August 22, 2008
I'm getting pretty tired of waiting for Obama to announce his VP pick.
But in case you want to talk about it, this is the post. I'm going to bet on Sebelius. I think she's got that blend of differentness and dullness that will go rather nicely with his.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
247 comments:
1 – 200 of 247 Newer› Newest»Which one is Hall and which one is Oates?
Easy. Oates is the one who doesn't do anything.
Armstrong and Getty are betting on Ahmadinejad as Obama's VP.
One thing is clear, they have blown the timing. Instead of getting at least an extra week's bounce out of the announcement, which they would have if he had announced last week, even if he announces today, it will go in the sink hole of the weekend, and if he announces on Monday, they would have gotten the bounce anyway because of the convention.
But Obama has the same problem as McCain -- because of our present-day oligarchical political system, where political power once obtained is never relinquished and the same old dinosaurs stay in office forever, preventing any new and fresh blood from gaining any real and necessary experience, everyone who is qualified for the position is lousy and boring.
I've been saying it will be Hillary from before Obama's dip in the polls, and I still see it this way.
The first public appearance will be in Springfield. Hillary will be trading her Yankees cap back for the Cubs cap she traded for her Yankees cap.
My two cents on this is that Obama must be and have been trying to get Hillary on the ticket. I don't know that he will be successful. It is the obvious choice for him.
At this point certainly it is a concession for her and a true Machiavellian would still play to lose if she accepted the vice presidency.
Seblius has clear positions on many issues, a pretty solid executive track record and doesn't come across as a vain glorious empty suit. How is that combination supposed to work?
I don't think it makes any sense for Hillary to agree to be his subordinate in what is probably going to be a failed campaign.
She should focus on 2012.
I too suspect the delay is caused by his effort to get her to join him.
Either Seblius or Bayh. I don't care who Obama picks, honestly, I just think it's a mistake for McCain to let him go first.
It will not be Joe Biden, and here's why:
Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.
Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.
Two bad middle names. One maybe, but not two.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say Tim Kaine. He's been out there acting like VP pick, talking Obama up, making press statements about the wonderfulness of Obama for the last few weeks. He's a little light in the resume, but still a solid choice.
The only unfortunate side would be the combination of their names. "Obama-Kaine" sounds like a topical ointment.
I think she's got that blend of differentness and dullness that will go rather nicely with his.
Thanks for the laugh. Loved it!
As to those who think it will be Hillary, I think not. It will be a grave error on his part. Symbolic unity is one thing but having a treacherous number two is beyond the scope of common sense. Also, he already gave her the convention she wanted. He is no longer the star. She is.
McCain absolutely has an advantage in going second. Look, nobody wants to vote for McCain. I doubt there are 900 people in the country who love the guy. He backed into the nomination and he is going to back into the presidency.
That's not a bad thing. Leadership defaulting to the best qualified yet least glamorous is often preferable.
Anyway, because of the circumstances, McCain needs to react to Obama. If he convinces Clinton, he will want to pick take a unique course. Say, Colin Powell. If he picks Biden or Bayh, he can react differently.
On edit: that's some deeply ambiguous pronoun usage on my part. I think you get the idea.
I'm with flexo--I absolutely do not understand the Fri afternoon Sat morning timing. Makes no sense to me--what am I missing here (unless it take some heat off the negative ad wars)
I think its Hilary, because otherwise he would have announced it earlier. If he picks someone else, you'd think he'd want to give time for the Hilary supporters to accept it.
Of course - it could be Wesley Clark. I'm surprised he's not getting more of a mention. He'd be a good choice.
If I were Hillary Clinton, I would not take the deal. My credit is still perfectly good after November. My political support skyrockets shortly after that as leftists everywhere write their eulogies for the failed Obama campaign.
If Obama wins, my political career is over whether I choose to be on the ticket or not. The only way I get to be president is in the event that Obama dies. In the event, though, conspiracy theorists will immediately suggest that I had something to do with the death.
That makes no sense Seven. Even after 8 years under an Obama administration, Hilarywould still be 18 years younger than McCain is today.
I don't think it makes any sense for Hillary to agree to be his subordinate in what is probably going to be a failed campaign.
You are one fucking funny lady.
Seven Machos said...
"McCain absolutely has an advantage in going second."
I disagree. Assuming he wants to win, McCain has two and only two viable choices for veep: Sarah Palin or Meg Whitman. A middle aged white man is not going to work, and that isn't going to change no matter who Obama's veep is. The realities of this election have already been defined by the Democratic candidate for President, not his sidekick. The only possible difference that the timing makes is that if Obama goes first and picks a woman, McCain's choice looks derivative, whereas if McCain goes first Obama looks like he's playing catchup. That's really all there is to it. In a normal election, you'd probably be right, but in this one, I think you're wrong.
You may be right that Obama will lose regardless. The overt and latent racism I've seen by some commentators make me think that will be a big factor. Also, historically, fascist regimes rarely give up power unless they are defeated in a total catastrophic war. Have you read Gorbachev's editorial in the NY Times about the war that Russia didn't want but was provoked into? Condi Rice may yet turn the world into a smoldering nuclear dustbin by placing "defense" missles on Russia's border with Poland and by other hostile actions that she and the Bush administration are devising.
As far as Sebelius is concerned, she looks like the female John Kerry with her long horse face. He has to pick someone who looks like Hillary if it isn't going to be her. Blond, pretty, smart and sexy, a blogger, a contitution law professor somewhere in the Midwest. I have no idea who that might be, but he must be having a great deal of trouble convincing her to join his likely to fail campaign. She will knows how many alt. houses, and outhouses she owns, and she may be thinking of running for president in 2012 after McBush destroys the economy some more and possible the planet in a nuclear war of his making.
Why does McCain have to pick a woman? Women don't make good leaders. At least according to the general public, who have yet to elect one to the Presidency.
downtownlad said...
"That makes no sense Seven. Even after 8 years under an Obama administration, Hilarywould still be 18 years younger than McCain is today."
After eight years of an Obama administration, Hillary's main problem wouldn't be that she'd be too old it's that no one will want to elect a Democratic president. And that's giving Obama some credit; to judge by his supporters' attitudes, he could announce in his inaugural address that we had now had our last election and he was assuming control for the greater good and his supporters would still cheer wildly and rationalize it away. Just as they claimed that by remaining privately financed he was really more publicly financed than any other candidate, they would claim that by not having elections, Obama is actually more democratic because... Well... They'll think of something.
John McCain: Born, August 29, 1936. Age: 72
Hillary Clinton: Born, October 26, 1947. Age: 61. Age in eight years: 69.
Downtown, math is not your strong suit. Stick to vitriol. You excel at that.
All those women who have run for president. It's so sad.
downtownlad said...
"Why does McCain have to pick a woman?"
Because politics operates in the real world.
"Women don't make good leaders. At least according to the general public, who have yet to elect one to the Presidency."
When have the general public ever been presented with the opportunity to do so? No major political party has ever nominated a woman to be President, and even if they had, the test would only hold good while all else is equal, and all else is never equal in an election (for example, had Hillary been nominated and went on to lose in the fall, it would be hard to say that the general public rejected her because she was a woman, rather than because she's that woman, or because of her politics, &c.).
Seven has no sense of humor either.
And trust me - I know more math than you. A LOT more. You don't even want to go there.
I took Albegra in college. (I'm sure that one will be right over your head too).
Trumpit -- I'm sure you are right. I'm sure President Bush will declare martial law in the event that a Republican loses. Just like his dad did. And Nixon. And Eisenhower. And Hoover.
Albegra is a country in the Baltics.
More delusion. Hillary will never be in that White House unless she is chosen V.P. for this run.
It's over for Hillary as President in 2012.
All that folks here reveal is their ignorance, while making their wet dreams public.
We will never allow her within 10 feet of that office. So give up the dream, she is over.
Don't be surprised if she loses her senate seat either, as she will be held responsible for what she and her husband have done during this election cycle.
