Obama will choose a NATIONAL SECURITY V.P. !! Lobbying for others is DANGEROUS. Let's get serious.

[Sensitivity]

Obama's image has been seriously damaged among “blue-collar” whites by Hilliary’s campaign to undermine his “patriotism." He will need a strong National Security, middle-America, V.P. on the ticket against the "maverick" war hero John McCain. To think otherwise is living in denial about the nature of American society and politics.

In 2004 John Kerry wanted to take Wes Clark as V.P. The party voices rallied behind the John Edwards lobby and that denied Kerry the National Security strength to hit back at the Swifties.

Activists, friends, PLEASE DON'T DO THE SAME TO OBAMA!!!

NO John Edwards – wrong in every way. Didn’t even have the courage to endorse.
NO Hillary – tough-minded, great campaigner, but sniper-fire fantasy is not the right war story
NO Sibelius – intelligent woman, great executive experience as governor, but no battle scars.
NO Richardson – a great diplomat, but braving Hillary’s anger is not enough war experience.


Obama absolutely must make a National Security V.P selection to begin to neutralize McCain's war and terror advantage. He also wants to win with a national coalition which crosses party lines in order to be able to get things done.

PLEASE STOP SUGGESTING V.P CHOICES BASED ON PRIMARY PREFERENCES OR STATE AFFILITATIONS THAT UNDERMINE THAT OBJECTIVE. NOMINATE THE RIGHT V.P. AND WE WIN!!

As an avowed “Uniter” Obama has a wealth of choices. Wes Clark is a known commodity and is an obvious favorite. But Clark has been criticising Obama and his age makes it improbable that he will be the successor to an Obama Presidency. So we may want to do some research into the others who are more likely to the requirements of an Obama ticket. Here are some whose credentials make them leading candidates:



Senator James Webb's is a highly decorated Vietnam War combat veteran with a son in Irq. During his four years with the Reagan administration, Webb served as the first Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, then as Secretary of the Navy. As a former Republican he could help win independents and the state of Virginia.

Political analyst Pomper writes a strong case for Webb:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_gerald_m_pomper/obama_s_vice_president




General David Petraeus is not just Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army and "America's most respected soldier” but this preeminent military strategist has a Ph.D. in International Relations from Princeton University. He has approached Iraq just the way Clark and others recommended – from a position of strength he negotiated strategic compromises with former enemies. In his widely publicized testimonies before congress, he has gained a reputation for straight talk. Has expressed interest in presidential politics, let it be as a Democrat.






General Anthony Zinni is a highly decorated combat veteranand one of the most respected and outspoken military leaders of the past two decades.

When he retired in 2000 he was commander-in-chief of the United States Central Command, in charge of all American troops in the Middle East, but after being appointed special envoy to the Middle East he broke with the Bush administration and became one of the fiercest critics of Bush Iraq war. In his book "The Battle For Peace" (2006) Zinni argues that the roots of the world's growing turmoil are not being addressed and that America's aggressive confidence is making it worse--with potentially devastating implications for the safety of Americans







Chuck Hagel, the long-time Nebraska senator bring strong credentials as a Vietnam veteran with extensive foreign policy experience. Hagel is one of a handful of Republicans who has shown willingness to act outside of partisan politics, who opposed to the war and the Bush jingoistic foreign policy.

Hagel recently went public with his support of Obama over McCain. He complements Obama as one with a strong reputation in military and intelligence circles yet has been consistently anti-Iraq war and has talked about America's challenges ways which parallels many of Obama’s post-partisan campaign themes.

Of course, folks like Nunn, Kerry or Clark still qualify. But vote seriously and send a message!

[MadBadger]

1. Petraeus??? WTF??

[backscatter712]

60. I was about to say...

Betray-Us is a sycophantic Bushie who got the job because he was the first one to tell Chimpy "Great idea, sir!" instead of "This is why your strategies aren't working or going to work."

[polpilot]

113. Biden.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

Petraeus, Zinni and Hagel are what are commonly referred to as

"Republicans," and they don't belong within a thousand miles of a Democratic presidential ticket.

[Sensitivity]

19. Please post evidence that Zinni and Petraeus are registered Repubs. Hagel is obviously

no more committed to the Pugs at this point than Webb

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

23. They wouldn't have gotten as far as they got in Bush's Pentagon

if they had been known Democrats. Zinni may have strayed from the party line recently, but Petraeus is totally in the tank for Bush's war. Which party they registered with would be difficult to determine, since active-duty military people can't express party preferences. Also, some states don't even require registration with a party. That's not important, anyhow. What's important is that Petraeus in particular is a total Bushite on the war. I could see McCain picking him, but if Obama did the Democratic party would go down in flames.

[Sensitivity]

30. Maybe Petraeus joining Obama would destroy RW meme that he will coddle terrorists

[ChairmanAgnostic]

35. not that ass-kissing sycophant

No way.

[ShortnFiery]

84. No, not General "Peaches" Petraus. I hear the veteran scuttle-butt and he's NOT respected

by the GRUNTS (Infantry/Airmobile/Airborne/Ranger/SF) that do the heavy lifting.

No, I could tell you STORIES, but I wont here. :blush:

But I implore you, NOT (almost anybody but) General Petraus?!? :thumbsdown:

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

125. One little story?

Pretty please!

[wmbrew0206]

189. Bull - F*cking - Sh*t

If you disagree with the war, fine. If you think he is a Bush toadie, fine. If you disagree with his opinion of what is going on in Iraq, fine.

However, I call BS on aneone saying the infantry, arty, and all the other tip of the spear soldiers, airmen, and Marines don't respect him.

Patraeus is probably the the biggest soldier's soldiers commander we have had in Iraq. The only general more respected by the Marines is Gen. Mattis. Patraeus is head and shoulders above Abizzad and Casey. Go look up the story about what happened to Patraeus on a live fire range when he was a Bn Cmdr. That story tells you what kind of commander this guy is.

Patraeus is extremely down to earth for a four star general. While I was in Ramadi last year (March to Oct), Patraeus or his deputy were at every memorial service for we had for soldiers or Marines that were killed in action (There were about nine in all). I never saw Casey at one on my previous tour. Patraeus was defiantly highly thought of by all the troops while I was in Iraq.

Patraeus will not leave CentCom to run for VP. The commander of CentCom has way more responsibility than the VP and you don't have to put up with the senate.

[Sensitivity]

198. Thanks for he first-hand report

[MediaBabe]

91. Great. He appeases warmongering Republicans

But then there is that pesky 'end the war' the Dems want

How does picking a pro war VP convince Democrats that Obama is sincere in his claim hwe will rapidly begin withdrawal and end the war?

[Schema Thing]

2. Just have to check in with a lol @ Patraeus.

That's some funny shit.


I must say, if someone could drag Zinni into the political fray, it would be with him kicking and screaming, and that would be impressive to the American voter.

[NewHampshireDem]

6. Damn, I wasn't fast enough

I wanted the first LOL! at that.

[grasswire]

3. how come no profile? (eom)

[DJ13]

4. How about Representative John Murtha?

You want a guy with war experience, a guy who's not afraid to go toe to toe with someone like McCain, theres your guy.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

9. would would Murtha think of this!!!!

