article tools: email | print | read more Bill Hare
To paraphrase Harry Truman’s dictum that the only things we don’t yet know being the history we haven’t yet read, current headlines, in a comparative vein, are reminiscent of 1960.
Shortly before the beginning of the Democratic Convention of 1960 a group of prosperous looking Texans stood in the lobby of the Biltmore Hotel in Los Angeles, the convention’s headquarters, and one said in a strong, determined accent with a notable Texas twang:
“That Kennedy is making me damned mad!”
The youthful Massachusetts Senator John F. Kennedy and the politically experienced majority leader of that same body, Senator Lyndon B. Johnson, had exchanged plenty of verbal blows as each sought to win the Democratic nomination and the opportunity to face Vice President Richard M. Nixon in the fall presidential campaign.
Despite animosity in both camps, when all was said and done a politically pragmatic result occurred as delivering the respective acceptance speeches before 50,000 in person viewers and millions more on national television were Senator Kennedy as presidential nominee and Majority Leader Johnson as his running mate.
Today on the “Cafferty File” CNN site the idea was discussed of a ticket comprised of senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for president and vice-president respectively.
Mentioned in this article for his current comments in this same direction was none other than former Bill Clinton aide and now ABC TV correspondent George Stephanopoulos, someone with extensive credentials among those in the New York senator’s camp.
In 1960 Kennedy sought to make history as America’s first Roman Catholic president. Forty-eight years later Barack Obama seeks to make history as the nation’s first African American chief executive.
Kennedy in 1960 needed electoral strengthening in the South, an area Johnson represented in Texas and knew exceptionally well nationally.
A current concern has been registered over Obama’s inability to register strongly with rural and white collar Americans, and among older citizens.
So which senator looms as a prospect to boost his prospects in the fall among those groups, and has been successfully courting them in the current campaign?
The answer is Hillary Clinton and there is more to be said in that vein. Columnist David Broder and others questioned Democratic strategy in the 2000 and 2004 campaigns for not using Bill Clinton more to “shore up the Democratic base.”
Could Bill Clinton be called upon to exercise heavy duty lifting in a campaign in which the vice-presidential candidate is someone who also has the last name of Clinton?
An interesting development from today is what Hillary Clinton said while campaigning in West Virginia. She noted the importance of winning that state, which contains high white rural and blue collar concentration, indicating concern over recent failures there in presidential elections.
The point the New York senator made involved both Clinton and Obama needing to make a good case in West Virginia to pull the state back into the Democratic column.
Could this statement in retrospect be seen as the first shot from the bow emanating from a Democratic pragmatic unity ticket? Could she right now be performing pre-November service for both candidates?
At this moment certain savvy Democratic Party professionals are pulling up as many numbers as possible to see the potential of Hillary Clinton along with husband Bill campaigning assiduously among groups where they are perceived as stronger and Obama weaker.
Obama has undeniably brought new faces into the 2008 political scene based on his message of hope and a fresh beginning, bringing in impressive numbers among young voters as well as independents and Republicans appalled by the neoconservative bent of that party.
Conversely the Clintons have drawn strong support from the old FDR-Truman-Kennedy base of white collar workers, union members, and grassroots rural voters.
If Obama and Clinton could metaphorically “hold serve,” meaning retain the support level of groups that voted for them in the primaries, then as a unified force the Democrats hold the potential for a smashing November triumph at the presidential and congressional levels.
This prospect is exemplified by the current level of polling revealing that some 70 percent of Americans disapprove of the Bush-Cheney administration’s record.
_______
Bill Hare
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
She's a bi-polar opposite...
...and shows the worst sides of the party, we're all trying to clean out!
Not to mention that what she represents is completely antithetical to everything Obama and his supporters believe in.
ABSOLUTELY NO. WILL NEVER HAPPEN.
A FOX REPORTER SHE WOULD BE BETTER AS!!
_______An adversary is not an enemy. And nationalism is not terrorism.
You beat me to it...
... macsporan, but I'll say it anyway.
NO
Oh hell no.
The Clinton stank on the party needs to be put downwind. Obama has a fine Democratic bench to choose from.
Oh Hell NO!
First and foremost, if Obama wants the message to be "change" there is NO WAY he can be credible with Hillary on the ticket.
Second, after all the crap she has pulled during this campaign, how could he possibly trust her.
Third, we've all suffered through the "fourth branch of government" as designed and executed by Dick Cheney. The LAST THING this country needs is Hillary setting up her own shadow government. And just to be clear, one of the FIRST things Obama needs to make clear to the eventual VP candidate and to the country is that that violation of the Constitution on the law will not be tolerated ever again in his administration.
