has been a long list. It seems to be getting shorter."

The spate of meetings between Obama and his vetting team this week in Washington were designed to brief Obama on the loose ends that the group is chasing down concerning various candidates rather than some sort of conclusive gathering in which a choice is settled upon.

No one The Fix spoke to for this story would confirm the names being subjected to the "deeper dig." Speculation over the past 48 hours has zeroed in on three names -- Kaine, Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh and Delaware Sen. Joe Biden -- but the idea of a wider list of potential veeps suggests that names like Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd, former Sen. Sam Nunn and Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (among others) are still in the mix.

With the exception of Kaine, who seems to be on something of a media blitz of late, all of the candidates above -- and their key political people -- are saying almost nothing about where they stand in the process. The idea guiding that approach is that the more publicly a candidate declares his (or her) interest in the job, the less chance there is that person will be the pick.

That radio silence makes reporting on the veepstakes one of the most difficult challenges in political journalism. A group numbering perhaps no more than four or five insiders has the whole picture of Obama's vice presidential search while everyone else -- including many of the candidates mentioned -- is left to interpret (and re-interpret) small comments and hints dropped by those in the know.

In other words, take it all cum grano salis. And, don't worry: this will all be over soon.

By Chris Cillizza  |  July 31, 2008; 6:00 AM ET
Categories:  Veepstakes  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Wag the Blog Redux: Name that Veep
Next: FixCam: The Fix Heads to Argentina

Comments

Go here to learn what the MSM hides:
The Obama File
http://theobamafile.com/
This massive file, written by a retired, widely respected college professor is the ultimate Obama sourse of accurate information.
The information is backed up by links to Obama's own books, speeches, news articles and matters of record.
It covers his history from his African ancestors to the present with daily updates under 'Latest News' button at the bottom of the page.
It is easy to read and research. ('search' box)
If the MSM would get out of the tank for Obama and report just half of this information he would be not only taken out of the presidential race but impeached from the Senate.

.

Posted by: cyberella | August 7, 2008 5:40 PM | Report abuse

I doubt if Obama will pick Evan Bayh for his running mate, though it would be good one. The problem is Bayh is a Democrat in a strong Republican state with a Republican governor, Mitch Daniels. If an Obama/Bayh ticket should win the presidential election Senator Bayhs' seat in the US Senate would become vacant and a Republican governor would pick Bayh's replacement. I doubt Gov. Daniels would select a Democrat to fill Evan Bayhs' senate seat. This would mean one less Democrat in the Senate in January, 2009. The Senate Democrats want every seat they can win and voluntarily giving up one is not an option.

Danny L. McDaniel
Lafayette, Indiana

Posted by: Danny L. McDaniel | August 7, 2008 2:11 AM | Report abuse

The major issue of the week has been the McCain people stating clearly that Obama has been playing the RACE CARD during this year's Campaigns - from the South Carolina primary onward to this summer when Obama keeps on attempting to charge that the Republicans are "going to make people afraid of him."


NOT that the Republicans have said or done anything racist yet, HOWEVER OBAMA KEEPS ON SAYING THAT THE REPUBLICANS ARE GOING TO BE RACISTS SOON.


Obama's campaign theme now is: YOU ARE A RACIST UNTIL YOU VOTE FOR OBAMA.


In response we post these Video Clips from all the major news FOX MSNBC CNN netwoks:


CLIPS OF OBAMA PLAYING THE RACE CARD THIS YEAR IN SOUTH CAROLINA: http://tinyurl.com/6gcstl


This is absolutely incredibly AMAZING.


This short Video clip includes THE LATE TIM RUSSERT OF NBC NEWS directly calling out Obama on Obama's Playing of the RACE CARD DURING OBAMA'S CAMPAIGNING IN SOUTH CAROLINE THIS YEAR in the Primary Campaign - in a Divisive and Extremely Shameful and Negative Manner.


.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 5, 2008 9:17 AM | Report abuse

Review: Video clips of Obama playing the RACE CARD during this year's Campaign.


Video Clips from all the major netwoks:


http://tinyurl.com/6gcstl


Video clips include Tim Russert directly calling out Obama on Obama's Playing of the RACE CARD in the Campaign in a Divisive and Extremely Shameful and Negative Manner.

.
Review: Video clips of Obama playing the RACE CARD during this year's Campaign.


Video Clips from all the major netwoks:


http://tinyurl.com/6gcstl


Video clips include Tim Russert directly calling out Obama on Obama's Playing of the RACE CARD in the Campaign in a Divisive and Extremely Shameful and Negative Manner.

.
Review: Video clips of Obama playing the RACE CARD during this year's Campaign.


Video Clips from all the major netwoks:


http://tinyurl.com/6gcstl


Video clips include Tim Russert directly calling out Obama on Obama's Playing of the RACE CARD in the Campaign in a Divisive and Extremely Shameful and Negative Manner.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | August 5, 2008 8:30 AM | Report abuse

"...Republican attempts at new regs..."

WOW, you mean Repubs wanted to regulate something other than people's personal lives???

Gimme a break.

Posted by: PeixeGato | August 5, 2008 1:28 AM | Report abuse

Review: Video clips of Obama playing the RACE CARD during this year's Campaign.


Video Clips from all the major netwoks:


http://tinyurl.com/6gcstl


Video clips include Tim Russert directly calling out Obama on Obama's Playing of the RACE CARD in the Campaign in a Divisive and Extremely Shameful and Negative Manner.


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | August 4, 2008 11:08 PM | Report abuse

Excellent blog. good luck.

Posted by: Comprar Tadalafil | August 4, 2008 10:44 PM | Report abuse

Dodd? This lowlife was taking bribes from the Tan Man at Countrywide. Dodd was incharge of watching Fannie. Fannie bought all of the Tan Mans fraudulent paper. This is the biggest scandal in US history and media ignores it. Why? Cause there has been no larger greaser of the DC lobbyist scene than these carpetbaggers. There is no telling how many bad trades were done as pay back for Dem politic contributions. Raines is still a free man. Barney Frank who stopped all Republican attempts at new regs several years ago,after Raines had looted the company,is now charged with the solution? WTF is going on here. This is insanity.

Posted by: Jack | August 4, 2008 5:11 PM | Report abuse

What you really need to be asking is,"will this guy be on ticket in nov". He is coming apart like a cheap suit. With each passing day Hillary looks like the Dem candidate but alas,again the Dems have managed to give us a candidates most reasonable people are scared to death of. Algore,Lurch,Obama,Hillary.
Did Obama notice that just the mention he might be for some types of drilling hammered the oil price down $4? The Dems plan to use strategic oil is akin to the father of 7 cashing in his life insurance policy to take bungee jumping lessons. Insanity. Still no mention from the media on how Dems and Barney Frank looted Fannie and have almost destroyed the entire US financial system. Now Dems want to take over health and energy. Please. Bush may sound like a moron but guys like Barney and Obama dont appear to be very smart

Posted by: Jack | August 4, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

I think to say that Obama cannot pick any woman other than HRC is a HUGE slap in the face of women in general. There are several women would would be qualified to be VP and they should not be overlooked just because HRC lost the nomination for Pres.

There is one person who just popped into my mind as a VP choice for Obama who hasn't been mentioned by anyone. I'd be curious to hear what the negatives would be or why this person hasn't been mentioned: NC Gov. Mike Easley.

PG

Posted by: PeixeGato | August 4, 2008 1:48 PM | Report abuse


37th&OStreet was way out in front on this issue:

From today's Washington Post:


By Juliet Eilperin and Jonathan Weisman
Raising a politically-explosive issue for the first time this election, Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) campaign accused Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) this morning of invoking the specter of race in order to bolster his electoral prospects.

The charge came in reaction to comments the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee had made at three separate stops in Missouri Wednesday, where Obama suggested Republicans were trying to scare voters away from him.

"So nobody really thinks that Bush or McCain have a real answer for the challenges we face, so what they're going to try to do is make you scared of me," he told voters in Springfield. "You know, he's not patriotic enough. He's got a funny name. You know, he doesn't look like all those other Presidents on those dollar bills, you know. He's risky. That's essentially the argument they're making."

McCain campaign manager Rick Davis countered this morning with a terse but harsh statement: "Barack Obama has played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck. It's divisive, negative, shameful and wrong."

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | July 31, 2008 9:46 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 3, 2008 9:49 PM | Report abuse

@ TIC: Que huevado de leche la vaina tuya!

If McCain wants economic policy help and some help re-coralling country-club Republicans he'll pick Romney. If he needs to shore up his base, he'll pick Huckabee. If he can't stand the thought of having a VP smarter than he is, he'll pick Pawlenty. If he's looking for someone who shares his values he'll pick Reverends Ted Haggard or Pat Robertson.

Posted by: DexterManley | August 3, 2008 9:08 PM | Report abuse

If Barack Obama wants a VP who is experienced in foreign affairs, it'll be Sam Nunn. If someone who'll bring the feminists in, it's Hillary Clinton. If he wants someone with a military background, it'll be Jim Webb. If he wants a VP who he's in full agreement with and shares his values, it'll be either Louis Farrakhan or Jerimiah Wright Jr.

Posted by: tic | August 3, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Colin Powell is satan and needs to be doing triple-life in The Hague. Sam Nunn? Is that a joke or what? Joe Biden? Does Obama really need a guy who called him a "clean Negro" at the outset of the campaign whose idea of debate preparation is doing double his normal amount of crystal meth? Bayh and Sibelius? Does anyone know what they stand for besides the death penalty and the war? Kaine seems OK....but RENDELL is BEST, that is...if the country is "ready" to have a Black and a Jew on the same ticket. That that's even a question is absurd but you're in America don't forget.

Rendell's a very loyal Democrat and brings Obama all of the kind of Western PA and Ohio voters Obama needs and can keep the gendergap narrow in a lot of ways especially given the weak choices McCain has to pick from. Romney really is McCain's best choice but I think McCain has worse problems with Mittens than Obama does with HRC.

I believe Rendell's out of consideration though. So, I think Kaine or Bayh work well enough. HRC is best choice.

Posted by: DexterManley | August 3, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

Colin Powell has made it pretty clear he has no ambition to higher office (he never seemed too enthusiastic for the offices he held before, but they were "up his alley").