[DJ13]

11. Dont know, but I do know how Move On would feel about General Betrayus

:shrug:

[MADem]

18. Yeah--a guy with ties to lobbyists, who didn't support the candidate in the primary, who is

in his mid seventies. He'd make McCain look like a spring chicken.

Please.

[nsd]

29. Murtha's too old. He turns 76 next month. /nt

[LucyParsons]

5. WEBB WEBB WEBB

Cynical reasons I've been advocating this for over a year:

1. He's a white, male Southerner.

2. He's a war hero and very pro-military (Marine, Vietnam vet, awardedt two Purple Hearts and the Navy Cross, former Secretary of the Navy, son served in Iraq).

3. He "gets it" re: populism, globalization, labor, oligarchy.

4. He's was Reagan Democrat, but has "seen the light" - and thus can be the embodiment of the frustration and disappointment and, even, anger many former Bush voters are feeling (mostly about the issues in #3, IMHO).

5. He basically told George Bush to go fuck himself - in person.

6. He's a great speaker / the right age / charismatic.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

7. these sound awfully right wing?

we can have someone who is solid on military issues besides these ex repub guys?

[MADem]

15. Obama is NOT a lefty. People seem to have that misapprehension.

Anyone who is in bed with General Dynamics, Exalon/nuke power and the coal industry isn't a Flower Power kind of guy.

But those choices still suck.

[VotesForWomen]

79. shhhhh! don't tell his minions here at DU.

[MADem]

99. It really is interesting.

I've never seen such UNINFORMED comment in my life.

McCain's strategists must be laughing their asses off.

[cliffordu]

109. LOL!! Fock, that's funny....heh.

Pathetic, But funny!! :rofl: :rofl:

[RainDog]

107. guess that's why Dirk Durbin promoted the idea of his presidency?

encouraged him to run?

I have no illusions about politicians being angels or saints. that's life. not all Obama supporters had him as their first choice. some not even their second choice. But of the two choices remaining - he's the one I can support.

JFK certainly wasn't squeaky clean either. Nor was FDR. I don't think they were bad presidents, tho. Reagan led an electoral revolution without Obama's smarts. I don't think Hillary could accomplish the same feat.

To me, one hoped for outcome of this election is a re-alignment of power away from the south. Only time will tell about that one. With Clinton, I have no hope of that at all.

[MADem]

126. Look what one his ardent supporters was doing this weekend--is this guy a lefty?

This fellow was at that Bible Thumping Gospel Tour in South Carolina, getting out the vote for Barack.

It's official: Jenna Welch Bush wed Henry Chase Hager Saturday – making her the first daughter of a sitting United States president to marry in 16 years.

The pair exchanged vows just before sundown in a lakeside ceremony threatened by a tornado watch at President Bush's secluded 1,600-acre Prairie Chapel Ranch in Crawford, Texas.

Pastor Kirbyjon Caldwell, of the Windsor Village United Methodist Church in Houston, presided over the "I do's" before a 4-foot limestone cross and altar that were the president's idea for the occasion and will stand as a permanent landmark on the Bushes' property.

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20199160,00.html?xid=rss-topheadlines

Read the whole link, now--start to finish: http://news.lavenderliberal.com/2008/01/21/barack-obama-and-kirbyjon-caldwell-somebodys-fibbing-maybe-everybody/

1. Kirbyjon Caldwell — spiritual adviser to George W. Bush, pastor of Houston’s Windsor Village United Methodist Church, and senior pastor of “ex-gay” brainwashing program Metanoia Ministries — announces his endorsement for Barack Obama, and says he plans to campaign for Obama, apparently with the blessings of the Obama campaign: “I have been in contact with the Obama campaign team,” he said. “I will be making visits on his behalf.”

2. Gay folks and our allies go ballistic. Especially after the Donnie McClurkin flap.

[RainDog]

127. the point is that we could both find left and right endorsements

Caroline or Ted Kennedy v. whoever, ad infinitum.

I will admit that I have concerns for the worries of my gblt brothers and sisters and understand many have a more compelling reason to support Clinton at this time. The most worrisome issue is the Af-Am church vote that doesn't see gblt rights in the same way that they saw civil rights in the 1960s. I don't understand this, honestly.

The Af-Am vote is more conservative about abortion rights too. That doesn't change the Democratic platform on the issue, tho.

I guess we'll see how this all shakes out.

[MADem]

130. Whatever. This is Bush's PERSONAL pastor in Crawford, who has

been a Bush supporter (and anti-gay) for seven or eight years that we know of.

Obama is NOT a "lefty." And a lot of his "lefty" supporters are going to be very irritated when they make that discovery.

[Name removed]

85. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MADem]

97. How lovely of you, having been here so long, to break the DU rules so boldly.

Shows just what you're made of, doesn't it? And how much you give a shit about them if they get in your way and cause you to have any hesitation about your saintly candidate.

Newsflash, Einstein--People who aren't on the Kool Aid bus are NOT trolls, and people who call people trolls when they speak uncomfortable truths don't have much confidence in their own candidate's qualities.

Do a little research if you don't believe me. Obama is up to his ass in Crown family money, Exalon money, and coal industry money. It's a fact, and I am NOT a troll for saying so. But you're something not too impressive for tossing that childish cheap shot.

[Sensitivity]

171. Bet he shows it with his V.P. pick

[Hawkeye-X]

8. Forget it. This is epic FAIL on ALL of the choices you made here

National security - my ass. Bill Richardson will do the job just fine.

So will Kathleen Sebelius, Janet Napiltano or Brian Schwietzer.

[LucyParsons]

10. Of course WE think so.

What about voters who aren't "liberals", though? Who are fence-sitters, independents, or reachable Republicans.

While I don't necessarily agree with all the choices presented, the OP is essentially right. For Obama to pick someone without hefty, unassailable military/foreign policy experience, ESPECIALLY if that person is also a woman/minority, will be suicidal.

[Bullet1987]

12. Petraus, Zinni, Hagel....HAHAHAHAHAHA

I'm not a fan of a crossover ticket by any means.

[beezlebum]

16. i am with you hawkeye

sebelius :thumbsup:

[dawgman]

20. Ohio fov. Ted Strickland.

[stevenleser]

136. What about General McPeak?

[LulaMay]

13. Are you serious? General Betrayus? Of COURSE not a woman! Can't win with THAT, can we? PATHETIC

[TLM]

32. not with Hillary... and think about this in pragmatic terms....

Voters driven mainly by women's issues are going to vote dem, if for no other reason than the supreme court appointments.


Adding a woman to the ticket isn't going to gain more votes.


Adding someone like Webb, a southern white guy, is going to bring more votes to the ticket from regional and military issue voters who might have stayed home or voted mccain.

I heard a republican say the other day... "I'm not sure who I'll vote for, Obama, he's a democrat so he wants to spend all my money... but McCain wants to spend all my money on this war. At least with the democrat, they spend my money here."

[donheld]

161. Pick any woman you'd like

I'll take any democratic woman compared to Betrayus or Hagel.

[MADem]

14. I like Tony Zinni. He's a nice person.

But no one else knows him. And he doesn't have a high profile.

