My Choice for Vice President
If I wasn't certain it would be like pounding sand down a rat hole, I would be taking out full page ads to tell the world I saw the man who should be the Vice Presidential running mate for either Barack Obama or John McCain. For John McCain because he calls himself a conservative. For Barack Obama because he said that in '06, despite his conservative credentials, he voted for Democrats who promised to end a war he had long seen as futile. For Barack Obama and John McCain because in this one-hour interview on Bill Moyers Journal (Friday, August 15 on your PBS station), Andrew J. Bacevich, graduate of West Point, 23-year Army veteran and retired Colonel, now an author and professor of history at Boston University, stood up with more strength, more historic context, and more clarity than any Democrat or Republican in the house or senate on all the front-burner issues.
Watch the interview here.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Clark bests Bacevich on any number of counts so why bother with hamburger when you could have steak?
Not least of which being that at bottom I think Bacevich is a hawk, albeit a smart one.
I agree.
Another point, American Voters should be obligated to watch Bill Moyer's Shows.
Each one provides mental thinking exercises which all other shows do not.
We should be worried about the lack of brain use in America as much as eating
too much sugar.
I agree with Voter!
However, the problem is, as Bacevich points out, that most Americans don't want to use their brains. They just want to elect someone who will "fix" things for them.
I don't see this changing in the foreseeable future, and that is truly depressing.
The problem with either party drafting Bacevich for VP, is he's already got the job he wants now. Why would he accept a lesser job?
Col. Andrew Bacevich's son was killed in Iraq 15 months ago.
He is a brilliant, distinguished, and dignified man, but had to stop for a few heartbeats during the interview when his son was mentioned to try to swallow the lump in his throat.
This was a glimpse of humanity, pain and suffering we never see in politicians who have never been called on to sacrifice much of anything, let alone the life of their precious child taken from them because of the deadly folly of some empty, imbecilic, dime store cowboy wannabe who struts around calling himself The Decider, The Commander-in-Chief and making life and death (mostly death) decisions that adversely affect us all.
Have we seen a trace of genuine heartfelt emotion amidst the rhetoric from any of our politicians? And NO! Hillary's pretend boo-hoo moment doesn't count.
I saw that at the end too. It was an excellent interview and the epitath at the end made it all that more potent.
The most striking point that was made is something I advocated from 9/11 on and that is that the entire episode should have been treated as a criminal matter and not as an act of war.Every criminal investigating resource around the World should have been brought to bear to find and bring to justice the persons responsible for that crime.Evidence should have been gathered,witnesses interviewed,and ultimately charges brought. Instead this debacle has occured needlessly.
At some point, it would have been necessary to use force against Afghanistan to arrest al Qaeda. But that should have come late in the investigation.
And when it did come, it should have been an all in commitment that didn't fritter away the moment.
When you want to trash a country you use the Army. When you want to find one person you use the Police Department.
The Army was used to justify a war based upon profiteering and grabbing access to someone's oil reserves. Until that is discussed the whole episode in Iraq and the croc tears cried about Bin Laden being on the loose mean nothing. We didn't catch Bin Laden because we weren't looking for him. We were looking to steal someone else's oil and get rich in the process. Remember who put Saddam in power in the first place (that photo of Rumsfeld and Saddam from the 1980s) remember who gave him the chemical weapons he used on his own people, and remember who was still trading with him up and until the day that we decided he had to be attacked (a Halliburton subsidiary based in Germany.) Who was the CEO who set up that Germany subsidiary for Halliburton? Need I say more?
No money in that. Also no "war powers". These are the two major reasons for our "wars".
I saw the Andrew Bacevich interview and was absolutely enthralled at the brilliance and prescience of him. I was so enthusiastic about him and the interview in general I emailed him to thank him. He was simply testament to the brilliance of Moyers as their conversation had such depth and foresight. Hell, forget VP I would vote for Professor Bacevich for president. Now THAT is the kind of person that should occupy this office of such importance and such gravity. Here is a man, a West Pointer and self described conservative, who could so clearly see the error of our nation's ways.
Kudos to him and to Moyers for presenting the best in TV journalism. Long live PBS!!
Clark may be admirable in many ways, but he's a lousy campaigner, and doesn't come across as a guy's guy, which Obama needs. Clark, for all his military cred, seems too soft. He'd serve well as VP, but I don't think he can win as VP choice.
He's flawed, but I'd vote for Biden. He supplies what Obama lacks, including personality-wise, and gives a better chance to win.
Me too.
It was a magnificent interview. Unfortunately, Americans are too entrenched in consumerist culture to accept Professor Bacevich's truth-telling. As he said, the imperial presidency will never be reined in so long as the American people refuse to look in the mirror and "see the extent to which the problems that we face really lie within."
Me, I'm convinced that General Clark is the obvious best choice to be Obama's vice presidential pick. He has military, political (on the periphery) diplomatic (European), and administrative experience. He is very well known. He was first in his class at West Point (as opposed to McCain who was about fifth from last) so he is demonstrably intelligent.
It was indeed an excellent program, and I was impressed; however, I don't think we're ready for this yet, because when you go down this road you have to be ready to stand by the princples expressed, and Obama is not that kind of politician--he wants to win [and I don't put any negatives on that], and seemingly will do whatever is required to get there...and perhaps, under the present circumstances, that's the best game plan.