Russ Feingold wouldn't really bring any extra votes were he chosen. Any voter who would be drawn to him is almost certainly going to vote for Obama anyway.

Politically, HRC would clearly be the best choice. But personal chemistry is at least as important as political considerations, and it's easy to see why Obama resists choosing her.

I continue to hold with the idea that Obama really can't choose a woman without choosing HRC (it would be like buying cubic zirconium when a diamond cost the same amount).

I think Biden and Sam Nunn are figures from the past, Reed and Bayh are too boring. Tim Kaine seems a little too "talkative."

I think Obama should look to the House, or at least to other people who aren't on people's "short lists."

Posted by: Budikavlan | August 3, 2008 1:02 AM | Report abuse

Gotta love all the buzz over Obama's soon-to-be VP selection, one he says will not be based on geography or composition.
First, can we PLEASE stop all the HRC talk?!?

Whether you lose by one vote or 100,000, you lose. Hillary lost as a consequence of her mistakes and failed gambles - and because she, well, is Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Voters gazed through the disguise and saw the uncompromising, love-it-or-hate-it entity (not to mention a two-headed one with Bill always in tow).


If you were from another country and heard Hillary campaign this spring, you'd have thought SHE was the neocon. She sounded more Republican than the actual GOP nominee (who now is a mouthpiece for the Bush cronies he publicly berated just eight years ago).


There is a fine line between moving to the center of the political spectrum and selling out your progressive base. Hillary not only crossed that line, but tripped over it and never recovered. She gambled and she lost.


Look, the Clintons were great for their time, but did little - if anything - for the progressive movement.


Bill Clinton presided over a wonderful period in America. We had eight years of peace and prosperity. A balanced budget. A surplus. Low unemployment. Low gas prices. The '90s were as fruitful for the middle class as the 2000s have been for the very powerful and obscenely wealthy.


However, Bill Clinton's years were not a success in the eyes of true Democrats. Unfairly exposed or not, Bill's personal flaws forced a pathetic legacy that reads not of healthcare, jobs or security, but merely personal survival.


As much as I didn't want to admit it, as much as I campaigned for John Edwards, Obama is simply the right man for this time. He can do great things.


He can begin to lift us from the quagmire caused by an administration that will no doubt be judged by legitimate historians and objective observers as the most destructive, incompetent and deceptive in our republic's short lifespan.


First, in order to position himself to mop up mess after mess left by Bush/Cheney, Obama must survive this lengthy and nasty general election process. There are some incredibly influential people who stand to lose should Obama triumph.


These financial giants and war mongers will not give up control without a bare-knuckled fight, as evidenced by their current puppet, McCain's, violent shifts towards offshore drilling and embracing of the far-right dogma he shunned as a "maverick" for so many years.


For Obama to not only succeed, but do so convincingly, he must provide himself legitimacy and leverage to perform these tall tasks. He needs a veteran by his side to FIGHT for change - not just one who can talk about it or symbolize it by some prima facia perception like governors Tim Kaine, the presumptive favorite, or Kathleen Sebelius.


Obama is smart, tenacious and has surrounded himself with seasoned advisors. He has earned trust and endured more attacks in nine months than Bush has in eight years. Obama has shown he's able to carry the burden - and fear - of change on his own bony yet sturdy shoulders.


That said, in a running mate, Obama needs an attack dog. He needs foreign policy gravitas. He needs someone with raw guts. A politician who can talk milk and potatoes with grocery shoppers while explaining the real dangers of Pakistan to cynical crowds at the local VFW post.


We've had eight years of unchecked hubris. Why not some hubris from the left now?!?
Tim Kaine, in this regard, brings little to the table except to try and turn Virginia blue and gather up some key independents and jaded Republicans. Ditto Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh.


It's our turn, and we need somebody who has scratched and battled for change for years. That is not "same old beltway politics", that is experience FOR change and the resume to back it up.


That said, my top three picks for who would clearly be Obama's most effective campaigner AND staunch assistant executive are as follows: Joe Biden, Joe Biden and Joe Biden.


The man is passionate, experienced and noble. He single-handedly neutered Rudy Gulliani and exposed "America's Mayor" for the manipulating the fears and anxieties of the 9-11 attacks for his political gain.

Joe Biden gives Obama, not only a safety net that Bayh or Kaine would provide, but a springboard to go and do the great things that must be done in these next four turbulent years.


Any other VP choice - no matter what Obama says - is simply for geographical and/or cosmetic purposes only and will be less an asset than Biden ever would prove a liability.

- RBJ

Posted by: Rick Bruni Jr. | August 2, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

I would LOVE to see Gen Colin Powell on the ticket as VP. But he would never do it. He hates the level of scrutiny that comes with running for public office. And if the Repubs had the gall to BOO him when he gave his speach to the Repub National Convention in 1996, you can only imagine what they'd do to him if he ran with Barack Obama.

If it weren't for the fact that Rhode Island's Gov is a Repub, I would go for Sen. Jack Reed. Assuming the Gov picks the replacement Senator, we can't afford to give up ANY Senate seats.

I like Sam Nunn, though he does look a bit old and worn down when standing next to Sen Obama.

At this point, I don't think the VP pick needs to be able to "bring" a state. I just think the VP pick can't "cost" us a state. In such a scenario, the options are wide open and I'm glad its not a decision I have to be the one to make.

PG

Posted by: PeixeGato | August 2, 2008 6:13 PM | Report abuse

People need to look at who the only guy in Washington who ids getting anything done is...

that is who Obama needs standing next to him.

If the problem in Washington is the bipartisan garbage and lobbyists...(which it is) then shouldn't we go with the person who can fix that problem as his VP?

Read a newspaper over who has passed the most legislation in the past 3 months across the aisle ?

that is who Obama should choose for VP.

Posted by: dl | August 2, 2008 10:18 AM | Report abuse

how about REALLY breaking the mold of wack politics, and reach across the isle and get Gen. Colin Powell. Now there's a dream ticket.

Posted by: terry g. | August 2, 2008 5:04 AM | Report abuse

I've been saying all along that Joe Biden is the man we need vor Veep of the U.S.

He has got the foreign policy experience -- big time. He is a voice of moderation. He would be excellent ballast. He will chew up and spit out Mitt Romney in debate.

And he has a beautiful crop of white hair.

Posted by: AdrickHenry | August 1, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

HILLARY HILLARY HILLARY. MY BELIEF IS THAT SHE HAS EARNED THE RANK AND HAS THE EXPERIENCE. I HOPE THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY DOES NOT INSULT MY CONVICTION AND INTELLIGENCE BY PUTTING UP A WOMAN OTHER THAN HILLARY FOR VICE PRESIDENT...PERHAPS THEY CAN FIND A HILLARY LOOK ALIKE...PLEASE DO NOT BLAME IT ON BILL CLINTON. HE WAS AN EXCELLENT PRESIDENT AND I FOR ONE DID MUCH BETTER WHEN HE WAS IN THE WHITE HOUSE. THE DYNAMIC DUO OF OBAMMA/HILLARY IN MY OPINION SECURE THE DEMOCRATS THE WHITE HOUSE FOR THE NEXT 16 YEARS....SO WHAT'S GOING ON GUYS AND I SAY GUYS FOR A REASON. ALTHOUGH HILLARY MAY HAVE PUT 18 MILLION HOLES IN THE GLASS CEILING, I AM RUNNING OUT OF PATIENCE WAITING FOR IT TO BE SHATTERED. I DO NOT THINK THE DEMOCRATS VALUE EITHER MAY CONVICTION OR VOTE...SO SO BE IT.

Posted by: ANNE MARIE | August 1, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Oh Obama...Better hear us. David Gergen spoke the truth - your poll numbers are going nowhere if you cannot rise after a great foreign tour. So he said you, if you want to win, better choose Hillary Clinton as your running mate. He said that Hillary and Bill campaigning for Obama would be a powerful tag team indeed - one far too much for McCain to handle.

Posted by: Pete Litterman | August 1, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Раскрутка и продвижение сайтов по "белым" технологиям, оптимизация контента, продвижение в
поисковиках. Массовая рассылка по доскам объявлений и гостевым книгам. Публикация статей и сообщений в форумах
массовая рассылка по форумам гостевым книгам и доскам объявлений

Posted by: dv-seotools | August 1, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

I was wondering why more posters are not speaking about governor schweitzer. I believe Bob Graham from Florida would be an excellent choice as well. He has foreign policy experience and would put Florida in play just as much as Sam Nunn does Georgia.

Posted by: robert | August 1, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Today could be the big day for the Obama Campaign... http://www.enewsreference.wordpress.com

Posted by: eNews Reference | August 1, 2008 6:04 AM | Report abuse

Download free mp3 music

Posted by: mpcontainercom | August 1, 2008 5:43 AM | Report abuse

РЕКЛАМНОЕ АГЕНСТВО "ПРЕСТИЖ" производит : производство ароматизаторов , с вашей фирменной символикой. к празднику 8 июня -- День Социального Работника !
Производство автомобильных ароматизаторов по индивидукальному дизайну. Ароматизаторы воздуха для автомобилей, освежители воздуха для помещений. Изготовление ароматизаторов по макету заказчика.
Мы крупная компания по производству рекламных сувениров. Одним из направлений нашей деятельности является разработка дизайна и поставка автомобильных ароматизаторов с логотипом заказчика.
Сразу оговоримся - мы не производим ароматизаторы сами, а являемся эксклюзивными дистрибьюторами турецкой компании, которая и является непосредственным изготовителем.
Тем не менее, наша компания имеет для Вас ряд преимуществ, таких как:
очень конкурентные цены;
минимальный тираж - всего 1000 шт.;
индивидуальная вырубка и полноцветная печать с двух сторон входят в стоимость.
Автомобильные ароматизаторы широко используются в рекламе, т.к. находятся постоянно перед глазами адресата рекламы и тем самым продвигают вашу марку, товар или услугу. Это отличный промо-подарок!
Закажите ароматизаторы прямо здесь и получите скидку 5%
., мы также продаём: Многофункциональный инструмент , vip подарки сувениры, vip подарки,Настольные
часы, Метеостанции,Винные наборы, Шкатулки, Подарки для нефтяников,Изделия из мрамора, Из
полудрагоценных камней, Настольные наборы, Мультибрендовые наборы , Костяной фарфор,чайные
пары, сервизы, Штофы, Письменные принадлежности: Parker, Waterman. Зажигалки: Pierre Cardin,
Sarome,Colibri.Аксессуары:Givenchy,Colibri,Diplomat.Многофункциональный инструмент:
Leatherman,Victorinox, Wenger. Фонари: Mag-Lite, Inova Изготавливаем и продаём оптом ручки
Lecce Pen (Лечепен). Наносим на своём оборудовании различные виды фирменной символики
методом деколь. Продажа деколированной посуды оптом , деколь
кружек. Печать изготовление
наклеек . Делаем все виды
тампопечати .Сувениры из металла.В нашем офисе представленны подборки
сувенирной продукции по отраслям,например: Строительная У нас вы можете
заказать подарок даже Депутату государственной думы!
Многоканальный телефон в Москве: 8(495)729-57-79

Posted by: aromatizatorwww | August 1, 2008 2:54 AM | Report abuse

Why wont people let go of the primaries? Its over and done with. Hillary thought she had it in the bag and Obama beat her out. Stop beating the guy down because people on fox would make comments in poor taste about her. ITS FOX! Its not Obamas place to stand up and dis-own, distance him self, or whatever the new word this week is for EVERYTHING.

http://www.mcfail.org

Posted by: McFail | August 1, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

las lilas is the best steakhouse you will ever visit. i had the best porterhouse i have ever had there - and i have had many. yet it was not even the best steak at the table. the filet was better.

it is a haul, but you should go to the iguazu falls.