The rest of those picks suck. Big Time, as Dick would say. I think it's funny to suggest that screaming lefties who don't bother to acquaint themselves with Obama's actual stances on the issues, and who think that he, too, is a lefty, would accept such a team.

Hagel? A Republican. Why vote for a fake GOP ticket when there's a real one on the ballot? Please. Those far lefties would vote for Nader. Of course, Hagel owns a voting machine company--maybe he could rig the vote.

Webb? Too many wives, read his novels--the salacious, nasty excerpts would make great campaign ads. For McCAIN. Plus, he has said some incredibly SEXIST stuff over the years. Really vicious. Drive away ALL those Clinton supporters, why doncha?

General Betrayus? Again, why vote for the fake Republicans when you can vote for the REAL ones?

[dawgman]

17. Webb is a mistake.

He would make a fine VP, but it would leave a senate seat in VA vacant that could be filled by a republican.

[Leopolds Ghost]

21. The OP is right. But Clark still makes the most sense. For one thing, he and Webb actually liberal

Webb is needed in the Senate. Virginia will not elect three Democratic Senators in 3 years.

and Kaine would appoint someone to the RIGHT of Webb such as Doug Wilder (who would be a
Republican in any other state -- he ran independent for Senate against the Democrat,
from the right, one year.)

I voted Kerry to give him props.

[MADem]

98. Clark is a staunch Clinton supporter. Fuggedaboutit. NT

[quakerboy]

22. Petraeus?

Come on here. Where are you living? Hagel? What is he right on, other than Iraq? Why not just throw Colin Powell Or John McCain himself on the list? Hell, if we could get Johnny to sign on, we don't even need to have a GE, since all the candidates are on one ticket, its a sure fire win, right?

And as for Edwards... I have always had mixed feeling about him, given his actual record as compared to his words. But the reality is that when he dropped out early he gave Obama more delegates than any endorsement could even remotely touch. So screw the courage to endorse argument. And he appeals to Republics, somehow, for many I suspect more than McCain himself.

In short, sure, we can consider national security, but it is NOT the only consideration. Not by a long shot. I would even advocate letting the Pugs pick their ticket before we make any final decisions. And I will support Obama in picking his own VP. He has done well enough so far, I am not going to start second guessing his campaign now.

[MadBadger]

25. I think Obama should strongly consider Hagel for Sec Def if he wins.

[quakerboy]

37. I will give that a

limited "perhaps that is worth considering". If you could come to some agreements, and keep him fully away from anything involving the many other issues facing our country, I could consider that.

[MadBadger]

42. "Issues facing our country"....Um, thats basically anything.

[quakerboy]

100. Yup.

I am ok with a Pug as Sec Def if they stick to enacting Democratically chosen Defense policy and stay the Fuck out of every other issue facing the nation.

[newmajority]

24. Clark is the only one on that list who is even worthy of serious consideration.

All of you people voting for Jim Webb need to understand something...

TWO SENATORS ON THE SAME FUCKING TICKET IS SUICIDE!!

And that (among many other reasons) is also why Hillary will not be VP. Goes for Kerry as well.

Petraeus? You gotta be fucking joking. That ass-kissing motherfucker just got a promotion from the Chimp, because (unlike his predecessor Admiral Fallon) he's willing to ATTACK IRAN on a moment's notice. Fuck that asshole.

Hagel?? Him and his electro-fraud machines got us into this mess in the first place. Glad to hear that he's come around to sanity on the war, but he's still a raving 'Puke in every other aspect.

Nunn?? Old and Homophobic. Last century. Certainly not the embodiment of Change.

[MadBadger]

26. Why are two senators on the same ticket suicide?

[newmajority]

43. Ask Kerry & Edwards

Or for that matter, ask any senator of either party who has run for President since 1960.

Since it's going to be an Obama vs McLoon contest, they cancel each other out, as far as having a senator at the top of the ticket. But you better believe it's going to be someone with executive experience in the #2 slot, for both parties. The pukes aren't running Cheney, and Al Gore ain't gonna be Veep again, so that means you're probably going to see governors on both sides. Clark might be the only exception to this rule, but as former NATO commander, that's a powerful executive position, if not a political one.

[MadBadger]

51. Its been my understanding that the problem of two senators was because of their long records

But Webb has an even smaller record than Obama. Plus, Webb's experience isnt in the legislative branch, it was working for Reagan as Sec of the Navy among other things. So I dont see that as that big of a deal with Webb.

[w13rd0]

27. You include Petraeus, Hagel and Nunn?

This is for the Democratic ticket you know...

[RainDog]

28. NO REPUBLICAN for vp

ppl have been talking about Hagel for a couple of years now... first as a third party - now as a dem? If he wants to be on a democratic party ticket, he should've registered as and caucused with democrats in the Senate.

Clark is a democrat. of any choice you noted above, he is the superior pick, imo.

I agree that Obama needs to strengthen his ticket with someone who brings military creds. PETRAEUS? No freaking way. He brings the wrong kind of military "creds."

People are hearing Obama's call for change, for work across the aisle. But that does not mean we are willing to vote for a republican who gets tacked onto a democratic candidates' nomination.

Republicans are have been completely debased by THEIR CHOICES for leaders. Let them go out and make their party relevant to this century. They could start by discontinuing a pander campaign to the talibornagains.

[TBF]

31. Webb and Clark are both interesting - and so much better than HRC

[Sensitivity]

34. What better way to cross party lines. No Red States, No Blue States

[RainDog]

56. b/c it's bullshit

because republican economic policies are why we have this mess now.

because republicans' "all war all the time" policies are why we are weaker, militarily, than we were. why we LOST the support of the world after 9-11. why we have destabilized the m.e. and made life hell for people in that region - and it didn't start with Junior, of course.

because the republicans have pandered to IDIOTS who have made this nation a laughingstock in regard to science, education, sexual rights, health and information - this is the group of people who have told the rest of us it's not our country if we're not talibornagains. and why have the republican "mainstream" done this? BECAUSE THEY CANNOT WIN ON THE MERITS OF THEIR POLICIES so they have to pander to assholes.

this is the party that has had an apocalyptic vision of the world since McCarthy.

this is the party that has looted the treasury for Halliburton. who has tried to privatize the fucking military and outsource it to a religious right whacko with no oath to defend the Constitution - but who is paid by Cheney and his fucking minions.

this is a party THAT REFUSED to bring the president and vp and cabinet under the authority of the U.S. Constitution. ILLEGAL WIRETAPPING LONG BEFORE 9-11.

this is the party that stripped oversight from all areas of industry - and we now get to live with the shitty results.

the party that stole an election in a coup in 2000. with Scalia who said (in a speech online called God's Justice and Ours) that DEMOCRACY IS THE PROBLEM and "the enlightenment" is the problem when it comes to dealing with the death penalty.

We can unite across the aisle by letting the republicans admit their philosophy is bankrupt, along with the economy. We can unite by republicans defecting to the democratic party - not by hijacking the democratic party.

HEAR ME

do not try to hijack the democratic party b/c you republicans are worthless.

HEAR ME. The divisions in this nation will not be healed by expecting those of us who were RIGHT about issues over and over to eat a shit sandwich of republican ideology disguised as "reaching across the aisle."

