If Obama wanted to mence fences with Hillary he SHOULD HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT BEFORE HE USED RACE IN A CAMPAIGN THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE POST-RACIAL.

He should have thought about that before he made false charges of "offensive remarks" against Bill Clinton in South Carolina.

Obama was never offended.

He should have thought about what would happen down the road BEFORE he made false charges of "offensive remarks" against Gerry Ferraro.

What a pathetic man Obama is.

NOW Obama wants the country to vote for him because he has better "judgement" than McCain.

What kind of "judgement" did Obama show in South Carolina??

What kind of judgement did he show when Obama voted to fund the war???

What kind of judgement did Obama show bringing his children to Rev. Wright's church week after week, year after year???

WHAT kind of judgement did Obama show making a real estate deal with Resko after he was elected to the US Senate?

WHAT kind of judgement did he show making friends and hanging out with William Ayers, a terrorist who bombed the Capitol Building and the Pentagon ? (younger people do not know about that)

WHAT kind of judgement did Obama show when he actually thought that NO ONE would point any of this out ???

Pawlenty might want to re-think his alligence with mcsame. mcsame has said had he been bush he would have turned his plane around and gone to La. when KATRINA hit.
Point in fact there is a photo of mcbush with bush presenting him with a birthday cake at that time. I doubt he told bush to go to La.
He also voted NO twice on funds for repairing the levees in New Orleans.
It is a matter of public record.

proudtobeGOP writes
"So, the facts don't matter to you apparently. The engineers' report that the bridge infrastructure was sound is immaterial. Your'e going to rely on public perception and insinuation to cast blame on Rs. How politically convenient of you."

Proud, this is a politics blog. That means we discuss the political ramifications of news events. Pawlenty, as governor of Minnesota, vetoed a transportation funding bill after a major bridge fell down in his state. Subsequently, two additional major bridges have been closed to vehicular traffic for safety concerns. That isn't saying the 35W collapse was Pawlenty's fault. That isn't saying the engineers' report is irrelevant. It is saying that the Pawlenty doesn't have his priorities straight.

Also, later in your post, you got your facts wrong. The Twins are getting a new stadium (an initiative supported by Pawlenty, by the way), the Vikings are not. Of course, to pay for a twins stadium, Pawlenty had no problem sticking the bill to Hennepin County taxpayers - who don't even get a say in the matter, though we're supposed to have control over such initiatives through referendum. In other words, the state imposed a county tax on one county specifically, over-riding the county board & taxpayers. Small, unintrusive government, indeed. How's the kool-aid?

McCain is very loyal. Pawlenty has been on his side since the campaign began. Remember this post: Pawlenty will be the GOP VP nominee!!

Before the GOP goes too far down the road with Pawlenty they should look closely at Pawlenty's wife's ties to the far right, specifically some of the most conservative pro-life groups - both in Minneosta and nationally. While this may energize the base, it will alienate moderates and independents.

Chris:

The most important reflection to make on this campaign is this: Hillary did this to herself. Hillary had more than enough people supporting her at one time or another to win the nomination and go on and win in November - but she drove them away.

It started from the first days in 1993.

Hillary went into the White House and was NASTY FROM DAY ONE.

Seriously.

There is a story that there was a list of people waiting for interviews for Presidential appointments - campaign workers and supporters. Hillary went through the list and declared that there were too many "White Males." She ordered hundreds of people CUT from the list based on that criteria - and ordered a search of non-campaign workers and non-supporters to fill minority and women supporters.

hhhhmmmmmmm

Does this sound famiiar? See Hillary CUT her natural supporters and went off in a direction - many of the people they got for those positions had little loyalty to Hillary or the Clintons - they had loyalty to affirmative action. The people who were on the original list were naturally offended and had little reason to completely support the Clintons from that day forward.

Chris if you look back - thousands of Presidential appointments took a long time to fill in 1993 - ask around the news room see if you can get someone to confirm this story.

Hillary continued to conduct herself in a way that did not build support - instead she knew better - she never had a good reputation from the early early days of the campaign - the secret service had secret names for her in 1992.

Hillary decided to run for President in 1998 - from that point it was all about her.

