« Please Tell Me McCain Is Not This Dumb | Main | Time Wasters »

August 27, 2008

McCain VP pick.

John Hawkins asks reich wing bloggers three questions. No, not those three questions...

...these three questions:

Out of the following VP candidates rumored to be on McCain's short list, which one DO YOU THINK HE WILL TAKE?

Out of the following VP candidates rumored to be on McCain's short list, which one WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE HIM TAKE?

Out of the following VP candidates rumored to be on McCain's short list, which one WOULD YOU LEAST LIKE TO SEE HIM TAKE?

Feel free to opine in the comments section. Grim (meanwhile) asked a good question of his own based on our exchange in the Kay Bailey Hutchison thread which I'd like to add to the mix:

Who is a credible standalone candidate for 2012, in the current field?

I await your thoughts with a keen sense of anticipation.

Posted by Cassandra at August 27, 2008 01:08 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.villainouscompany.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2349

Comments

DL Sly

To cause hate and discontent....and lob snarky commentary....and dodge incoming flying marmosets.....and.....

Blood red

0>;~}

Posted by: DL Sly at August 27, 2008 01:49 PM

Oh.........wrong questions.
My bad.
heh

Posted by: DL Sly at August 27, 2008 01:51 PM

For ease of reference, here's the list:

Carly Fiorina (Former Hewlett-Packard CEO)

Rudy Giuliani (Former Mayor of New York)

John Thune (Senator, South Dakota)

Meg Whitman (Former eBay CEO)

Kay Bailey Hutchinson (Senator, Texas)

Eric Cantor (Congressman, Virginia)

Rob Portman (Former Congressman, Ohio)

Charlie Crist (Governor, Florida)

Joe Lieberman (Senator, Connecticut)

Tom Ridge (Former Governor, Pennsylvania)

Sarah Palin (Governor, Alaska)

Tim Pawlenty (Governor, Minnesota)

Mitt Romney (Former Governor, Massachusetts)

Posted by: Grim at August 27, 2008 02:04 PM

Frankly, the only one from the list that does anything for me is Eric Cantor. The rest are about as exciting as watching paint dry.

I notice that Fred Thompson is absent from the list. Sad.

My personal pick would be John Kasich (former R-congressman from Ohio) mainly because he lives about 4 blocks from my house and it would liven up the neighborhood. So that's my choice, based solely on narcissistic self interest. Nyah.

McCain picks Tim Pawlenty.

My three questions are:
What is your name?

What is your quest?

What is the airspeed of a swallow?

But I think these three questions are more pertinent to the days' issues.

Posted by: Don Brouhaha at August 27, 2008 02:08 PM

In all honesty, none of them are very appealing to me as a Presidential pick. If 2012 is the standard, I don't want any of them. :)

Now, I can think of some people who may be free to enter politics in 2012 who are currently busy with other things: first among them, GEN James Mattis, USMC.

I don't think the political class we have today is where I want our future leadership to be drawn. There are some remarkable American leaders right now: but they're not in politics. The country needs to convince some of them to make the transition.

Posted by: Grim at August 27, 2008 02:10 PM

I am about as excited as Mr. Brouhaha seems to be. I think Kasich is a fine fellow and staunch conservative who exudes common sense, so just for sport, I'll see Mr. Kasich and raise you one Bobby Jindal... further down the road.

Without a doubt any and all can be picked over pretty well to expose positions on issues with which I can not agree, but as they say, you go to the polls with the pols you got. So as a matter of practical politicin' and keeping our collective eye on the White House, I say Mitt.

Grim has a good point in that an infusion of new blood would be, as we say down heah, mighty fine.

Posted by: bt_what-me-worry_hun at August 27, 2008 02:41 PM

Oh yeah, would that be a European swallow or an African swallow?

Unencumbered or laden with Cocos nucifera?

Posted by: bt_what-me-worry_hun at August 27, 2008 02:47 PM

They've.
Got.
Nothing.

Posted by: vanderleun at August 27, 2008 02:53 PM

So what is it you all are looking for?

Posted by: Cassandra at August 27, 2008 02:57 PM

An alien baby?

Posted by: MikeD at August 27, 2008 03:00 PM

Well, Fred Thompson was mentioned; Duncan Hunter was my top pick from the Presidential field this time around, but never made headlines (or headway). Either of them would be OK as a President if something should happen to McCain.

I just wouldn't think of the pick as being made with an eye to 2012 -- although Hunter could fill that bill. He's not an option for McCain, though, b/c he's intensely opposed to one of McCain's basic concepts, which is the need for comprehensive immigration reform.

Posted by: Grim at August 27, 2008 03:04 PM

Of those in the pool, Mitt is probably the most solid candidate to assume the position of being one heart beat away from the big chair. At least in my estimation. However, should he be selected, I suspect that there will once again be a brouhaha (nothing personal Don) made of his religion. One that will be blown all out of proportion to the size of those making the noise.

That is my primary concern with Mitt as VP, pre-election.

Posted by: bt_what-me-worry_hun at August 27, 2008 03:14 PM

"An alien baby?"
Hey babe wanna Wookie?
Wookie, wookie, wookie with me....

Posted by: chewbaca at August 27, 2008 03:16 PM

Grim - A long shot not on the list above is J.C Watts, former congressman from Oklahoma. Apparently he and McCain are pretty friendly.

