| |||||||||||||
|
Wednesday, May 28th, 2008
Catch 22 for BHO
Poor Obama. He just can't seem to get rid of Hillary. She won't go away, and her husband is an ex-President who became famous with quite a few folks.
How in the world is Obama supposed to pick a VP?
If it's Hillary, he probably retains all her supporters and has a surge for November. BUT, then he's got BILL in the foreground of his whole Presidency, and it becomes really, really hard for Obama to look like the leader (if he won) with a 2-termer in the wings. Not to mention, Bill has gone after Obama HARD. Even more reason Obama would not want him around. But has Hillary stuck around to make her case for VP? Could the two even get along? I have lots of doubts about that, but Obama could also be in a lot of trouble without her supporters.
If it's not Hillary, then who? John Edwards? Maybe, but he has a much weaker following and is a bit of a re-tred. One of the Virginia 3? Mark Warner, Jim Webb, or Tim Kaine? I still think one of these guys is the best pick, Warner and Webb having an edge on Kaine, and maybe helping the Dems carry Virginia which might swing the whole election. Still, no Hillary might mean losing lots of her supporters to McCain or to staying home. Plus, Hillary probably starts to get 2012 aspirations (her last chance), and might work undercover to get Obama defeated.
I'm not voting Obama, but I do pity this choice. (By the way, McCain absolutely nailed him today- asked why he's willing to meet with the Iranian President but not Gen. Petraeus- ouch!) He's got the toughest decision of his life ahead of him the next 2-3 months.
To HIllary, or not to Hillary? That's the question, Barry.
Catch 22 for BHO
Poor Obama. He just can't seem to get rid of Hillary. She won't go away, and her husband is an ex-President who became famous with quite a few folks.
How in the world is Obama supposed to pick a VP?
If it's Hillary, he probably retains all her supporters and has a surge for November. BUT, then he's got BILL in the foreground of his whole Presidency, and it becomes really, really hard for Obama to look like the leader (if he won) with a 2-termer in the wings. Not to mention, Bill has gone after Obama HARD. Even more reason Obama would not want him around. But has Hillary stuck around to make her case for VP? Could the two even get along? I have lots of doubts about that, but Obama could also be in a lot of trouble without her supporters.
If it's not Hillary, then who? John Edwards? Maybe, but he has a much weaker following and is a bit of a re-tred. One of the Virginia 3? Mark Warner, Jim Webb, or Tim Kaine? I still think one of these guys is the best pick, Warner and Webb having an edge on Kaine, and maybe helping the Dems carry Virginia which might swing the whole election. Still, no Hillary might mean losing lots of her supporters to McCain or to staying home. Plus, Hillary probably starts to get 2012 aspirations (her last chance), and might work undercover to get Obama defeated.
I'm not voting Obama, but I do pity this choice. (By the way, McCain absolutely nailed him today- asked why he's willing to meet with the Iranian President but not Gen. Petraeus- ouch!) He's got the toughest decision of his life ahead of him the next 2-3 months.
To HIllary, or not to Hillary? That's the question, Barry.
Bush presents Social Security reform, fails, goes back in cave.
Bush feels pressure about Iraq war, finally listens to McCain, implements surge, goes back in cave.
Did I miss anything? The guy is the anti-Reagan in terms of communicating with people.
I suppose we also need to remember, a sincere speech from Hillary to concede and have her supporters back Obama probably undoes almost all the division right now. That is still an "if," but certainly possible.
Everyone said how divided the Republicans were 6 months ago with 5 major candidates, and now they are pretty strongly unified behind McCain. The division can be breached pretty quickly.
By the way, who is this Hillary person everyone keeps mentioning?
Everyone in the world did not endorse this war, that's the issue. Clinton did. Obama did not. Finding evidence after invading a country doesn't make the action justifiable (not that we actually found any evidence).
Besides, the world was scared of Iraq because the media was telling us to be, because that's what the White House was telling them. It was not an accident that we were all scared of Iraq right before the war.
sorry to hijack your blog Brian but I just wanted to respond to Dave's statement. While I agree to a point (the media blows things out of proportion all the time, remember the summer of the shark attacks?) I have to respectfully disagree with your statement that that is THE reason the world was scared of Iraq. My closest friend is Chaldean--a Christian Iraqi. He was born and raised in America, but had family living in Iraq under Hussein's rule. One of his uncle's was forced to fight against the US in the first Gulf War even though he was against it, threatened that his family would be killed if he didn't fight. In the time between the two wars almost all of his family was able to leave, bringing with them horrifying stories about the rule under Saddam. So yes, the media does exaggerate and spends way too much time trying to tell us what to think, but there was also a reason to be afraid of Iraq. (maybe not the fear of WMD's, which many believed they had before the war started, but definitely about rule under Hussein.)
As for who Obama should pick as a running mate...I don't know enough about the dems (other than Hil) to comment.
Not that I condone preemptive war - but the administration really twisted 9-11 into something it wasn't and pulled the wool over many citizen and political eyes.
I agree with hayley, and I disagree with hayley about the administration. On the one hand, every credible intelligence agency in the world believed Iraq had WMD before the war, and there was history of Saddam using them on his own people. We had reason to fear, or so we thought. On the other hand, out of fear to try and keep support for the war, the administration did goofy things like "Mission Accomplished" and so forth to try to keep momentum going. They got too political, and less practical. And they probably won't own up to those mistakes until at least 2015, when it won't help anyone.
On the other hand, Obama had no answer to the challenge. Go with McCain, and it only helps McCain. Go alone, and it was still McCain with the suggestion. Don't go at all, and you look even more foolish. McCain will ride that one out all the way to November if he has to.
The real problem here is that Obama has hardly been there or had substantive conversation with generals to really know what is going on there. McCain IS being political, but wise, to expose this failure in Obama's judgment.