I honestly cannot believe that you can even bring up this bullshit. Let Hagel run with Bob Barr as an independent.

If a republican is on the democratic ticket, I fucking give up on this nation. I give up. Just when I thought I had reason to hope. Just when I had given up all hope. I guess I better step up on sending out those resumes to other nations. I had been focusing on the U.S. and thought I could also campaign for Obama. That will not happen if he chooses a republican as a vp.

[Sensitivity]

141. I thought the Obama movement was "post-partisan." Or are you a Clintonite?

[RainDog]

182. who said I was part of an Obama "movement?"

no, and if you had read my post, you would understand why a republican is a no go.

"post-partisan" is a joke. it is advertising with no realistic application in real life. what do I have in common, politically, with someone who holds talibornagain beliefs?

nothing.

I am a liberal. I am part of the group that gets democrats elected, when they do get elected. republicans are trotting out this bullshit, imo, because they know they have so totally fucked up they will be out of power for a long time to come.

I think that the right wing in this country needs to removed from power. Let Hagel work to rebuild the republican party as conservatives, not fascists, okay? because the honest truth is that they have moved to fascism. look up a definition. I've never used the word to describe any politician in this nation before the last 8 years.

Again, let Hagel fix his own party. He has the power to do so via the voting machines that have been used to disenfranchise Americans over the last few years.

The majority of Americans are FAR more "liberal" than the republican party. Go look at the info. They favor legal abortion, universal health care, decriminalization of med. mj, good public schools, progressive tax structures... in other words, everything the republicans oppose.

[flpoljunkie]

33. Disagree with your premise. Obama would be signaling foreign policy weakness if he chose military

connected person. Not gonna happen. Chuck Hagel has a 100% conservative voting record--he even voted for the IWR, altho he has been very good about speaking up about ending the Iraq debacle.

Have confidence Obama will pick someone, as Ted Kennedy recently said, who is "in tune with his appeal for the nobler aspirations of the American people."

[atufal1c]

65. No. Needs someone with military experience.

I don't see why or care that it would signal foreign policy weakness.

He needs someone with military experience.

He needs someone that the doubters feel will help him answer that call at 3am.

We don't solve that problem, we've got a BIG problem.

Clark is not a strong campaigner but he is unassailable on military and national security cred and probably on executive ability cred.

Didn't know about Webb was a decorated vet, but I understand that he could be better utilized somewhere else.

If anyone thinks we should go against a highly-decorated, ex-POW, Vietnam vet senior senator with a couple of people with no military experience (during wartime!), you need your head examined.

[Sensitivity]

169. Well said: To go against a Decorated Senator during wartime w/out N.S. strengh on would be CRAZY

"If anyone thinks we should go against a highly-decorated, ex-POW, Vietnam vet senior senator with a couple of people with no military experience (during wartime!), you need your head examined. "

[iamthebandfanman]

36. a republican VP? are you serious? n/t

[hollowdweller]

38. What about Richard Clarke then?????

[Gore1FL]

39. I don't buy into the premise.

Kerry didn't lose because of his VP.

He choked because he didn't respond to anything in August.

[Sensitivity]

173. Edwards responses were INEFFECTIVE. The V.P. is the one to respond to SMEARS

[gmudem]

40. No Wes Clark but...

Petraeus or Hagel? Really? Petraeus just don't make any sense at all, and Hagel is good on the war but he's your average Republican on everything else.

OBAMA/CLARK

[patrice]

41. Webb is in a hotly contested seat that we need to KEEP for a while.

Clark would be good, but he needs to establish why he isn't kind of a "beauty queen", like just what are his regular military bonifides?

[Exultant Democracy]

44. I have a little crush on Petraeus' daughter, him as VP would only make things harder for me.

In person he is a great guy btw with a very nice family.

[Sensitivity]

46. Is he a Democrat? That is what matters

[Exultant Democracy]

70. He is an Old school general first which means he isn't a democrat or a republican

but before all this Iraq stuff happened I would say he seemed to have some rather progressive leanings. Notice that he has never said that the Iraq war is making America safer.

[Sensitivity]

149. BULLSEYE! Petraeus is neither a capitalist nor a "less educated, low income white"

[McCamy Taylor]

45. Obama needs to working class vote. Clinton has them and she has national security tied up, too.

All that tough talk has made her look ready for day one. Bill Richardson can be drafted for SOS if they need extra foreign policy experience and he can campaign in the GE.

[MadBadger]

52. She doesnt have national security tied up. That is a ridiculous statement to make.

[Sensitivity]

166. N.S. Credentials???? You mean in BOSNIA?? PLEASE!!!

[JNelson6563]

47. Some of the Clarkies need to settle down

Wha tis this, the 35,072nd thread I've seen begging DU to excersize it's awesome power and make Clark the VP??

:rofl:

While I understand that for some there is now a glimmer of a reason to live again let me be the one to shine the bright light of political reality on that for ya. Clark jumped on the Clinton (aka "safe"/"surest bet" at teh time) bandwagon way, way back. He got into the race in 04 when the Clintons needed him and stepped aside as needed. He faithfully served the Clintons once again this primary season. He is a good soldier.

There is no chance in hell that he will be asked to be Obama's VP. I'd wager $100.00 on it.

Julie

[Clark2008]

163. I'm calling bullshit.

He did not "step into the race" when the Clinton's needed him. Thousands of us - and I was one of them - BEGGED him to get in the race.

Oh - and I thought all our choices were SHIT this time around and don't give a flying flip who wins the primary - mainly because it will be President McCain considering that many of us liberals cannot seem to FATHOM how sexist and/or racist this entire nation still is (W.VA aside).

Thanks to folks like you... we're stuck with more of the same.

[Megahurtz]

184. What you said. n/t

[jillan]

48. Didn't he just say that he is so good on foreign relations that he doesn't need help?

If he did want a foreign relations VP, there is only one that will help him kick McCain's ass:

[Johnny__Motown]

49. I disagree with the premise of this thread, but I do see your point. Electoral Map may be the factor

that decides who our VP will be.



Kerry picked Edwards, and he didn't help carry any states.



If you want to carry Ohio.....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Strickland

[sellitman]

50. No Quasi Republicans please

Most on that list haven't been Democrats long enough in my book. I still like Richardson. He has tons of experience and would help greatly getting out the all important Spanish voters. They would be unstoppable.

[Leopolds Ghost]

53. I like Richardson, but he only helps in the Southwest.

Maybe if he came out against NAFTA and bracero-style registering illegal immigrants as a permanent low-wage underclass.

[RainDog]

69. there are hispanic voters all over this nation

he's a better choice than any of those mentioned, imo. but i recognize the military fear factor.

it would be the great irony of life if the first time I ever donated to a prez candidate would also be the first time I chose not to vote at all. but honestly, if someone tries to take over the democratic party in this way - no. simply no. Clinton is not the candidate for me no matter what. Obama is not the candidate for me with a republican on the ticket.

I would imagine such a move would lead to a third party candidacy from the Nadar camp, too, because the greens will be the only option for some.

[sellitman]

102. Sure....give McCain your vote by......

voting Nader or write in.

Enjoy another 4 years of bush.

Brilliant thinking.




