Barack's starting lineup:

[Labors of Hercules]

Madame Vice President: Kathleen Sebelius


Mister Attorney General: John Edwards


Mister Secretary of State: Bill Richardson


Madame Senator from the state of New York & future Senate Majority Leader: Hillary Clinton

[DevonRex]

1. I think I like that lineup. K&R.

[shadowknows69]

2. I'm even still game for Madame Senate Majority Leader Clinton

But I think Hillary may have burned that bridge on her own. Other than that, yeah, I'll take that line up. Can you say the end of the GOP as we know it? I knew that you could. Who's up for 16+ years of Democratic rule!!!

[Cant trust em]

3. That's not bad. I could get down with that.

I think she'd do a good job in that role.

[Labors of Hercules]

4. added on edit! Excellent!!

That's what I call a strong Government!

[Kierkegaard]

5. If we can take this razed landscape that used to be America...

and turn it back into a semblance of its' former self, the contrast will be obvious to even the most hardcore wingnut. As a result, the dominance of our party will last much longer than 16 years.

[mkultra]

6. peace and prosperity make wingnuts nervous

they will eventually start to freak out.

[Aloha Spirit]

12. agreed. Yesterday, I tried really hard to imagine McCain ruling over a peaceful US. Couldn't do it.

[mmonk]

7. That would indeed be a great lineup.

[KansasVoter]

8. Nice and recommended!

[Boz]

9. Flip Richardson and Sebelius, and your golden.

She is our first woman president, not first woman Vice President.

Richardson has the brand penetration that Hillary has been riding on.

Sebelius, needs more work on name recognition in real(outside du) world.

Took 16 months or more to get Obama national Name penetration, we have 6 at most maybe 3-4 at worst case.

In the 50 state we are weak in plains/southwest, Richardson brings that to the table.

Sebelius brings Ohio up, but not more than a solid ground game can do, Ohio is still not going to go Dem, it will hover 48-49%

Sebelius has strong diplomacy and needs to cut her national teeth for her run in 2016

[hisownpetard]

17. Who's Flip Richardson? Did you mean Flip Wilson?

:hide:

[Boz]

22. Speaking of Hoisting GRIN These guys are being sought for questioning

:spank:






The last guy kinda looks like you.



Doing this
:hide:

Ill be hiding over here:yoiks:

:rofl:

[hisownpetard]

23. Heh heh.

:hi:

[Boz]

25. Updated ^^^^^^^

[shadowknows69]

39. I see a buddy movie there

The Three Wilsons. Except that Wilson number one is currently still lost at sea.

[Kahuna]

10. Hillary will NOT be majority leader if Obama is president. He needs

someone he can trust and work with. Sorry but Hillary is NOT that person.

[Boz]

13. He needs a whip, someone that can move people and legislation, she deosnt have a record of that in

the senate.

Its likely going to be Kerry, with a Webb understudy in the wings, marking his time

[mmonk]

15. I'm not worried with that scenario though I'm intrigued

with the idea of Hillary on the Supreme Court as a firebrand against CJ Roberts. I still like the idea of Dodd as Senate Majority leader for his tireless defense of the constitution. But I'd be happy with Clinton as Senate Majority leader.

[Boz]

27. I think Hillary may be Marginalized in the Senate,

Thats why you would see Kerry/Webb Leadership.

She will never be confirmed for SCOTUS but I would not be surprised by a governorship.

[mmonk]

36. There may hard feelings in the Senate

but I'm not sure how lasting it will be.

[Darth_Kitten]

11. Is it past November yet?

:shrug:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

14. Why no liberals?

[cboy4]

16. Oh you can better believe that back-stabber

Bill Richardson will have mooched yet another White House job.

I'm sure that was all worked out ahead of time when he pissed all over the Clintons.

I couldn't have a lower opinion of another Democrat.

I'll have to think about it, but nobody comes to mind.

[Colobo]

21. So Bill HAD to endorse Clinton? That's so authoritarian.

[cboy4]

30. He didn't necessarily have to endorse her....I think we've been

over this.

The bottom line is Richardson behaved like a disloyal, ungrateful friend .. especially leading on the Clintons so much that he was actually watching the Super Bowl in February with Bill Clinton .. pretending like he was at the least undecided.

When in fact, he was just buying time -- waiting to make sure Obama was going to be the nominee before he crapped on the Clintons, because he wants another White House job at any cost.

So he could have very early on had told the Clintons he thought Obama was a better choice, and I might have been able to respect that.

But no.

He completely back-stabbed the family to whom he owes a mind-boggling amount of his political success, and the fact that he's on television every other day talking about it is an indication that the guilt is rightfully causing him to lose sleep.