Her support for Al Gore was weak - she stole valuable media time from him in 2000 - and that may have been one major factor why Al Gore did not make it that year.

Hillary was not focused in on helping Al Gore.

Hillary's involvement in Washington with the Dean candidacy - Hillary was concerned Dean would win in 2004 - delaying her Presidential campaign to 2012 - and by then the country might be willing to go Republican.

Chris - if you do not know this inside story ask around - Howard Dean was talking about it at the beginning of the Rules Committee meeting - fitting that he was there - clearly stating why he was backing Obama and clearly broadcasting how those votes were going to go that day and why.

Did you catch that at the beginning of the meeting when Dean spoke?

.

It'll never happen, but if McCain picked Clinton as his running mate he'd win in a walk.

That being said, I go with the "anyone but Romney" poster. Romney makes Satan look like Mother Theresa.

Given the concern over McCain's age and Republican party precedent, I think the GOP veepstakes is even more important this year than most. McCain's veep-pick could basically drive the direction of the party for years to come.

At this point, my vote is McCain's to lose. A Romney pick would give me a lot of pause -- can't stand the idea of that guy hovering over McCain like a vulture waiting for him to exit stage right so that he can have the spotlight.

So, anyone-but-Mitt sounds like a good strategy to me. Someone from PA or OH would probably be best.

OBAMA GETS ANGRY WITH "LOSERMAN"
...FINALLY SHOWING HIS BEHTZIM
AND IMPRESSING THE MACHO SET

"EMPTY SUIT" STITCHED WITH RAZOR WIRE?

>

The most important political news of the past 24-hour cycle has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton -- it's Barack Obama showing his "behtzim" in a Senate chamber countretemps with the the Benedict Arnold of the Democrats, "If you can't beat 'em join 'em" Joe Lieberman.

As reported in Roll Call, Obama got right up Lieberman's grille, backing Joe into a corner, sternly poking and gesticulating, with both Senators apparently talking over each other's words. This, the fallout from Lieberman's earlier attack on Obama for his stance on Iran, even though Lieberman admitted he hadn't heard Obama's speech before the Israeli lobby group AIPAC.

This tete-a-tete speaks volumes to those who have wondered for months whether Obama can stand up for his beliefs and his positions.. whether he's got the intestinal fortitude to man up when the need arises.

Turns out the "empty suit" might be stitched with threads of razor wire.

Of course, Obama will undo it all if he caves into the pressure to name Hillary as his veepee pick (an unlikely scenario, given the nearly universal condemnation of Hillary's non-concession speech on Tuesday night). The Lieberman episode suggests that Obama's been "baracked" ("blessed" is the English translation) with the stones to stand his ground.

That's been a huge unknown this entire campaign: Whether Obama's usual mild-mannered nature would lead him to be co-opted by the Washington power structure. The Lieberman sturm und drang provides the first clear evidence that Obama has the resolve and the self-confidence to be his own man.

Many, including this writer, still doubt that Obama brings sufficient experience to assume the highest office in the land. But if this "inner John Wayne" emerges as an alter ego to the image of Obama as an effete, latte-sipping elitist, we could see the experience quotient rendered moot by Obama's velvet-clad brass knuckles.

lonewolf

Your comments at 712 are slander. You are a horrible person.

I believe you could be sued for those comments actually.

You are abusing your rights.

lonewolf

That is the most disgusting thing I have read in a long long time - you are a liar and you are attempting to create a deception.

You should be ashamed of yourself

How do you look at yourself in the mirror???

.

Whoever wrote this is correct:

"My lasting memory is right after Super Tuesday. The biased media acting like FL and MI don't exist. My jaw drops to the floor, they are discussing this like there are only 48 states?! Taking our delegates right off the score board, I watched in anger the entire time. I wondered? are they stupid? are they doing this on purpose to favor Obama?"

100% CORRECT - ACCORDING TO ROB JOHNSON AT THE DNC RULES COMMITTEE THEY DECIDED TO STOP MICHIGAN AND FLORIDA FROM VOTING EARLY BECAUSE THOSE TWO STATES WERE "TOO WHITE" -

SOUTH CAROLINA WAS DEEMED TO BE BLACK ENOUGH

NEVADA WAS DEEMED TO BE HISPANIC ENOUGH

SO SOUTH CAROLINA AND NEVADA VOTERS WERE FAVORED BECAUSE OF THEIR BLACK AND HISPANIC POPULATIONS.

