Obama's Uniquely Awful Veep Prospect

Barack Obama's vice presidential search team had begun floating the name of former Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman, one of George Bush's most loyal lieutenants, as a possible running-mate on the 2008 Democratic ticket.

What the Obama camp is doing is clear enough. They are signaling that the candidate might consider a bipartisan "unity" ticket. That's reasonable, as long as the Republican has some record of taking stands that might by some reasonable stretch of the imagination be considered breaks with Republican orthodoxy. Of course, Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel, an edgier critic of the Bush administration's foreign policies than most Democrats who recently traveled with Obama to Afghanistan and Iraq, tops most lists of cross-over contenders.

Someone like former Rhode Island Senator Lincoln Chafee, a steadfast Iraq War foe who has endorsed Obama, could find a place on a list of possible running mates.

Former Iowa Congressman Jim Leach, a determined internationalist who like Obama opposed attacking Iraq and generally served as a moderate (some would even say "liberal") Republican, is an intriguing prospect.

Perhaps former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Danforth, who was no liberal when he served as a senator from Missouri but who is universally recognized as an honorable and realistic political player, would fit the bill.

But Ann Veneman?

Veneman would be a uniquely awful choice.

All of her political roots are in California -- where her father was a prominent ally of Ronald Reagan -- a state Obama will win with or without her in November.

Veneman is not trusted by farm and rural folk, so it would be ridiculous to think that adding her to the ticket would help in Midwestern and Plains states that might be in play this fall. In fact, this uniquely un-charismatic bureaucrat who has never held elective office was booed on visits to farm country when she served as Bush's Secretary of Agriculture.

And Veneman, whose background was as a corporate lawyer specializing in trade issues, was known to organized labor as one the most militant advocates for free trade in a militantly pro-free trade Bush administration.

In sum, it is hard to imagine a worse Republican to put on a Democratic ticket.

When Veneman first entered the national spotlight in 2001, I penned an assessment of her record for The Nation.

It was titled "No Friend of the Farmer" and read:

The fierce farm crisis that is ravaging rural America garnered scant attention during the 2000 presidential campaign, so it came as no surprise that President-elect George W. Bush's nominaton of Ann Veneman for the post of Agriculture Secretary received far less attention than those of several others. Yet, because of the broad authority she would be handed and because of her extreme politics, Veneman merits every bit as much scrutiny as that directed at Bush's more high-profile appointments. Veneman's track record leaves little doubt that if confirmed she will use her position as head of a powerful agency with 100,000 employees, an $82 billion budget and responsibility for implementing federal farm policy, protecting food safety and defending public lands, to advance what farm activist Mark Ritchie describes as "strictly pro-agribusiness, pro-pesticide company, pro-pharmaceutical company positions."

As a key member of the Reagan and Bush farm teams, as former California Governor Pete Wilson's Food and Agriculture Department director, as an agribusiness lawyer and as a member of the national steering committee of Farmers and Ranchers for Bush, Veneman has rarely missed an opportunity to advance the interests of food-production and -processing conglomerates, to encourage policies that lead to the displacement of family farms by huge factory farms, to open public lands for mineral extraction and timbering, to support genetic modification of food and to defend biotech experimentation with agriculture. Indeed, Veneman served on the board of Calgene, the corporation that in 1994 launched the first genetically engineered food, and she declared last year that "we simply will not be able to feed the world without biotechnology."

With Veneman's encouragement, California developed an increasingly conglomerated, big-farm, chemically enhanced version of food production that Iowa Farmers Union president John Whitaker describes as "an entirely different face of agriculture" from that practiced or desired by most working farmers. "I don't want to see that face transferred to Iowa," says Whitaker. But with Veneman at the reins of the USDA as Congress prepares to rewrite the dismally flawed Freedom to Farm Act, the transfer would likely be unavoidable.

Veneman would not merely be hustling to deliver for Bush's corporate contributors on domestic farm policy and public-land-use issues; she'd also be working for them on the international stage. A militant free-trader, Veneman helped negotiate the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (which led to the World Trade Organization) and NAFTA. Even as family farmers were marching in Seattle to protest WTO interference with agricultural supports and food-safety standards, Veneman was there to tell the WTO to be more aggressive in removing so-called technical barriers to trade. So determined is Veneman to advance the free-trade agenda that Bush transition-team aides briefly considered her as a candidate for the position of US Trade Representative.

Veneman "seems to be coming in with the notion that her job is to be as extreme as possible in parroting the agribusiness line," says Ritchie, president of the Minneapolis-based Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. "The problem is that that line is completely out of sync with what farmers want, what consumers want and what we know to be scientifically, ecologically and economically right."