I'm a very liberal New Yorker who spent 1992-2000 defending these two dirtbags(the Clintons) and think I have a little bit better idea of how New Yorkers will be reacting to Obama's loss and whom will be held responsible.
Dream on dreamers.
It's over for Hillary.
I was a math major - I get a pass on typing....
Trumpit said...
"You may be right that Obama will lose regardless. The overt and latent racism I've seen by some commentators make me think that will be a big factor."
Racism won't be a factor at all. The only people who seem to care about Obama's race are himself and his surrogates. The rest of us - apart from a vanishingly small number of the lunatic fringe - don't care about race.
"Also, historically, fascist regimes rarely give up power unless they are defeated in a total catastrophic war."
Oh, yawn. What other tired canards are going to be wheeled out this season? We've already seen the return of the discredited "Bush will start a draft if reelected" meme that failed in 2004 and was falsified; are we really going to have to endure the return of the "Bush won't leave ofice if defeated" meme that went with it? Honestly, what's the matter with you people? Every party has its lunatic fringe, but what is it about the mainstream left that makes it think that being paranoid racist aren't things to be deeply ashamed of?
I enjoyed studying homomorphisms.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphism
This may be a bit too conventional, wisdom-wise, but since Obama's weak spot is foreign policy experience, his only sensible VP choice would be Joe Biden. (David Brooks' NY Times column today is about Biden.) If Obama picks a governor, then he's really betting that the election will be about domestic issues, not the war or other messy matters.
I don't know how much a veep pick really matters in the big picture, but I do think Biden will be the perfect candidate to uphold the tradition of embarrassing vice presidents. With his uncanny propensity for speaking before he thinks -- not to mention a resume littered with plagiarism and self-puffery -- Biden could be a glorious synthesis of Spiro Agnew and Dan Quayle. Let's all hope that Biden's "it's not me" quip from earlier in the week will be enshrined along with many other misstatements to come.
Yes, because Biden would be the first vice presidential pick EVAH to deny that he was being picked.
Biden would be a pretty good choice. Better than Bayh or Sebelius or Kaine.
Trumpit said…
He has to pick someone who looks like Hillary if it isn't going to be her.
Why would he pick someone who looks and sounds like everyone’s pissed off mother?
Armstrong and Getty excerpt the cell-door-slamming sound effect in the Obama anti-McCain ad, for everyday doom purposes.
``Clean up your room or there will be (boom) consequences''
``I'm going to the bathroom now and may be (boom) in there a while.''
Caller suggests counter-ad, Obama has so many brothers he can't count them.
Apparently some audience isn't entirely of the soap opera news demographic.
Becoming a running joke may not bode well for the media.
I have had the misfortune of being forced to sit through a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing. (The back of the head of your Seven Machos is in a picture in the Washington Post.)
When Biden spoke, he spoke and spoke and spoke. He did not ask one single question of the people about whom the Committee convened. He just talked. And he never said a single thing of substance.
I took Albegra in college...
OK that explains a lot.
Was she a gal from East Germany?
Did she have a sister named Cualucus?
downtownlad said...
I took Albegra in college. (I'm sure that one will be right over your head too).
College? I took it in the eighth grade. You must have gone to some real backwater, in the woods, bark chewer outhouse of a school.
I also learned how to spell Algebra too.
Okay. Let's give Downtown some credit here with the purposeful misspelling. That was funny.
No Peter - You didn't take it in 8th grade. As I suspected - it was over your head.
Obama's best pick would actually be Gore.
downtownlad said...
"Biden would be a pretty good choice."
If he's the pick, the ad writes itself. Biden is a total cunt, and for the life of me I can't see why anyone would even take him seriously as a Senator, let alone a veep.
Seven Machos said...
"I have had the misfortune of being forced to sit through a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing ... [and w]hen Biden spoke, he spoke and spoke and spoke. He did not ask one single question of the people about whom the Committee convened. He just talked. And he never said a single thing of substance."
That's how he seems to approach all hearings. Certainly that's reflective of his approach to the Roberts and Alito hearings. He's a vapid little man who likes the sound of his own voice a little too much.
downtownlad said...
"Obama's best pick would actually be Gore."
I think that's probably right.
Al Gore? Inventor of the Internet and Carrie Nationesque environmental scold?
If he gets the nod, there will be blizzards in October. I'm not kidding.
Well...
I'm willing to bet that Obama is not all Mr. Hope and Change-
And he goes with a white male.
Liberals are paternalistic, and have lowered expectations of "the masses" which always gives them-our dear leaders- the excuse to act how they really want to and not how they supposedly wish the rest of us would.
So male definitely and perhaps Hispanic.
But-female?
I wouldn't bet on it.
Isn't Albegra the NPR terrorist who keeps asking for money?
If McCainbushcohalmurder Jr. surprises everybody and springs Condoleezza Rice on us I'll die. Then rise from the dead and die again. Then do that several times for dramatic effect acting surprised each time.
But that won't happen so I can just forget about that plan.
Albegra is a country in the Baltics.
Province in Canada
He just talked. And he never said a single thing of substance.
Meeting his job description.
InTrade heavily betting Biden.
Caulucus from the caucuses-who ran with the kossaks...
Simon wrote: McCain has two and only two viable choices for veep: Sarah Palin or Meg Whitman.
Simon, you're overselling the topic. McCain can pick the whitest squarest guy in the country and it really wouldn't change the fundamentals of the election. As long as the VP isn't a laughable choice, the VP doesn't matter.
McCain should pick Larry Bird. He's not white. He's clear.
Wait shit, that would make Albegra's sister Russian...
Obama's pick for VP will be the only bit of news between now and the election, so I don't mind waiting a bit. I'm already tired of can a senile rich woman's plaything beat an unlicked terrorist pup, however brilliant he may be
That makes no sense Seven. Even after 8 years under an Obama administration, Hilarywould still be 18 years younger than McCain is today.
I'll assume you're either trying to be funny and you fail, or are completely stupid beyond human comprehension. Today Hillary is 60 and McCain is 71. Eight years after Obama makes Hillary 68 which is 3 years younger than McCain is today.
Your math skills are about as poor as your critical thinking.
I took Algebra in the 10th grade. Along the way it occurred to me that all those numbers were actually merely symbols. I tested my theory by turning each number into an Egyptian hieroglyph, a snake for a 7, an open hand for a 5 and so on, sticking with my system and painstakingly drawing each glyph to work out one of those parabola formulas, which I never saw the usefulness for but which my teacher guaranteed held umpteen uses. I was delighted when the answer turned out the same in contrived hieroglyphs as it did in Arabic numerals and lettering. Now this might seem stupid to a mathematician but it was a profound and delightful epiphany to me at the time. And so concludes one of many algebraic anecdotes.
Henry said...
"Simon, you're overselling the topic. McCain can pick the whitest squarest guy in the country and it really wouldn't change the fundamentals of the election."
I don't agree. McCain needs to pick a credible female candidate, and he needs to have already done it and already announced it. McCain needs to counterbalance the inclination of a handful of voters in the middle of the spectrum who are going to vote for Obama because they want to prove to themselves that they aren't racists, and to prevent the voters from the same part of the spectrum who want something different from having so clear cut a choice. He needs to find a way to capitalize on the continuing hostility towards Obama from former Clinton supporters. All of those factors point to Palin, ideally, or Whitman in the alternative.
If he makes the safe pick of a middle aged white guy, he may well lose although he might eek it out. If he picks Lieberman, he'll lose in a clean sweep. If he picks Palin, Ann's prediction the other day that Obama will hold only the bluest of the blue states will come true.
McCain needs to pick a credible female candidate
``How many shoes do you own?''
Simon, I don't know why a VP pick would matter this election any more than any other.
Why would McCain bold's choice of Sarah Palin accomplish any more than Walter Mondale's bold choice of Geraldine Ferraro? Or Al Gore's bold choice of Joe Lieberman?
Even bizarre and unfortunate picks, like Dan Quayle and Spiro Agnew, don't have much impact.
...or Whitman in the alternative.