Of your list, I can rule these:

Carly Fiorina - Brilliant woman and successful in business but limited national exposure or political experience. And as any business person running for office, she will be attacked as someone who laid was directly responsible for people being laid off and/or moving jobs out of the country.

Rudy Giuliani - Based on his lackluster performance as a presidential candidate, highly doubtful.

Meg Whitman - Same downsides as Carly Fiorina plus has a history of campaign donations to both parties.

Joe Lieberman - Would be a nice swipe at the Dems, however McCain needs help bringing in the Southern conservative vote, a Lieberman selection doesn't help.

Sarah Palin - Not well know, from a strong Republican state with only 3 electoral votes ... but being a woman she could bring in some disgruntled Hillary voters but I think Kay Bailey Hutchinson would be the better choice if this is a strategy.

Fred Thompson - Would be good for the Southern conservative vote, but like Giuliani was a lackluster presidential candidate ... both seemed to expect it to be handed to them just because they declared they wanted it.

There are a couple on your list I don't know much about - Rob Portman / Eric Cantor so I can't say either way.

No surprise, Romney doesn't do anything for me and he was the governor of my state!

My bet is it is one of these:

Tom Ridge - Polls have McCain behind but close in PA, Ridge might pull McCain ahead in this big electoral count state.

Kay Bailey Hutchinson - McCain has already reached out to disaffected Hillary supporters ... how better then to pick a female VP? Texas is solid Republican, but her conservative credentials may help pull in those conservatives thinking of sitting it out because they don't trust McCain.

Charlie Crist - Popular (though first term) governor of another important electoral vote state.

Posted by: Frodo at August 27, 2008 03:20 PM

Crist doesn't poll as well as Romney in Fla :p

Joe Biden's barely a blip. Mitt Romney's more of a hit. Gov. Charlie Crist should stay where he is. And Joe Lieberman should go away.

That's all according to Mason-Dixon Polling & Research's latest Florida voter survey gauging the vice presidential picks and possibilities in the presidential race.

The poll shows the race is almost dead-even: 45 percent favor Barack Obama and 44 percent favor Republican John McCain.

Obama's decision to pick Delaware Sen. Biden on Saturday as a running mate doesn't seem to have done much for the ticket. The poll shows that those who said Biden would make them either more or less inclined to vote Democrat almost canceled each other out, while 64 percent of likely voters said the pick made no difference.

Not so for Romney.

About 32 percent of respondents said they'd favor McCain if he picked Romney. That's double the number of those who said they'd be less inclined to back the ticket. Only 17 percent said they wanted Crist on the ticket.

''People like Charlie Crist where he is, in the governor's mansion. They know Romney, who campaigned hard in this state,'' said Mason-Dixon pollster Brad Coker. ``Romney looks like he gives McCain more of an edge than Biden gives Obama.''

You want linkee? Please to click name.

Posted by: Pardon my Schadenfreude at August 27, 2008 03:26 PM

I suspect that there will once again be a brouhaha (nothing personal Don) made of his religion.

That is (IMHO) the beauty of having him in the VP slot - it gives people time to get used to the idea - and him - w/out it being a central issue in the campaign.

Posted by: Pardon my Schadenfreude at August 27, 2008 03:29 PM

Frodo,

I agree with your assessment up to;

Tom Ridge - Pro-choice which is not going to help McCain with conservatives so Pa. would have to be calc'ed against that liability.

Kay Bailey Hutchinson - comprehensive immigration reform...

Charlie Crist - Crist is darned close to a democrat IMHO regarding a lot or his fiscal and social policy positions.

Just my opinions, but we are talking McCain so who knows what he will do.

Then again McCain being an obstinate sorta curmudgeon, a trait that I seem to share, maybe Mitt is the play that McCain will make with an implicit bring it on for those who would make an issue of Mitt's religion.

Given the alternative on the Dem side of the election, Mitt may be the least offensive to the largest group of those who are being courted to vote for McCain.

Posted by: bt_what-me-worry_hun at August 27, 2008 03:36 PM

Or what PmS? said...

Posted by: bt_what-me-worry_hun at August 27, 2008 03:38 PM

I would like either Joe Lieberman or Mitt Romney.

Posted by: Cricket at August 27, 2008 03:51 PM

One of the big criticisms of Romney is, of course his Mormonism. And the big stick in most peoples, uh, whatever, is polygamy.

So what about this Obama guy, and his father, and his half-brother George, and all the rest?

Bringing in Mitt might be a clever piece of political judo: Mitt is a straight shooter, and has been married to the same woman for,like +40 years. He's not polygamous. But if the media/Demo-apparatchniks bring in the , uh, polygamy issue because of Mormonism, well, right back at you! Barack's daddy was likely a Muslim polygamist (legal where he lived), but not exactly appealing to the majority of the American voting class. And there is the distinct possibility (not clear at this time) that Obama's father was married to another woman at the time he was married to BHO's mom. Wouldn't that be an interesting aspect of this?

And frankly, I hope this really doesn't become a campaign issue, because it's all just so much backwash. But if McCain brings Romney on board....? Just, hmmmm.