Posted by: jimmyd51esq | July 31, 2008 11:52 PM | Report abuse

"Why is Feingold not mentioned for a possible Obama VP pick?"

Duh! It's a job that requires total loyalty, but Feingold is the ultimate loose cannon.

Posted by: Hank | July 31, 2008 10:43 PM | Report abuse

What does it mean to play the race card from the bottom of the deck? How is that different from just playing the race card?

Posted by: DDAWD | July 31, 2008 10:39 PM | Report abuse

37th&OStreet was way out in front on this issue:

From today's Washington Post:


By Juliet Eilperin and Jonathan Weisman
Raising a politically-explosive issue for the first time this election, Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) campaign accused Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) this morning of invoking the specter of race in order to bolster his electoral prospects.

The charge came in reaction to comments the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee had made at three separate stops in Missouri Wednesday, where Obama suggested Republicans were trying to scare voters away from him.

"So nobody really thinks that Bush or McCain have a real answer for the challenges we face, so what they're going to try to do is make you scared of me," he told voters in Springfield. "You know, he's not patriotic enough. He's got a funny name. You know, he doesn't look like all those other Presidents on those dollar bills, you know. He's risky. That's essentially the argument they're making."

McCain campaign manager Rick Davis countered this morning with a terse but harsh statement: "Barack Obama has played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck. It's divisive, negative, shameful and wrong."


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | July 31, 2008 9:46 PM | Report abuse

37th&OStreet was way out in front on this issue:

From today's Washington Post:


By Juliet Eilperin and Jonathan Weisman
Raising a politically-explosive issue for the first time this election, Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) campaign accused Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) this morning of invoking the specter of race in order to bolster his electoral prospects.

The charge came in reaction to comments the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee had made at three separate stops in Missouri Wednesday, where Obama suggested Republicans were trying to scare voters away from him.

"So nobody really thinks that Bush or McCain have a real answer for the challenges we face, so what they're going to try to do is make you scared of me," he told voters in Springfield. "You know, he's not patriotic enough. He's got a funny name. You know, he doesn't look like all those other Presidents on those dollar bills, you know. He's risky. That's essentially the argument they're making."

McCain campaign manager Rick Davis countered this morning with a terse but harsh statement: "Barack Obama has played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck. It's divisive, negative, shameful and wrong."


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | July 31, 2008 9:46 PM | Report abuse

Real Choices-

No it's the 50% of the Dem nomination voters that are owed- she should be asked- she should refuse- but she should be asked.

Your constant and irrational hatred and accusations about her over the months do not speak well for your candidate. Find a hobby and let go- she dropped out- 2 months earlier than Saint Edward Kennedy had with more than 3 times the delegates he had. She has been a good sport. Now it's your turn.

Leon

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 9:28 PM | Report abuse

*Breaking* Obama hides his Indonesian Identity. Obama had dual citizenship with Indonesia.

http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/breaking-obama-hides-indonesian-identity-fake-birth-certificate-explained/#comments


His 1981 college trip to Pakistan, he entered on an Indonesian passport, not a U.S. passport.


Posted by: Nan | July 31, 2008 9:20 PM | Report abuse

The Hillary supporters should can their outrage that she isn't going to be VP. Vice-Presidents don't select themselves. Just because she wanted it doesn't mean it was owed to her.

Posted by: RealChoices | July 31, 2008 9:15 PM | Report abuse

37th&OStreet was way out in front on this issue:

From today's Washington Post:


By Juliet Eilperin and Jonathan Weisman
Raising a politically-explosive issue for the first time this election, Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) campaign accused Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) this morning of invoking the specter of race in order to bolster his electoral prospects.

The charge came in reaction to comments the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee had made at three separate stops in Missouri Wednesday, where Obama suggested Republicans were trying to scare voters away from him.

"So nobody really thinks that Bush or McCain have a real answer for the challenges we face, so what they're going to try to do is make you scared of me," he told voters in Springfield. "You know, he's not patriotic enough. He's got a funny name. You know, he doesn't look like all those other Presidents on those dollar bills, you know. He's risky. That's essentially the argument they're making."

McCain campaign manager Rick Davis countered this morning with a terse but harsh statement: "Barack Obama has played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck. It's divisive, negative, shameful and wrong."

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | July 31, 2008 9:11 PM | Report abuse

If McCain is on the verge of imploding as his campaign's bizarre antics would indicate, then unfortunately Obama could pick whoever the hell he wanted, Mickey Mouse even, and though no one would be pleased, it may not even matter.

Posted by: Justin | July 31, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

Looks like someone failed to vet McCain.


Looks like McCain married into the mob...

http://www.girlinshortshorts.blogspot.com/2008/02/john-mccain-and-mob.html

Compromise: (verb) To expose or make liable to danger, suspicion, or disrepute:

Can't have a compromised POTUS

End of story. End of McCain.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

Not that this (ss) has anything to do with vetting a veep!

Posted by: DCH | July 31, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

At the end of 2006 the Social Security Trust Fund surplus stood at over 2 trillion dollars. The Clinton Administration actually presided over a real budget surplus, without resorting to any anomalous accounting tricks, attested to by the fact that several hundred billion dollars of debt was paid down by 2000. Interestingly enough, the reforms were enacted during the Reagan Administration that made the Trust Fund solvent.

Posted by: DCH | July 31, 2008 6:10 PM | Report abuse

The nation was running on a surplus and that was the important thing.

Posted by: DDAWD | July 31, 2008 3:47 PM

Not really. there is that whole "lockbox" thing - you know the money that will need to be paid back eventually. too bad it has been spent. when SS payouts exceeds its income (coming soon) there will be nothing to do but raise taxes or reduce payouts. this pyramid scheme is illegal for real pension funds.

Obama's soution is to raise taxes - surprise. that's the change you are voting for. the proper solution is to retire the government from the pension business entirely. just another big program thay have completely messed up.

Posted by: kingofzouk | July 31, 2008 5:58 PM | Report abuse

As one utterly disgusted by the misogyny and wrongful bias that continues to perpetuate in the media and among some in the campaigns, I'll say this: if Obama shows that fairness is not in fact his mantra and that he is in fact not different, not brave, but just another same-old-same-old by denying Hillary and THE HALF OF DEMOCRATS THAT VOTED FOR HER the ticket, and if McCain is smart enough to put a reasonable figure like Collins or Snowe on his ticket, then this life-long Democrat, Iraq or no-Iraq, will be sorely tempted to change her tune. I am so angry at the arrogance of my Obama Democrat friends, at the dismissal of the rampant misogny, which, frankly, in the grander scheme, is a much bigger issue than Iraq. The numbers alone prove that HC is the best choice by far for a running mate. This situation is so insulting to the half of us Democrats who voted for HC. My vote is definitely not a given. And, Tim Kaine isn't going to get it.

Posted by: RY | July 31, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

please, please, please, Obama, not Biden. He's one of the leading alcohol supremacist bigots in the country.

Posted by: newageblues | July 31, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Why is Feingold not mentioned for a possible Obama VP pick? If Obama wants to cash in on the changing Washington theme, why not pick the guy who has changed campaign finance and who Obama himself worked with on ethics and lobbying reform? These guys have an established track record of already changing Washington together.

Also, he's the #2 budget hawk in the Senate (no tax and spend liberal) and sits on the Intelligence Committee (adds foreign policy cred). Judgement? Feingold is the only Senator who voted against the extremely flawed Patriot Act 1.

Posted by: deepthroat | July 31, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Another thing you people seam to forget
mr Mc Bush was pulled from sure death by a little vet nom man whitch surley saved his life hummmmmmmmm what did the wonderful war
hero do gave him a lapel pin worth $5.00
and has $100.000.00 yep one hundered million Mr Mc Bush lives to run for president the man that made this all this happen has died and mr Mc Bush didnt even
send flowers so dont tell me hes a hero he is the worste form of an american ive ever heard about yep i lost family friends in the nom war he is not fit to be this great nation,s president for just this alone But wait why did he shun this little man could it be he,s a lier he lies a lot now this little man may have been able to shed some light on the ???????????????? war hero think about this and tell me there is anyone on this sight that would not help and make sure this mans family and he would
ever wont for anything if you had $100.000.000.00 million dollars now tell me MR JOHN BUSH SHOULD BE PRESIDENT

Posted by: Randel | July 31, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Sure some stupid people here read and learn
#1 proper tire preasure will give you up to 1 to 2 miles per gallon now go figure
#2 a clean air filter will give you up to
2 miles per gallon now go figure
ill do it for you and just use one mile
on each to show you how right Obama is
simple if you get 18 miles per gallon for
every 18 gallon you buy you get one free so
if you gain a gallon for each one you keep your car up to date you will get 2 extra
miles per gallon now you get 20 miles per gallon so for every 1000 miles you drive
you will burn 50 gallons of gas 2 miles per gallon more is 100 miles 5 gallons of
gas saved $4.00 per gallon $20.00 you saved
now if everyone would do this look at the
fuel we could save Ha Ha Ha Obama gets an A
Mc Bush gets an F

Posted by: Randel | July 31, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

"Clinton's so-called "balancing of the budget" was a sham, just like both the Clintons are, since they merely cooked the books by amalgamating Social Security income as general income."