I have no particular problem but how will most voters regard a relatively unknown woman billionaire with no government experience?
I don't care who he picks. Sorry, Barack, I still haven't forgotten about your opposition to the Live Birth law in Illinois.
Obama might have tipped his choice awhile back with the "Kansas Values" advert -- never mind that he didn't really ever live here and his values are such anathema to most Kansans that McCain is leading him by 23% in this state.
He can hope the Sebelius will help him with the PUMAs, but he won't get our 6 EVs even with our governor on the ticket. She's not that popular and is in office only because Republicans ran extremists against her.
She's terribly vulnerable on two issues:
a) her insistence, through her chosen head of the Kansas Dept of Health and Environment, that CO2 is a pollutant, and
b) her close financing arrangements with Dr. Teller, the world's leading late-term abortionist, to the degree that she had a luxurious dinner meeting with him (and other big donors) at the Governor's Mansion ... for which she conveniently forgot to reimburse the state for over a year until the Republicans forced the media to address it.
Obama must have had a difficult time finding a candidate who's not gonna make him look woefully unprepared.
Albegra is the secret name given to Al Gore by our sainted Mother Earth when he lost all sense and decided to worship her as a goddess. He was given the name Albegra when he made Mother Hearth his personal savior. Now he must travel her domain, preaching and giving witness on her behalf. He must convert the world to the one religion. Albegra is the designated messiah. He has been personally chosen by our Mother to save the world.
I'm pretty sure that Obama will pick a white person. Is algebra related to abacus?
Henry, I think that this election is unusual because Obama is unusual and because the GOP candidate is unusually vulnerable both personally and generically. The veep is McCain's opportunity to pick someone who defuses intangibles that are otherwise going to help Obama. The more the Republican ticket looks like every other Republican ticket in history, the easier it is for Obama to paint his ticket as being about change and the future and our side as being about the past. McCain needs to destroy the idea that he he Dole/Kemp '96, and picking Palin is about the only way he can do it.
McCain needs a way to get the media to pay attention to him (the media is in the tank for Obama, and pays attention to McCain only when and to the extent that McCain is talking about Obama), and could benefit from picking up disaffected Hillary supporters. Picking Palin creates a win-win situation. If the media doesn't pay attention to a female nominee for veep, they will confirm the picture painted by Clinton and her supporters of the media. If they do pay attention, people will find out things about Barack Obama, and the more voters know about Obama, the less likely they are to vote for him.
Bart said...
"[Sebelius is] terribly vulnerable on ... her insistence, through her chosen head of the Kansas Dept of Health and Environment, that CO2 is a pollutant...."
The Supreme Court has endorsed that view, see Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 549 U.S. 497 (2007), and I fancy it's not an unpopular view among the people who are going to or might vote for Obama.
I was up for the first-half of the Brazil-Belgium Bronze Medal match, and kept switching over to the news networks for the breaking news. I fell asleep to Fox News covering Bayh's, Biden's, and Kaine's front doors for any activity.
I woke up and feverishly turned on the TV. WHAT, nothing still at 1:00 PM?!
Tease.
If he's got any sense it's Biden. Now announce it dammit. Can you believe this Barack guy?
Cheers,
Victoria
Thomas Eagleton.
Simon wrote:
Picking Palin creates a win-win situation. If the media doesn't pay attention to a female nominee for veep, they will confirm the picture painted by Clinton and her supporters of the media. If they do pay attention, people will find out things about Barack Obama, and the more voters know about Obama, the less likely they are to vote for him.
Yes. Yes. Yes.
(Un)fortunately, I think it's Romney.
Since McCain can't stand him personally, it tells you that he's pragmatic like JFK was. And he'll win because of it.
Once Obama announces his veep pick, the rains will stop in Florida and the most beautiful double-rainbow ever to grace the sky will appear.
Or maybe not.
DTL, way to go my man, that was a seriously funny funny. And your gracious, good-natured laugh at yourself was refreshing, too. Thanks.
But Mr. Perfect doesn't need any help with the Kansan or Kenyan constituencies. And selecting what's-her-name will only infuriate the already angry white women who dig Hill. She's out.
Gonna be a semi-gun-toting white guy, someone who looks damn good in the hatch of an Abrams. Colin Powell would be a very sound choice.
Just out of curiosity, I ran a Google search on albegra, and it yielded almost 7,000 hits. Even funnier to me is that the sites where the typo shows up most prominently are those of textbook publishers, teachers' supply stores, etc.
One TV news story called it "albegra" at the top of the browser and "algreba" in the story's main headline. ("al-Greba" would be a good name for a terrorist organization that kills its enemies with interminable amounts of homework.)
Let me be upfront about two biases that affect my evaluation: I want a female President sooner rather than later, and that notwithstanding, McCain winning this fall is more important than just about anything. If the only way for McCain to win was for the troops to be home by then, I'd counsel Bush to start flying them home this afternoon, because once one realizes that the person inaugurated in January picks the adult supervisors who decide what laws the rest of us can or can't enact, it becomes clear that winning this fall is more important than anything. That issue is more important than the war on terror, it's more important than climate change, it's more important than the economy, it's more important than healthcare, it's more important than abortion, it's more important than immigration, it's more important than bickering about BCRA and the First Amendment, it's more important than a billion and one petty resentments the party has with McCain, it is more important than anyone's pet issue. It is the issue. The court is the whole ballgame. Whether we have a court that believes in the rule of law or whether we have a court that believes in following its heart as Obama desires is more important than every other issue put together; it is more important than life and death: it is the life or death of the republic itself. And putting Obama in a place to make appointments - a fortiori if the GOP can't and wouldn't try to stop him - simply isn't an option.
I have jumped the shark.
My husband just walked through the room and told me that Obama will be in the Quad-Cities on Monday, to which I spontaneously responded, "Oh, God. Why?"
It's come to this. I've lost my life-long political junkie moorings. The only thing I can say on my behalf is that I'm 100% sure I'd have the same reaction if it were McCain.
What now, take up crafting or something?
Simon -- It's not.
On this topic you are utopian.
You think McCain can stop the tide, but he can't. Sometimes the tide comes in. Sometimes it goes out. Even a jetty doesn't last that long against the tide.
The most important factor that shapes the country is the character of its citizens, which has little to do with presidents or courts.
Henry, it is. If you have a Supreme Court that won't take seriously the structural limitations on the federal government, the states cease to exist. That's the logical upshot of the Garcia case, and we were only saved from that result by the changing of the guard at the court before Congress could realize what it meant. Liberal control of public education in this country has led to a public that has not been taught to understand the Constitution, and thus does not know to bark when liberal politicians propose policies that are essentially national government in action. And if you have a Supreme Court that overenforces federal rights - a fortiori a court willing to make up such rights - in ways that prevent the people from governing themselves, not only is that directly injurious to the constitutional order, but it breeds apathy and something even worse: the desire to amend the Constitution (or, worst of all, to do away with it) to get around the blockage. It is the most important issue because no matter what policy you are in favor of, if you have a court that will say it's unconstitutional, your policy preference is a dead letter.
reader: take up scrapbookiug
FLS: LOL. Originally I had written "scrapbooking" but then changed it to "crafting."
OK, then.
I thought it would be Biden...but...I'm making a "no guts no glory" prediction:
It will be Hillary.
Come on...go out on a limb, who is your NGNG pick?
2:21 p.m. Eastern and still no announcement. He's waiting for Rush to go off the air for the weekend.
RIA, next time Obama or McCain comes to Florida, which will happen a gazillioneth times until November, I will go.
I'll take pics. For your scrapbook.
P.S.: Stop jumping sharks. That's jes crazy, girl.
RUTH ANNE, YES. Man are you on fire today.
He wants this fresh for rush hour at 5 PM.
ZPS, my NGNG pick is Caroline Kennedy.
Two things:
1. If it's Romney, I wouldn't THINK of voting for McCain. I have thought about it, and am a genuine undecided. I usually vote Democratic for President, but I am very, very nervous about Obama. Romney kills the McCain deal for me. I think he might for a lot of people. I may be wrong, but I see him as a negative.