Posted by: Don Brouhaha at August 27, 2008 04:41 PM

J.C. Watts hasn't been vetted. He was on Hugh Hewitt last week and HH directly asked him whether he was in the running for the VP slot. Not only is he not in the running, he's not even sure who he plans to vote for in November. I like J.C. Watts but that one about knocked me off my chair.

I like Palin. Yes, she's an unknown but that might work to her advantage if you compare her with KBH.

I'm not a fan of Romney - never was. However, he's pro-life and I think it would be suicide for McCain to go with anything BUT a strong pro-life candidate (I think it would be suicide for him to go with a candidate that is not a very strong conservative). He's also already had the exposure so there would be no ground to have to make up.


As for 2012, give me Jindal. I don't know enough about Pawlenty, Crist, or many of the rest. Not impressed with Ridge - never was. Nor am I impressed with most of the rest of the names on the list. I do think that if McCain is going to win this, he HAS to pick a strong conservative. Someone who will balance out his RINOness. Otherwise, he's dead in the water.

Posted by: HomefrontSix at August 27, 2008 05:57 PM

Maybe its symptomatic of the condition of the Republican party today that there don't appear to be any solid VP contenders.

Posted by: Jeffrey at August 27, 2008 06:22 PM

*sigh*

Jeffrey, like the Democratic party (which has experience more than its share of division this year), we have our own disagreements.

I happen to think Mitt Romney is an extremely strong VP candidate. So far, every poll I've looked at agrees with me. Whatever that may be worth, we'll see. I was right when the conservative wing of our party went weak in the knees in 2000, and I was right when they did the same damned thing again in 2004. We'll see if I am right now. I trust my gut, but I'm hardly infallible and there is a lot of time before this next election. A few months ago I was saying Obama wouldn't wear well and everyone seemed to think he was invincible. The polls aren't looking so good for him, now, are they? Whether that means anything (and I freely admit it may not) remains to be seen. It is not a hopeful indicator however.

Whether or not some of my esteemed readers want to recognize reality, America doesn't elect pure conservatives or pure liberals: we elect pragmatists and compromisers who appeal to the central mass of the population who are moderate. Ranting on about "betraying principles" is a massive waste of time if you don't possess the raw demographics to elect someone who will enact your "pure" policy preferences.

And you can re-write history (and boy do people like to forget what conflicts with their prejudices, both on the left and the right) all you like, but George Bush got several bills passed that Clinton couldn't pull out, with all his 'charisma'. And that was after a bitterly contested election.

Hillary Clinton got the support she got because there are lots of folks in the Democratic party who found Obama not quite to their taste. That shows a schism not at all unlike the one in the Rethug party.

In a moment I'll tell you what I think of Grim's (or John Hawkins') list.

Posted by: Cassandra at August 27, 2008 06:54 PM

If only Democrat party loyalty translated to a belief in the loyal opposition when it came time to declare war and act on it.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at August 27, 2008 06:54 PM

Wouldn't that be a glorious thing to have and hold, Cass?

As compared to what we currently have in the Democrat party?

Posted by: Ymarsakar at August 27, 2008 06:55 PM

So what is it you all are looking for?

I'm looking for somebody that will kill America's enemies and stack them up like cordwood. That may seem rather simplistic, though.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at August 27, 2008 06:57 PM

Heheheh... Jeffery,

Might I say that's pretty funny when considering the depth of the Democratic bench from the perspective on this side of the big muddy.

"America doesn't elect pure conservatives or pure liberals: we elect pragmatists and compromisers who appeal to the central mass of the population who are moderate."
Being a nuts n bolts pragmatist I'll vouchsafe to that statement.

Posted by: bt_what-me-worry_hun at August 27, 2008 07:05 PM

Cass, do you honestly think that Conservatives are going to vote for a Mormon? Forget about whether that's politically correct or not, or that it's representative of religious bias. Do you really think that Conservatives from the Bible belt are going to like having a Mormon a heart-beat away from the Presidency?

Also, since your gut seems to be having a winnig streak, care to make a prediction about who will win in November?

Posted by: Jeffrey at August 27, 2008 07:17 PM

Conservatives in the Bible belt, aye. And I'll throw in nine, that I can count without having to remove my shoes, Southern Baptists who will, to boot.

Take that Monsieur Preconceived Notion!

Posted by: bt_careful-with-that-axe-Eugene_hun at August 27, 2008 07:22 PM

I think the problems Romney had in the Bible Belt were more to do with the fact that he ran as a Yankee businessman. That's a category with far worse associations that "Mormon" for most Southerners. :)

That said, the real problem he had was convincing Southerners that we should consider him a serious candidate. I didn't realize anyone did; I thought he was one of those regional 'favorite son' candidates, who rarely win the primary and rarely do well in general elections if they do.

As Vice President, he'd be over that barrier -- there's no question of whether or not he's a serious candidate for the office, as he's one of only two, one of whom will definitely win. So it's just a question of, do you want him more than Joe Biden?

Posted by: Grim at August 27, 2008 07:24 PM

"As candidate for Vice President," I meant to say; although, as Cass wants a candidate who can run in 2012, his standing as actual VP would also put him over that barrier then.

That said, I would really prefer to see one of our current military leaders run in 2012. I don't care which party he picks, I'd vote for Mattis in preference to anyone. If Petraeus wanted to run, again, he can choose the party he wants or start his own.