Andrew J. Bacevich would make an excellent Presidential or VP candidate, provided that he could get enough popular support to make a real stand against the status quo; we're not there yet [if we ever will be], and whomever goes down that path has to be willing to hold onto the stated principles despite all the BS they would be assaulted with--he would certainly tell us the truth, but the majority isn't ready for that--we have to be fully knocked off of this "greatest nation/world leadership" pedestal we've come to identify the US as occupying.
As he pointed out, America has a real problem with reality and self-examination, and we're still too self-glorified to accept the truth of what we are, and how we need to change.
I'd like for someone to address the whole 'whatever is required to get there' issue.
Aren't we, as Americans, the ones who controls that? Are we so conditioned to the sports and wrestling and spectator events that we want to be entertained and a team to root for.......no matter what kind of cheating or lack of integrity takes place............just so OUR team wins.
Are WE the reason the bar gets set lower and it becomes a 'whatever it takes to win' situation?
If one candidate puts out a completely dishonest and well.......frankly stupid ad......and his numbers go up the next week.............where's the incentive to NOT do that anymore?
I'd like to take the pointing finger off the candidate for a minute and point it back at.....us.
A lot of excellent analysis on the subject here:
http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/20080718.htm
The finger does eventually come back to point at us, and we in turn create the candidate that we, as consumers, can accept [as directed by corporate media guidelines].
Ultimately we must assume responsibility for resisting the corporate media manipulations used against us, but first we must understand what they are, and how they are used to control us before we can effectively resist and organize against them.
Once we have freed ourselves of undue influence and near-subliminal manipulations, we can foster a candidate that can fly in the face of the accepted status quo version of what a candidate must be; he/she is already out there waiting...it is we the people who are holding up the first true democratic revolution in the US.
Point it at the media. And the lack of truth therein.
Love your name Rolo. Wonder how many get the reference.
Only the true movie buffs get it, I suspect.
Why go for a retired Colonel when we can have a retired 4 star General?
Wesley Clark has an incredible resume graduated first in his class at West Point, was a Rhodes scholar and studied at Oxford, Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, received a Silver Star, Bronze Star and Purple Heart for heroism in Vietnam, is a great liberal democrat and will almost guarantee victory in November.
Obama/Clark
For a return to sanity in government.
In addition to below, go to Amazon, do a search for books by this guy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Bacevich#Biography
And what's wrong with a retired Colonel?
I agree, this man can restore America and Obama would be wise to choose him. He's like the medicine that 90 % of the country desperately needs but doesn't even know it.
Obama/Bacevich..................this would be a miracle.
OBAMA'S RUNNING MATE?
For those who have asked me whom I think Obama will choose as his vice presidential running mate, these are my thoughts:
If he doesn't do the smart thing and pick Hillary Clinton he will then need a heavy weight in foreign policy, defense and security issues to compensate for his obvious deficiencies; someone with impeccable credentials whose knowledge and credibility are unquestionable. In short, Obama will need the man who John Kerry would likely have picked if he could return to the 04 campaign. That man, I believe, is the excellent, formidable Sam Augustus Nunn. As Nunn is a former U.S. Senator from Georgia, and liberal anti-Soviet cold warrior in the JFK mold, he would greatly help Obama on the Georgia crisis and Russia's resurgent imperialism. But like Lloyd Bensten in 1988-the heavy weight senator who failed to help Dukakis-Nunn will do little to advance Obama to the presidency for reasons I'll discuss on Saturday if he's BO's choice.
I'm from Georgia. No you don't want Sam Nunn a repub in demo clothing.
No one has asked you anything, because nobody wants to hear you go off. I bet your co-workers run when they see you approaching the break room.
Since Nixon, negative adds have worked in Politics election after election...If you repeat it enough it must be true. It's not about character or judgment or the best vision for America. We think we must run the Government as a business and therefore privatize all functions including are Military. What fork will we take the past seven half years or _______________?
He seems polar opposite of McCain.
This interview was watershed television and should be seen by every American even considering the possibility of voting in the next election. No bumper sticker sloganeering, no posturing & no editing of the facts to protect an existing position- just the plain and unvarnished inconvenient truths about the situation America is in.
It's really too bad that all of our Congressional candidates cannot be vetted through such truth.
I have always considered Carter the best pres in my lifetime, I'm going to watch this interview and get some talking points. Thank you for sharing it, HP.
Where is Dave Chapelle when we need him.
Are you joking? I saw that interview and I agree with most of your comments. But most Americans do not have the intellect or patience to watch a thoughtful, deliberative interview. I'm thinking of Dave Chapelle and keepin' it real. Can you imagine sitting down watching that interview with your tuna and noodle casserole, potato chips, and bud light instead of the Nascar race/WWF match you had planned on? Look at the polls. People will actually vote for John McCain because he's a regular white guy instead of the obviously more intelligent and thoughtful Barack Obama. People are complaining they don't know Barack Obama when he has 2 book and his biography and policies are all over the Internet. That just takes too much trouble. Vice President? Let's find the most white bread, milquetoast, guys' guy we can find. And don't make him too smart 'cause that would make us feel bad about ourselves. Look at who is President now -- I think I made my point.
katmeyster, you nailed it on the head. A great shame for our country.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