2. Reader: We have some openings here at the flute company. You're musical. I could teach you piccolo making. Takes your mind off just about everything.
Zachary Paul Sire...
"Come on...go out on a limb, who is your NGNG pick?"
Ooh, careful there, Zach. If Hillary's commercial with a child wearing "good night" pajamas was invoking the N word, because "night" contains the letters "nig," then talking about Obama's veep as his "NGNG pick" risks being accused of invoking the same.
Theo, I fear it might be Romney. I say "I fear" because I don't think Romney is quite the knockout punch some people think he is. The reason I think it is Romney, is that Lieberman was clearly floated as a "worst case" rumour, meant to terrorise us Repubs.
"At least Romney is a better pick", type of mindfake.
Now, seriously, I DESPERATELY want to be online when the Bammer announces his VP pick, but I have to go workout. :((
Have fun yawls! Be back after 6.
Cheers,
Victoria
Can't be a governor - Obama needs at least some additional foreign policy cred and can't get it that way. A governor would also immediately draw a contrast with Obama's lack of elected executive experience, raising questions about how he would utilize it without becoming a figurehead.
Can't be a woman other than Hillary, and it ain't Hillary - Obama has a problem with blue-collar men, not women. Putting a youngish woman on the ticket is going to result in a lot of older blue-collar guys at best sitting on their hands at home (if they don't pull the lever for the ex-figher jock with the hot beer heiress wife). Picking a woman other than Hillary will cause a revolt among her supporters since she pretty much exceeds all of his criteria (prepared to be president, able to help him govern and willing to challenge his thinking) in their eyes. I think the fact she's already setup as a prime time speaker and is having her name placed in nomination with the roll call theater says she's not it. Hillary is much better positioned for 2012 outside an Obama administration giving her reason to turn it down even if Obama offered it. If McCain wins, she's the front runner. If Obama wins but struggles she has a plausible base for challenging him. She can regulate her support for him much better outside his administration than in it.
gotta be lightweight - Can't overshadow His Articulateness without him becoming Dukakis with a tan.
By process of elimination, it's probably Biden of those most often mentioned (Biden, Bayn, Kaine, Sebelius). He's got the foreign policy credentials, mainstream Democrat views, experienced but nothing that would make people wish the ticket was reversed, looks like the pictures on dollar bills.
The other telling point is 'willing to challenge his thinking'. That seems to be a way of saying that it's ok to have *not* been an enthusiastic Obama booster from the get go. (possibly innoculation against a reprises of Biden's "articulate" comment about Obama, too)
dtl,
"it could be Wesley Clark... He'd be a good choice."
Yeah--if your goal is to sink the campaign for sure. So, dtl--when did you come over to our side? :-)
Drew W,
Your point about Biden and speak-before-you-think is good, but wouldn't that apply just as well to Clark?
It will be Edwards. I guarantee it.
No, not the Edwards who cheated on his dying wife, impregnated his campaign age of aquarian documentarian, and hid from reporters in the hotel bathroom before coming 99.9% clean.
The other one, the one even Texas Republicans vote for because Obama needs to balance his ticket with someone who is nothing like a communist liberal socialist from Chicago who, when voters come to realize who he really is can point to Edwards of Texas and say, "Yeah, but look at my running mate. He's a Democrat and HE'S normal."
I checked out Insty before shutting down the comp. Hooboy, he linked to Wonkette, and for once, she's got a doozy of an idea.
Send a fake Obama picks his VP text message
Freak out your favourite Obammesiah nutjob!
See, this is what happens when you delay in announcing your pick, Obama.
Ha ha...Andrew Sullivan is saying that Obama will send out the text message at 3 a.m.
I'm surprised people aren't complaining more about feeling deeply manipulated. What's with getting so excited about being "controlled" into waiting with baited breath for a text message? It's almost undignified.
Weirdly, I've got an old Violent Femmes songs running through my mind. Haven't heard or thought of in probably, oh, 15-20 years, but--zap! just like that!--it pops up out of nowhere (OK, the darker recesses of my unconscious mind) and starts worming away.
Heh. Name that tune!
Kiss Off?
What's with getting so excited about being "controlled" into waiting with baited breath for a text message? It's almost undignified.
Are you kidding?? You're talking to Althouse readers who spend hours trying to figure out Ann's latest photo puzzle!
Oh, you meant the rest of the world. Well, yeah. Text messaging your VP choice is gimmicky, but what do you expect? It's the Democrats.
Yeah, I'm still here. Every time I walk out, I think, the moment I leave he'll announce it! Argh.
Hee, hee! Hey, you know, you could make that song I'm thinking of into a ringtone for the txt msg. Helluva thing to alarm one awake at 3 a.m., though, if Sullivan turns out to be right.
(Meade, nope, but I appreciate someone trying.
I couldn't find a video on YouTube of the Violent Femmes doing the song, though I did find the song set to other things.)
Okay, the more I think about this wait, the more I wonder if it's not being strung-out for, yes, a Hillary pick.
Because there comes a point when something is anti-climatic.
At this point, at 3 PM on a Friday, after everyone thought it would come at 7 AM, it HAD BETTER be a Hillary, because we didn't wait all day for no Evan Bayh.
Simon said...Assuming he wants to win, McCain has two and only two viable choices for veep: Sarah Palin or Meg Whitman. A middle aged white man is not going to work, and that isn't going to change no matter who Obama's veep is.
Palin and Whitman are only slightly more qualified for the job than Obama. Picking either of those two is simply an act of pandering.
McCain should pick Palin to introduce him at the convention.
Obviously McCain and Romney made a deal long ago on this issue and McCain/Romney is the ticket.
Simon said...Racism won't be a factor at all. The only people who seem to care about Obama's race are himself and his surrogates. The rest of us - apart from a vanishingly small number of the lunatic fringe - don't care about race.
Obama's involvement with the black racist lunatic Jeremiah Wright is probably not going to be to his advantage.
Obviously the fact that Obama is black, with out being too black , helped him win over a lot of White libs in the primary and his blackness is what pulled the black vote away from Hillary. If Obama wasn't black the black Democratic primary vote would have gone to Hillary.
Race will continue to be a factor in world events just like nation, tribe and ethnicity. Why the Good White People of the world need to deny this truth is another issue.
downtownlad said...Obama's best pick would actually be Gore.
I prefer Mondale.
Fox News saying that General David Petreaus might be on the shortlist for McCain. That's like believing Chet Edwards was really a likely VP pick.
Okay, the more I think about this wait, the more I wonder if it's not being strung-out for, yes, a Hillary pick.
If Hillary, delay probably caused by his battling it out with Mrs. O.
BTW what is NGNG? All I could Google up was National Gay Newspaper Guild.
If Hillary, delay probably caused by his battling it out with Mrs. O.
LOL!
BTW what is NGNG? All I could Google up was National Gay Newspaper Guild.
According to ZPS' own words, "no guts no glory".
"Own words" sounds like that was meant as a slap, Bearbee. Sorry! Not intended.
Chet Edwards just got face time on Fox News, with his son. A very Mark McGwire moment.
I'm assuming "no guts, no glory," but don't really know. Was a bit too disturbed by that acronym in light of previous Althouse context to want to Google it. Or ask. Or even think too much about it.
See? I was so disturbed by the acronym, I didn't even remember ZPS writing that, but I must have read it, obviously, since I assumed correctly.
Oh, my mind, my mind, my weird little mind ... it just churns away, even when I'm not paying attention.
Reader: Why not take up churning butter?
Go on. Give me a pat on the back.
Well, we are starting to make our own yogurt--test run tonight.
Seriously.
Sort of a dairi-ation on the theme, don't you think.
(Yeah, I know. I just don't have Ruth Anne's natural talent. Do I get points for trying, anyway?)
This is ridiculous.
