There are some situations so obvious that you almost feel you don't have to comment upon them. Then you wake up one morning and realize not only should you have expressed your opinion but you should have done it loudly and resoundingly and repeatedly. The odious concept of former Georgia Senator Sam Nunn serving on a ticket with Senator Obama is one of those situations.
Over the last week or two, we all have seen his name mentioned by some very progressive activists as an ideal running mate for the Illinois Senator. The conventional logic is that he is very conservative, could help us take some Southern states (especially Georgia) and would provide needed balance to the ticket. On the superficial face of that evaluation, I suppose they might be correct. However, upon closer consideration, this is a classic case of decision-making based on crass politics without regard to reality. Sam Nunn might bring us Georgia and maybe even another Southern state but, in my opinion, at an unacceptable cost to our principles and to the concept of change that has stirred millions to rise and work for Barack Obama.
Sam Nunn would be a disaster as a running mate and a total anathema to millions of Americans. His presence would totally diminish the power of the Obama campaign notion of change. Nunn on the ticket would show that 'Politics As Usual' has supplanted the 'Change In Politics' mantra. More importantly for some of us, it would place a man on the ticket who has an execrable record on civil rights - especially LGBT rights.
Over the years, categorically, Nunn has made all the wrong decisions when it comes to equal rights. He was a strong supporter of Lester Maddox for Governor, a rabid segregationist who handed out axe handles to highlight his 'whites only' policy. In addition, Nunn was a supporter of George Wallace in his ill-fated campaign for President. The former Senator has opposed every advancement for the LGBT community and vigorously took the lead in the opposition to gays and lesbians in the military. Along with former President Bill Clinton, we have Sam Nunn to thank for the sorry debacle of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."
Can you imagine anyone who opposed equal rights for blacks, Jews or women being granted such a place of honor? Clearly former Senator Nunn's positions on equal rights for the LGBT community should be reason enough to keep him off the ticket.
www.davidmixner.com
Until South is really Reconstructed by immigration from outside US and migration from North, a North/South Coalition is not possible for Democrats.
If you start with 2004 performance, swap Iowa for NH, then battleground states become NV, CO, NM, VA, and a district in NE all of which are more like the Midwest, Northeast and West Coast (more urban, "ethnic", catholic) than like the South/Appalachia/Ozarks (more WASPy and rural). At that point OH/FL are not nearly as relevant nor electorally polarizing.
Fighting over SouthernOhio and NorthernFlorida is to replay a "southern/appalachia" strategy which is unlikely to work, backward-looking, and emphasizes a redux of cultural and civil rights wars. For goodness sakes lets, start acting like we've "overcome" or at least almost "overcome". To fight over NV, CO, NM, VA and maybe a district in NE, is forward-looking and about a new vision that is pluralistic not dualistic.
We're ready for President who's a non-WASP with vowel on end of name. When Obama gets the nomination he should pick a VP that is also foward-looking. That ain't Nunn, Webb, or Clinton.
A few decades ago, Greene County, Alabama elected a Black sheriff, Thomas Gilmore. In his youth he was a member of SNCC. My WASP grandparents came to appreciate and respect Gilmore as a sheriff, and he won re-election with white support, if I recall correctly.
The point is, Obama can teach my fellow Alabamians to be Al Obamanians.
It's gonna come out 'Al Obama-nanians'.
How about 'Alobamians'?
I am an undecided independent from GA, attended the Sam Nunn School of International Affairs at GA Tech(one of the best in the nation, Go Jackets!) and having Sam Nunn wouldn't sway me to vote for Obama. Only Obama can do that. The importance of the VP on the ticket is so over rated its gotten ridiculous. It only matters to the Washington insiders and DNC cronies.
I always wonder about the term "progressive". I'm a liberal, and from my viewpoint way out here on the left, these people look like Republicans to me, conservatives who are fed up with the GOP, and now are trying to take over the Democratic Party.
Anyway, Sam Nunn with Obama? NEVER!
But what about Wes Clark? He is someone we can trust.
The folks suggesting him are the same folks who feel that the ticket needs to have at least one member of the DLC on the ticket.
My fear is that the various parts of the Dem coalition will always have some beef with the VP choice. Webb is too anti-woman, Nunn is anti-gay, etc.
That said, I can see both good and bad in Obama's picking Nunn. First, I'm not sure Nunn is the ideal VP candidate -- I recall him as kind of dour and not the best speaker. But with Barr (GA) siphoning off some of Georgia's small government-minded voters as the Libertarian candidate and with some evangelical disaffection for McCain, having Nunn on the ticket could allow the Dems to appeal to AA and moderate white suburbanites and the Dems could unexpectedly snatch GA's electoral votes. At a minimum, with Nunn on the ticket the GOP will need to spend more resources protecting its southern flank -- resources that might otherwise be spent in places like Ohio or Michigan or Pennsylvania.
Nunn should be considered, as a statesman. Also, Bob Graham.
Both are old, but as they say, '70 is the new 50', right?
Gay men just love strong tough women. It breaks the stereotype of gender roles.