This wasn't cooking the books. This was well known.

I'm just curious why this was such a problem. Ultimately, the budget was balanced. It's just that social security wasn't a stand alone system. I'm no economist, so I might be missing some ramifications, but I really didn't see the problem. The nation was running on a surplus and that was the important thing.

Posted by: DDAWD | July 31, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Just to be fair, since I am totally non-partisan and care only for America rather than either political party, I will agree with something Zouk wrote: "Liberal [Democrat] solution to any problem - raise taxes and spend more."

Now that is a trite and mindless sentiment, but true to a large extent. It's called an attempt at "pay as you go"--though with the liberals they still spend more than they tax. Result: the national debt increases.

I'm certain Zouk will ALSO proudly proclaim the other side of the equation: Conservative [Republican] solution to any problem - give tax cuts (to some), borrow, and spend more. Result: the national debt increases, and increases, and increases.

By 1985 under Reagan, America had become the greatest debtor nation in the history of the world. Clinton's so-called "balancing of the budget" was a sham, just like both the Clintons are, since they merely cooked the books by amalgamating Social Security income as general income. Under Bush-Cheney, well, America is now in debt beyond human comprehension--to infinity and beyond.

And who have the Republicans borrowed so heavily from and hocked America to??--China, Japan, and certain Middle East countries, dubious friends to say the least. So America is totally in debt for generations to come, at least, and our debt rests largely in the hands of countries that we really should want to be controlling America.

A plague on both these parties! They've made worms-meat of America!

Posted by: RadicalPatriot | July 31, 2008 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Exxon Mobil today broke its own record for the highest-ever profit by a U.S. company, with net income this quarter rising to $11.68 billion. While Exxon officials regularly tout the company's investment in alternative energy, ABC reported today that Exxon spends only 1 percent of profits on alternative energy sources.

"They're probably spending more on the advertising than they are on the research," noted an oil analyst contacted by ABC. BP invested the most out of the big five oil companies, at 2.9 percent.

UPDATEAccording to a new study from the Center for American Progress Action Fund, their U.S. profits from the last 12 months were the equivalent to $236 from every single person with a drivers license in America.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

now that drindl is back, we can look forward to all the loony postings that usually reside over at moveon, Kos and huff. hold on to your tin foil hats.

Posted by: claudia Wrong | July 31, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse


HERSH: There was a dozen ideas proffered about how to trigger a war. The one that interested me the most was why don't we build -- we in our shipyard -- build four or five boats that look like Iranian PT boats. Put Navy seals on them with a lot of arms. And next time one of our boats goes to the Straits of Hormuz, start a shoot-up.

Might cost some lives. And it was rejected because you can't have Americans killing Americans. That's the kind of -- that's the level of stuff we're talking about. Provocation. But that was rejected.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse


Speaking at the Campus Progress journalism conference earlier this month, Seymour Hersh -- a Pulitzer-Prize winning journalist for The New Yorker -- revealed that Bush administration officials held a meeting recently in the Vice President's office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran.

In Hersh's most recent article, he reports that this meeting occurred in the wake of the overblown incident in the Strait of Hormuz, when a U.S. carrier almost shot at a few small Iranian speedboats. The "meeting took place in the Vice-President's office. 'The subject was how to create a casus belli between Tehran and Washington,'" according to one of Hersh's sources.

Interviewing Hersh during the journalism conference event, I asked him specifically about this meeting and if he could elaborate on what occurred. Hersh explained that, during the meeting in Cheney's office, an idea was considered to dress up Navy Seals as Iranians, put them on fake Iranian speedboats, and shoot at them. This idea, intended to provoke an Iran war, was ultimately rejected:

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

"Rewarding effective teachers with pay increases is an incentive to keep effective teachers."

OMG a lib finds the market effective. for teachers only, all other prices to be set by Barack himself.

you really aren't that clueless are you? do you even know one single teacher who went into the profession because they were interested in the pay? After a few years they all surely think "If I don't get at least a 5% pay raise, I'm outta here."

Liberal solution to any problem - raise taxes and spend more.

Posted by: kingofzouk | July 31, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

don't you even try to look for work anymore, zouk?

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

zoukie went to private school -- and you can see whatit did to his brain. sad case. can't get a job, lives in his mom's basement.

a good argument for public school.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

drindl - still angry, still lonely, still shrill, still kooky. In short still a liberal moonbat.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

There is no evidence that early education delivers long term sustainable benefits.

this is just another liberal grab at the nanny state and the village raising your kid. A typical liberal program at work - more money, more power, more control, no metric for success that is met.

Posted by: kingofzouk | July 31, 2008 1:50 PM | Report abuse

kingofzouk--still unemployed, still useless, still spending all day on here like an ape flinging feces.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 1:48 PM | Report abuse

"please explain exactly how altering the margins of some teachers pay is going to magically substantially change the dynamics of the students who are flunking."

Surely you're not as slow as you pretend to be. Rewarding effective teachers with pay increases is an incentive to keep effective teachers. Effective teachers improve their students' performance, which should help increase their grades. Its not a very complicated theory.

Perhaps more importantly, Senator Obama is also a proponent of improving early childhood education programs. Earlier this week David Brooks - one of the token conservatives at the NYT - wrote about how improving early childhood education programs helps kids do better in school - and thus develops a better educated workforce, which helps boost our country as a whole. His example is how the US education system did a much better job between the 50s and the 70s at educating our population - and our economy grew as a result. Since that time, our status has slipped. You ought to check out Mr Brooks' article - there are conservatives out there who aren't totally bereft of ideas. If only the McCain campaign would listen to them, we might have an interesting policy debate between the presidential candidates.

Posted by: bsimon | July 31, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

""accept all students free of charge""

you are confusing two important issues:

1 - free
2 - accept all

It is never free, it is simply paid by someone else. Universites too - PELL grants and other mechanism allow the poor to attend in just about any case.

the more prickly issue is the one of having to accept any student and this is what is the underlying cause of the public school problem - not teachers pay.

But allowing motivated students to opt out of the bad schools and permitting them to attend a better school of their choice will send the proper message. Remember that half of all students are below average and there is only so much that can be done for them. add in the faulty parenting of many and those kids don't stand a chance, no matter what you do.

But liberals want everyone to be equally miserable, except themselves. they attend private school but force the poor black kid to go to the worst schools in the city because of where they live.

Posted by: kingofzouk | July 31, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Will your story change again?

Posted by: bsimon | July 31, 2008 1:18 PM

I admit it is hard to keep up with Obama's positions. I hurt my neck with whiplash on the campaign finance thing, then the guns, then the reverand, then FISA. It seems this injury is not going to heal.

Posted by: kingofzouk | July 31, 2008 1:23 PM | Report abuse

simple simon - please explain exactly how altering the margins of some teachers pay is going to magically substantially change the dynamics of the students who are flunking. contrary to popular beilef, we have plenty of teachers who are willing to work for the decent pay they are offered. Of course it would be nice to be able to get rid of the flops, but that in itself is no solution to the public school problem.

As usual, the Libs have a magic solution which offers no promise. just like the no drilling, no nukes, no oil, no coal energy "solution". I always knew you Libs believed in Santa claus because of your tax policy, but now we need magic dust to enact other policies too.

Posted by: kingofzouk | July 31, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse

zouk writes
"but your candidate did."

First you said I said it. Now the story changes & you say Obama said it. Will your story change again?

Posted by: bsimon | July 31, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse

zouk also misrepresents the facts with
"this approach [taking public dollars away from public schools and diverting them to private schools] is exactly what has made our college and university system the best in the world - with the threat and promise of competition."

When have public dollars been diverted from public colleges & universities to private ones? There has never been a system of public colleges & universities that accept all students free of charge. At least, not in this country.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 1:14 PM | Report abuse

"Side benefit: taking his pants off will increase airflow to his brain."

Yeah, but will also increase his fertility

Posted by: DDAWD | July 31, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

zouk keeps the lie alive...
"I thought your guy was about change? yet it seems he will not change anything about the public school system."

Its odd for a guy who's so well informed to keep misrepresenting Obama's positions on the issues. I'm beginning to think its deliberate. Sen Obama has proposed that teachers' compensation be changed to a merit-based system - something that teachers' unions oppose & that Senator McCain & his likely running mate Gov Pawlenty have both endorsed.

Posted by: bsimon | July 31, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Is he trying to loook like the "reach across theaisle candidate"


sounds more like the "reach around" candidate.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

THE REAL QUESTION...

WHEN ARE THE MEDIA AND POLITICAL PANELS GOING TO VET THE NOMINEE FOR PRESIDENT, BARACK OBAMA?

There is a lot out there about him and it is basically IGNORED by the media and political panels. It is OUTRAGEOUS and totally unacceptable! This is the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES not the latest cult and the voters need to be informed to make a decision.

When did we care more about the EXPERIENCE and CHARACTER of the Vice President than the President?

American people do be afraid! Something is not right about all this! ZIG ZIGGLER for President?

Posted by: DEM now IND | July 31, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

taking public dollars away from public schools and diverting them to private schools.

Posted by: bsimon | July 31, 2008 12:50 PM

this approach is exactly what has made our college and university system the best in the world - with the threat and promise of competition. doing the opposite (aka the staus quo, spend more, hire administrators, etc) has failed the public elementary and HS school systems. I thought your guy was about change? yet it seems he will not change anything about the public school system. just more failure instead. gotta suck up to the teachers union I suppose. Is that the new politics I heard about. funny, sounds a lot like the old politics to me.

and he knows it is a failure or he would send his own kids there. But he only wants to send "your" kids there instead. It seems what is good for the goose is too good for the gander in this case.

Posted by: kingofzouk | July 31, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Can we just say that Kaine is now bending on offshore drilling.

