Biden is VP --- But What Now?

Barack Obama made the right choice.  I know what I've said before about potential veeps for Obama, but Biden was the best choice out there.  Biden brings experience, enthusiasm, and possibly most important of all, an absolutely captivating background story.  Obama, in addition to needing someone to bring experience and blue collar workers to the Democratic ticket, needed someone to play the role of the "attack dog".  We all know that the Republicans are going to go after Obama head on, holding nothing back.  Biden is uniquely positioned to hit back on John McCain and to do it with a smile.  I believe that I speak for millions of Americans when I say that I am truly looking forward to seeing Barack Obama and Joe Biden in the White House. 

But now what for Obama?  He's named his VP and the convention is coming up.  But what else can he do to assure voters that he should be the next President of the United States?  I have a suggestion.  Barack Obama should come out and name who his Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of the Treasury, and Attorney General will be.  Not only would it assure some uneasy voters if Obama makes the right picks, but it will also give Obama four more high profile surrogates and campaigners.  Let's look at some suggestions for these four positions:

Secretary of State: If anyone but Biden was named VP, then Biden would have to be the frontrunner for this position.  But since Biden was rightfully named the VP nominee, Bill Richardson has to now be the considered the leading candidate for Secretary of State.  In addition to Richardson's experience in foreign affairs, Richardson, if named by Obama to be his Secretary of State should he win, would be able to almost certainly deliver New Mexico, and possibly Colorado, for the Democrats.

Secretary of Defense: This is yet another position where naming the right person could help Obama immeasurably.  Who would I name?  General Wesley Clark.  Clark, despite the ridiculous attack on him by the media a few months ago, has earned the respect and trust of the American people.  Wes Clark could be yet another surrogate to go talk to white voters uneasy about Obama in Appalachia.  

Secretary of the Treasury and Attorney General: I'm not sure who would be considered a frontrunner for these two positions.  Surely John Edwards was a leading contender for Attorney General before his scandal.  Now, however, I'm not sure.  As far as the Treasury Secretary is concerned, someone like a Mike Bloomberg, who is well versed on economics, could bolster Obama's poll numbers on this election's number one issue. 

Again, why stop at the Vice-President?  Let's show the American voters true transparency by letting them vote not just on the President/VP, but the next administration as a whole.  As I've said, if Obama makes the right choice for cabinet members, he can more easily win this election.  

Veepstakes: My Prediction Time

Joseph made his predictions just a few nights ago and now I guess it's my turn: 

I believe Senator McCain will choose former Governor Mitt Romney because of his experience with managing and the economy, something Senator McCain lacks in both the reality and the public mind.

 

I believe Senator Obama will choose Senator Jack Reed.  Senator Reed has military and foreign policy experience which Senator Obama lacks.  

 

My own choice for McCain would be Senator Chuck Hagel or Senator Richard Lugar.  Both have common sense and political and foreign policy experience.  They would bring some sanity to McCain's know-it-all attitude.

 

My own choice for Obama would be General Wesley Clark, Senator Jim Webb, or Senator Hillary Clinton.  I once wanted to see Senator Joe Biden as VP, but now feel that he would be more valuable as Secretary of State in an Obama administration.  Clark and Webb have military experience and although Clinton does not, she has the overall experience to make a difference.

 

If I had to pick a potential surprise, a wildcard if you will, I would go with Senator Lindsay Graham for McCain and Governor Ed Rendell or former Senator Sam Nunn for Obama.

 

Whoever Obama and McCain choose, however, lets just hope the next President does not choose another Dick Cheney type.  Only time will tell.

Memo #2 to Obama: Learn from Clark

The following is from MyDD's Todd Beeton, which I noticed just moments after I wrote my previous post chastising Barack Obama for giving into Republicans on everything.  Someone who's not doing that: General Wesley Clark.  Here's how Mr. Beeton summed it up:

"Usually when Democrats get in hot water with the media, whether mis-interpreted or not, the instinct is to immediately apologize and slink away. Sometimes that is called for. In Wesley Clark's case, it is not, and I am thrilled to see him sticking to his guns.(...)

(...)A friend I spoke with last night said he wished Clark would shut it as he feared it was only playing into McCain's hands by raising an issue that treads on McCain-friendly terrain. Personally, I'm glad Clark has taken on what is widely considered hallowed ground and the third rail (choose your metaphor...) Clark was uniquely equipped to deliver this message and while people's instinct may be to shirk away from the suggestion that McCain's service is anything but perfect preparation to be commander in chief, the conversation that Clark has initiated has allowed people to really think about the validity of the premise for the first time and actually question it.  

Way to go, General. Continue to stand strong. We have your back."

I'll second that "way to go, General".  Wesley Clark has nothing to apologize for and is right to not apologize.  Apologizing would only play into the Republican's hands (as Obama did on this very issue) and would continue to allow them to censor Democrats, out of fear of being called un-patriotic or un-American, from saying things that are true and need to be said.  

I hope Barack Obama takes note of Gen. Clark's behavior and begins to challenge John McCain and the Republicans.  On a side note, it's very ironic, that in the process of McCain and his team comparing Gen. Clark's comments to a "swift-boating" of McCain, that they actually question Gen. Clark's patriotism.  Indeed, in this instance, it wasn't John McCain being swift-boated, it was Gen. Wesley Clark. 