I followed Ann Veneman's tenure as Secretary of Agriculture closely -- noting her frequent abandonment of her official duties to advocate for free-trade pacts that harmed the interests of working farmers in the U.S., undermined the ability of African farmers to feed their families and neighbors and generally tilted the balance in favor of the international corporate agribusiness interests for which she had always worked.

Nothing that Veneman did during her years in the service of George Bush and Dick Cheney led me to alter my opinion of her. Indeed, she confirmed the accuracy of the initial concerns expressed by farm and rural activists.

The selection of Ann Veneman as Barack Obama's running-mate would not balance the Democratic ticket. Rather, the selection of Veneman would discredit that ticket in the eyes of Americans who want change -- as opposed to the worst of the status quo.

Comments (72)

1. Between her tenure at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (under George Bush Sr.) and being named head of California's Department of Food and Agriculture in 1995, Ann Veneman served on the board of directors for Calgene Inc. In 1994, Calgene became the first company to bring genetically-engineered food, the Flavr Savr tomato, to supermarket shelves. Calgene was bought out by Monsanto, the nation's leading biotech company, in 1997. Monsanto, in turn, became part of pharmaceutical company Pharmacia in 2000. Monsanto, which donated more than $12,000 to George Bush's presidential bid, wants two things this year: no mandatory labeling of biotech foods and better access to international markets. Veneman also served on the International Policy Council on Agriculture, Food and Trade, a group funded by Cargill, Nestle, Kraft, and Archer Daniels Midland.

   ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶

   i wonder if obama is round-up ready.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 10:29pm

2. I get the feeling this is so much political noise. She's one name on a list we also know includes John Edwards and Chris Dodd. I highly doubt Obama conducts the extreme strategic blunder of picking a Republican who's also a Bushie. My guess is some political reporter didn't get invited on the trip and wanted his/her name on a byline.

   Posted by yutsano at 07/26/2008 @ 10:30pm

3. dubya nickname for ms. annie:

   "bullets".

   Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 10:32pm

4. here, mr. obama.

   check out this link:

   http://www.nndb.com/org/083/000167579/

   you'll be able to fill a whole cabinet with these folks:

   George W. Bush for President ORGANIZATION

   Name Occupation Birth Death Known for Richard A. Abdoo Business c. 1943 CEO of Wisconsin Energy, 1991-2004 Jack Abramoff Government 28-Feb-1958 Lobbyist, incarcerated William F. Achtmeyer Business c. 1955 Partner, The Parthenon Group F. Duane Ackerman Business 1942 CEO of Bellsouth, 1997-2006 John L. Adams Business c. 1944 Vice Chairman of Trinity Industries, 2005-07 Robin J. Adams Business c. 1954 CFO of BorgWarner David Addington Government 1957 Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff

   Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 10:43pm

5. You're absolutely right about Veneman. But Danforth supported the Iraq invasion and gave us Clarence Thomas - he's just as bad in his way. And Iraq aside, Hagel is a typical right-winger.

   Posted by jgold2 at 07/26/2008 @ 10:43pm

6. hey,

   how about howard baker?

   yeah, that's the ticket.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 10:44pm

7. Uh-oh Frosty went to Timmy's again LOL.

   Obama needs, at the end of the day, a white male. Period. Not even Her Highness could do what a white male would, which is assuage the fears of the racists out there ("Well, if somethin' happens ta him, at least his replacement'll look like us!"). Besides which, isn't he waiting to announce until just before the convention anyway? Let him get back in the country first sheesh!

   Posted by yutsano at 07/26/2008 @ 10:46pm

8. Nichols, I agree that she is probably not the best VP pick or even the best Republican pick, but her record is a lot more moderate and politically balanced than you described in your article.

   This is from her Wiki page:

   Early life and education

   Veneman was raised on a peach farm in Modesto, California. Her father, John Veneman, was former undersecretary of Health, Education and Welfare and member of the California State Assembly. She earned her bachelor's degree in political science from the University of California, Davis, a Master of Public Policy from the Richard & Rhoda Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and a Juris Doctor degree from the University of California, Hastings College of the Law. She has also been awarded honorary doctorate degrees from California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo (2001); Lincoln University (Missouri) (2003);Delaware State University(2004) and Middlebury College (2006) .

   Legal, political and corporate career

   Veneman began her legal career as a staff attorney with the General Counsel's office of the Bay Area Rapid Transit District in Oakland, California, in 1976. In 1978, she returned to Modesto, where she served as a Deputy Public Defender. In 1980, she joined the Modesto law firm of Damrell, Damrell and Nelson, where she was an associate and later a partner.