I know we all have mixed views on this but as Biden and Dodd and Obama are fighting to show that the oil companies have thousands of miles of oil rich locations to drill that they spin is not oil friendly (which is bologne...it just doesn't have the crazy profit margins that they want to open their options to)

here is this moron Kaine...who I am hating more and more each day...
saying "well I think we should explore the possibilities of off-shore drilling"


Is he trying to loook like the "reach across theaisle candidate"

sorry but whether you call me a liberal or not...if obama picks a "pro-life" anti-gayrights" "anti-stem cell" "throw the environment out the window at 4$ a gallon and get on the oil company lobby gravy train" VP choice...

and McCain picks a Pro-choice" VP cnadidate when he himself is gay friendly and pushed with nancy reagan for Stem Cell research (kaine opposed)...

I would realize McCain is the maverick that he used to be...

I don't think it's going to happen but it scares many of us that Obama is even looking at this guy.

Posted by: dl | July 31, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Doug, perhaps it is because he really IS under consideration!

Posted by: DCH | July 31, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

I'm not surprised; it always seemed to me like the Kaine thing was a head fake, maybe a trial balloon at best. (Or maybe Kaine just loves the attention... though he could be talking himself out of the job). Just like the Novak and Romney stuff last week was a head fake from McCain.

By the way, watching the candidates in action in various settings on youtube has only reinforced my long-existing gut inclination in favor of Kathleen Sebelius. If all you've seen is the SOTU, look up some other clips of her speaking and interviewing. I found them quite convincing. There is some good commentary on Sebelius for VP over at fivethirtyeight.com if anyone is interested in joining the discussion.

Posted by: John M. | July 31, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

[]---[][]--[]--[][]---[][][][]----[]-[]-[]---[][][]--[]---[][]--[][]-[]
-[]--[][][]---[][][]--[]-[]--[][][]---[][][]---[]---[]---[]--[][][][]-[]
[]--OBAMA LEAHY '08 ---[][]--[]--[][][]--[][][]--[]-[][]--[][]--[]
--[][][]--[]--[][][]---[][]--[][]---[][][]---[][][][][]---[]-[]--[][]--
[][]--[]-[]-[][]---[][]--[][][]--[][][]--[]--[][]--[]--[][][][]--[]

I still find it discomforting to allow these pin heads at WaPo to limit the list of Veep possibilities to this limited list. The repugs got for strength... the strongest veep would be Leahy... hands down. The repugs would have gone undetected had it not been for Leahy.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | July 31, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

""I haven't said the surge is a failure. Nor have I said it has made things worse. ""

but your candidate did.

Posted by: kingofzouk | July 31, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

To the "AA Candidate":

I work in publishing, and Obama's book deal was run-of-the-mill.

Publishers often pay huge sums (1-2 million) for books based on articles editors read in the newspaper, or a magazine, etc. In the industry, Obama's 40K advance was chump change.

To "DCH":

I, too, am intrigued by Brian Schweitzer. I wonder why his name hasn't been floated more.

Posted by: Doug in NYC | July 31, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

zouk writes
"Instead he takes his wealth and directs it to his kids only, in essence, throwing up his hands and abandoning the system."

that is not at all the 'essence' of what he's doing. 'Abandoning the system' is what conservatives propose: taking public dollars away from public schools and diverting them to private schools.

Posted by: bsimon | July 31, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

No to Hillary: too many negatives among "independent voters" and--she'd make a great Supreme Court justice, on the bench for at least 20 years! I would prefer Richardson because of the extent of his experience in government, but he doesn't campaign effectively on the national level. Nunn is old news. Dodd wouldn't bring any new votes with him. Sebelius? They'd still lose Kansas. Does the process of elimination leave Biden?

Posted by: Texun | July 31, 2008 12:47 PM | Report abuse

zouk, if you have to lie about what I said in order to make your point, perhaps it is your point that is flawed.

zouk wrote
"ie the surge was a failure and made things worse and now this."

I haven't said the surge is a failure. Nor have I said it has made things worse. I have said that the surge has not accomplished what it set out to do - foster political gains by the Iraqi government. The Bush White House agrees - it assessed just last month that the Iraqi gov't has made 'satisfactory efforts' on 15 of 18 metrics set out by Bush at the outset of the surge.

There's an interesting article in the Minn Post today, where Army Chief of Staff, General Casey, is reported to agree. The title: "Gen. Casey: Surge bought time, but gains are fragile and reversible"

http://www.minnpost.com/stories/2008/07/31/2776/gen_casey_surge_bought_time_but_gains_are_fragile_and_reversible

Posted by: bsimon | July 31, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

How's about a dark horse for VP, former Gov. Bob Miller of Nevada?
He supported Clinton in the primary, but was still positive about Obama. Has a military background, and held the governor's office for 10 years (1989 -1999), longest of any governor of Nevada. I think he's well respected. He's 63.

Posted by: Verisol | July 31, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

"EXPERIENCE AND BACKGROUNDJ DO COUNT PEOPLE."

Right. Like Nixon's service in the Navy, the House, the Senate and as Vice President. Boy, that sure guaranteed resect for the Constitution, didn't it?

I'll take sound judgment anytime.

Posted by: FlownOver | July 31, 2008 12:25 PM | Report abuse

simple simon - you seem to have become a Barack apologist lately. too bad. you must have quite confusing discussions with yourself over the facts involved. you used to be reasonable but now you ignore anything that doesn't advance your cause. ie the surge was a failure and made things worse and now this.

don't you think if the Obamas were committed to public education, the best demonstration of that would be to send their own kids to public schools, participate in the PTA, be a home room mother, interact with the other neighborhood kids, attend bake sales, donate books, etc.

Instead he takes his wealth and directs it to his kids only, in essence, throwing up his hands and abandoning the system.

typical liberal. ride a bike, I'll take my fleet of limos.

Posted by: kingofzouk | July 31, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

zouk writes
"why do his own girls go to private school? Has he thrown up his hands and walked away from chicago public schools."

Taking his schools out of public schools frees up resources for other kids whose parents don't have the money for private school. If Obama were diverting public funding to private schools via vouchers he'd be the hypocrite you describe. As it stands, he is not. Choosing a private school for his own kids' educations is entirely consistent with the idea that public money should not be diverted to private schools.

Posted by: bsimon | July 31, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

I am firmly convinced that it will be Sebelius. Since Obama won't pick Hillary, he'll have to do something to shore up his standing among the many disappointed women who supported Hillary. The other candidates are all duds anyway.

Having said that I still think that an Obama-Sebelius ticket would be a loser. The name itself sounds more like a tag team from a foreign country. Most people can't even spell Sebelius. I think you need at least one candidate in a ticket with a more common anglo sounding name that average Americans can relate to (McCain-Romney, for example).

On top of all that, this election is boiling down to the lesser of two evils, and I don't believe Americans will take a chance on Obama. Despite all his charm, Obama has practically zero experience and is not getting anywhere with white America. McCain, on the other hand looks very old and tired, but he has a great deal of experience. No matter who these candidates select for their running mate, it won't matter.

As much as people want change, I don't believe they will trust Obama enough to elect him, especially with both Houses of Congress already in the hands of Democrats. America will take the safer route and go with McCain, guaranteed!

Posted by: Pixie | July 31, 2008 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Like the poster below, I too saw and heard Kaine for the first time last night on Charlie Rose.

Like MarkinAustin, I too was less than impresed with his long-winded (and frankly uninteresting and often evasive) answers to Rose's questions.

He might be "okay" politically, but at least at first hearing didn't seem to have the intellectual depth Obama is looking for in a VP. I asked my husband, "How could he turn to this man for useful advice?"

Harvard notwithstanding, Kaine seemed very "small town" to me--a quality that may or may not play well on the national stage, but really isn't what I'm personally hoping for in an Obama/ "?" presidential team.

Posted by: Julie from LA | July 31, 2008 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Another Miss for the Modelers [Chris Horner]


The hits (or rather misses) just keep on coming, in the form of observations and facts that are proving very inconvenient for James Hansen's and the rest of the IPCC gang's paranoid, hysterical, and angry advocacy for global governance, energy rationing, Kyoto, etc. Today, it is Hansen's catastrophe posterchild, Bangladesh -- which, far from being soon underwater, is actually gaining land mass rather than losing it.

It turns out that the genii at the IPCC never considered that rivers silt up. This should not be surprising: leading sea-level rise expert Nils-Axel Mörner noted that the IPCC's SLR panel is stacked with people who aren't sea-level rise experts. Possibly they are the anthropology TAs, transport-policy instructors, and others that Climate Resistance discovered among the IPCC's 2,000 "world's leading climate scientists."

So, let's review the bidding. The IPCC and the models on which it premises its version of reality are wrong on rainfall. They are wrong on GHG concentrations and behavior. Models are wrong on Antarctica, on Andean snowpack, on Bangladesh, on ocean temperatures, and wrong on the Northwest Passage. Roy Spencer's research appears to have affirmed that models are demonstrably and fatally wrong on the threshold question of climate sensitivity.

Not to worry, the U.S. government is preparing to issue a hysterical statement, on which EPA says it will base its CO2 regulations [the deadline for public comments to NOAA is August 14, everyone], claiming that at least the models are finding observations consistent with models' projections in . . . Alaska. Um, except that in April, NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory announced that the Pacific Decadal Oscillation -- which accounted for all of Alaska's warming (with a little help from the urban-heat-island effect) -- had flipped again, and cooling is in the cards.

Other than that, why, those models are perfectly wonderful tools on which to premise trillion-dollar economic decisions!

Fortunately, we have two candidates for president promising to do just that.

http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/

Lib "science" - ha ha

Posted by: al gore - your 15 min is up | July 31, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Money Changes Everything: (video name)
Super delegates are for sale, no matter who you are voting for in the Democratic general election this video is a must watch. The truth is out there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLPoV4diMjk

Posted by: Georgiapuma | July 31, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama on school choice:

[John McCain's] only proposal seems to be recycling tired rhetoric about vouchers and school choice... What I do oppose is using public money for private school vouchers. We need to focus on fixing and improving our public schools; not throwing our hands up and walking away from them.""

why do his own girls go to private school? Has he thrown up his hands and walked away from chicago public schools.

the liberal hypocrisy is breathtaking. they love to tell you waht to do, but is never applies to them.