It's 3:30 PM and here I am, tuned to 3 TV sets like some jacked up fan eagerly awaiting the Oscars nominations. I bet you anything it will be announced on Saturday, and all this waiting is for naught.
How bush league, Obama.
Text messages were bad enough, but now you string us along all day Friday like some rockstar keeping his audience waiting because he can.
What are you? Liam Gallagher?
I bet you anything McCain will stride up with military precision at 8 AM on August 29th, and announce HIS VP pick.
Because that's how the pros do it.
Yet another reason why I thank God I am not a Democrat. Amateurs.
Lates,
Victoria
Freak out your favourite Obammesiah nutjob
And if you need to find some Obammesiah nutjobs, go to Redstate.com where you can find the Obama Anti-Christ coffee mugs and T shirts.
I'm not watching TV or listening to radio (and, since my uploads/downloads will soon be done, I'll likely be off the 'net in pretty short order). As I said, times have changed, and it's pretty liberating.
Reader: You curda been a contender. And the yogurt does add to the culture.
[Hint: keep the spelling correct within the new word--"dairy-ation" instead of variation.]
Well all this waiting better pay off. He has to do it, if he's doing it today, before the evening network newscasts, right? That would be 6:30, 3:30 here in the west. So he's got 2.5 hours left. I must be a complete masochist because I want it to be Hillary. As much as I hate the idea, it would certainly be exciting.
Hillary probably toured that Old State House in Springfield in the early 1950s as part of a school trip. It could be kinda cool to have 2 Illinoisans [annoyans?] vying for the office.
reader_iam: Heh. Name that tune!
Dance Motherfucker Dance?
It would be you, Bill. I shoulda started a contest on who would come up with it first, but then, that would have been too easy.
; )
So, this is where the center of the universe is. I guess he didn't get the memo you're sooo tired waiting. I'm sure he'll get to it, being that you've got better things to do.
Perhaps while we wait, we should talk about the challenge to Obama's eligibility, filed yesterday in federal court. I'm very dubious, at first glance, but if Obama's going to leave us hanging with nothing better to talk about, maybe this here's a spectacle meriting a moment's consideration.
Simon- I saw that over at Protein Wisdom a few moments ago and thought it was a joke.
It is, sort of.
It's a "The Reps will do this if we don't" kind of thing, coming from a Hil(l)ary supporter.
If I understand the situation.
I am doubling down. It's gonna be Hillary.
All of the stories about him dissing her? Just a way to get her supporters pissed and then thrill them. All the better to turn them from reluctant followers into enthusiastic backers.
In 2000, I started getting suspicious when, a few days before Al Gore announced his decision, a bunch of Democrats were on TV saying that Joe would be great, but he wouldn't be the choice because it would be too risky to choose a Jew, and that Gore would play it safe.
I've seen this dance before.
It won't be Hillary. Hillary dissed. Talking heads going on about 'why would he do this and leave the dominant story overnight be that he dissed Hillary?' Hillary Hillary Hillary.
Then he announces her, and the prodigal Cubs fan comes with him to Springfield.
Wow, that's a good templae for the McCain complaint. Except you don't have to imagine all the naturalizaion steps:
Unfortunately, McCain is not a "natural born" citizen. Just to name one of the problems, McCain -- a Panamanian citizen by reason of birth in a part of Panama over which Panama retained legal sovereignty -- lost his U.S. citizenship when he failed to take the oath of allegiance when he turned eighteen (18) years to regain his United States Citizenship status.
Why do 9/11 Truthers hate Obama?
Maybe he will pick You, ala Time Magazine. You are the one you have been waiting for!
I can't agree with Simon's take on it. Actually, I can barely understand it. (Not the part about the justices, that's pretty straightforward.)
As someone said earlier, not many are voting for McCain.
If there's a meme that's gonna stick to McCain, it's that he's too old. The only reason the VP pick matters, IMO, is that people are going to look at that person and say, "Can this dude/ette be Pres?"
They're unlikely to do that with Obama, even if his actual life expectancy is shorter.
That's gotta be the key thing.
FLS, whether or not we can agree on McCain (he was born in the PCZ, American soil under both the operative treaty and for all functional purposes under the recent Guantanamo Cases, making him natural-born), we should be able to agree that as legal writing goes, the complaint in this case is quite unbelievably poorly drafted.
garage mahal said...
"Why do 9/11 Truthers hate Obama?"
Whatever the merits, we should expect this sort of attack from a 9/11 truther. If they weren't predisposed to believe any piece of crap that lands in their inbox and happens to line up with their existing prejudices, they wouldn't be a troofer, would they?
It seems to me that when something sounds too good to be true, it usually is. Obama being ineligible is by far too good to be true, and so probably isn't.
The only people who seem to care about Obama's race are himself and his surrogates.
Not even close. This is typical of the garbage being spewed by rightwingers when it comes to the uncomfortable questions about race that keep popping up as the election season moves forward. It's entirely self-serving, and more to the point, demonstrably untrue.
For example, refer to the exit poll in Kentucky which found that "17% of the voters were whites who said they voted against Obama partly because of race." A similar exit poll in West Virginia found that 19% of voters were whites who voted against Obama based on, among other things, considerations of race.
It may not be comfortable for Americans to admit it, but race will be a consideration for some voters, both Democratic and Republican. Based on the evidence from primary season exit polls, voters who consider race as a factor are more likely to live in red states. And again, based on the evidence from exit polls, consideration of race in voting is more likely to hurt Obama than to help him.
He won't do it now - too late on a Friday which is when you release bad news.
He will do it at 11AM tomorrow in Illinois and get maximum exposure in Sundays newspapers and morning smooze fests.
For Obama fans, this is a troubling sign of indecisiveness.
And Ann if it is Sebelius, I win some pools but it says Obama f-ed up his 1st big judgment.
"It seems to me that when something sounds too good to be true, it usually is. Obama being ineligible is by far too good to be true, and so probably isn't."
Too good to be true? I can think of few non-violent things that would be more harmful to the country right now than somehow a court deciding Obama was ineligible.
Well, if I'm wrong, I'm going to have a big fat dumb wrong post on the top of my blog. But...NGNG!
It's Hillary.
I think Enig and ZPS might be right. I doubt he would wait this long for Boring Biden. It would certainly send a lightning bolt through the party. And I think he needs some goons like me on his side who's sole purpose is to clear the boards and rough some people up.
Hey, maybe he's gonna quit and step aside for Hillary! Hoo boy, now wouldn't that be a thing-and-a-half!
Cyrus said...
"For example, refer to the exit poll in Kentucky which found that '17% of the voters were whites who said they voted against Obama partly because of race.'"
And what percentage of that 17% of primary voters meant by that statement not that they were racists, but rather, that they were concerned that voters in the general election would be racists and that selecting a black nominee would diminish the chances of the Democrats prevailing? You don't have that data, I suspect. Nice try, but it doesn't hold water.
EnigmatiCore has left a new comment on the post "I'm getting pretty tired of waiting for Obama to a...":
"I can think of few non-violent things that would be more harmful to the country right now than somehow a court deciding Obama was ineligible."
Why is that? And in any event, surely better now, before he's nominated, than in a few weeks, or worse yet after the election itself, or worst of all, after he's taken office. I believe that McCain is eligible, but if he is found not to be, he doesn't get to be President. It's as simple as that. Doesn't matter how many votes he gets; doesn't matter how much his supporters want him to be. Ditto Obama if he's found ineligible.
If that Drudge story pans out- how tawdry, how tabloid!
I get your point, Simon, and certainly I think the rules should be clear and evenly applied, but I also think EnigmatiCore is right in his/her implication that there could be some profoundly ugly consequences in the event that Obama were to be declared ineligible, and especially at this late date. You seriously think there wouldn't be?
I think the stuff about both Obama's and McCain's citizenship/eligibility is a distraction and born of a certain hysteria and desperation on either side.
Of course, since I think 1) they're both eligible and 2) the arguments that they're not are unconvincing and driven by bad-faith, dirty-pool politics, that reaction on my part ought to be utterly unsurprising.
