What do the Jim Webb for VP supporters think of this opinion piece?

[Bread and Circus]

Personally, I want Sebelius, perhaps Clark or Richardson.

However, a lot of people tout Webb. I've never been convinced.

Can folks read this and let me know what you think? http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/05/ixnay_on_the_ebbway.php

Sell me on Webb in terms of electoral enhancement and on intrinsic (not political) value. I'd like to know what the points are.

Thanks :)

[Alexander]

1. Webb would be a total disaster as a VP...

He voted for Bush and Macaca in 2000.

He wrote a book called "Women Can't Fight" - I'm sure that'll go over well with women.

He just got into the Senate, by the barest of margins.

I don't understand the infatuation so many here have with Webb.

[TooBigaTent]

2. It seems that many Democrats are so anxious to avoid the "weak on defense" attack

that they automatically think a military Democrat is the safest way to go.

IMHO, just another example of many in the party moving far-too-far to the right.

[SoxFan]

6. The national security issue is a legit political concern

It has nothing to do with "moving to the right".

Webb has some baggage that hasn't been fully discussed. I believe that is Obama wants to pick a VP who addresses the foreign policy/national security "gravitas" charge, he should look at Wes Clark and Bob Kerrey. If being a combat vet isn't a factor, add Joe Biden, Sam Nunn, Jane Harmon, and Tim Roemer to the discussion.

[marylanddem]

4. While I respect his win over Macaca, his expressed attitude

toward women makes him damaged goods, whether he still holds it or not.

[hedgehog]

12. It was an article written in 1979; here it is:

http://www.washingtonian.com/articles/mediapolitics/2182.html


Before making a judgment about Webb, you should read the article AND consider his description of combat. Webb is one of the few who is honest enough to suggest that combat soldiers aren't always knights in shining armor!

On edit: I have to say that Webb was correct in 1979 in saying that the introduction of women into the Service Academies changed the system. The question remains; was it a change for the good or for the bad?

[mod mom]

18. Oops, I missed your comment but agree w you.

[arewenotdemo]

14. I'd much rather see Mark Warner, should Obama target Virginia.

[mod mom]

17. Webb: "There is a place for women in our military, but not in combat"

It's an op-ed piece from '79 that says there's a place for women in the military but goes on to explain why he believes not in combat. As a woman, I respect his opinion on this.

[PBS Poll-435]

3. Webb is doing a great service in the Senate.

I loved his work ending Bush's abuse of "Recess" appointments.

[mod mom]

9. QUESTION: If Webb becomes VP-does the Dem governor choose his replacement?

The article in the OP appears to mean NO, but I can't find any other info on this.

[PBS Poll-435]

10. I am not 100% sure. I will have to look it up for you.

[DevonRex]

5. I have to agree with the article. I recognize that his views have

undoubtedly changed over the years, but those remarks about women in the military would definitely not help unite our party.

As a veteran myself, I am not surprised that someone in his age group would have held those views. Things had changed somewhat when I was in the service, thank goodness.

I would have to see clear evidence that his views had changed and that he has actually been working to prevent that kind of sexism since then. And I mean actively working, not just paying lip service.

[AspenRose]

7. It convinced me that Webb is a bad idea.

.

[mod mom]

8. I hesitated but then read this case for:

April 01, 2008

The Case for Jim Webb

I mentioned some of the factors that make Jim Webb, the Democratic Senator from Virginia, a less than entirely compelling Vice-Presidential pick for Barack Obama, here. To recap: when he campaigned for the Senate in 2006 Webb was, not to put too fine a point on it, hopeless on the campaign trail. You could see that it pained him to even ask people to vote for him and he plainly had little patience for the self-abasement and daily humiliations of life on the campaign trail. He is not a natural baby-kisser. My sense - from his own writing and what I've read about him - is that he is also difficult, stubborn, awkward, cussed and not to be trifled with. these too may not be attributes best-suited to a national campaign in the modern political era.

What he is, however, is something more important: he's clearly his own man and, crucially in this political era, a man one can respect even - or especially - if one disagrees with him (eg, on trade). There is, to use the word that came to dominate his 2006 Senate campaign, an authenticity to Webb that most politicians would chew their right arm off to possess. That is to say, I'd trust that Jim Webb had come to a decision honestly and because he considered it the wisest, most appropriate cause of action, not because a focus group or political calculation had persuaded him it was the most advantageous way forward. This would be true, I think, even in areas of disagreement. Perhaps especially so. In other words, I think he acts in good faith which is, in the end, all one can ask of any politician.

And so there's something compelling to the idea of Vice-President Webb. The political considerations first: the Democrats have no other plausible candidate with anything like Webb's military experience. At the very least one might think Obama could ask Webb to be a Shadow Secretary of Defense in advance of nominating him to the post after the election. Sure, Webb was a Republican until recently, but in addition to the Navy Cross, Silver Star, two Bronze Stars and two Purple Hearts he won in Vietnam he served as Secretary of the Navy in the Reagan administration. He also, and vitally from a Democratic point of view, opposed the Iraq War for reasons that, alas, look more cogent than ever.

That he resigned from Reagan's Pentagon on a point of principle (opposing cuts to the Navy) also a) stamps him as a man the US military ought not to be afraid of and b) marks him as a man cut from different cloth to that customarily worn by politicians today. Clearly, however, his presence on the Presidential ticket would go some way towards reassuring some voters that Obama's national security team is not going to be wet behind the ears and that there'll be no repeat of the drift and squandered opportunities of the Clinton years. Webb won't be learning on the job.

-snip

http://www.debatableland.com/the_debatable_land/2008/04/i-mentioned-som.html

Also, I am reading his book Time to Fight and as I am reading it I am truly thinking this guy is would be great!

[Leopolds Ghost]

15. "First off, the Dems have no other plausible candidate with Webb's military experience"

Clark? :shrug:

[mod mom]

16. What I feel appealing about Webb is that he will have strength w independents

since he served under Reagan, Virginia is a swing state and he connects w Appalachia-he even wrote a book about the "Scot-Irish" people.

Personally, what I like the best is the fact he is a Renaissance man-self made, accomplished writer, military expert, card carrying union man and seems to understand the importance of social justice.

[JimGinPA]

11. This Came Out Today...

[musicblind]

13. I've never been convinced on Webb either. Personally

my choices go in this order. 1.) Clinton 2.) Edwards 3.) Easley 4.) Sebelius (all of those would be fine choices... there are even a few more that would be good.

Webb and Richardson never struck me. Though I respect Richardson's experience with energy and foriegn policy. I just don't think Richardson would help the ticket in the eyes of the uneducated masses.