:sarcasm:

[RainDog]

105. when you have a choice b/t one republican and another

i.e. McCain or Hagel - what's the difference?

sometimes ppl have, you know, standards - whether you like them or not. I think it would be a disservice to this nation for a republican to run on a democratic ticket. If that's what Obama intends to do, he will find his base will shrink, not grow.

a republican vp - and who would be the successor to Obama? Hagel? so why bother having two (nominal) parties anyway? your logic would make sense if the OP wasn't talking about putting Republicans on the Democratic ticket. If you and others cannot see how fucked up that is - then we have very different ideas about political power.

and you know, I just noted what would be the truth, whether you like it or not. The green party would gain lots of voters. That's the simple truth. I'm not gonna make them do this. They'll do this b/c they vote with/for democrats. They do not vote for Republicans. get it?

Americans are SICK of republicans. why are they trying to gain power this way? that doesn't bother you the tiniest little bit? McCain already has the "Hagel demographic." Republicans are losing in special elections!! They are dead as a national party.

I do not understand why the OP has an avatar of Arundhati Roy. She would be vomiting at this idea as well.

What you and others do not seem to be able to get into your heads is how pissed off people are after the last 8 years. You do not "fix" that and create unity by screwing over the people who are not responsible for this. Is that really that hard to understand?

For all the talk of unity, there ARE blue state mindsets and red state mindsets. If the U.S. wants unity, then let's have a national day of atheism. Right after the national day of prayer. how about it? or, for unity, let's say we'll keep the prayers in people's homes and churches? how about that? Think the talibornagains are gonna be all over that idea of unity?

My vote is my vote and I will not throw it away on a republican.

[sellitman]

111. You throw it away voting something other than the Democratic ticket.

It's a fact.

Nader already proved that.

Read a book.

[RainDog]

121. you're clueless

and, as far as reading a book - think I know how to do that since I have a masters degree and was a Phi Beta Kappa ugrad at a major U.

If all you have as an argument are insults then you have nothing.

[sellitman]

129. Your education didn't include common sense 101

Oh well.

[RainDog]

131. If you really do not understand why someone would not support a republican vp

then you don't understand a large portion of the electorate. All you offer in response to my problems with this are insults. Insults are what people use when they have NOTHING worthwhile to say about an issue.

I have nothing more to say to you and I exercise my option not to have to see your posts here.

The truth is that choosing a "republican" is a huge mistake. You don't like it - I don't give a shit. Politics is about power and a person's vote is an exercise of that power.

who the fuck do you think you are to tell someone they must vote as you say?

[sellitman]

133. Your post # 121 was titled an insult.

Seems you have NOTHING worthwhile to say according to your own standards.

"All you offer in response to my problems with this are insults. Insults are what people use when they have NOTHING worthwhile to say about an issue".

[Megahurtz]

186. Great point,

that why I don't think it should be Richardson because he would get slammed for this.

Not a good idea.

[seaglass]

54. If he puts a Republican on the ballot - he loses 3 votes in my house n/t

[RainDog]

59. mine too

and it is just choice that the republicans cannot win - so now they want us to let them be on our tickets?????????

what fresh hell is that?

[seaglass]

64. Rain Dog I have to say that this is one of my biggest concerns

about some of the Obama supporters on DU - a Republican VP has repeatedly been mentioned and the idea defended on DU. I understand that one of the appeals of Obama is his message of reaching out and unity but I will be completely honest - I am not there - and it is probably the main reason I am not open to Obama.

It will take me a long time to get past these last 8 years, I do not take it lightly and I am not ready to be conciliatory to any Republican that was complicit in this disaster. I also feel that if the Democrat wins the GE - WE run the show and it is the Republicans that need to do the reaching out.

[RainDog]

68. I was ready to say screw it all

when the primary first geared up and Hillary was a "lock." when the nomination was hers for the taking... Candy Crowley on CNN was like a broken record on this.

so I said... okay, politics as usual. more b.s.

even tho Congress was elected in '06 because people do not support these republican actions and policies... we're still going to get another corporately bought and sold same-old candidate.

now, I'm not saying that Obama does not have his own big money backers. But he also has 1,500000000 individual donars who feel we have invested a stake in getting a candidate that will not continue the same old b.s.

well, putting a republican on a democratic ticket is WORSE THAN the same old b.s. It's the same old b.s. on steroids. I understand the need to create a ticket to balance and pull in other voting blocs. but that does not mean rewarding the assholes who have gotten us where we are now.

for the "long-play" on this, I went into a bit more detail above in a post that says b/c this is bullshit. because it is bullshit.

[seaglass]

72. I have done a really good job of ignoring pundits pronouncements and spin

because I finally figured out that they really don't know more than me - they're just trying to get the eyeballs and the focus is on such TRIVIAL shit that just doesn't matter to me. And they're not honest.

So I really missed the inevitability of Hillary, though I would say that any candidate would love that story line on the theory if you say it enough it might come true :-)

[madrchsod]

55. clark is the best choice if we want a "big dick whitehouse"

[nomorewhopper]

57. General Newbold

[Aloha Spirit]

58. Maybe Obama could hire an assistant to focus exclusively on military issues. Like a CEO of Defense?

[Leopolds Ghost]

116. I was thinking he'll need a General to oversee Attorneys. Call it the Attorneys General?

[Bullet1987]

61. Why the hell would Obama pick Petraeus when he DEFENDS the

war in Iraq and was assigned by Bush? The same thing goes for Zinni...lol!!

[ShortnFiery]

90. You don't know Zinni. IMO, he is truly a man of integrity. He RESIGNED as ME Envoy in 2002 because

he was AGAINST the Iraqi invasion. Because Zinni does NOT CRAVE THE LIMELIGHT, unlike the vast majority of retired general officers, he did NOT become "political" over this. However, you can see by his remarks below that he was dead set against the Iraqi invasion from it's conception.

http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/zinni.html

Comments of Gen. Anthony Zinni (ret.) during a speech before the Florida Economic Club, Aug. 23, 2002:

Attacking Iraq now will cause a lot of problems. I think the debate right now that's going on is very healthy. If you ask me my opinion, Gen. Scowcroft, Gen. Powell, Gen. Schwarzkopf, Gen. Zinni, maybe all see this the same way.

It might be interesting to wonder why all the generals see it the same way, and all those that never fired a shot in anger and really hell-bent to go to war see it a different way. That's usually the way it is in history. (Crowd laughter.)

But let me tell you what the problem is now as I see it. You need to weigh this: what are your priorities in the region? That's the first issue in my mind.

The Middle East peace process, in my mind, has to be a higher priority. Winning the war on terrorism has to be a higher priority. More directly, the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Central Asia need to be resolved, making sure Al Qaeda can't rise again from the ashes that are destroyed. Taliban cannot come back. That the warlords can't regain power over Kabul and Karzai, and destroy everything that has happened so far.

[wmbrew0206]

191. ShortnFiery, I disagree with your opinion of Petraeus, but you are

dead right on Zinni.

General Zinni is probably the best pick for Obama in the "Former General" category.

He has great NS credentials as CentCom Commander. Has been a special enovy.