Drudge is saying it's Evan Bayh. Oh f**king yawn snooze kill me now.
All this suspense and people are going to get a text message with quite possibly the two most boring words in the English language paired together: Evan + Bayh?
FAIL.
If it's Bayh he should've announced it at 9am today.
And if this is how he chooses to run this shitshow I'm not voting for him.
You gotta ask yourself: why are people so curious about Obama's pick and not McCain's? Part of it is the media swooning and cocooning. Part of it is that Obama enjoys oddly devoted support as some political messiah by a fraction of the electorate. All true.
However, it's not he is leading by a mile, or even an inch. He is behind in leading polls.
Implicit in the curiosity is the fact that Obama really has no credentials and no experience. People want to see Obama make a decision, any decision, and they want to feel more comfortable with voting for him.
And what percentage of that 17% of primary voters meant by that statement not that they were racists, but rather, that they were concerned that voters in the general election would be racists and that selecting a black nominee would diminish the chances of the Democrats prevailing?
Simon, your speculation is a real stretch, and of course, is inconsistent with the details of interviews with the segment of the 17% who chose to elaborate. But more to the point, your speculation is entirely irrelevant as it in no way defends your initial claim:
Racism won't be a factor at all. The only people who seem to care about Obama's race are himself and his surrogates.
First, your bizarre speculation itself hinges on considerations of racism in voting. Second, implicit in your speculation is an admission that some fraction of the observed racial considerations in voting do amount to racism. Third, it's clear that those who care and consider race as a factor in this election are not limited to Obama and his surrogates.
Your initial claim is demonstrably false. You'd be better served by modifying your assertion to fit the evidence rather than simply denying the existence of evidence that disproves your claim. In general, when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
People want to see Obama make a decision, any decision
Any opportunity to slam Obama!
But you're wrong. If McCain were going first there would be just as much speculation.
Drudge has a big question mark in his headline.
"If it's Bayh he should've announced it at 9am today."
How dare you question his timing
Won't some 99 percent of all African-Americans vote for Obama? Is this not because of his race?
Cyrus Pinkerton race baited:
Based on the evidence from primary season exit polls, voters who consider race as a factor are more likely to live in red states.
And even more likely, in general - they tend to be Democrats.
Covert racism: the silent killer.
On edit: African-Americans vote for Democrats largely, anyway. This we know. But isn't it fair to say that African-American voters consider Obama's race a critical reason why they will vote for him?
The leftists who say that it's impossible for minorities to be racist are actually just being honest. They are thinking their own position through to its logical conclusion.
If it's I was wrong about his choice. But I was right he f'ed it up because Bayh will not even win Obama Bayh's state.
Obama/Bayh 08
Ba Ba Ba...
...bomb Iran!
you needed one more "bomb" there seven to keep the beat.
On another note...
I sure hope Barack Obama has a good text-messaging rate plan.
Mine only allows for 300 free texts per month. After that it's 10 cents each.
Yikes.
Simon - I disagree. Assuming he wants to win, McCain has two and only two viable choices for veep: Sarah Palin or Meg Whitman. A middle aged white man is not going to work, and that isn't going to change no matter who Obama's veep is.
Your words reflect the obsession with identity politics common on the Left, academia, with Jewish and black Americans, and of course the pundit class.
It was just scant months ago that Condi Rice was touted as the "perfect VP". Her policy disasters and being the person "closest to Bush" non-withstanding.
Why? Because she ticked off a long list of affirmative action "diversity" bonus points "sure" to send each demographic group into rapture to vote for her! "Shes black, she's smart! She was a black ice skater! Shes female. AND, she miiight just be gay!!!!"
Never elected to anything, seen as too weak to stand up to Cheney-Rumsfeld on any policy matter...yeah, that would have made sense! Female black women and gays, just piling into the polls for her, along with the minority ice skater vote..
The past perception is someone that feels compelled to boldly pick a "special diversity candidate" like Ferraro ends up paying for it because voters see the Presidential nominee as weak simply for selecting an underqualified, weak candidate.
Obama has even more of a problem if he "goes female". A female pick other than Hillary will be seen as a big diss of the woman that actually ran and has half the present votes of Dems behind her.
But picking Hillary basically throws his whole "change, transcending the old race and politics business" message right out the window as Barack would restore the "Dynastic Politics" of a Bush or a Clinton on the ticket for almost 30 years.
It would also be seen as the Clintonistas sucessfully intimidating and punking out little inexperienced Obambi..following their many disses and steamrollering of Obama's forces on the Convention vote and speaker slots.
With McCain, picking a weakly qualified woman like Palin, Jodi Rell of Connecticut, Christine Todd Whitman (who failed and bailed at EPA) would also be seen as Ferraro-like pandering.
My own choice would be Tom Ridge to finally beat it into the Jesus Squad that they cannot run the Republican Party like it was the Christian Taliban and marginalize and drive away the half to the Republicans and 70% of the independents that are moderate pro-choicers or who think it was wrong for the Court to usurp The People but have no issue with voters in any state setting their own abortion laws.
(Oh, and the matter of Ridge helping in blue collar working states like Pennsylvania, Ohio - plus his national security and decorated Marine background)
My second choice is the brilliant, able Romney - who set up his own biggest problem - the date that has tons of good qualities - but puts the gal off and loses out because he is pathetically too eager to please, to get into her pants.
Romney could work if Mccain selects and sells Romney as his pointman to start fixing the massive problems in America both Parties decided to kick down the road. Saying that if elected, he would delegate Mitt responsibility for picking a bipartisan team that would do a complete strategic audit of the Federal Gov'ts waste and duplication of services in order to keep taxes in control.
Then follow up with news he would have Romney take day-to-day leadership of the drive to get the team and policy in place to turn around the US economy, especially with respect to the poor economies of the Midwest and Northern industrial states and report daily to McCain on status and McCains review and consent. With key elements being fiscal stability, ending the unsustainable loss of American wealth to foreign countries, and a coherent national energy policy.
And say he is "very open" to ideas from Romney and Democrats on how to cover 40 million hard-working Americans now denied health insurance by employers, their own meager resources, or a pre-existing health condition.
Romney makes great sense in that way because since Mondale, the Parties have realized that the VP office can get a lot of things done that a Cabinet member or appointed "Czar" cannot. It makes sense to have a powerful, able person in that office rather than a "spare in waiting" that does nothing. Cheney's screwups and Gores wierd diversions nonwithstanding...
(And Romney's big help in Michigan, toss-up Western States)
Rice is also a Jew, Cedarford. Strike three.
A-ha!
I've got it. Maybe Barry has free nighttime texts and this is why he's waiting till after the 7pm to announce?
Cyrus Pinkerton race baited
Meade, I'm sorry but you're full of shit. I've reported the results of exit polls. If you disagree with my interpretation of those polls, be specific in your disagreement.
Your comment is, unfortunately, typical of the kind of garbage that pollutes these discussions. You've made an accusation, not based on evidence, but based on a desire to silent a voice with which you disagree. If you have something intelligent to say on the subject, please share it. I'd be thrilled to see an intelligent counterargument based on facts. But if your irrational and reactionary charge of "race baiting" is the best you have to offer, then please know that you, and anyone genetically related to you, have my deepest sympathy.
because of our present-day oligarchical political system, where political power once obtained is never relinquished and the same old dinosaurs stay in office forever, preventing any new and fresh blood from gaining any real and necessary experience, everyone who is qualified for the position is lousy and boring.
*Congress* is filled with the "same old dinosaurs", but Congressmen seldom get to be President. For the past 44 years the winning candidate has been either a governor (current or former) or a Vice President (current or former).
A Senator vs. Senator race is extremely unusual.
Is there a limit on recipients for a text? I think the whole thing is costing Obama 10 cents. Money poorly spent, of course, if Drudge proves to be a great gumshoe once again.
By the way, Zach: if you want to take back your vow to not vote for Obama, I give you two hours until after the nomination. That's it. Then you are on the record into perpetuity.