Posted by: Grim at August 27, 2008 07:26 PM

I've been looking around for someone totally off the map but brings experience to the table. If you want a woman on the ticket.

Linda Lingle: Governor of Hawaii since 2002.

Strong party background, knows her way around a campaign.

Posted by: Allen at August 27, 2008 07:30 PM

Jeffrey won't vote for the Mormon, but does that then logically mean that conservatives won't?

That said, the real problem he had was convincing Southerners that we should consider him a serious candidate.

It may be hard to get people's attention when the two Senators from the state that you are a governor of, are John Kerry and Ted Ale Kennedy.

Particularly when those people are Southerners.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at August 27, 2008 08:32 PM

It may be why he got attacked for flip flopping on abortion or something. Cause people knew, insiders that is, that if Southerners got too much of a whiff that Mitt was like his state's senator, it may preclude any real attempt to get to know the guy or his positions.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at August 27, 2008 08:34 PM

That was, indeed a problem -- although I wish you wouldn't take the name of Ale in vain. :)

Posted by: Grim at August 27, 2008 08:34 PM

I was thinking up Al Bundy to begin with, actually. It was that Married with Children's reference you made, Grim.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at August 27, 2008 09:26 PM

Ah, yes.

"Don't tax beer."

Posted by: Grim at August 27, 2008 09:27 PM

Jeffrey, I think it is still far too early and close to call yet.

I want to see how the candidates handle themselves in the debates. That will be key.

I will say this: so far, despite all the hype, Obama keeps falling slightly short and that trend has only been exacerbated by increased exposure. He hasn't fallen disastrously short -- just slightly. But in this close a race that may well be fatal. He lost the overwhelming majority of the last series of primaries - even ones he'd been predicted to win. A strong candidate would have crushed Hillary.

Obamajust doesn't project strength and that's very bad because even liberals want that in a man (or a President). When people ask (in polls) "Do you like Obama?", sure, the answer is 'yes'. But that doesn't automatically translate into trusting him with the Presidency. That's his weakness. However I wouldn't sell him short.

McCain is less likeable, and since the press refuse to give him anything approaching even coverage people don't tend to find out how personable he can be. But what he does do - credibly - is project strength. And humor, too. Focus group after focus group end up liking the guy if they can get past the media wall. But how many will get past it?

The YouTube campaign has been brilliant - he figured out how to do an end run around the MSM.

The debates will be important, I think.

Posted by: Cassandra at August 27, 2008 09:43 PM

However I wouldn't sell him short.

Obama's got ruthlessness. That can carry you a long way, Cass. Even if it means dragging everybody else's corpse along with you.

Focus group after focus group end up liking the guy if they can get past the media wall.

It is nice that McCain is very focused and decisive in his debate answers. Bush never seemed that way. He never seemed to just answer a question and be done with it, he was always explaining, elaborating, or what not. Except that little moment after 9/11 when he said "bring it on" and what not. Those were decisive moments and those were the moments that it was crucial for the Left to crucify him on. If Bush could be made to recant those phrases, it would make him look far far weaker and thus less popular.

However, given McCain's Senate recorder, I do not truly believe McCain is that decisive in closed debate deal making behind the door sessions.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at August 27, 2008 09:46 PM

I am a Mormon in the south and so far, no one has asked me how many wives my husband has, or about John Smith and his golden bible, or the Angel Moroni. They are more interested in the Precious, why I homeschool (it is far preferable to have one's child in either the local Christian private school or charter school) and when can I start attending ________ church's meetings.

I am not complaining. As to the polygamy thing, oh well. Better to be up front with it and look people in the eye and say 'Yes, we did practice plural marriage and it was outlawed over 100 years ago. There are many books that deal adequately with the subject; please check your local library.'

Then move on to what is relevant.

Hey, you think that is why Obama won't show his birth cert? Because maybe his parents weren't lawfully wedded?

Not that it matters...but that is intriguing...

Posted by: Cricket at August 28, 2008 12:57 AM

Doesn't project strength? How well has that worked for the past 8 years? I'd say that's one of the least important considerations. This nation's problems aren't a result of a lack of a projection of strength by the Chief Executive.

Cricket, Obama's birth certificate is available for viewing at factcheck.org. http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

Posted by: Jeffrey at August 28, 2008 01:23 AM

FactCheck-dot-org isn't exactly a disinterested party in the ferfluffle:

FactCheck-dot-org is an Annenberg Foundation project.

The Chicago Annenberg Challenge is also an Annenberg Foundation project.

Barry was the first Chairman of the Board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge.

Posted by: BillT at August 28, 2008 03:27 AM

Personally, I find it more interesting that the Field ArtHillary bunch has filed suit claiming Obie is ineligible because he received *Indonesian* citizenship when his mother remarried and his step-father adopted him -- and Obie has never filed for re-instatement as a US citizen.

http://www.stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/08/21/obama-is-a-us-citizen/

Wheels within wheels...

Posted by: BillT at August 28, 2008 03:39 AM

I'd say that's one of the least important considerations.

It is much more important to present the illusion of strength and competency. That way when things go bad, only other people have to die for mistakes made. And since mistakes can't be corrected on this level, we just go back to basics like economy and getting more votes.