Fourth, the argument that he NEEDS her is bogus. The idea her supporters would rather stay home, or worse vote for McCain, in the fall is an empty threat. The heat Nader took after 2000 would be NOTHING compared to the animosity that would land on Hilary should republicans prevail in November. She is on record as saying that she will "work her heart out" for Obama when he is the nominee. She will have to prove it without any strings attached.
Finally, the talking heads have been going on that Obama HAS to at least offer her the position because she feels she is now entitled to it. She is entitled to exactly NOTHING. She started her campaign believing her name entitled her to the presidential nomination. She lost 12 straight primaries after Super Tuesday because she never once thought she would have to do anything more to win the nomination than just smile and show up. And when that didn't work out she had no plan for running a real campaign and became a whiny, petulant, spoiled brat, endlessly complaining about why the rules needed to be changed until she could win. Sorry Hillary, they're called rules for a reason. Once you agree to them, and you did, they, not you, determines who wins.
Let's keep in mind that
Let's keep in mind that Hillary Clinton is as machevelian as her husband and will do anything to become President of the United States.
My suggestion: when Barrack and Michelle get invited by Hil and Bill to the Blair House for a formal dinner, they bring along their own taster.
ha!
Props to Rev. Al Sharpton for writing this joke - although it was originally about whoever took Guiliani for his vice-president.
So now the Clintons are presumptive murders? A little too much Fox "News" there? A little too much Rush Limbaugh seeping through the cerebral cortex?
_______Rational apprehension of dangers is necessary; fear is not. - B. Russell
sorry to disappoint you. It
sorry to disappoint you. It was a joke. And I hate Fox and Rush as much as you do. If someone came up with the joke before, I didn't know. And, no, there is no way in hell I would think either Bill or Hil were that machevelian.
Kennedy chose Texan political power for VP and was murdered
Kennedy's choice literally backfired. In Texas. Then, LBJ went to war nearly instantly against a government that didn't attack us. It took over 50 years for the government to release information about the fake 'attack' on our navy to admit they knew all along, it was totally fake.
But then, America's many colonial wars have nearly always been based on faked attacks! And often are connected to assassinations, too.
_______Culture of Life News: Diplomacy, Geology, Space Sciences, Religion, and always, endless Wars and daily Financial News. And with this, a new cartoon every day. Meet Miz Liberty, the China Dragon, Miss Japan and the crafty Persian kitty.
Http:elainemein
There's got to be
about a half dozen other dem presidential candidates who would be a better choice. There might be a spot for Hillary as an ambassador to a country with a woman head of state, though.
empty opinions
All the comments above betray a dislike for Hillary Clinton, therefore a dislike for the idea of a joint ticket.
Not one of them actually mentioned why the joint ticket would be bad. Other than lobbing labels such as "sociopath" and "Machiavellian" - which betray nothing more than a misunderstanding of the term by those who used them - the list of objections seems pretty thin on reasons.
Have the Clinton-conspiracy nutters settled here to roost? Doesn't Fox "News" have a blog anymore? I notice they never attack McCain...
I think the joint ticket is the only reasonable solution at this point. I prefer Obama, but I'm not willing to push those swing voters to McCain just to keep him free of some imagined ill influence she will cause him.
The two of them would likely bring two different portions of those who would vote Democratic together in a better way than any of the other former candidates might. And if it's Clinton's voting for Bush's war that is objectionable, how many candidates actually voted against it and stood up to loudly criticize it? Among these, how many are electable?
Sometimes idealism needs to give space to pragmatism. Maybe the Hilarybots and Obamabots need to come together and fight a common enemy, instead of handing him the White House keys.
_______Rational apprehension of dangers is necessary; fear is not. - B. Russell
Don't let the crazy Clintons poison the ticket
The only people who think this is a good idea are the republicans and the media, who would love the Clinton freak-show to go on.
Obama/Clinton ticket
So this is going to be the next media pitch for Hillary, eh? Vice-President!
If a Obama/Clinton ticket were to come to pass, I'd hire a taster if I were Barack.
I really think it's unlikely. Public statements to the contrary, I believe Obama sees Hillary for what she is...someone who would stop at nothing to get elected.
If this divisive campaigner will pander to racists, lie and think nothing about destroying the reputation of a decent and brilliant man, not to mention her own party, what would she do as Vice-President? In all likelihood try to back stab him into a one-term presidency since she's not getting any younger.
As for her appeal to the so-called "Reagan" democrats, it won't take long for even the reddest of necks to recognize a poseur. Given the choice between McCain and Hillary's phony beer-swillin', they'll take McCain.