Hey, Cedarford mentioned Jews in his comment. What are the odds?
You are race-baiting, Cyrus.
And it's true: the people who thus far have voted against Obama on the basis of race, if any, have been Democrats who are serious enough about the party to vote in a primary.
Cyrus Pinkerton said...
Meade, I'm sorry but you're full of shit. I've reported the results of exit polls. If you disagree with my interpretation of those polls, be specific in your disagreement.
Your comment is, unfortunately, typical of the kind of garbage that pollutes these discussions. You've made an accusation, not based on evidence, but based on a desire to silent a voice with which you disagree. If you have something intelligent to say on the subject, please share it. I'd be thrilled to see an intelligent counterargument based on facts. But if your irrational and reactionary charge of "race baiting" is the best you have to offer, then please know that you, and anyone genetically related to you, have my deepest sympathy
LOL!
Who really reads a Cedarford post closely enough to see if he actually spouts off his antisemitism? It's just a given.
Whenever I do my nightly drunk texting to all my ex's I can only text like 20 people at a time.
There are some plans where you have "unlimited texts" per month, which I'm sure Obama has. But still, can you send one individual text to, let's say, 20 million people at once? Geez it would take so long to put in all the numbers. And is Obama going to do the text or will it be an aide? I like the idea of Obama texting.
I'm going to sign up at his site right now (I don't know what I haven't yet) and I will report back what it says.
And yes, Seven, I will honor your 2-hour window post nomination if it is Bayh.
African-Americans vote for Democrats largely, anyway. This we know. But isn't it fair to say that African-American voters consider Obama's race a critical reason why they will vote for him?
Sure it is. It's another reason why Simon is wrong. But as far as estimating how considerations of race factored into the Democratic primaries in KY and WV, for example, the evidence shows that Obama had a net loss of votes among those who considered race. It's quite clear from the polling data.
Meade -- Cryus never tries to "silent" voices. His is not the voice of a bully, surely. He is a well-meaning leftist with no ax to grind and tolerance for all views that do not oppose his own. Now, please, just shut up and listen to him.
So, Cyrus, in a state with equal percentages of blacks and whites, the racism would wash out. In any state that is majority black, under your own premises, racism would just swing the vote to Obama.
Former Law Student -
McCain -- a Panamanian citizen by reason of birth in a part of Panama over which Panama retained legal sovereignty -- lost his U.S. citizenship when he failed to take the oath of allegiance when he turned eighteen (18) years to regain his United States Citizenship status.
Oh yeah! I strongly encourage you and your nutroots/can't see the forest for the trees lawyers to keep pursuing that one.
Here are some minor flaws with the Left's "brilliant" ploy to claim McCain is technically disqualified from citizenship.
1. McCain "failed" to claim he was secretly a Panamanian Zonie at 18 because he had already started at the Naval Academy at age 17, sworn his oath of allegiance to America and the Constitution? And was otherwise busy with classes, driving fast cars, challenging upper classmen "assholes" to fights, and sneaking out to fuck strippers or high school cheerleaders.
2. Yes, because the Democrat effort to throw out absentee military ballots in 2000 and otherwise treat Americans deployed abroad as 2nd-class citizens wasn't enough.
Challenge their very citizenship.
3. No American born of US citizens overseas forfeits their citizenship at age 18 unless they swear a loyalty oath. That is crap. More 2nd-class treatment of the 30 million Americans in families affected by overseas obligations?? And I thought Lefties weren't keen on loyalty oaths. Especially ones where they claim foreign treaties cause a loss of US citizenship, and a loyalty oath is needed to regain it
Truth is that a born of blood, jus sanguinis American has an ironclad right to citizenship that predates the 14th Amendment now abused to confer instant citizenship on whatever spawn from whatever illegal or someone here on Visa spits out inside our Borders.
The only way you can lose jus sanguinis citizenship is to actively seek to renounce it in a formal State Department application process. Your parents cannot do it, you cannot do it until AFTER you turn 18 and also declare you are no longer a dependent.
You are race-baiting, Cyrus.
Well, I guess there's more than one person here who's too dumb to know what race baiting means. Worse yet, the ignorant are unlikely to use this opportunity to educate themselves.
Silents, Seven! I'm trying to listen to Cyrus Pinkerton.
If only everyone would just listen to you, Cyrus.
OMG Seven and Cedarford and whoever else stop arguing and listen up!
Here is the auto-text I received after signing up for Obama's VP text:
"Welcome to Obama Mobile. You will now be one of the 1st notified when the VP candidate is selected. Text HELP for help. Std charges apply. Please forward."
Help?
Help is on the way!
Std charges apply? Uh oh.
You get to know the pick AND you pay money AND you get herpes!
Truly, change we can believe in.
Sounds like Barak is texting everyone COLLECT.
Hold on while I put a condom over my phone.
You will now be one of the 1st notified
Well at least he is being honest and telling you about the STD. I hate it when dudes are all "It wasn't me!"
What did you say? I can't hear you.
Cryus never tries to "silent" voices.
Seven, you are such a fool sometimes. First, I'm not a "leftist," which you would realize if you ever took the time to think about what I've written rather than just reacting. Oh well.
Second, I always hold a minority opinion here, and I've never made any attempt to chase a fellow commenter from this blog. On the other hand, there've been many attempts to push me out. That hardly makes me a "bully," Seven. However, if your concern about bullies is genuine (which I doubt), I'm sure you'll step up in my defense at some point.
Third, if you read my comment to Meade, you'll see that I encourage him/her to respond substantively to my post. That hardly amounts to an attempt to bully or silence someone with whom I disagree.
Okay, Seven, sorry for the interruption. You can go back to your wildly inaccurate observations now.
Cyrus -- I don't know you. However, I cannot remember you ever having one single thought that wasn't highly left of center.
I certainly am not trying to muzzle you.
I think it's fair to say that your posts have a certain shut up and listen to me your morons tone to them.
That's right, your morons.
So, Cyrus, in a state with equal percentages of blacks and whites, the racism would wash out.
I don't think the evidence from exit polls in KY or WV supports that conclusion. However, since the extent to which consideration of race factors into the vote depends on the state itself, you'd have to place your hypothetical state regionally before any sort of attempt to extrapolate from exit poll data would begin to make sense. (And in my opinion, it still wouldn't make sense!)
In any state that is majority black, under your own premises, racism would just swing the vote to Obama.
Again, this really just doesn't make sense. I was reporting results from real exit poll data from real states. I don't see how I could possibly predict results from hypothetical states. It just isn't a sensible proposal.
"...you'll see that I encourage him/her to respond substantively to my post. That hardly amounts to an attempt to bully or silence someone with whom I disagree."
Yeah, Seven, Cyrus encouraged me and then, just when I was feeling self-esteemful, he said my gene pool was full of shit.
But he meant it in a nice way. Because he's a nice guy.
Who race baits.
reader_iam said...
"I get your point, Simon, and certainly I think the rules should be clear and evenly applied, but I also think EnigmatiCore is right in his/her implication that there could be some profoundly ugly consequences in the event that Obama were to be declared ineligible, and especially at this late date. You seriously think there wouldn't be?"
I think that the Constitution is in dangerous waters this election. I think Obama is very likely to win a majority in the popular vote while being crushed in the electoral college. If that happens, his supporters will go apeshit, and start pushing to amend the Constitution. If Obama (or McCain) are determined to be ineligible but are elected anyway, and the courts refuse to step in, the eligibility clause is rendered effectively advisory, begging the question of what else in the Constitution can be overriden if a temporary majority think it should set aside? And if Obama wins, the consequences are unimaginable, a fortiori if he has not only a majority but a filibuster-proof majority in Congress, per the link above.
Cyrus Pinkerton said...
"Simon, your speculation is a real stretch, and of course, is inconsistent with the details of interviews with the segment of the 17% who chose to elaborate. "
It isn't a stretch, it's a hypothesis that fits the data no better or worse than yours. And your attempt at a reply reflects the truth of my supposition above that you don't have an answer - just the raw data and a theory that fits it.