Posted by: liberal hypocrites | July 31, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

The RNC is chuckling over Obama calling for voters to make "sure your tires are properly inflated" because "we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires."

RNC spokesman Alex Conant responds, "Obama's solution to America's energy crisis is inflating tires?! Maybe he's been out of the country too long."

Posted by: finally the answer we seek | July 31, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

It's an old point about Obama's early life experience, but when I read about the formation of the book Dreams From My Father, a thought or two similar to Robert Stacy McCain's ran across my mind.

A 28-year-old law student gets written up in the newspapers, then gets a call from a literary agent? She calls him?

The agent then signs this 28-year-old nobody -- whose only credential as an author is student law journal stuff -- with Simon & Schuster. Hello? In what alternative universe does this happen?

He misses his deadline, but that's OK, because he then gets another big contract with a $40,000 advance. At this point, Obama's story is reminding me of another popular book, The Peter Principle.

But the real killer is how, having gotten a contract based on a proposal for a book about race relations, Obama pulls a bait-and-switch, and instead delivers ... a memoir.

A memoir! Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?? Unless you led the league in RBIs and helped the Yankees win the Series, how the hell does a 28-year-old get away with selling a memoir to a major publisher for $40,000?

That reminds me, Voting to Kill is now available at fine remainder bins everywhere...


Posted by: the AA candidate | July 31, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

If the press insists on hinging on every word of Obama, can't they at least ask for clarifications and details about his sweeping proclamations? Most are still waiting for the particulars of his idea to create a shadow Pentagon of civilian aid and civil support workers funded to the same tune of $500 billion a year. That seems a big deal that the electorate should ponder? How would it function? Where would the funding come from? What would be the relationship with the Pentagon?

Posted by: vdh | July 31, 2008 12:02 PM | Report abuse

TomJ at 10:17A - this was my take about TK on Rose as my wife and I watched:
------------------------------------------
I am watching Tim Kaine on Charlie Rose. My wife and I both do not think he projects as "presidential". We had never seen him before.

Perhaps he will grow on us over time. Perhaps he is an acquired taste. Charlie is trying to keep him from free form riffing during his avoidance answer on NAFTA and D protectionism, but TK seems to insist on rambling.

He answers a question on the power of teachers unions by saying VA is educating more kids than it used to.

He is rambling on. I do not think he will grow in our estimation until he learns to answer a direct question with some semblance of a relevant answer.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | July 31, 2008 12:54 AM
--------------------
I generally agree with bsimon and optimyst.
I specifically agree with Scrivener that CD should be counted as a credible possibility. I specifically disagree with Blarg's assessment of Gen. Powell, but agree with Blarg that CP cannot run for VP as a D, or with BHO.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | July 31, 2008 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Just noticed the "handle" of the poster, "AnaList."

And I was talking about seeing D.C. out the "rear-view mirror."

Is that what you guys call "Neuro-Linguistic Programming"?

Maybe there is something to your psy-ops.

Posted by: scrivener | July 31, 2008 11:54 AM | Report abuse

Wish more time was spent checking out Obama's background AND experience: But bottom line. Experience does count so:
McCain Senator: 26 years
McCain Military 22 years

Obama Senator: 143 DAYS
Obama Military: 0 Zero

EXPERIENCE AND BACKGROUNDJ DO COUNT PEOPLE.

Posted by: Roinct | July 31, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

Sounds the the rhetoric of the spring "we have an abundance of outstanding candidates" doesn't apply to the veep selection.

I have complete faith that Barack will make the one single outstanding selection.

I love you Barack!

Obama-Caroline 2008

Posted by: Paul | July 31, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Huffington Post and other sources are reporting that "Vote Both" is shutting down, because the writing on the wall that Hillary won't be chosen as VP.

Looks like a moot point to consider Clinton.

Posted by: Sunshine | July 31, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Side benefit: taking his pants off will increase airflow to his brain.
Posted by: | July 31, 2008 11:46 AM

Standing up will take some pressure off too.

Posted by: | | July 31, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Take off your pants before you burn to death.
Posted by: | July 31, 2008 11:43 AM

Side benefit: taking his pants off will increase airflow to his brain.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

CC = Hardest working scribe inside the Beltway.

Next thing ya know he'll start hanging with the "peeps" at the local bars and joints across the river to give us the rear-mirror view!

Posted by: scrivener | July 31, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Yet the surge was and still is a failure, according to him. and any good results were credited to other inputs, not the US military.
Posted by: kingofzouk | July 31, 2008 11:40 AM


Take off your pants before you burn to death.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

Obama has repeatedly and regularly given credit to our fighting forces in Iraq for their many accomplishments and hard work.


Posted by: | July 31, 2008 11:30 AM

Yet the surge was and still is a failure, according to him. and any good results were credited to other inputs, not the US military. everyone knows this shiester won't admit his error for fear of his last bastion crumbling away - judgment, of which his is clearly suspect.

I thought one of the big complaints about bush was his failure to admit mistakes. what about big ears? his signature stance that won him the primary was a big fat error.

Posted by: kingofzouk | July 31, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Not a lone Hillary poster, but he does need to pick her if he wants to win. Obama was not my first pick out of a hoard of primary contenders, but neither was Hillary. His numbers are in single digets and they are not moving up. Caroline Kennedy may be a beloved persona, but she adds to the charges of Republican "elitism" that seperate him from voters in key states. No one is talking about Bill Richardson because that pick (and I do like Richardson and his foreign policy experience)would add no votes that he doesn't have to the ticket and cost him lots of Hillary voters who are holding their noses and voting for him at this point. The VP slot really shouldn't be as important as it has become, but because we have a divided nation we cannot afford to have a divided party. I so want a Democratic President, but I think Obama has lost himself in media adoration and no longer sees the facts about how close the race really is. He needs to paste his smile own, pick Hillary, send Bill off to handle "really foreign" nations and put her in charge of health care and social security. His staff is doing him no favors by enveloping him in a false sense of security that he no longer has to pander to the portion of the party that doesn't see him as the crown prince. If every black person turns out to vote it won't hand him the election, they make up only about 14% of the total population and their population is highest in New York, Florida, and Texas. Pick Hillary to give the women and working class a say in the election. He has the right to pick who he wants, but I think he wants most to win.

Posted by: txajohnson | July 31, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Chris, I have not always agreed with your opinions, but I must say that over these 18 months, or so, I have seen you mature as a journalist right before my eyes. You are doing a terrific job, your product reflects your objectivity and hard work. Thanks.

Posted by: AnaList | July 31, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Obama has to pick someone who can offset his lack of experience, particulary in foreign policy and maybe more importantly economic issues. This won't help his change message, but people who are voting change aren't voting McCain. Clinton would have been ideal had she not gone negative during the primaries. If Obama chooses her, he will look like a fool as the Republicans use her own words against him repeatedly for the next three months. Not to mention the Bill issue. She doesn't pass the 'do no harm' test, otherwise Obama would almost surely pick her. This does not leave him with any home-run options. Biden, Dodd or Richardson seem to fit the mold best. Biden, if he can stay on message, would seem to be the best choice, but I wouldn't be too shocked if a less talked about person with economic cred, such as Bloomburg, gets the pick.

Posted by: steve | July 31, 2008 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Obama still has trouble admitting the surge worked and will not give credit to the United States soldiers who made it a success.
-----------------------
Liar, liar, pants on fire. Obama has repeatedly and regularly given credit to our fighting forces in Iraq for their many accomplishments and hard work.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

For over four years, war critics insisted that we took our eye off Afghanistan, empowered Iran, allowed other rogue nations to run amuck and soured our allies while we were mired in an unnecessary war. But how true is all that?

The continuing violence in Afghanistan can be largely attributed to Pakistan, whose tribal wild lands serve as a safe haven for Taliban operations across the border. To the extent the war in Iraq has affected Afghanistan, it may well prove to have been positive for the U.S.: Many Afghan and Pakistani jihadists have been killed in Iraq, the war has discredited al-Qaida, and the U.S. military has gained crucial expertise on tribal counterinsurgency

Iran in the short-term may have been strengthened by a weakened Iraq, U.S. losses and acrimony over the war. Yet a constitutional Iraq of free Sunnis and Shiites may soon prove as destabilizing to Iran as Iranian subversion once was to Iraq. Nearby American troops, freed from daily fighting in Iraq, should appear to Iran as seasoned rather than exhausted. If Iraq is deemed successful rather than a quagmire, it is also likely that our allies in Europe and the surrounding region will be more likely to pressure Iran.

These shifting realities may explain both the shrill pronouncements emanating from a worried Iran and its desire for diplomatic talks with American representatives.

Other rogue nations -- North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba (not to mention al-Qaida itself) -- also do not, for all their bluster, think that or act like an impotent U.S military is mired in defeat in Iraq.


Posted by: vdh | July 31, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

unlike President Bush, Obama will not adjust his position when the facts prove he's wrong. Bush changed his tactics and instituted the surge. But Obama still has trouble admitting the surge worked and will not give credit to the United States soldiers who made it a success. Apparently, Obama would rather discount the brave actions of our fighting men and women than admit he made a mistake. He also persists with the absurd assertion that America is less safe since the war began. Will someone in the drive-by media ask Obama how a free Iraq and thousands of terrorists dead or on the run make us less safe?

Posted by: is he dumber than a 5th grader? | July 31, 2008 11:25 AM | Report abuse

Leichtman

the problem with Hillary (and I would be fine with her on the ticket far above Kaine Sibelius or Bayh)...

is not Obama supporters hating Hillary...it is a large number of independents and Republicans "hating" Hillary.

That is the problem...go look at the numbers...her ceiling is sooo low now...she brings in 18 million voters most of whom and I would say almost all...are going to be there (if history is any proof because almost as many people said they wouldn't vote for Bill C after eh won the nomination in 1992) anyway.

It is the fact that a large majority (and larger now after the primary) really will not vote for her.

They need twice that many more voters to come in to win. The voters who did not vote in the primaries... and those include a large population that ...
well her ceiling is really low...that is the problem ...not obama supporters not wanting her.