NOOOOO THAT IS NOT DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WHITES NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

.

I heard that cocaine can put holes in your brain - or is that crack cocaine - or is it both? Which did Obama do?

.

I heard that cocaine can put holes in your brain - or is that crack cocaine - or is it both? Which did Obama do?

.

seems to me that mcbush intends to breath the life back into the kkk. he should choose jindal from lousiana to cover his tracks though. all good republicans don those hoods and become good team players now. 'ya all hear me now!

"Ted" posited:

Selecting Palin is such a "no brainer" that it's hard to imagine anyone else is really in contention.

My Comment:
She's a no brainer if the basis is making a pick without any thought as to ability to actually serve as President.

Let's look at her "positives".
1. She's a woman.
2. She's a Governor
3. She's popular.
4. She's photogenic.

Let's look at the "negatives".
1. She's aggressively pro-life. Whether the pro-life forces will acknowledge this or not, the fact is that the majority of the American People are, in fact, pro-choice. Not pro-abortion, but pro-choice.
2. She's been governor for less than 2 years - of a small state, a very small state. Before that she was the Mayor of a town of LESS THAN 10,000 people.
3. She's comparatively uneducated with only a BA and that BA's in Journalism.
4. She has family distractions with a child with Down's Syndrome born only in April of this year.

Most importantly, she "destroys" one of McCain's biggest arguments -- that Obama is unqualified to be President because he is too young and does not have enough experience. Palin is younger and has even less experience. If Obama's not experienced enough, how can Palin be experienced enough (particularly with an older candidate who has had major health problems including TWO procedures for Cancer).

Christine Todd Whitman? Sure. Great candidate. Palin? Nope.

DDAWD - Some thoughts on your comments. I side with those that think that a VP selection should not be based heavily on a person's ability to carry their state. I think that is a dated paradigm and won't hold true for either candidate. My feeling for both is the ability to mesh seamlessly with the candidate's personalities and campaign style.

As to your first point, Webb's inexperience is both a plus and a minus. A minus because of his limited Senatorial experience; a plus because he doesn't carry the resultant baggage. He also has a very interesting resume.

Your second point is well taken. I don't remember the actual margin but it was very slim. He likely only made it over the top because of George Allen's now infamous "ma-cac-ca" moment. On the other hand I think he has carried himself well and subsequently earned his seat.

You're right about his paper which argued against women in the military and this would no doubt be exploited in the GE but I think that it is as relevant as the respective candidates' pastor problems.

Foot-in-mouth is a problem, no doubt. But on the other side I think people would see this as refreshing and he would fit with Obama's cross-aisle platform. I also think he is smart enough to learn how to speak carefully. I have always been impressed when he is interviewed by the media.

Negatives, for sure, but I don't think they are insurmountable. And to those that keep on bring up Kaine as a prospect (the present governor) he is head and shoulders above him.

Bottom line, with Palin as VP, McCain WINS.

Without Palin, McCain likely does not win.

Case closed.

I am not going to vote for Obama - I am seriously thinking working for McCain.

The democratic party has got to be kidding.

Hillary had the most votes - the Superdelegates stole the election from the regular democrats - the party leadership of the democratic party is so bloated and old it is time to leave them.

.

I like Webb, but let me play Devil's Advocate.

In terms of him delivering Virginia.
1) He has been a Senator for two years. (not sure if this hurts or helps. He's not an entrenched VA politician, but he's still fresh in the minds)

2) Its not like he overwhelmingly won. He won VA by a very close margin. Remember, it was VA that was the deciding factor in determining Senate majority.

3) The chick vote is a bit volatile right now. Webb has a paper that he wrote a long time ago about keeping women out of the military.

4) Seems like a perfect candidate for foot-in-mouth stuff. That's the risk that comes with a free-wheeling guy.

I like him, but there are negatives.