PLUS, Zinni was against going into Iraq in 2003. I sat through a lecture of his in Febuary of '03 at Camp Lejeune and he stated that it was the wrong time to go into Iraq. He said that not enough allies supported going in.

[DemVet]

115. Uh...that's his fucking job.

All military officers are charged with carrying out the will of the Commander in Chief...be that George Bush or Barack Obama.

They don't suddenly hire a new batch of top-ranking officers just because a new President takes office.

Petraeus will be Commander of Centcom this November no matter who wins the election.

[wmbrew0206]

190. I see someone else has a realistic view of the military, DemVet

If all the generals are all Republicans, how did Clark or Fallon pick up four stars?

Also, why would you leave one of the two most sought after positions in the US government (CentCom and EuCom) to possibly be a VP?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

62. General Clark is still haunted by the Motor Pool Incident ....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x387808

[izquierdista]

63. Just say NO!

NO military! Enough with the military industrial complex and their shills. They have caused the problem the US has with the rest of the world and they can't be part of the solution. Find someone with the courage to be diplomatic instead of bellicose.

[atufal1c]

77. Didn't say MIC shills. Said someone with military experience.

That doesn't have to mean someone that wants to run around starting wars. Clark was against the war, for example.

And if he can't be diplomatic, we don't need him. Agreed?

[NorthCarolina]

66. I don't think Obama needs to reach across to the RIGHT, but rather

he needs to reach across to the Progressives because they are the base of the party and only they bring real enthusiasm to the campaign. Sibelius is the correct choice IMHO. A woman on the ticket will help bring over those Hillary supporters that are diggin in their heels, and if Obama truly wants to "Change Washington" he's not going to do it with a conservative DLC Democrat like Webb or a Republican on the ticket with him. We've tried the "conservative" approach to government, and it doesn't work for anyone other than the wealthy. We need a strong progressive team for real change, and Sibelius would be a great choice.

[Hippo_Tron]

67. People dont' vote for the Vice Presidnet on top of that...

The last thing Obama needs is the impression that he's going to run to his VP to handle a crisis after Cheney has been doing that for Bush for 8 years.

[atufal1c]

88. I don't get it. Why not?

This inexperience issue with Obama is real. And it's not going away. And it's a bigger issue than race. It has to do with how young he looks, how little gray hair he has, and the thinness of his resume. Let's not pretend. Further, I believe he knows that. He knows that he needs to surround himself with people with experience (political and executive, and MILITARY) and gray hair.

I don't see why we all don't know it.

Check his citing "Team of Rivals", the book about Lincoln. The book is about how the inexperienced Lincoln chose the best people he could find to fill his cabinet and other positions, this despite the fact that many of them despised him.

I also think they're really going to be working the bogus "raised as a muslim", "Manchurian Candidate" bullshit. We *need* a strong counter to that.

And LOTS of people felt better about supporting Bush knowing that Cheney was there. He was an important part of that ticket.

What's wrong with that?

As you said, Bush was President for EIGHT years.

We should hope to do as well.

[Alexander]

71. Webb voted for Bush and Macaca in 2000! No Webb, please!

He wrote a book called "Woman Can't Fight".

He just barely made it into the Senate less than two years ago.

Why are so many DUers infatuated with Webb? He has bad judgment.

[Bullet1987]

74. People like Webb purely because he's criticized the war...

[Alexander]

80. Unfortunately a lot of these people don't think about Webb's baggage...

If we pick Webb, say goodbye to women voters as they find reasons to defect to McCain or not vote.

[Sensitivity]

101. Why are we buying the RW smear on Webb??

[RBInMaine]

73. Clark is a staunch Hillary supporter, but he would be good and a good unifier. Webb GOOD too !

[ShortnFiery]

86. No, the fact that Clark IS a HRC supporter is NOT going to help us "turn the page"

If you need a retired General Officer of HIGH integrity - respected by both Marine subordinates and Civilian staff, that man is Anthony Zinni.

General (ret.) Anthony Zinni (USMC) was - like Barack Obama - AGAINST the Iraqi Invasion from the beginning. :thumbsup:

Comments of Gen. Anthony Zinni (ret.) during a speech before the Florida Economic Club, Aug. 23, 2002:

http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/zinni.html

Attacking Iraq now will cause a lot of problems. I think the debate right now that's going on is very healthy. If you ask me my opinion, Gen. Scowcroft, Gen. Powell, Gen. Schwarzkopf, Gen. Zinni, maybe all see this the same way.

It might be interesting to wonder why all the generals see it the same way, and all those that never fired a shot in anger and really hell-bent to go to war see it a different way. That's usually the way it is in history. (Crowd laughter.)

But let me tell you what the problem is now as I see it. You need to weigh this: what are your priorities in the region? That's the first issue in my mind.

The Middle East peace process, in my mind, has to be a higher priority. Winning the war on terrorism has to be a higher priority. More directly, the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Central Asia need to be resolved, making sure Al Qaeda can't rise again from the ashes that are destroyed. Taliban cannot come back. That the warlords can't regain power over Kabul and Karzai, and destroy everything that has happened so far.

[atufal1c]

92. So no Hillary supporters in the Obama Administration?

Wow. That's getting rid of an awful lot of good people.

This isn't a purge. (Not a shot at you. Can't think of a more subtle way to say it.)

I understand the call for no Republicans, but this is too much.

[Clark2008]

165. And, as pointed out to you a ZILLION times, so was Wes Clark.

He was adamently against the invasion and did one step better than either Zinni or Obama - he testified in front of Congress to tell them it was a boneheaded move.

Why can't you allow this to seep into your head?

[Sensitivity]

195. Clark would fit the "turn the page" agenda

[crankychatter]

75. lobbying for others is dangerous?

kma

[Exilednight]

76. David Petraeus is a rethug who pushed for the surge and wants to put a halt to a further draw down..

of troops in Iraq.

[VotesForWomen]

78. whatever; it will only highlight his questionable credentials in that area.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

81. Wesley Clark!

n/t

[davidinalameda]

82. Jim Webb is my first choice

Clark is my second

[kenny blankenship]

83. The lack of a FOAD option on your poll renders it meaningless

[Vattel]

87. If you care about restoring the constitution,

Webb would be a terrible choice. Unlike Obama, who scores a 10 on restoring the Constitution, Webb scores a 2: he never met an executive power he didn't like, and he doesn't seem to care about any constitutional rights other than the right to bear arms.

[JerseygirlCT]

89. Hagel? Petraeus? You cannot be serious.

There are excellent possibilities among DEMOCRATS. That's where he needs to look.

[ShortnFiery]

94. I also don't get this "Ga Ga" fascination with Wes Clark? I don't trust him since

he's mired with The Clintons and their illustrious DLC. :thumbsdown:

[JerseygirlCT]

96. He's never particularly excited me

And frankly, I'd love to see us move away from this obsession with all things war. There are myriad problems that need to be solved here at home. The stupid-ass war that Bush needed to start just needs to be dealt with, not celebrated in some sort of "homeland security" orgy.

[Megahurtz]

187. I don't trust his bombing the Balkans move either

along with the Clintons. I'm sure my relatives didn't fucking appreciate that one.