Posted by: dl | July 31, 2008 11:15 AM | Report abuse

Doug in NYC makes some good points about Richardson. If one accepts the nostrum that a VP should "do no harm" even unsubstantiated rumors are probably the kiss of death and apparently, the Lt.Gov of NM, Denish, has publicly mentioned her "discomfort" with Richardson's "touchy-feeliness." I have to admit that I am warming to Gov. Brian Schweitzer of Montana. Not because he (or any VP candidate for that manner) will bring any large number of undecided voters on board, but because choosing him would signal a very definite direction for an Obama Administration given Schweitzer's credentials on the environment.

Posted by: DCH | July 31, 2008 11:15 AM | Report abuse

It could/would be viewed as arrogant to choose a candidate with no foreign policy.

and would be used against him(I am pretty sure successfully if he did that).

Posted by: dl | July 31, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

"Interesting that the folks I have spoken with inside the O campaign know and understand that problem"

Whatever. Name one "insider."

Posted by: bondjedi | July 31, 2008 11:08 AM | Report abuse

Dodd runs second because he can't help with any swing states and doesn't have quite the veritas that the loud mouthed, sometimes messy attack dog of Biden has.

Posted by: dl | July 31, 2008 11:04 AM | Report abuse

shut up and get on board is the mantra we have heard now since January. Great message of Unity. Perhaps if some of the O supporters would do the former and show oh just a shade of decency towards their opponent's supporters that just might happen. Interesting that the folks I have spoken with inside the O campaign know and understand that problem, but just can't seem to get that message through to their vocal supporters who's hatred for Bill and Hillary and their supporters continues today.

Posted by: Leichtman | July 31, 2008 11:02 AM | Report abuse

Chris sorry not that you care but ...got a little intense on comments yesterday because I thought for sure (and so did a number of his supporters in NH and NYC) Obama was going to sell his strongest and longest supporters out, by putting Kaine on the ticket... and for someone who has seen him and been around both Barack's campaign and Mccain's campaign for a year and a half now...(NH)... it seems extremely antithetical that Obama would pick someone with Kaine's various whacky 1950's stances on some key issues.

I will say this new round of sparring between McCain and Obama tells me they are going to need to focus on Obama looking a bit more grounded...i.e. humble to his own "humanity" and recognize qualities that he doesn't have when choosing a VP...rather than picking a candidate that doesn't have those...i.e. experience.

McCain will open up a huge assault I am sure if Obama picks a candidate that is change with no substance.

A good President recognizes holes or the best qualities or brains...and fills them, brings them in or utilizes them on his team.

Barack needs to be careful of this arrogant thing sticking (and from someone who has seen him up close and personal too many times...I can tell you his pride is pretty much consciuosly kept in check...he is a smart guy he knows who he is and who he isn't...as challenging as that may be when 1000's of people are chanting for you to win and America to pick you)...

but for the sake of appearances I would guess he knows he is heading into territory that is dangerous ...opening up an opportunity to pick the "Humility choice" who happens to be the greatest resource of knowledge out of the selection.

Dodd runs second.

Posted by: dl | July 31, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

Any of these candidates would be acceptable, except for Sam Nunn. All of these beltway insiders who keep pitching Nunn are clueless to the hostility that pick would generate among the lesbian and gay community, since Nunn will be forever linked to the hated Don't Ask-Don't Tell policy of antigay discrimination in the military. Our community has neither forgotten nor forgiven his role. It would be a serious misstep for Obama to pick Nunn.

Posted by: BZ | July 31, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

A couple of things.

1) There seems to be a disproportionate focus on currently sitting US Senators. Obama would be foolish to choose a US Senator for two reasons a) John Kennedy and Warren Harding are the only two sitting US Senators elected President since the Civil War. Adding another US Senator leaves a unbalanced ticket for executive experience and b) Bayh, in particular, would likely have his seat change party because the appointment would be made by a GOP Gov. With a growing potential for a filibuster proof majority or working majority, why play with that?

Posted by: leuchtman | July 31, 2008 10:47 AM | Report abuse

"If he doesn't choose Hillary, then Obama proves to be an idiot"

So Hillary lost to an idiot? What does that make her?

Posted by: bondjedi | July 31, 2008 10:41 AM | Report abuse

To the single Clinton poster scribbling under multiple aliases, to create the illusion that there are more than a few dozen dead-enders supporting a fantasy candidacy - shut up and get on board.

There will be no Hillary in the VP slot. If there are 18 million of you (whatever), put your money where your mouths are. If each one of you gave a dollar to her, it would pull her out of her financial mismanagement, and give her no reason to keep begging from Obama's well-managed campaign.

I hope Obama picks Sebelius.

Posted by: bondjedi | July 31, 2008 10:39 AM | Report abuse

Biden. Biden. Biden.

Posted by: kelso75 | July 31, 2008 10:39 AM | Report abuse

"I think Richardson would be an excellent vice president."
great a woman hater for president and a woman molester for VP

GO for it Obama!

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Who the heck is Kaine? Richardson is a retard. Selibus is a nobody. Bahy isn't strong enough.

If he doesn't choose Hillary, then Obama proves to be an idiot, not to mention divisive, self-centered and egotistical. Can he get over himself long enough to bring the party back together? Hmm...I thought he wanted to bring us all together?? Guess not. SAME OL' POLITICS

Posted by: NO-OBAMA | July 31, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

What is it with all of these Senators for VP? That is NOT change. That is Washington as usual. Obama got to where he is by running on change, and now he might pick a Senator to be his running mate? Say it isn't so. How about somebody from the business world? Somebody who actually knows something about how things work in the real world! Think big and outside the box, Mr. Obama.

Posted by: CP | July 31, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

I think Richardson would be an excellent vice president. He's the rare candidate who can represent both change _and_ experience. The problem, though, is that he wasn't very good at being a candidate. His performance on the campaign trail was much less than stellar.

Posted by: Eric | July 31, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Kaine had his hour-long audition on Charlie Rose last night, answered all the questions which have been raised about his suitability (particularly his position on Roe v Wade) and passed the test with flying colors.

imo this is a general vetting process, not just for Veep but also for potential Cabinet members.

Posted by: Tom J | July 31, 2008 10:17 AM | Report abuse

The Obama campaign doesn't like leaks and Kaine may have shot himself in the foot by even hinting that he's in the running. That may have been part of the plan too. I personally hope Obama picks Sebelius. As for the notion that if he picks a woman, he has to pick Hillary, give me a break. If you rule out Sebelius because of her gender, that makes you a sexist. Of all the people supposedly in the running, Sebelius is the one who lines up best with Obama's message of change and his governing style. Plus, the two are friends so he doesn't have to worry about whether to trust her.

Posted by: DennyCrane | July 31, 2008 10:17 AM | Report abuse

The Fix writes
"Barack Obama's vice presidential vetting process has moved into a new stage in which a larger than previously reported group of candidates is being exposed to a "deeper dig" into their backgrounds"

After expressing surprise that the 'short list' isn't so short, The Fix goes on to repeat the list of names people have been speculating about for months. I wonder why The Fix thinks his sources are correct about who's on the list, if they've been wrong about the size of the list? My guess is that Optimyst is correct in saying "the punditry has been chasing its collective tail and that we are likely to be surprised when the details of the process and the veep choice itself emerge."

Posted by: bsimon | July 31, 2008 10:17 AM | Report abuse

BB wrote: "Virginia has an election in 2009 and the sitting governor can't be re-elected."

I'm aware of the election, but by putting the GOP in charge of the governor's seat, they become the incumbent party with the benefits that insures. I'll repeat, picking Kaine comes with plenty of risk for democrats in VA state governance.

Posted by: Optimyst | July 31, 2008 10:10 AM | Report abuse

Barack and Hillary

Posted by: KAren in Idaho | July 31, 2008 10:06 AM | Report abuse

• COLIN POWELL IS ALREADY SPOKEN FOR.
• HE'LL BE HILLARY'S VP PICK AFTER THE PUTSCH.


Now, to stave off that growing possibility...

...to restore his civil liberties bona fides...

...and to arrest John McCain's steady gain in the tracking polls...

Obama must give serious consideration to:


CHRIS DODD AND THE AUDACITY OF SAGACITY


Obama will not choose a candidate with loose lips. Nor will he pick someone who would be second-guessing his every move, someone who might prompt the hiring of a food taster. Barack won't go to the Hill.

Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius isn't nationally known and has no foreign policy chops. If Obama goes with a woman, he must go with Hillary; he won't, for the reasons alluded to above.

That leaves the obvious perfect choice: Chris Dodd. The silver-maned statesman is chairman of the Senate Banking Committee at a time of economic turmoil. He's a devoted adherent to civil liberties, an area in which Obama needs some shoring up with his disillusioned base. He's got foreign policy know-how, and he possesses the maturity and the gravitas to serve as a trusted adviser, upon whom Obama can count for unvarnished, sage advice.

And Dodd knows the workings of Washington. It is naive to think that an Obama administration won't need someone at his side who knows how to pull the levers of power.

Of course, Dodd's Washington bona fides might be the reason why the "change" candidate might take a pass on Dodd. That would be a mistake. Obama needs a "wise man." And did I forget to mention that Dodd is a devout, reformist Catholic, at a time when the party needs to attract that key segment of the electorate.

Now, a Dodd selection might cost Connecticut his Senate seat, since the governor there is a Republican. But that would have happened had Dodd's own presidential campaign succeeded. Obama badly needs someone like Dodd; it may be the only way he can win back the passionate support of those whom he has disappointed with his issue vacillations and flip-flops.

Of course, all this assumes that Hillary's probable convention putsch won't succeed.

*******************************************
Today's poll numbers provide more ammunititon to those disaffected Dems who believe that the party is going into its convention backing the wrong horse.
*******************************************

Hillary will drop some hints later today at the AFSCME convention in California. She will demand that the part standard-bearer adhere to core principles. Her performance will accelerate talk among the supers that they must change course or face the prospect of defeat in a year that should have been a Democratic cakewalk. Stay tuned.


WILL THE ELECTION EVEN COUNT? NOT WHEN
"VIGILANTE INJUSTICE SQUADS" USURP
THE RULE OF LAW ACROSS AMERICA:

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/get-political-vic-livingston-opinion-expose-state-supported-vigilante-squads-doing-domestic-terrorism
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/vigilante-injustice-organized-gang-stalking-american-gestapo-are-they-doing-hi-tech-torture
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/zap-have-you-been-targeted-directed-energy-weapon-victims-organized-gang-stalking-say-its-happening-usa-1

Posted by: scrivener | July 31, 2008 10:01 AM | Report abuse

considering Hillary got more votes than obama i would think he wants to WIN. one guarantee of this would be to put her on the ticket, if he doesn't do this he risks her delegates forcing him to (especially since she is only shy of his pledged delegate number by about 100).

he is making a big mistake not putting hillary on the ticket.