Oh come on we all know who the VP is going to be. Rev. Huckabee. McCain needs to mend fences with the conservative base. The Base is fleeing the GOP like birds migrating for winter. How I long for the headlines. McCain Picks Huckabee ! Huckabee is Mccains top pick ! Huckabee accepts VP spot ! Its official Huckabee is the Vp. If you dont beleive me about The GOP having to pick Huckabee go read the blog on barrs campiagn website, Or read this article about Huckabees Supporters Poised to Vote Barr. Lots of Huckabees supporters are lining up to vote for the Libertarian ticket. The GOP has only its self to blame. They should hurry up and make it official before these Hucka Conservatives start liking the feel of the water in the Libertarain Camp. Heres a link to where the article is. The article is at the bottom of the page. www.BarrRoot08.com

The irony is that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as Veep with McCain WOULD likely carry Minnesota for the GOP, while Gov. Pawlenty on the ticket would not.

Selecting Palin is such a "no brainer" that it's hard to imagine anyone else is really in contention.

It seems the issue is just WHEN McCain will make the Palin announcement. I would think that at this point, the earlier the better.

The "'no new taxes' philosophy has a very real cost to peoples' quality of life."

So, the facts don't matter to you apparently. The engineers' report that the bridge infrastructure was sound is immaterial. Your'e going to rely on public perception and insinuation to cast blame on Rs. How politically convenient of you.

Yes, the philosophy of no new taxes has an impact on people's lives. It saves them money! If the democrats had wanted to spend the taxpayers' money on bridges and roads instead of building a new football stadium for the Minnesota Vikings, then maybe there'd be no pointing of fingers now.

Gore did carry Tennessee for Clinton in 92 and 96.

proudtbeGOP writes
"e.g. Not Pawlenty's fault; not a fault of non-funding. Basic human error."

In a political sense, the actual cause is irrelevant. Considering that the bridge, for years, had received low grades and that just last year the decision not to reinforce the gusset plates was made, allegedly due to funding concerns, there is still some tarnish on Pawlenty & Lt Gov Molnau. That two more bridges have subsequently been closed further reflects poorly on his management of the state. This is not to argue that the bridge falling down is Pawlenty's fault, but just reinforces the notion that his 'no new taxes' philosophy has a very real cost to peoples' quality of life. The guy vetoed a transportation funding bill - through raising the gas tax - in a year when the the infrastructure is literally falling down around us. Surely you don't think this is a sign of a savvy politician who people will look to for leadership?

I doubt the VPs job is to carry the state, anymore. Edwards and Gore couldn't, and Lieberman and Cheney's weren't contested.

With McCain and Obama, it's to provide balance - Age balance or experience balance.

tony, the pitiful

Actually, the report from the engineers' study came back this week, and the collapse was due to excessive weight on the bridge, an extra layer of concrete roadway that had been laid on there about 10 years ago, and the extra weight of construction materials that were errantly placed on the bridge during a construction project underway when the collapse occurred.

So, the collapse was not due to funding problems, or lack of infrastructure maintenance. Not a political problem, you see, but a terrible tragedy due to the worker's placing construction materials on the bridge. The main engineer who issued his report this week and an international conferenece of engineers said that the bridge construction would have held if not for the excessive weight placed on it by the added material.

e.g. Not Pawlenty's fault; not a fault of non-funding. Basic human error.

Sorry to take the fun out of your argument, but I thought you might want to know the facts.

I thought nancy's comments were funny. If you were offended you could a) move on b) get real. I mean how were you offended, really?

Pawlenty?

Huh, whaddya know.

Ain't he the guy from that state where Republicans can't keep the bridges from falling?

Yep, they're all about the less-government and no taxes, ain't they?

Sure hate to have a Republicant-ignored bridge fall on me, thought. Must hurt pretty bad.

reason writes "McCain has a great short list to choose from.."

Yes, indeed; especially when compared to Obama's short list which goes something like this:

1. Hillary
2. Not-Hillary

Maybe he should use the daisy method. LOL

GOPinheads - McShame/Dole

I'm talking Libby here, she'll have a tough time getting re-elected. Will it matter in the long run? NO! McShame will shuffle off to the old-folks home after the election, there to hang with Sen Byrd D-WV.

