Author's posts
Jun 11 2008
Why Wesley Clark Is Going to Be Obama’s V-P
Clark on McCain, yesterday:
“I know he’s trying to get traction by seeking to play to what he thinks is his strong suit of national security,” Clark said of McCain while speaking from his office in Little Rock, Arkansas. “The truth is that, in national security terms, he’s largely untested and untried. He’s never been responsible for policy formulation. He’s never had leadership in a crisis, or in anything larger than his own element on an aircraft carrier or [in managing] his own congressional staff. It’s not clear that this is going to be the strong suit that he thinks it is.”
What a genius choice he would be. Take all that tough chickenhawk military talk and shove it down the pugs throats.
h/t Big Tent http://www.talkleft.com/story/…
May 11 2008
So . . . Who Will Be Obama’s V-P??
As so often happens these days, the Saturday evening post-movie (Iron Man) conversation turned to politics. The consensus is Hillary is through in the campaign. The lack whether she should be Obama’s running mate. Some say unity is the thing now. And the need for Obama to appeal to Joe and Jose Six-Pack.
My take? No way it’s Hillary. First, too much animosity between the two and too big a political figure to be a V-P. In fact, I think Obama, as is his wont, while being conciliatory, will also take the position that the Clintons represent the old way of doing things.
Second, is Hillary the one to appeal to Six-Pack? While she does better with this group than Obama, she isn’t exactly loved by them either. Indeed, if you could choose two candidates that are least loved by Six-Pack, I can’t imagine two lesser than these.
So, who will it be? Webb of Virginia? Fairly conservative, but could help get Reagan democrat southerners. Don’t think so. Too conservative and won’t likely pull enough southern man voters to put Obama over the top there.
My bet: Richardson of NM. I think Obama can’t win the south and will instead focus on the west. And the west means hispanic voters. Richardson appeals to western whites, but more importantly gets Obama the hispanic vote.
What do you think?
Apr 07 2008
Prediction: If Obama Nominee, Hillary Under The Bus
Over at Talk Left, BTD is arguing that if, as his supporters and surrogates say, Obama has locked this thing up, he should attempt to unify the party–that it is not Hillary who should do this (as Kos and Meteor Blades argue). http://www.talkleft.com/story/…
I argue the opposite. I believe if Obama gets the nomination, not only does he not try to gain the consent of Hillary supporters, and not only does he not request Hillary to help in his campaign (much less ask her to be his v-p), he throws Hillary under the bus.
My prediction is that Hillary will become the token of what is characterized as “old school” politics, divisiveness, and the belt way. I think Obama determines that Hillary supporters, in the end, will not vote for McSame no matter what he does and that he will run to the right (to the extent he cannot simply run on hope, change and unity) in the general election.
What do you think?
Jan 23 2008
Push the Candidates To Fight Telecom Immunity
Glen Greenwald over at Salon and Jane Hamsher and the folks over at FDL are trying to push all of the presidential candidates to take a public stand, and a leadership position, on the upcoming telecom immunity question. See here:
http://firedoglake.com/2008/01…
and here: http://www.salon.com/opinion/g…
Glen, about the attempt to immunize the telecoms for their illegal spying and violation of fundamental rights, says:
As always, conventional media wisdom is that Democrats will be harmed politically if they don’t capitulate to the Big, Strong, Tough Republicans on all matters relating to national security (even though the efficacy of that fear-mongering tactic was empirically disproven in 2006). But isn’t it painfully evident that a far greater liability for Democrats at this point than being “soft on terrorism” is their refusal and failure to demonstrate that they will take a stand — any stand — against this extremely weakened President and his discredited political party, and therefore prove they stand for something?
The only way for there to be any prospect of impeding Bush’s most extreme demands for vast warrantless eavesdropping powers and immunity for lawbreaking telecoms is for the presidential candidates — Obama, Edwards and Clinton — to demonstrate (rather than speak about) real “leadership” and take a stand in support of Chris Dodd and his imminent filibuster. There will be campaigns beginning this week to persuade and pressure them to do so — I will be posting extensively about them here. Any efforts to stop warrantless eavesdropping and telecom immunity is almost certain to fail without the active support of the presidential candidates, who these days have a virtual monopoly on the ability to set agendas and shape media attention.
Jane says:
John Edwards should challenge his rivals Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to go back to Washington, DC and fight against retroactive immunity for the telecoms.
The Republicans are not going to let Reid punt and extend the Protect America Act for another 18 months so it looks like the FISA bill is going to come back up again on Monday. Chris Dodd’s objection to Unanimous Consent still stands, so they will pick up in the middle of the Motion to Proceed debate.
Glenn Greenwald:
It will be increasingly difficult to listen to Edwards, Obama and Clinton tout their supreme leadership attributes and their commitment to “changing the way Washington works” if they choose to sit by, more or less mute, and allow such a blatant and corrupt evisceration of the rule of law — and such a vast and permanent expansion of the limitless surveillance state — to occur without a fight. Any one of them, or all three, has a unique opportunity to actually demonstrate with actions, rather than pretty speeches, their commitment to the principles they claim to espouse.
John Edwards is the perfect person to lead with this message. Such an action would illustrate his genuine commitment to change and fighting vested interests in Washington, and hopefully it will channel that intense anti-immunity passion toward his campaign. He won’t be able to participate in the filibuster himself, but by offering to leave the campaign trail and go back to DC with Clinton and Obama he’ll be able to show leadership in challenging all Democrats to put thoughts of personal gain aside and join together in the fight to save the constitution.
Without the help of the presidential candidates, we are doomed to lose this fight. And all their calls for change will ring hollow if they allow George Bush to railroad this bill through a supine Democratic-controlled Senate because of their absence.
Jane has posted an email address where you may be able to contact the Edwards campaign: [email protected] Here is a link for contacts for other senator presidential candidates: http://act.credomobile.com/…
She also has a link to a place where you can get updates on how to help this vital project: http://action.firedoglake.com/…