It is only a projection of weakness that allows people to come together in harmony and cooperation. This strength thing in Iraq and Afghanistan is making people uncomfortable and vicious.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at August 28, 2008 03:52 AM

So what is it you all are looking for?

I'm with Ymar on this one - I want someone who will walk softly and carry a very big stick. Preferably one that goes BOOM.

Allen ~ Lingle? Seriously? She's STRONGLY pro-choice, wants to outlaw the death penalty, is against vouchers and school choice, wants to throw MORE money at education, and has created a wonderful $700million+ surplus here in Hawaii on the backs of tax payers. Yet our roads and our schools suck (for lack of a better term) and our airport looks like something you would expect to fly into in a 3rd world country. NO THANKS.


As for Romney, I'd much rather have a Mormon in the VP slot than Barrack Obama and all of his baggage in the Oval Office. I am pretty sure I'm not the only

Posted by: HomefrontSix at August 28, 2008 03:54 AM

So what is it you all are looking for?

I'm with Ymar on this one - I want someone who will walk softly and carry a very big stick. Preferably one that goes BOOM.

Allen ~ Lingle? Seriously? She's STRONGLY pro-choice, wants to outlaw the death penalty, is against vouchers and school choice, wants to throw MORE money at education, and has created a wonderful $700million+ surplus here in Hawaii on the backs of tax payers. Yet our roads and our schools suck (for lack of a better term) and our airport looks like something you would expect to fly into in a 3rd world country. NO THANKS.


As for Romney, I'd much rather have a Mormon in the VP slot than Barrack Obama and all of his baggage in the Oval Office.

Posted by: HomefrontSix at August 28, 2008 03:55 AM

And HF6 is *adamant* on those three points...

Posted by: BillT at August 28, 2008 04:16 AM

Well alrighty then, HF6 sold me! =;^}

Posted by: bt_what-me-worry_hun at August 28, 2008 05:49 AM

How much did she get for you? And did Walking Boss get her cut?

Inquiring minds.

Posted by: BillT at August 28, 2008 07:27 AM

Like I know? I'm just a slab of ham hangin' around in the smoke house. =8^}

Posted by: bt_what-me-worry_hun at August 28, 2008 07:49 AM

You know, BillT, what you say about Hillary is intriguing, especially when she was the First Lady. Wasn't it a standard Hillary tactic to investigate people via their FBI records? Of course, part of that file would be any travel, passport stuff, etc...but if B was born in Hawaii, which is a state, and his mother held US citizenship at the time, then he is a defacto US citizen by birth, courtesy of his mother and birthplace, which, he can't renounce until he is of age.

Soooooo if his MOTHER received Indonesian citizenship, and she declared for him as a minor, then at 18 he has to declare his status, and I don't think dual citizenship is allowed unless the dualee was born overseas.

Interesting interesting...

Of course, any INS attorney types here could shed some light on this, right?

IOW, if I am wrong, feel free to correct me...like I noticed people correcting me about Meeshell O attending Hahvahd instead of Princeton....

Posted by: Cricket at August 28, 2008 08:40 AM

So Palin and Jindal aren't experienced enough? That's what advisors are for. Sure it would be nice if they had more experience, but obviously we need them NOW! Either of them bring so much to the table.

Posted by: nan at August 28, 2008 08:44 AM

...then at 18 he has to declare his status...

I believe it's age 21 for both Indonesia and Kenya, but since Barry didn't live in either of those places for the requisite five years, it's a non-issue.

What I found so interesting is that a Dem *lawyer*, who certainly has access to the State Department's pronouncements, would institute the lawsuit on such flimsy grounds and that a judge wouldn't toss it right out.

Then, again, that stuff *does* go on all the time, duddenit?

Posted by: BillT at August 28, 2008 09:04 AM

Mike Huckabee is the man for the job and it is remarkable to me that he is never mentioned. I hope McCain surprises everyone and chooses the man America really wants - Mike Huckabee

Posted by: mary at August 28, 2008 10:03 AM

Personally, I want Bobby Jindal as VP. I WOULD say Fred Thompson, but the man needs (and has earned) some rest. Jindal would make a great choice, but I will definately take the argument he needs a few more years seasoning before stepping up national. I DON'T want to see him pull an Obama where he peaks too early.

And by the by... I do believe Obama made a strategic mistake by running so early. Had he waited till 2012 or 2016 (if a Democrat won in 08) he'd have been a MUCH more formidable candidate than he is now. The experience thing, as much as the Democrats want to ignore/cover it up IS a big deal.

Posted by: MikeD at August 28, 2008 10:38 AM

"Wasn't it a standard Hillary tactic to investigate people via their FBI records?"
Actually I did the investigations on my own initiative...

I would have returned the files sooner had I not forgotten to calculate time dilation into my itinerary. Unfortunately, when I returned, the only option available to me was to teleport all the FBI files to Hillary's nightstand.

She had nothing to do with any of it... honest Wookie!

Posted by: chewbaca at August 28, 2008 11:05 AM

My sources tell me that Romney has suddenly received additional body guards that are on the government payroll ... not sure how good the source is as he/she is not in the Romney inner circle nor works for the fed.