[mmonk]

119. Hagel is a good choice. I came to that conclusion

after reading "America, The Next Chapter". Think country first and it works. I too say NO to Patraeus.

[Warren DeMontague]

93. Your assumptions about the American Electorate are 100% wrong.

The American people want someone smart and capable, someone who will articulate why government should get out of citizens' bedrooms and bloodstreams. Someone fiscally responsible enough to say that it is fucking ABSURD to spend half a trillion a year on "defense", more than the rest of the planet combined.

The American people want a strong military, but they're tired of the military-industrial STATE. We need to focus our economy on building things and technologies people can actually use; like renewable energy.

Out of the choices you list, however, I'd take Wes Clark.

[Leopolds Ghost]

118. Ha! I was about to reply "but dammit, Clark DOES fill those reqs!" :-)

[Name removed]

95. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Danger Mouse]

103. Clark, webb 2nd choice.

[Sensitivity]

208. Clark seems to lead the vote. Won't his age be a factor if he is to run for Pres in 2016

[lumberjack_jeff]

104. NO, NO, NO! Fer cryin out loud!

We can't have Hillary - she's too much of a hawk. So who else... hmm.. how about Petraeus?

:banghead:

Seriously, I suggest Patty Murray. Good progressive with rural and veterans creds.

[ecstatic]

106. anyone but Clark

His voice sounds just like Bush--I know it's shallow and petty, but I can't stand to hear an accent like that ever again! Plus, he comes across as too war hungry for my taste.

[Leopolds Ghost]

117. With that attitude defeats the purpose of reaching out to areas of the country abandoned by Clinton.

[Clark2008]

168. Thanks for putting down all us real Southerners...

That was nice of you. :eyes:

FWIW, Clark's voice is NOTHING like Bush's. Clark may have a Southern accent, but he speaks with knowledge - something Bush can never do - on any subject save animal torture.

And, how can a general who consistantly advocates war as a "last, last, last resort" be "war hungry?" :wtf:

[Larry in KC]

175. Really? I love his erudite speech, with an almost generically southern accent, contrasted with *'s

faux, idiot Texas twang. (The "idiot" part is directed at *, not Texas)

[JCMach1]

108. Sorry, but Bob Graham has major National Security Cred

and can deliver Florida.

Should be at the top of your list...

[Hawkowl]

110. Out of your effin mind.

Dude your choices suck. At least pick democrats for christ sake.

[Bright Eyes]

112. Petraeus? Are you joking?

I'll go with Clark.

[mmonk]

114. If we go that route, I would choose Hagel, Zinni, or Nunn.

Possibly Clark. I still like the idea of Sebelius or Richardson though as well.

[frickaline]

120. I still would like to see Sam Nunn nt

[WA98296]

122. Glad it's not up to you.

[ShaneGR]

123. If's smart he'll pick Strickland from Ohio.....

Former Clinton supporter, and wins him support in the area of the country he's most weakest in.

[thunderdog]

124. Webb would deliver Virginia. However, the choice may end up being someone who deliver

a larger state.

Bigger is better in this game.

[Clear Blue Sky]

128. He will pick who he picks, without consulting us.

The speculating and suggesting is interesting, but nothing more.

[Sensitivity]

134. Wish that happenned with Kerry. He was lobbied into choosing Edwards

[Clear Blue Sky]

135. Hopefully Obama has good counsel and thinks the decision through.

[Sensitivity]

140. Unfortunately there are strong lobby groups already pushing their favorite POL ala Hillary, Sibelius

various other Guvs

[Megahurtz]

188. And he SHOULD pick who HE feels is best.

Not us, or anyone else.

[2rth2pwr]

132. Cynthia McKinney.

[Sensitivity]

137. Hardball panel chose HAGEL. Interesting!

[RainDog]

138. a one-party state sounds absolutely... soviet!

how absolutely horrific!

[CarbonDate]

139. Aw, let's just nominate Mike Huckabee while we're at it.

Why is it that the only "national security" people a lot of folks can think of are current or former Republicans?

[harun]

142. A good question

I think the way the media sells them as "hawks" has a lot to do with it.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

143. have you lost your friggin mind?!?

or your way to TO THE OTHER UN NAMED BOARD....half of them are god damn rethuglicans.

[Sensitivity]

146. There is 1 republican -- the one who many analysts say is a top choice

[ElsewheresDaughter]

147. 2 Rethugs...Hagel is a Rethug and Betrayus

[Sensitivity]

148. Please post evidence of Petraeus Republican registration

[ElsewheresDaughter]

150. Petraeus most certainly is a Rethuglican! ow long have you been interested in politics?...link here

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=petraeus_12

"Indeed, Petraeus can basically write his next round of orders. But wherever he goes, his next important campaign probably won't be on any battlefield. It'll be political. For the past year, the GOP has laid the groundwork to enlist Petraeus as its standard-bearer in the fairly likely event that the party loses in November to Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. You read it here first. Plant your lawn signs now. Petraeus 2012: Surging to the White House."

"

[Sensitivity]

151. Repub want Petraeus. SO? Does not mean he has made any commitment to the Pug party

[Sensitivity]

152. Please give link to the point. Dems should recruit Petraues as well. May be you can find

a links about this.

[wmbrew0206]

194. Did you read that article?

The only quote from Petraeus was the one saying that he thinks generals should stay out of politics.

[iconicgnom]

144. There's a bogeyman with a boxcutter under every bed!

And only General David Petraeus can save us!

Oh oh oh, we're all so skeered!

[Milo_Bloom]

145. RICHARD CLARKE!!!!

Probably the most qualified person in the country on national security (considering 9/11 would have been avoided if anyone listened to his warnings).

EXPOSED the bush administration on Iraq.

NON PARTISAN - has served in both republican and democratic amdinistration.... BUT donated 2300 to Obama AND serves as one of his top advisors on national security.

Military experience does not equal foreign policy experience and it is important for Obama to highlight that, since McCain will fall back on his military experience.

[Doityourself]

153. General David Petraeus ? HUH?

:wtf: :puke:

[Doctor_J]

154. Wouldn't having Betrayus on the ticket make a "Stop the war" platform a tough sell?

He's the "Stay the course" poster boy.

[Sensitivity]

172. Has anyone show more ability to bring the war to an END. HE PAID OFF HALF OF

the insurgents -- hired them to police their towns. And that was the smart "Democratic" thing to do.

[ORDem]

155. None of the above. Much rather see Sebelius or McCaskgil. nt

[dana_b]

157. ditto. What happens if Obama becomes the Pres., gets re-elected in 2012...

and then the VP runs for Pres. in 2016? Do you want any of these peopleto be the future President?? I don't.

[Sensitivity]

170. They would be Democrats then or they would not get the NOM

[Sensitivity]

201. LOVE SEBELIUS!! But she can't fend off the National Security, War and Terror BLOW THAT IS COMING.

[rucky]

156. Disagree about Richardson being out.

FoPo cred trumps military cred. Clark & Kerry have both, but Kerry's damaged goods. I see Richardson or Clark as the strongest.

[donheld]

158. Please stop with the Chuck Hagel crap

He's right on the war but wrong on EVERYTHING else.