   Veneman joined the United States Department of Agriculture's Foreign Agricultural Service in 1986, serving as Associate Administrator until 1989. During this time she worked on the Uruguay Round talks for the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). She subsequently served as Deputy Undersecretary of Agriculture for International Affairs and Commodity Programs from 1989 to 1991. From 1991 to 1993, she served as United States Department of Agriculture's Deputy Secretary, the Department's second-highest position. At this point Veneman took a break from political and administrative office to practice with the law firm and lobby group Patton, Boggs & Blow and also served on several boards of directors and advisory groups.

   In 1995 Veneman re-entered government, when she was appointed Secretary of the California Department of Food and Agriculture. From 1999 to 2001 Veneman was an attorney with Nossaman, Guthner, Knox and Elliott, where she focused her attention on food, agriculture, environment, technology, and trade related issues. On 20 January 2001 she was appointed Secretary of Agriculture by President George W. Bush, a position she held until January 20, 2005.

   She is currently a board member of Malaria No More, a New York-based nonprofit that was launched at the 2006 White House Summit with the goal of ending all deaths caused by malaria.

   Reportedly, Barack Obama's representatives mentioned Veneman to members of Congress as a potential Vice Presidential nominee who would appeal to Republicans and independents. [2]

   Personal life and distinctions

   Veneman has received several awards and distinctions, including: Cal Aggie Alumni Citation for Excellence (1995); National Farm-City Week Award given by the Kiwanis Club of Greater Modesto (1995); Outstanding Woman in International Trade Award (2001); UC Davis Outstanding Alumna of the Year Award (2001); Food Research and Action Center Award (2001); National 4-H Alumni Recognition Award (2002); Dutch American Heritage Award (2002); Junior Statesman Foundation Statesman of the Year Award (2002); United Fresh Fruit &Vegetable Distinguished Service Award (2002); California Council for International Trade Golden State Award (2002); Goldman School of Public Policy Alumnus of the Year Award (2003); California Agriculturalist of the Year (2003); Sigma Alpha Sorority Honorary Membership (2004); Republican Main Street Partnership John Chafee Award for Distinguished Public Service (2004); American PVO Partners Award for Service to People in Need (2004); and U.S. State Department U.S. Afghan Women's Council Honorary Membership (2004).

   In a personal capacity, she serves as a board member of the Close Up Foundation, a nonpartisan civic education organization, and has served previously on a number of advisory councils and committees, particularly those involving higher education.

   She was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2002 and received successful treatment.

   Record as UNICEF Executive Director

   Since beginning as UNICEF Executive Director on May 1, 2005, Veneman has made the Millennium Development Goals a priority, saying "the Millennium Development Goals should be our guide, because children are at the heart of the MDGs," and emphasizing that UNICEF work with others to achieve "results for children."

   Veneman has said UNICEF is "focused on partnerships and leveraging resources. Common goals such as the MDGs can provide a rallying point for partners." She has also made it a priority to improve UNICEF's business and management practices, while working to help achieve better UN system-wide coherence.

   Veneman has focused on accelerating "integrated" approaches to the delivery of social services in developing countries, inspired by the initial results of the 11-country Accelerated Child Survival and Development program in West and Central Africa.

   The editor of the The Lancet medical journal, Richard Horton, in January 2006 wrote: "UNICEF too has emerged under new leadership as a crucial protagonist for child survival. This commitment was not always assured. Yet UNICEF's new executive director, Ann Veneman, has pledged the agency to what amounts to a second child survival revolution. Her vision is to use 'sound science' to expand dramatically an integrated approach to child health. The latest State of the World's Children report[3] recommits UNICEF to MDG-4, draws attention to the exclusion of children from many of today's global debates, and presents a powerful analysis of the causes of this systematic exclusion and the ways in which it can be overcome." [4]

   Record as USDA Head

   Early in her Cabinet term, Veneman published "Food and Agricultural Policy: Taking Stock for the New Century [5]," the Bush administration vision for the USDA. According to Meatnews, the publication "outline[d] the Administration's priorities for farm sector policy, trade expansion, infrastructure enhancement, conservation and the environment, rural communities, nutrition and food assistance, and USDA program integration."

   Within weeks after taking office, Veneman confronted the outbreak of foot and mouth disease in Europe, prompting stronger sanitary and phytosanitary measures. After the September 11, 2001 attacks, additional protections were implemented.

   Other animal diseases confronted during her term included Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow disease, and avian influenza and exotic Newcastle disease in poultry.