Posted by: Frodo at August 28, 2008 11:45 AM

A lot of hate/fear mongers have already made their closed minds up already. All they can do now is blog/flame to boards with ignorant rants that go beyond silly sarcasm. Our country is in the trenches and the moron over there wants to link Obama/Biden with Bin laden or turn his conception and birth into something sordid.

As a conservative, I think McCain has a place in Washington, he has done much as an Independent, I didn't mind him turning Republican, I'd hope he would represent what he used to stand for, but it was a disappointment to see that wasn't so. I cannot even recognize the republican party of today, because it has been taken over by right wing religious extremists, fearful klansfolk and their elk. John McCain feels he has to connect to these people and cater to the loyal Bushies who have surrounded his camp. No, he is not the one to lead this nation out of yolk of the declining middle-class. China and Germany are leading the way in goods and productivity. India is answering our techlines. Start up companies CEO's can't get health insurance for themselves much less their workers. Home owners and working couples need full health/dental benefits so they don't get swamped in medical bills.

Obama & Biden is the right choice at the right time.

Posted by: Nina at August 28, 2008 11:47 AM

Typical left wing rant, instead of talking about problems and solution they use Move On rhetoric : "right wing religious extremists, fearful klansfolk and their elk"

I am conservative, but I do not , repeat do not own an elk.

Posted by: Frodo at August 28, 2008 11:55 AM

Nina, you're a conservative as much as I am a socialist. But nice try.

Posted by: MikeD at August 28, 2008 11:59 AM

Elk.. ahhh a wapiti by any other name...

I know they're good eating, but I had no idea that they are interested in politics.

In the future, I suppose that I had better check their party affiliation before I hunt them.

Posted by: bt_careful-with-that-axe-Eugene_hun at August 28, 2008 12:07 PM

Now, now, now.

You know that she meant "ilk", not "elk".

As a bitter gun-clinging, right wing religious zealot, klan-folk sympathizer with an already closed mind, I can only say "Right On! Nina!"

Having actually been to China once upon a time, I can only say that I dearly hope that we do NOT emulate the Chinese. They are nice people as individuals, but they have some really HUGE problems in their society. And despite what you may hear, most Chinese are pretty poor compared to the average American. Their GDP, while it has grown immensely over the last 20 years, is still half of the US, with five times the population.
Their per capita income is then roughly 1/10 that of the average American.

Germany has a rather stagnant annual growth (on average) compared to the US. Unemployment is higher there, also.

Posted by: Don Brouhaha at August 28, 2008 12:46 PM

Yes, manufacturing companies move there because they have a seemingly endless supply of man power at a low cost ... no unions, little or no environmental restrictions, a government that cooperates with them as opposed to deamonize them (read Democratic party platform on the evil big corporations) and burying them in red tape ... redoing NAFTA, and bringing hope for change isn't going to change any of that.

Posted by: Frodo at August 28, 2008 01:01 PM

I lived in China with my wife in 2000-1. People go to Beijing, they go to Shanghai, they go on some tours, and they say: "Wow, look at this."

Go out into the country -- even to travel by land to one of their Economic and Technical Development Zones, but especially if you can just get out and wander on foot for a while. You'll find a degree of poverty that those who've never left America can't even imagine.

Posted by: Grim at August 28, 2008 01:22 PM

Looks like Cass has borrowed John's echo chamber.


As for the points I made, I LIVE with the Lingle Legacy thankyouverymuch. I think she's as much of a RINO as McCain and the 2 of them on the ticket would be the same as electing a Dem to the office. Hell, you might as well go with Lieberman at that point.


And yes, elk is quite yummy. I like moose better.

Posted by: HomefrontSix at August 28, 2008 01:27 PM

It says a lot about a country when the national government mandates a one child policy (complete with penalties, should you "choose" to have more than one baby).

I find it beyond amusing that anyone in America, the bastion of individuality and reproductive "choice", would speak of emulating China :p

Posted by: Cassandra at August 28, 2008 01:50 PM

It is much more important to present the illusion of strength and competency. That way when things go bad, only other people have to die for mistakes made. And since mistakes can't be corrected on this level, we just go back to basics like economy and getting more votes.

Projecting weakness on an international level only invites aggression. When Osama bin Laden originally declared war on the U.S., he had nothing but contempt for us due to our serial folding in response to acts of terror - his analogy of the strong vs. weak horse was quite apt.

It is only a projection of weakness that allows people to come together in harmony and cooperation.

WTF? Of the world's major armies, few are being fielded by nations with democratic governments anymore. You might care to examine the future implications of this inescapable fact in light of the also inescapable fact that none of these nations have shown themselves to be respecters of even the most elementary human rights. Placing one-sided might behind autocratic governments which fail to guarantee basic freedoms or respect human rights doesn't strike me as the recipe for global "harmony and cooperation" unless of course you trust that that wolf at the door (who doesn't even guarantee its own citizens the most basic freedoms) will inexplicably respect your rights or your way of life.

This strength thing in Iraq and Afghanistan is making people uncomfortable and vicious.

And the solution to that is for the democratic nations of the world to stand down? The words "uncomfortable and vicious" may come to have an entirely different meaning, and far sooner than you might care for. But then maybe this is the solution: let the U.S. stick its head into the sand and allow the rest of the world to go hang. Then they can decide just who is the greatest danger to world peace.