"Your initial claim is demonstrably false.
If that were so, you would demonstrate that it was false, which you did not.
Cedarford said...
"Simon ... [y]our words reflect the obsession with identity politics common on the Left, academia, with Jewish and black Americans, and of course the pundit class."
It reflects my insistence that our strategy reflect what a majority of the actual electorate thinks, rather than what a hypothetical electorate filled with people who think like me think. You go to war with the army you have, and into an election with the electorate you have.
Well, dude, if I'm not allowed to extrapolate from past results then you certainly aren't, either.
Simon -- If the winner of the popular vote keeps losing the electoral college, that's certainly a decent argument to change the Constitution or make some adjustments to the electoral college allotment.
I think it should remain. I think it's vital that pure popular sentiment not be the only thing. North Dakota is a big state with few people but the fact that it has such few people shouldn't make it politically unimportant.
Still, there's a decent argument there.
For the record, I don't think it's going to be a problem.
I cannot remember you ever having one single thought that wasn't highly left of center.
Fair enough. I guess you haven't read my comments on the Iraq War, the economy, the environment, energy policy, gay marriage, etc...
Tell me though, please, on what issue do you believe I'm "highly left of center?"
Instead of amending the Constitution, wouldn't it make more sense for popular vote winners/electoral college losers to just move to North Dakota?
I stand by my claim, Cyrus.
Yeah, Seven, Cyrus encouraged me...
Well, for the record, here's what I wrote:
I've reported the results of exit polls. If you disagree with my interpretation of those polls, be specific in your disagreement.
That reads like an encouragement to me, Meade. I'll admit, I discouraged you from name-calling, particularly name-calling without basis in fact, but I certainly encouraged a substantive reply.
In any case, I'm sorry, Meade, if you were put off by my reaction to your insult. Isn't it a bitch when someone objects strongly to a cheap shot that has no basis in fact?
Seven Machos said...
"Simon -- If the winner of the popular vote keeps losing the electoral college, that's certainly a decent argument to change the Constitution or make some adjustments to the electoral college allotment."
Only if you assume one of two things:
(1) that the electoral college ought to produce a result complying with the popular vote winner, and that it is broken and must be fixed if the result obtained there is routinely at variance with the popular vote; or
(2) if you think that the national popular vote winner ought to be President and that impediments to that result should be removed.
I disagree with both assumptions, and note that the former would render the electoral college purposeless. I don't believe that our system was designed as one in which the President is to be elected by a majority in a national election, and I don't want such a system. That the Constitution doesn't preclude that result as a command enforceable by the courts doesn't mean that as a normative matter we shouldn't adhere to it as a discretionary choice (cf. my comments the other day about Congress having the power but not the right to extort state policy).
I don't think the evidence from exit polls in KY or WV supports that conclusion.
In every state -- blue, red, or purple -- blacks voted for Obama in vastly higher percentages than whites voted for Clinton.
Now, it could be that Obama is so orgasmicly wonderful that he'd have snatched up 80+% of ALL the Democratic votes, rather than just the black ones, if white Democratic racists weren't compelled to vote for Clinton or Edwards. But meanwhile, back here on planet Earth, the truth is that a lot of black voters never needed to know anything more than his skin color.
For Obama or his fans to whine about race as a factor is silly. If it wasn't for race, Hillary would currently be pondering whether or not to offer HIM the Vice Presidency. Black voters choosing the color of his skin over the content of his character is what put him over the top.
Simon wrote:
...it's a hypothesis that fits the data no better or worse than yours
Actually, your hypothesis (in addition to being bizarre) is inconsistent with the reported detailed answers given by respondents. Your hypothesis is also entirely inconsistent with the regional variations in the data. And, more to the point, your hypothesis explicitly acknowledges that your initial claim is incorrect. You simply cannot prove your claim is correct when you start with an acknowledgement that your claim is incorrect.
...you would demonstrate that it was false, which you did not
Oh man, are you really that slow? Okay, by the numbers then...
Simon says: Racism won't be a factor at all.
Simon's hypothesis: [Some] percentage of that 17% of primary voters meant by that statement not that they were racists, but rather, that they were concerned that voters in the general election would be racists and that selecting a black nominee would diminish the chances of the Democrats prevailing?
Explanation for Simon: Simon, unless that "percentage of the 17%' is 100%, then you are admitting that some voters are directly selecting a candidate on the basis of race (i.e., racism). In that case, your hypothesis contradicts your claim.
Now, what about the voters who are "concerned that voters in the general election would be racists and that selecting a black nominee would diminish the chances of the Democrats prevailing?" Well, Simon, in that case, those voters are voting on the basis of perceived racism, and whether actual or not, considerations of racism will have played a role in shaping the vote. Again, your hypothesis contradicts your claim.
Simon says: The only people who seem to care about Obama's race are himself and his surrogates.
Explanation for Simon: Simon, according to your hypothesis, some voters are selecting a candidate based on direct or indirect considerations of race. Obviously then, race is something considered by people other than Obama and his surrogates. Again, your own hypothesis contradicts your claim.
Finally Simon, I assume you've heard of groups such as Aryan Nation, The Order, etc... Is it really your position that the members of these organizations don't care about Obama's race?
As I said earlier, it makes more sense to modify your statement to be consistent with the available evidence rather than to deny all evidence that contradicts your claim.
Face it, Simon. You are a slobbering moron.
"In any case, I'm sorry, Meade, if you were..."
Apology accepted!
dude, if I'm not allowed to extrapolate from past results then you certainly aren't, either.
Dude, I didn't. I reported the results. If you don't agree with my interpretation, give me your take. But to be honest, it's a pretty simple, straightforward analysis--it involves reading numbers from a table.
Good luck with an alternative interpretation, dude.
I stand by my claim, Cyrus.
I'm sure you do, Seven, but it speaks volumes that when I challenge you to produce a single example from your many observations, you can't supply a single one.
Cyrus Pinkerton said...
"Actually, your hypothesis (in addition to being bizarre)..."
It's not bizarre at all. It assumes that some primary voters decide how to support based on which candidate they think is best able to win in the general election rather than who they would prefer to govern. That isn't "bizarre," it's ordinary and rational voter behavior.
"...is inconsistent with the reported detailed answers given by respondents."
Doubt it. If that were so, you would have linked to the data supporting your position, because show me is always more convincing than tell me.
"You simply cannot prove your claim is correct when you start with an acknowledgement that your claim is incorrect. "
Never made any such acknowledgement. My claim was that racism won't be a factor, not that liberal primary voters won't believe that racism will be a factor in the fall and structure their primary voting accordingly.
"Finally Simon, I assume you've heard of groups such as Aryan Nation, The Order, etc... Is it really your position that the members of these organizations don't care about Obama's race?"
There are also people who believe that we never landed on the moon, but their votes will not be a factor in this election. The fact that there are people out there who are racists doesn't defeat my claim.
If it wasn't for race, Hillary would currently be pondering whether or not to offer HIM the Vice Presidency. Black voters choosing the color of his skin over the content of his character is what put him over the top.
The exit polling data certainly doesn't support this conclusion.
The fact remains that, based on the KY and WV exit polling data, the results show that among those voters who said they considered race as a factor, Clinton gained a significant advantage over Obama.
You know what would be cool?
The announcement to come, via text message, at something like 11PM EDT.
It would be a way to say to the young voters-- this one's for you. You're with me, right?
It would be different, hip, and I think it would generate positive buzz.
Simon's comment is 194 (or least when I came in to post this), which means mine is 195.
The magic 200 is approaching ... .
"Officials said text message announcement will go out Sat. morning..."
Oh shucks. Guess I might as well take my condom back off.
You can't assume a black voting for a black is racist anymore than a white voting a white is racist. You should be able to vote any damn way you please, for any any damn reason you please, without a explanation to anyone.
Who do you think you are, garage mahal? It's a free country. Cyrus Pinkerton has a right to assume anything about anyone he wishes to assume.
Post a Comment