Democrats - Obama/Richardson - would make the most sense geopolitically and demographically, but that might be too much change.

Democrats - Obama/a Woman - again too much change in year.

Democrats - Obama/Strickland - no geographic dispersal. Same goes for Rendell.

Democrats - Obama/Edwards - would John Edwards want to be 2nd banana again?

Democrats - Obama/Webb - this is good all around.

abqturk, I shouldn't speak for Nancy as she seems terribly well-tuned in to national politics, but I think it was Scooter Libby, wasn't it?

nancy sabet,

Please enlighten us, who is the current Secretary General of the United States? Who will Al Sharpton succeed?

I wait with bated breath for your answer.

"To suggest that Sen. McCain would play the race card is beyond ridiculous. His entire political career is representative of the new kind of politics that Obama only speaks about. The fact of the matter is that the Democratic Party, not the GOP, is premised on racial and gender identity. The Republican Party, is a party of ideas that resonate across race, gender and ethnicity. Over the next 5 months, John McCain will articulate this ideas to the American people."

Well, its not hard to resonate across race when a party is essentially homogeneous. But there are black Republicans. Didn't like all of them run for some kind of office in 2006? I think they all did pretty badly. Like it or not, Republicans have built their base off racial hatred. Whether they are trying to change is debatable, but the history is not.

And McCain is trying to run as Obama. The agent of change and a new kind of politics. In my short life, I've never been able to see anyone do this successfully. McCain did a very good job of being Bush. Now he wants to be Obama. This strategy is going to kill him.

McCain doesn't strike me as someone who would play the race card, but after trying to paint Obama as the candidate of Hamas, I'm not so sure anymore. The guy has pretty much shed all pretenses of being an independent. I guess it was necessary if he wanted a shot at president. Republicans are very, very stupid people who overwhelmingly like Bush. The entire Republican primary was a scene of pandering Darwinism. This is McCain now and I don't see him becoming Bush anytime soon. Clinton had the Iraq vote which killed her. Now let's see how McCain does with his voting record on agreeing with Bush every chance he got.

First off, as a Democrat and a woman, I have to say I found Pawlenty's remarks at the Prescott Bush dinner...pretty funny.

But back to the topic at hand-I have the distinct impression McCain has no chance of winning Minnesota, with or without Pawlenty on the ticket. Minnesota is Obama's.

And nancy sabet, if you want to make a ridiculous and borderline offensive post, don't ask people how to spell part of it.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Please, take Pawlenty away from us! He's a Bush-like, no-compromise, doctrinaire politician who has never won the majority of MN voters. Ick! In McCain's re-Bush candidacy, Pawlenty is perfect.

Here is what OBAMA's cabinet will look like:

President: OBAMA
Vice President: Aires
Secretary General: Rev. Al Sharpton
National Security Advisor: Preacher Pfeiger (sp?)
Homeland Security: Rev. Wright
First Lady: Michelle Obaman

John 100-years-war McCain is full of ideas alright. All of them bad.

"To suggest that Sen. McCain would play the race card is beyond ridiculous. His entire political career is representative of the new kind of politics that Obama only speaks about"
-----------------------------------------------
Though I haven't seen McCain overtly play the race card so far in this election I do remember him voting down the MLK national holiday and Arizona becoming the last state in the union to finally accept it after 20 years of no, no, no from McCain

Instead of this ridiculous rumor, why don't you report on the fact that Obama is requiring the DNC not to take money from lobbyists or PACs. That is real news. It's nowhere to be easily found on your newspaper right now. This stuff about some joker from Minnesota is not relevant to anyone.

Pawlenty is much despised in MN by the DFL (local Democratic party), being the most veto-prone governor in over 40 years (or is it most ever?)and having a guiding hand in the erosion of job, education, health care and transportation quality going back to his career in the state legislature.
However, he IS an adept politician; well spoken and glib while always on message; photographs well; has a dramatically more youthful and energetic mien about him than McCain. I would love to have him run if only to give the DNC the chance to knock him around and help damage his future prospects in MN.

McCain doesn't to play the race card.

Do you think people are blind?

