- BIG NEWS:
- Barack Obama
- |
- Joe Lieberman
- |
- Sarah Palin
- |
- GOP
- |
Decision time is at hand. The two presidential candidates must now choose their running mates and, if history is a guide, their choices will likely be appalling.
The names flash before you: Eagleton, Quayle, Ferraro, Lieberman, William Edward Miller, Agnew.
With all the resources available to a candidate, couldn't anyone find out that Eagleton had undergone shock therapy? That Agnew was a crook? Richard Nixon was a very bright politician, but obviously paranoid. And now we've learned about John Edwards' extramarital adventures.
Many of us in various walks of life find ourselves in a position where we have to make a judgment about people. Whenever I hire someone, I always realize how difficult it is to ferret out the secrets -- is he a secret drunk? Closet predator? None of that stuff is readily available and, as I have learned the hard way, the most ominous secrets are always the best disguised.
But I don't have the FBI and Secret Service at my disposal. Had I been a candidate, I think I could have learned that Quayle was a hopeless dummy. Or that Joe Lieberman was a closet neo-con. Or that Dick Cheney believes that there is only one branch of the federal government that has any constitutional authority - the executive branch.
And then there are the practical considerations. Ferraro was no help in '84. Henry Wallace was a little deranged in '40. Lloyd Bentsen didn't help anyone in '88. And, for those trivia addicts, Miller ran with Barry Goldwater and no one could have helped him.
So where does this leave our present candidates?
Do your homework, guys. Don't give us any more crooks and psychos. Our fine country cannot take much more punishment.
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
Obama/Wright...
Not that one, the Gov. of Montana
I still want Caroline Kennedy. Sure, she'd only heighten the 'little experience' issue, but look where all the NeoCon CRONIE experience has gotten us over the years...
The last two VP picks on the Democratic side were losers.. Obama should get someone else to choose his running mate.......
Senator Bentsen upstaged the boss in his veep debate with Dan Quayle, and got off the best line of the whole campaign ('Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy!"). No one ever took Dan Quayle seriously again.
Well, Dick Cheney was a conscious and informed choice--on Cheney's part. And, from the administration's standpoint, he was a very effective choice. (That he has been a disaster for the country is not incidental, but follows logically from the nature of the Bush-Cheney regime.)
I don't have the knowledge to guess whom either candidate will pick. But Obama has rather consistently surprised me by being an astute campaigner--something I had long ceased to expect from Democrats. For the first time in many years, I'm actually looking forward to this next major move by a candidate of my party, instead of cringing in anticipation of some new blunder.
The only clear choice for VP for Obama would be CLINTON. The power of the vote she brings severely outweighs any backlash from the supposed independents. Also, the Republicans coming out in DROVES against Clinton is EXTREMELY overstated. I think Obama CAN win without her, I think he wins for sure with her. Hands down. Obama-Clinton '08. (Obama supporter since the beginning.)
You could well be right; I think Obama-Clinton could be a very strong ticket. (Obama supporter myself since very near the beginning.)
Senator Joe Biden
Obama/Clark 08
Bart, I'm sorry to say I have to agree with you. However, there is one gleam of hope. The hope that a veep might be chosen by accident, who actually embodies the concept of making wise decisions. What do you think, huh? What do you think?
It's coming. Just got my Obama email saying a decision is impending. Can't believe they would do it during the Olympics. Why not during the convention?
The email said it is going to happen between now and the convention. So, I might not happen during he Olympics.....
Dick Cheney belongs at the top of the list of bad vice presidents.
Ferraro didn't matter because Mondale was worse.
Bentsen didn't make much difference because of Dukakis. But Bentsen put Dan Quayle in his place in the famous debate.
Al Gore was good but I expected more from him.
George Bush the father was probably neutral as a vice president, no good, no harm.
I guess your reasoning leaves out Hillary Clinton.
Be sure to leave out Hillary.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with