[starroute]

18. We've got to get our own act together as well

I woke up this morning thinking about how the right undermined Jimmy Carter and sabotaged Bill Clinton. There will be no honeymoon for Obama either -- no easy hundred days during which he gets a chance to introduce his team and implement his starting agenda. He's going to have to hit the ground running -- and so will we. We're going to have to have his back but also keep his feet to the fire, to make sure the solutions he offers are genuinely progressive ones.

What this means in practical terms is controlling the discourse. As long as the media controls what gets through -- and as long as the "non-partisan" experts invited to explain everything are actually right-wing hacks -- we don't have a chance. So we need to start thinking right now about how to handle that next January.

One thing that will obviously help is if Obama is swept into office on a wave of public approval and interest so intense that the networks have every incentive to run his speeches and press conferences live in prime time. But even if that happens, we'd need to keep up the pressure to make sure they keep doing it -- or if they don't, we'd need to push them hard to change. (My recollection is that Clinton got much less live coverage than Bush has, and that this made a significant difference in the apparent failures that led up to the GOP takeover of Congress in 1994.)

A second thing we'll need to do is to stay on our toes as far as the pundits and "experts" are concerned -- to be aware of what false messages are being presented and by whom and to get the word around to both the blogosphere and our allies in the media and cut them off at the root. The right has enjoyed an echo chamber where something like, say, the War on Christmas (to take a fairly trivial example) can start with a couple of exaggerated or even manufactured incidents, flow through Drudge to Fox News, and wind up as conventional wisdom before we know what's happening. That has to end.

But perhaps the most important thing is that we'll need to have our own experts and talking points to counter the right. It's well-known that the Democrats have tended to put their money into political campaigns while the Republicans were building up an infrastructure of think-tanks, policy institutes, and astroturf front groups, all of them prepared to offer an easily-digested opinion on any topic of the day. That's one of the things that has given them such an advantage in the perception wars.

We're not prepared to create an equivalent network -- we don't have either the time to do it or the friendly billionaires to fund it. But over the last few years, we've build up an impressive list of people and groups on the left with the knowledge and credentials to make our case in public. Whether it's to support an Obama administration initiative, to push for a more progressive approach over a more centrist one, or to suggest bold new solutions for the intractable problems of the environment, the economy, and the global community, those people will now have to be on the front lines. And the rest of us will have to do our part to make sure they get the visibility and positive feedback they need.

We know how to do all those things -- we've done them here at DU many times. But we've never done them in a focused, coordinated, rigorous way, because we've mainly been playing damage control against the horrors of the Bush administration. During an Obama administration, the function of communities like DU will clearly have to change, and I am suggesting that one of the things we can do is provide a conscious movement to control the larger public discourse, using all the tools we've developed over the last seven years.

[mmonk]

19. I respectfully add for UN Ambassor

Samantha Power

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

20. Monstrously good choice.

[mmonk]

28. .

:thumbsup:

[LeFleur1]

29. Actually

If Obama were to win the nomination and then the White House, I think Rev. Wright would probably be Ambassador to the UN or Secretary of State. :)

[mmonk]

31. No

Secretary of Defense

[styersc]

24. I see Richardson at State and Clinton in Sen leadership

but Sebelius and Edwards are weak choices that will be viewed as political pay-off. Will not go with the New Politics theme.

[Psst_Im_Not_Here]

26. How about...

Joe Biden as Secretary of State and Richardson as Immigration Czar? Immigration will be a huge issue, so, a new Immigration Czar might be a good idea. Either way, I like the way you think!

[Gidney N Cloyd]

32. Who's the current "Immigration Czar?"

[Psst_Im_Not_Here]

35. Nobody that I'm aware of

I was suggesting a new office. I know it sounds republicanesque, maybe a different name but, something like it. It's an issue we can't ignore this time around, I'm not big on the repugs position on it. It's unrealistic. But, it must be addressed from the perspective of national security. We need to know who is coming into this country, but, if I were a terrorist, I'd come in from the Canadian border!

Don't get me wrong, I'm not an anti-immigration person, I'm the daughter of an immigrant. German, but none the less, an immigrant. But, having said that, there are many that this is a major issue. Who better than Richardson to address this, being from New Mexico?

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## DON'T DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our second quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Whatever you do, do not click the link below!

[canucksawbones]

34. what about Justice..

Hillary Clinton.

I think she might have a significant amount of pull in that position. It's also a place where her tenacity will be truly useful.

GK

[mmonk]

37. I'm not sure how deep she would want investigations to go.

[Shakespeare]

38. The Attorney General heads the DOJ (which most think will go to Edwards).

What position, specifically, are you suggesting?

[psychopomp]

41. Not a swipe

but I am uncomfortable with a self-admitted liar in the Justice Department.
"I just said some things that weren't in keeping with what I knew to be the case..."

[SeattleGirl]

40. Why is Sebelius your choice for VP?

I don't know that much about her. What do you think she would bring to the ticket?

(No snark here; just an honest question.)