[Sensitivity]

200. Hagel in not my candidate. He is prominent in MSM discussion of options

[mystieus]

159. None of the above.

[Clark2008]

160. Why didn't you post a picture of Wes.

Afterall, he's the smartest and best looking.

:)

[Sensitivity]

164. You got it -- Clark and Kerry are too well known already, No need for bio

[RiverStone]

162. Clark, Webb and the others are OK, but NEVER Hagel!

Chuck is a full fledged rightie on social and environmental issues, good on the war - but otherwise a pure breed puke.

All your other choices look good - and I agree - either Webb or Clark would be my top two choices.

[Sensitivity]

167. Thanks for the compliment. Re Hagel, he is widely viewed as on short list for UNITY ticket

To be post-partisan one has to include the opposing views, but pershaps not in the V.P. position.

[RainDog]

176. widely viewed by whom?

who, other than the talking heads who are paid to say things without regard to their worth, is trying to sell a unity ticket?

I'd like to see links to those who support the move to a one-party ticket.

It doesn't bother you in the least that voters would have a choice between conservative party A and conservative party B? - that, in effect, what you are proposing is to reward those who have created the messes we currently face?

why would anyone with any common sense choose to put a republican on a ticket to fix the problems their policies created?

why is this nothing other than a bid for republicans to continue to remain in power? why reward them for riding on the coat tails of democrats who have no use for them?

who in his or her right mind thinks that a democrat is going to achieve "unity" by choosing more of the same for a running mate? Is this "unity" that you speak of a very narrow unity that punishes those who were right on positions about the war, economy, civil rights, etc. etc. by spitting in their faces and offering them yet more bankrupt republicanism?

this talk of unity almost seems like something set up to kneecap Obama. Those of you with a very, very narrow view of political options really need to understand that if you think liberals, greens, etc. have to vote for democrats, even when that democrat has a "Liebermanesque" vp, you are mistaken.

there is a large voting bloc in this nation that would not support a one-party ticket.

last time I looked, Obama needed this bloc in order to win an election. He does not need a republican to win an election. A republican would be a drag on the ticket and would make any talk of hope and change we can believe in nothing more than bullshit. Instead, such a ticket would be an enforcement of a status quo that is NOT WORKING.

If you read Obama's take on civil rights and just societies, such a choice makes no sense either.

Democrats do not need republicans on a ticket to win an election. "Unity" is a word that seems to mean biz as usual, pander to the right wing, and make sure no one is empowered other than the current elite.

no thanks. this is a losing strategy.

[Sensitivity]

177. Have you read Hagel's new book, America: the Next Chapter?? He is a Repug. That is not news.

[RainDog]

179. no I haven't. so this is a republican idea?

hagel wants to hijack the democratic party? that's what has prompted your enthusiasm, what a seated republican during the bush years has to say?

[RainDog]

180. this article seems timely - republican attempts to "rebrand" themselves - w/o actual change

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x358958

The Senate minority set a new record for filibusters before the first session was over. The president issued a record number of veto threats. House Republicans perfected procedural tricks that would put sand in the gears. As last as last week, they switched their votes on a resolution celebrating mothers on Mother's Day simply to obstruct business on the Senate.

They blocked the resolution to set a date to get the troops out of Iraq. They blocked extending health care to children. They blocked allowing Medicare to negotiate lower prices on prescription drugs. They blocked overturning subsidies to big oil and investing them in alternative energy.

But despite their success in gumming up the works, the strategy hasn't been working out too well for them. Congress has grown less popular, but increasing majorities think the solution is to throw out Republicans, not Democrats. 29 Republicans looked at the race and decided to retire. Republicans suffered stunning special election defeats in former House Speaker Dennis Hastert's seat in Illinois (to an anti-war candidate), and in a solidly Republican district in Louisiana (despite running ads painting the Democrat as an Obama clone). Newt Gingrich warned that they faced "real disaster" this fall unless they changed course. "We can't win solely by tying our opponents to Barack Obama and his liberal views," Boehner concluded, "We also have to prove Republicans are agents of change."

[npincus]

174. I like Webb- and good counterbalance to McCain who also has a kid in Iraq

[HCE SuiGeneris]

178. What is this? 5th ? 6th time you posted this? Argggg.

Petraeus is NOT, I repeat NOT, a viable choice.

[Heather MC]

181. Can I vote non of the above?

Webb Barely won VA,
Gen Betray US umm no
Hagel?? I am glad he supports Obama but that's a real slap in the face to Qualified Dems
although if the short list goes down to Hillary and Hagel
HAGEL ALL DAY

where's Biden
I pick Biden

[Megahurtz]

183. Webb.

And that's that!

:nuke:

[New Dawn]

185. Petraeus is a Neocon (and a Republican)

So he would obviously never be Obama's VP.

[wmbrew0206]

192. Please provide some proof for that in the form of links that show

Petraeus talking or writing about his political views.

Just saying, well he is working for Bush's Pentagon doesn't cut it.

Petraeus was picked to be the commander in Iraq because he was in charge of writing the Army's Counter Insurgency (COIN) doctrine. This was the strategy Gates wanted to go with, so they picked the guy who was in charge of developing the strategy.

The only other general seriously considered for this position was Gen. Mattis (USMC) and Mattis is a little to rough around the edges for some of the delicate negotiations that the COIN strategy requires.

[Sensitivity]

196. COMPLETELY AGREE. Those who think they know Petaeus's view by his readiness to do his best

to turn Iraq around do not understand role of U.S. military forces and its leadership.

[Gore1FL]

193. I don't buy into the premise

Obama-Sebelius 2008

[sfam]

197. I disagree with the Premise. Obama should double-down on the change message...

He should pick someone that either gets us a state or a voting block. But he shouldn't pick someone from Washington or someone associated with the war.

[Sensitivity]

199. Is change incompatible with National Security credentials?

[4_Legs_Good]

202. I think Kerry needed Edwards in 2004, but then sucked the life out of him...

Kerry was boring as Gore had been in 2000, and he needed someone who would bring some life to the ticket. Edwards was the best choice IMO, but somehow the instant he made the announcement (and I remember it like it was yesterday), all the energy left Edwards and he was almost as boring as Kerry.

Had he simply wanted to win with boring, he should have chosen Gephardt, and he would have won MO and OH and we'd be in the White House right now.

I think Edwards failed as a VP choice, and Kerry failed to let him help. I'll never forget the Edwards/Cheney debate which should have been a complete blow-out and ended up being a tie at best. That was the biggest disappointment in the General Election campaign for me.

David

[Sensitivity]

203. Kerry needed Clark: At a time of war Clark could have hammered the Swifties. Edwards was lame

[TexasObserver]

204. NOOOOOoooooooooo! No to generals and former generals.

No to Hagel. He's a Republican.

Hell No to Petraeus!

[Sensitivity]

205. So Kerry, Webb. Nunn, Bob Kerry and Hagel should be ok

[TexasObserver]

207. No to Kerry, to Nunn, to Bob Kerrey, and to Hagel.

Webb is a possibility.

[Sensitivity]

209. And what if your favs don't agree to run

[Quixote1818]

206. Richardson doesn't have a chance now. He won't help with white, blue collar Dems

I agree that the VP should be strong on National Security. Wes Clark or Anthony Zinni are both great choices.