No, Barack has to hire on the real deal as his veep. Probably a moderate southerner with a basement full of firearms. But surely not Hillary.
_______inditer
More Obama/Hillary ticket
I'm actually responding to my own comments. I've never posted on a site twice in one day before, but I had to acknowledge in reading other post, that people other than myself are advising Barack to hire a taster and to watch the back stabbing. Clearly Hillary won't fly as a Vice-President. I doubt you'll see another senator on the roster. That leaves out some pretty good people. I've read other names like Colin Powell (an even bigger liar that Hillary if that's possible), Chris Dodd (too old), Michael Bloomberg - say what? and Jon Corzine...another huge money guy. I think sitting governors will get a long hard look. Bill Richardson would be highly qualified, but as a hispanic might overload the ticket with minorities, which would be no problem for decent democrats, but as Hillary has proven, not all democrats are decent. There are a couple of good ladies out there; Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas and Jennifer Granholm from Michigan. There are two strong Hillary supporters in the governor's ranks. Ted Strickland of Ohio, also fairly old, but a good ticket balancer and Mike Easley from North Carolina, but only because he's from the deep south. Former Virginia governor, Mark Warner would be terrific but he already declined to run for president and is now running for the senate. No, it won't be Hillary, but it will be somebody who appeals to the more moderate Hillary supporters. Edwards? Maybe, but his corporation trashing (and I agree with him)would probably turn off the contributor spigot. Better as AG once Barack is elected.
_______inditer
rational and lucid
Good posts - rational and lucid.
And one obvious point - it should be a white protestant male. Dems have a tendency to be too cute in the trendiness department.
Don't think for 1 second
Don't think for 1 second Obama's run is going to be a walk in the park. The MSM is gonna tear him a new asshole because Corporate America says to.
As someone said, I think it was Mike Malloy, the more logical choice will be Jim Webb. He has the military exp./creds Obama will probably need. Not only that, but he has a son in Iraq and was a Reagan Admin member(sorry too many beers and too lazy to look it up.)Finally he stood in Booshs' face and refused to shake his hand. I may not agree with Webb on a lot of issues, but that one gesture sold me.
Vice President Clinton?
Not necessary. If 8 years of smirky's disasterous incompetence and the prospect of 4 more under mcsenile isn't enough to scare some sense into the voting public, then the question of who will run with Obama is the least of your worries.
Have you ever experienced sitting down to a meal at someones home and had their dog park itself in your line of sight? You know that unwavering stare it gives you, hoping you'll maybe fumble something? Why would Obama choose to sit through that for the next 8 years?
An excellent metaphor;
however, this pair of mutts is too aggressive to sit there for long. After too brief a time, you’d have one of them gnawing on your kneecaps and the other one humping your leg.
(And has anyone considered how Bill might fit into the role of assistant VP?)
_______incognito ergo sum
Bill as assistant VP.
Hillary stated that if president, she would use Bill as an ambassador of goodwill, to help america regain its standing in the world. I'd guess his role if he became assistant VP would be much the same, america's leghumper-at-large.
Hillary for VP
Hillary for VP might work for some but it wouldn't do for me. Obama just doesn't have it. You can't just keep quiet for an entire campaign and not tell people what you would do as president until you're in office.
I still think the best thing Hillary's supporters can do is to write in "Hillary Clinton" when they vote. Sends a hell of a message to the democratic party. Second choice is to vote for Nader.
It's a shame. We had this one won until that little jerk off egotist let being a media darling go to his head. He should have waited, gotten a little experience under his belt and then gone for it. Hilllary could have won the general for the democrats. Although, I would have perfered John Edwards. All Obama is going to do is give it to the republicans.
Makes you wonder if that wasn't the media plan from the start. I'd bet money that was the plan at MSNBC. It's no secret that Chris Matthews is a republican and has been trying to screw up Hillary's chances for at least a year. It's just hard to believe that so many prople on smirking chimp drank the kool aid. But then, as P.T. Barnum said, "there is a sucker born every minute."
There, there
It's way past your bedtime, young man, and you know what you're like when you're tired. Now run along.
_______The Corporations must be Destroyed.
A horrifically bad idea.
If Obama is as smart as he seems to be, he won’t let those people near him. He'll have enough problems keeping one step ahead of their plots to undermine him even without them being that close to him.
The Bill Clinton sparkle is advancing rapidly into total tarnish mode, as people learn more about him, recognize him for the sociopath he is.
If Obama had Hillary as VP, he’d have to double his staff just to keep the figurative daggers out of his back--and it’s probably not hyperbolic to suggest he’d probably have to always be looking for the real blades too.
Nope. It’s a totally scary idea.
_______incognito ergo sum