You'll excuse me if I watch from the comfort of my deserted island in the Pacific.

*grabbing the popcorn from Bill and retreating to my agrarian utopia*

Posted by: Cassandra at August 28, 2008 02:03 PM

Welcome to the island. Would you like a drink? And if so, what color umbrella would you like?

Posted by: HomefrontSix at August 28, 2008 02:04 PM

Speaking of Obama's admiration for China ... if he can get reporters arrested while just a candidate, imagine what he will do if he gets elected!

ABC Reporter Arrested in Denver Taking Pictures of Senators, Big Donors
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Conventions/story?id=5668622

Check out the video of the cop pushing the reporter into the street into traffic and then accusing him of blocking traffic!

Posted by: Frodo at August 28, 2008 02:14 PM

Hey! Wait for me...

Is there room for my new wapiti friend? He's says he's a libitarian with strong conservative principles on trade and defense?
[whispers - just in case our new totalitarian overlords end free markets and we wind up with soup and bread lines]

Posted by: bt_what-me-worry_hun at August 28, 2008 02:17 PM

Blue, of course! :)

Though that's not my favorite color.

Posted by: Cassandra at August 28, 2008 02:19 PM

China and Germany are leading the way in goods and productivity.

Obamanation Talking Point Alert!

http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2008/08/did-obama-just.html

Posted by: BillT at August 28, 2008 02:20 PM

No Blue Hawaiians for you!

Posted by: HomefrontSix at August 28, 2008 02:32 PM

Moose can't spell. look like Elk or Elk buddy can't spell either. Is Libertarian.

HIRE SPELL CHECKER, CHEAP CAPITALIST PIG!

Posted by: Boris Badenov at August 28, 2008 02:38 PM

I never knew that klansfolk had elk. Huh. Learn something new every day.

Posted by: HomefrontSix at August 28, 2008 02:51 PM

Elk is actually employed as Librarian.

Squirrel works the stacks with moose.

Report to Gulag -- bring extra socks...

Posted by: Ivan TB Alawnovitch at August 28, 2008 02:55 PM

Moose and Squirrel ran rings around the Communist spies Boris and Natasha, so is the vast right wing conspiracy counting on elks to outsmart the liberal God of hope and change?

Posted by: Frodo at August 28, 2008 03:32 PM

In New Jersey, one vote from an elk negates the votes of 300 deceased Hudson County Democrats...

Posted by: BillT at August 28, 2008 05:40 PM

I find it beyond amusing that anyone in America, the bastion of individuality and reproductive "choice", would speak of emulating China :p

Posted by: Cassandra at August 28, 2008 01:50 PM

Oppression is fun and progressive, up until the point where your back is under the boot, Cass. Then it starts becoming mean, and we can't have that in our utopia, now can we.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at August 28, 2008 05:41 PM

I want someone who will walk softly and carry a very big stick.

In case people hadn't noticed, that is an assassin or footpad depending on your preferences.

Assassins walk softly in order to obtain stealth and they carry a big stick because they can hide stuff inside of that stick while using it as a crutch and disguise prop.

Footpads just carry sticks to beat people up and get money.

Either way, that is the mentality one needs to have when one must fight goons and thugs like Putin and Amanie.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at August 28, 2008 05:44 PM

Their GDP, while it has grown immensely over the last 20 years, is still half of the US, with five times the population.

Last time I checked China’s GDP was 1 trillion dollars compared to the US’s 11-14 trillion GDP. Unless you are talking about China’s PPP compared to the US’s GDP.


Cass, surely you suspected why I wrote that comment you recently replied to... right? ; )

Posted by: Ymarsakar at August 28, 2008 05:55 PM

McCain should pick Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska. She may be the only pick that brings all he needs to win.

I have been on the fence leaning towards using the write in vote option come November. However, if McCain picks Palin for VP, I will vote the McCain-Palin Ticket.

I watched several interviews with Palin on YouTube. She is an amazing person who gives straight answers and makes solid eye contact. Speaking of eyes, she has the spark of enthusiasm in hers.

Sarah Palin knew at 9 weeks gestation that her 5th child had down syndrome. There was never a question for her or her husband. She carried and gave birth to her beautiful baby boy. That's real Pro-Life in action.

Palin is from common roots. Her parents are teachers, her husband a commercial fisherman, her son a U.S. Army foot soldier, and she is a lifelong member of the NRA. That appeals to the average, hard working American.

She stood up to the party elite and Sen. Stephens over his earmark for the "bridge to nowhere". She will bring that strength and integrity to the ticket as VP.

There are millions of disaffected Cinton followers, mostly women, who are looking for an option. Palin will draw millions of those voters. And she is really Catholic, as opposed to Biden's pro-choice catholic stand. She will draw Catholics looking for a viable option.

Palin represents the future of Republicans and conservatives. She wears that mantle well.

Sadly, McCain sounds a lot like Claude Raines in Casablanca "Round up the usual suspects".

Hopefully McCain will look beyond the usual suspects and make the smart choice - Sarah Palin.

Any of the "usual suspects" would be a disaster. Carly Fiorina got drummed out of HP as arrogant, a poor leader, and impossible to work with. Kay Baily Hutchinson is a Beltway insider and almost as old as McCain.Meg Whitman has no political experience. Lieberman would sink the Republican party for the next 25 years.