To suggest that Sen. McCain would play the race card is beyond ridiculous. His entire political career is representative of the new kind of politics that Obama only speaks about. The fact of the matter is that the Democratic Party, not the GOP, is premised on racial and gender identity. The Republican Party, is a party of ideas that resonate across race, gender and ethnicity. Over the next 5 months, John McCain will articulate this ideas to the American people.

with the incessant rumors about Charlie Crist, there is zero chance of him getting even a whiff of the ticket.

Although, I don't see Jindal as a great choice if McCain plans to play the race card in any states...which he likely will in places like Tenn., Ark. & W. Va.
Posted by: reason | June 5, 2008 3:02 PM

And the fact that Republicans are even suggesting "the race card" as a viable strategy (whether it affects Senator Obama or Governor Jindal) reveals the level of their party's moral bankruptcy.

If McCain "plays the race card," he deserves the public scorn and repudiation he is due. Period.

Two points often missed or mentioned about Tim Pawlenty.

1st point While he is an excellent politician he never got more than 45% of the vote in each of his two statewide races. In 2006 if the DFL candidate (Mike Hatch) hadn't let temper get the best of him in the last week of the campaign, Tim would have lost.

This year Tim couldn't carry Minnesota for MCCain in the caucuses. McCain in 3rd. In fact Ron Paul's folks have elected at least 6 national delegates from here.

Tim looks good; But if the argument is that he helps to carry Minnesota and I were McCain I would look elsewhere.

I have long predicted that McCain would win the R nomination (I supported Romney) & T-Paw would be the VP nominee. It's not that I am upset with McCain as the nominee, but he just isn't conservative enough for my liking: examples include differences on environmental policy & stem cell research. However, I do think McCain/Pawlenty would be an attractive ticket for the fall. I think SC gov. Mark Sanford propably took himself out of the running by not endorsing McCain in the R primary. I think McCain's short list goes something like this:
1. Tim Pawlenty (Minn. gov)
2. Charlie Crist (Fla. gov)
3. Mitt Romney
4. Bobby Jindal (La. gov)

In my view, Pawlenty & Romney would be the best choices. Mark Sanford (SC gov) & John Hunstman Jr. (Utah gov) would also make great choices. When times of crisis are viewed, though, Charlie Crist has done a better job with the insurance changes for Florida homeowners than has Pawlenty with the bridge issue. Jindal certainly understands tradegy as he's going through alot in La. Although, I don't see Jindal as a great choice if McCain plans to play the race card in any states...which he likely will in places like Tenn., Ark. & W. Va. Mark Sanford would attract alot of money from the Club for Growth, which has a fairly negative impression of McCain. That would bring in more money for McCain. Romney or Hunstman has alot of money of their own to put forth on this campaign. McCain has a great short list to choose from, now he must choose wisely. It could be the difference between victory & defeat vs. Obama.

This one site also has a 2008 Vice President Poll at:

http://www.votenic.com

They started a VP poll last week, and the results from that poll have just been posted. This poll is honest and represents all of America.

In 2006 tpaw sneaked by with less than 1% of the vote while the Independence party took 6.43%.

In 2002, he won by 7.9% while the Independence party took 16.18%.

Both Independence party candidates were from the DFL.

Yep, the bridges would be a huge issue. Also tpaw won the governership with split DFL tickets.

For people wanting to get the registration fixed. Try talking to the Ombudsman, Deborah Howell. It's pretty much her job to reflect complaints and stuff to the newspaper.

Deborah Howell can be reached at 202-334-7582 or at ombudsman@washpost.com

Yeah, you can even call her.

TPaw looks good on paper, but is not ready for the national audience. His biggest problem - that is likely a deal breaker as far as the VP goes - is that after having one bridge fall down, there are now two more closed to traffic. His 'no new taxes' policy killed a couple bills in years past that would have raised the gas tax rate - that is dedicated to road/bridge repair. If he's on the ticket, the Dems will harp on this issue relentlessly. I think McCain will go elsewhere - but The Fix is correct in that TPaw is definitely getting ready for his national career. With 4 more years of behind-the-scenes work for the party, he will be well placed for a run in 2012. Or an appointment sooner, should McCain win this year.

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.