Smart Take: The Columbia Journalism Review on "What Wesley Clark really said, and how the press missed it"

Zachary Roth at the Columbia Journalism Review has an new article up rightfully defending Gen. Wesley Clark against the smears by McCain and the media.  Here's Roth's very smart take:

__________________________________________________________

So: The latest round of mock outrage—in a presidential race that has turned the tactic into an art form—now comes in response to comments made by General Wesley Clark.(...)

When moderator Bob Schieffer interjected that “Barack Obama has not had any of those experiences, either, nor has he ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down”, Clark responded: “Well, I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president.”(...)

The McCain camp, sensing an opportunity, complained that Clark had “attacked John McCain’s military service record.” Of course, Clark had done nothing of the kind. He had questioned the relevance of McCain’s combat experience as a qualification to be president of the United States. This is a distinction that you’d expect any reasonably intelligent nine-year old to be able to grasp.(...)

This is the perfect embodiment of the press’s unbelievably destructive habit of assessing every piece of campaign rhetoric for its political acuity, rather than for its validity and accuracy. Clark’s comments may (or may not) have been impolitic. But that has no bearing on their validity or lack thereof—which is how the news media should be evaluating them.(...)

It’s crucially important that we have a political debate in this country that’s at least sophisticated enough to be able to handle the following rather basic idea: Arguing that a person’s record of military service is not a qualification for the presidency does not constitute “attacking” their military credentials; nor can it be described as invoking their military service against them, or as denying their record of war heroism.

That’s not a very high bar for sophistication. But right now it’s one the press isn’t capable of clearing.

It's Controversies Like This That Get My Blood Boiling...

Let's be clear: Wesley Clark, GENERAL Wesley Clark, neither said nor did anything to demean John McCain's service to this country.  

Here's the full quote from Gen. Clark from yesterday's Face the Nation that has stirred up all this controversy:

"In the matters of national security policy making, it's a matter of understanding risk.  It's a matter of gauging your opponents and it's a matter of being held accountable. John McCain's never done any of that in his official positions. I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in the armed forces, as a prisoner of war.

He has been a voice on the Senate Armed Services Committee and he has traveled all over the world, but he hasn't held executive responsibility.  That large squadron in the Navy that he commanded, that wasn't a wartime squadron....

...I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president." 

What is so damn wrong about what Gen. Clark said?  He spoke the truth.  He did say, after all, that he honors McCain's service and that McCain was a hero to him.  But being in the military does not necessarily prepare you for being President.  And although it makes for a sympathetic story, being shot down and held as a POW is not a qualification for being President.  

And for Gen. Clark to be attacked by John McCain for being somehow disrespectful to the military is absurd.  McCain should apologize.  The media should apologize for making this a lead story today.  And Barack Obama also owes Gen. Clark an apology for coming out against them today.  Why isn't anyone standing up and saying that Gen. Clark has said nothing wrong?  But once again, the media and our Democratic nominee is falling into the trap of appeasing the Republicans.  John McCain says Obama needs to go to Iraq.  What does Obama do?  Schedule a trip to several countries around the world, with the anticipation of an unscheduled visit to Iraq.  McCain says that Gen. Clark was disrespectful to the military.  Obama comes out, agrees, and condemns Gen. Clark.  And all the while, the media plays along.  

I'm sick and tired of the reputation of great men and women being destroyed by the Republicans, the media, and the lack of backbone by some members of the Democratic party.  It happened to Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Bob Kerrey, and now Gen. Wesley Clark.  Enough is enough.

Clark endorses Clinton

General Wesley Clark, a retired four star general and the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO during the Kosovo War, has endorsed Senator Hillary Clinton for President of the United States. Having been involved with wars himself, he states that she is the best person to deal with the War in Iraq as well as new challenges that will undoubtedly rise in the coming years:

"Senator Hillary Clinton has earned the support of millions of Americans in her campaign for president -- and today I am pleased to count myself among them. The world has reached a critical point, and we need a leader in the White House with the courage, intelligence and humility to navigate through many troubling challenges to our security at home and abroad. I believe Senator Clinton is that leader, and I whole-heartedly endorse her for President of the United States. Senator Clinton and I share a worldview in which diplomacy is the best first-strike tool in our arsenal; in today's complicated global system, the United States should be making more friends than enemies. Never before have so many Americans had our well-being so closely tied to world events. Our economic and national security has become more complicated than ever before, and we deserve a leader who draws on wisdom, compassion, intelligence and moral courage -- in short, we need Hillary Clinton. She is tough but fair, a rock-solid leader equal to the many weighty challenges ahead of us."

This is a huge endorsement for Hillary Clinton. General Clark is highly respected by both parties and in military circles. Clark is an expert on foreign and military affairs and will strengthen the public's view of Hillary on those issues. It will be interesting to see if he campaigns for her, as that would be a huge asset for the Clinton campaign. There is already rumors on the internet about Clark serving as VP or in a cabinet position. That may be thinking a little too far ahead, but I'll for one be watching this situation very closely, as it should give a boost to the Clinton campaign.