Posted by: Frank Herrmann at August 28, 2008 09:23 PM

Look harder; from CIA Factbook (online):

Rank Country GDP (purchasing power parity) - Date of Information

1 World $ 65,610,000,000,000 (2007 est.)

2 European Union $ 14,380,000,000,000 (2007 est.)

3 United States $ 13,840,000,000,000 (2007 est.)

4 China $ 6,991,000,000,000 (2007 est. )

So yeah, the GDP of the PRC is about 1/2 that of the USA.

Posted by: Don Brouhaha at August 28, 2008 10:53 PM

So yeah, the GDP of the PRC is about 1/2 that of the USA.

That says it is the purchasing power parity, the PPP, which is not the same as the Gross National Domestic Product.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at August 28, 2008 11:12 PM

It's due to Chinese manipulation of their currency market value. No other nation has such an inflated PPP compared to their actual GDP.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at August 28, 2008 11:15 PM

I was aware of Palin, but the more I read, the more I like...

And as I prepared my latest cup-o-grog this am. I overheard the speculation that Pawlenty is not, Romney is not, Palin may be... And Karl T.M.B. Rove was sing Palin's praise on the talkin heads Fox tube.

That Rove would endorse her so heartily, thereby driving those on the other side of the divide to conniption fits if she were to be selected, can only be a plus.

Posted by: bthun at August 29, 2008 09:03 AM

According to Fox, it's Palin! The game's afoot!

Posted by: bthun-It's-Palin! at August 29, 2008 10:36 AM

Interesting, I'm not a political analysist, I only play one on the internet, but I think Sarah Palin is a good choice ... experience as a governor, smart and may draw some disgruntled Hillary supporters.

Posted by: Frodo at August 29, 2008 10:42 AM

Sarah capitalizes on Barack's equally low experience factor.
How can they crticize her 'lack of experience' when BHO is in the same boat? How can they criticized McCain for being old when Biden is just as old and has been in the Senate longer?
As Nelson would say: "Ha - ha!"

She is also pretty charismatic, from my limited viewings of her. Maybe I should get in my car and boogie on down I-70 to Dayton to take it all in? Could be good fun.

Posted by: Don Brouhaha at August 29, 2008 10:49 AM

Heh, I can't even play one on the intertubes, but McCain-Palin IMHO is a powerful ticket. Particularly when contrasted against Mr. BO and Mr. Joe. Yo ho ho!

Posted by: bthun at August 29, 2008 10:50 AM

Yes, she lack national exposure and foreign policy experience, but brings in a history as a reformer as a mayor and even went against her own party to expose corruption in Alaska (which may explain why the so called Maverick McCain like her) ... another plus for me is her oldest son is in the Army and will deploy to Iraq next month.

Posted by: Frodo at August 29, 2008 10:56 AM

Good pick up, Master Frodo. McCain's son served in the Marines in Iraq (other, older son at Annapolis), and Palin's son in the Army, on the way for a tour in the sandbox.

Chickenhawks? Chickenhawks? I don't see no steenkin' chicken hawks here!

I think this choice will goose more than a few people. I'm glad I was wrong about him picking Pawlenty! :)

Posted by: Don Brouhaha at August 29, 2008 11:23 AM

Blacks only vote for Obama because he is black. Woman are more complex than that. They will not vote for Palin because she is a woman

Posted by: Michael at August 29, 2008 02:53 PM

I don't think you can lump any group of people into a convenient bin (though statistically blacks vote Dem about 90% of the time, which makes it hard to argue there isn't something going on there, but whatever). But I think they would have voted for Hillary in the same proportions. The interesting split was when Hillary was running against Obama. Some blacks voted for Hillary.

I can never predict what women voters will do. As a group they rarely make sense to me, but luckily I only have to deal with induhviduals in this life :p

Posted by: Cassandra at August 29, 2008 03:02 PM

As a group they rarely make sense to me,

That's cause women are irrationa, duh, even to other women.

Posted by: Ymarsakar at August 29, 2008 03:14 PM

How can they crticize her 'lack of experience' when BHO is in the same boat? How can they criticized McCain for being old when Biden is just as old and has been in the Senate longer?

Posted by: Ymarsakar at August 29, 2008 03:17 PM

How can they crticize her 'lack of experience' when BHO is in the same boat? How can they criticized McCain for being old when Biden is just as old and has been in the Senate longer?

How can they? THey can cause... they did.

You see, regular laws of physics and logic doesn't work against the Democrats. You have to pull our your BFG and conduct anti-temporal and anti-reality operations, instead.

If you think reality and logic works when analyzing the Left, you'll be surprised every time, Don.

Chickenhawks? Chickenhawks? I don't see no steenkin' chicken hawks here!

Hey, by Billy Arkin's and Cassandra's redacted version of it, chickenhawks are still chickenhawks if they have other people fighting for them.


Posted by: Ymarsakar at August 29, 2008 03:17 PM

Post a comment

To reduce comment spam, comments on older posts are put into moderation 5 days after the last activity. Comments with more than one link also go into moderation. If you don't see your comment after posting it, try refreshing the screen. If you still don't see it, your comment is probably in the moderation queue.




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)