I for one, will vote for McCain if Hillary Clinton is not part of a democratic ticket.

Posted by: Jared in Philly | July 31, 2008 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Biden.

Posted by: Soonerthought.blogspot.com | July 31, 2008 9:52 AM | Report abuse

As a moderate Democratic-leaning indpendent, Evan Bayh is obviously the safest--and in my opinion--best pick, since he brings economic credibility as governor of a Rust Belt state and could help immensely in the Midwest and Ohio and Michigan. He's also a centrist Democrat who brings foreign policy experience.

Sebelius has the potential to be either an utter disaster or a brilliant pick.

Kaine is a terrible choice and Biden will drag down the ticket. Voters aren't looking for an "attack dog". They are looking for a credible executive that can bring economic change.

Obama/Bayh
or Obama/Sebelius.

The rest are no good.

Posted by: Alex C. | July 31, 2008 9:51 AM | Report abuse

It seems to me that one person not talked about enough is Sam Nunn of Georgia. Obama get's a running mate without upsetting the balance in the Senate, and Nunn has gravitas with a capital "G". And he would also put Georgia in play with perhaps just enough push to throw it in Obama's column.

Posted by: Bob | July 31, 2008 9:51 AM | Report abuse

You say "four or five insiders" are deciding this. What about the convention delegates, who have a right to vote on this? What about the 18 million voters supporting Hillary Clinton having a voice? I guess Caroline Kennedy gets a voice, but not real working-class women?

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 9:45 AM | Report abuse

The VP pick will be someone not on the radar. I am not surprised to hear the list is longer than previously reported, and I think we will have a pleasant surprise soon.

My favorite choice remains Richardson, but he is looking less likely as time passes. Biden will be great as Secretary of State, but not VP.

Posted by: Susan | July 31, 2008 9:43 AM | Report abuse

I'd guess Hagel's too far off the rez on nearly every domestic issue. He's a good man, but you don't want to spend the entire general debating your running mate.

Posted by: FlownOver | July 31, 2008 9:39 AM | Report abuse

What about Hagel?

Chuck Hagel would take all the air out of any possible slander campaign against Obama for his lack of "patriotism". Plus, Hagel would be a great surrogate in the new win-the-west strategy.

I also think Hagel would be a) a seasoned guy to have in on the kind of discussions that would come up in times of crisis b) a great help in trying to pull together the Republican votes that Barak will need to get anything important done and c) he would also be a living proof that Obama wants to practice a new across-the-aisle approach to politics.

Not a proponent of this idea but am just curious to hear others thoughts and reasoning as to why this won't happen or wouldn't be a good thing.

Posted by: Liam Shannon | July 31, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

For those who keep going on about Richardson, there has been much written and spoken about him that you probably haven't seen.

His #1 problem is that he has a reptutation for being very touchy-feely with the ladies. The absolute last thing Obama wants or needs right now.

His other problems include his sloppiness in debates (how long did it take him to figure out how to answer whether he felt homosexuality was a choice or not?).

He also doesn't project any sense of strength or fortitude when asked about using the military. He always says that he would rely on diplomacy to resolve international issues. That's great, but a future POTUS or VPOTUS has to also show that they can be resolute and tough when they need to be.

Richardson's got a great resume, but unfortunately, that's about it.

Posted by: Doug in NYC | July 31, 2008 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Optimyst - Virginia has an election in 2009 and the sitting governor can't be re-elected. Kaine won't be governor in 2010, regardless as to his VP selection.

It's a good tactical selection. Probably puts Virginia in Obama's column. If not, it's a wasted chance.

BB

Posted by: Fairlington Blade | July 31, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

Kaine is a cover for the real pick. What is this campaign about? 'change' right? Does Bayh (supporter of the war and snoozefest) really show change, or Biden (who can't keep his mouth shut for two seconds and 30+ years in the senate) represent change?

Kaine is a distraction for Obama picking Sebelius. There is nothing else that makes any sense. Kaine is talking way too much, either it was planned that way to divert attention, or he took himself out of the running for talking too much. Sebelius has a much better record as Governor than Kaine, and she is in her second term, on top of having over 20 years of elected experience.

Obama-Sebelius

I called it months ago.

Posted by: Stephen | July 31, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

Colin Powell was also an architect of the Iraq War, which killed his credibility. And he has no domestic policy experience, or experience in elective office, so he shouldn't be VP. Maybe Powell could have a position in a McCain administration, but Obama should stay away from him.

Posted by: Blarg | July 31, 2008 9:02 AM | Report abuse

And there is a weekly poll at http://www.votenic.com so see what America thinks. You Won't Believe These Results!

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 9:00 AM | Report abuse

>>>"The idea guiding that approach is that the more publicly a candidate declares his (or her) interest in the job, the less chance there is that person will be the pick."

You're right, but you don't say why greater expressions of interest tend to lower chances of getting VP.

It's simple interpersonal politics -- if you say you want something, then the giver fears that others will believe that he would be satisfying a request rather than awarding the position for presumably "correct" reasons, such as skill, competence, etc.

Saying you want a gift devalues a gift and, by extension, the giver. No giver wants what they have to give to be devalued. So, any person who wants to be VP has to preserve the value of the job -- and, paradoxically, then has to pretend like they don't want it.

Posted by: EgoNemo | July 31, 2008 8:51 AM | Report abuse

BabsinTX, you are right that Powell would be an impressive choice for any candidate--other than Obama. The problem is, running with Powell would inevitably put race front and center in the campaign--something Obama would very much like to avoid.

Posted by: dch | July 31, 2008 8:31 AM | Report abuse

How about Colin Powell for Obama's VP? Yes, two African-Americans, but Powell is older, has loads of military and foreign policy experience, and he'd be able to make the hard points about the importance of strategic planning in both areas. I think the fact that he's a Republican would reinforce Obama's message of working across party lines for the good of the country.

Posted by: BabsinTX | July 31, 2008 8:27 AM | Report abuse

There is no question that the Obama campaign is looking to overshadow any imminent running mate announcement from McCain. They have their own final three and appear to be ready at a moment's notice to make the call.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | July 31, 2008 8:26 AM | Report abuse

CHRIS DODD AND THE AUDACITY OF SAGACITY


Obama will not choose a candidate with loose lips. Nor will he pick someone who would be second-guessing his every move, someone who might prompt the hiring of a food taster. Barack won't go to the Hill.

Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius isn't nationally known and has no foreign policy chops. If Obama goes with a woman, he must go with Hillary; he won't, for the reasons alluded to above.

That leaves the obvious perfect choice: Chris Dodd. The silver-maned statesman is chairman of the Senate Banking Committee at a time of economic turmoil. He's a devoted adherent to civil liberties, an area in which Obama needs some shoring up with his disillusioned base. He's got foreign policy know-how, and he possesses the maturity and the gravitas to serve as a trusted adviser, upon whom Obama can count for unvarnished, sage advice.

And Dodd knows the workings of Washington. It is naive to think that an Obama administration won't need someone at his side who knows how to pull the levers of power.

Of course, Dodd's Washington bona fides might be the reason why the "change" candidate might take a pass on Dodd. That would be a mistake. Obama needs a "wise man." And did I forget to mention that Dodd is a devout, reformist Catholic, at a time when the party needs to attract that key segment of the electorate.

Now, a Dodd selection might cost Connecticut his Senate seat, since the governor there is a Republican. But that would have happened had Dodd's own presidential campaign succeeded. Obama badly needs someone like Dodd; it may be the only way he can win back the passionate support of those whom he has disappointed with his issue vacillations and flip-flops.

Of course, all this assumes that Hillary's probable convention putsch won't succeed. She'll drop some hints later today at the AFSCME convention in California. Stay tuned.

WILL THE ELECTION EVEN COUNT? NOT WHEN
"VIGILANTE INJUSTICE SQUADS" USURP
THE RULE OF LAW ACROSS AMERICA:

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/get-political-vic-livingston-opinion-expose-state-supported-vigilante-squads-doing-domestic-terrorism
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/vigilante-injustice-organized-gang-stalking-american-gestapo-are-they-doing-hi-tech-torture
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/zap-have-you-been-targeted-directed-energy-weapon-victims-organized-gang-stalking-say-its-happening-usa-1

Posted by: scrivener | July 31, 2008 8:17 AM | Report abuse

Out of the short list of Kaine, Biden and Bayh, selecting two of them will have serious negative effects for the democrats. Virginia would gain a governorship for the GOP heading into redistricting. And Bayh's senate seat would go to the GOP courtesy of Indiana's current GOP governor. Given the hope -- however slim -- that democrats get to 60 seats this fall, that can't be a desirable outcome.

Instead, I think one of two things is happening here. Either this is all leading to Biden so it didn't matter that the other names on the short list created problems, or that the punditry has been chasing its collective tail and that we are likely to be surprised when the details of the process and the veep choice itself emerge.

Posted by: Optimyst | July 31, 2008 7:59 AM | Report abuse

It will be interesting if the VP choice turns out NOT to be on the "list" that seems to be everywhere. I still have not heard any cogent explanation why Richardson is not on the list and that makes me think that he may just have the inside track. Obama needs someone who does not take attention away from a candidate who still has a lot of work to do to achieve the kind of recognition he'll need to carry swing states. Choosing someone whose qualifications are unimpeachable would furnish credible testimony to the judgement factor that independent voters seem to be looking for. Bill Richardson would in fact steal a lot of McCain's "thunder" although the way things are going, the thunder these days is sounding more and more like the scuffle of desperate feet heading for the door to get out before it's too late.

Posted by: DCH | July 31, 2008 7:23 AM | Report abuse

Why is no one talking about Bill Richardson??

Posted by: Phil | July 31, 2008 7:06 AM | Report abuse

Obamakaine? I hope not. Obamabayh a tad better but still wierd. Obamasebelius, wow, its bumper sticker mayhem.

Posted by: johndoug | July 31, 2008 7:04 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company