   U.S. agricultural exports in 2004 rose to a record $62.3 billion due to higher commodity prices and aggressive international trade policies.

   Veneman has focused on new approaches to help feed the hungry around the world. To help meet the international goal of reducing global hunger by half by 2015, she organized and hosted in 2003 the Ministerial Conference on Science and Technology, which brought together ministers from 120 nations to Sacramento, California, to discuss how science and technology can reduce hunger and poverty in the developing world.

   During Veneman's tenure, the Food Stamp Program and child nutrition program were reauthorized. In 2004, paper food stamps were replaced by electronic debit cards in an effort to reduce fraud.

   Under Veneman, new Dietary Guidelines for Americans were released, which were the basis for USDA's MyPyramid, which was released in 2005. The Guidelines stress moderation across a wide variety of food groups, as well as exercise.

   Veneman led the implementation of legislation such as the 2001 Farm Bill and management initiatives such as the Healthy Forests Initiative, the President's management agenda (PMA) and USDA's eGovernment initiative. She established USDA's "Leaders of Tomorrow" initiative to strengthen agriculture-related education and mentoring programs.

   USDA received its first clean financial audit under Veneman.

   Mad cow disease

   On December 23, 2003, Veneman announced the discovery of a single cow with Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow disease, in Washington State. The cow was determined to be of Canadian origin.

   In her statement that day, Veneman said: "Even though the risks to human health is minimal based on current evidence, we will take all appropriate actions out of an abundance of caution. ... This incident is not terrorist related nor is it related in any way to our nation's heightened alert status. ... At this time of year many Americans are making plans for the holidays and for food. We see no need for people to alter those plans or their eating habits or to do anything but have a happy and healthy holiday season. I plan to serve beef for my Christmas dinner. And we remain confident in the safety of our food supply."

   After taking initial steps in response, one week later, on December 30, 2003, Veneman announced additional protective measures to be put into place. [6] These included a ban on "downer," or nonambulatory cattle, from the human food supply; additional food-safety measures in the processing of beef and related products; and an acclereation of "the development of the technology architecture" for a national system to track and identify livestock.

   USDA also increased the number of cattle tested for BSE from just over 20,000 in 2003 to more than 176,000 in 2004. [7] More than 708,000 animals were tested between June 1, 2004, and May 7, 2006. [8]

   BSE proved to be a complex issue on the international-trade front. U.S. trading partners made sometimes-conflicting demands on the United States, while public-interest, consumer and farm groups called for differing protection measures and responses.

   Japan, the leading U.S. beef-export market, had been demanding 100 percent testing of all cattle for export, a position it has since altered.

   Public-interest groups also called for the closing of loopholes in the so-called "animal-feed ban," which prevented the feeding of ruminant products back to ruminants, which had been discovered as a key-pathway for BSE transmission. The feed ban falls under the purview of the Food and Drug Administration.

   Relations with Industry Groups

   In reflecting on Veneman's record, Meatnews wrote that she "played a key role in eliminating trade barriers and expanding opportunities for American farmers through new export markets. She has worked closely with U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick, helping lead to the successful launch of a new round of trade negotiations for the World Trade Organization.

   The American Meat Institute also had a positive view of Veneman's record. "The last 12 months have presented intense challenges for Secretary Veneman and her department, and she has faced them with vision and commitment," said AMI's Patrick Boyle. "In addition, under Veneman, USDA's food safety efforts have complemented the industry's own food safety initiatives."

   Posted by Metteyya at 07/26/2008 @ 10:49pm

9. Veneman was even a former Public Defender! You can't possibly be too right-wing with that on your resume.

   Posted by Metteyya at 07/26/2008 @ 10:57pm

10. Obama needs, at the end of the day, a white male.

    Posted by yutsano at 07/26/2008 @ 10:46pm

    projecting?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 11:00pm

11. Veneman was even a former Public Defender! You can't possibly be too right-wing with that on your resume.

    Posted by Metteyya at 07/26/2008 @ 10:57pm

    calgene?

    patton boggs?

    bush?

    zoellick?

    ¡¡por favor!!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 11:03pm

12. >>>It'll be Hillary.

    Posted by frankgrits at 07/26/2008 @ 10:50pm<<<

    Obama does not intend to be assassinated...if you get my drift.

    Posted by Metteyya at 07/26/2008 @ 11:05pm

13. Veneman was even a former Public Defender! You can't possibly be too right-wing with that on your resume.

    Posted by Metteyya at 07/26/2008 @ 10:57pm

    she helped negotiate SHAFTA!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 11:08pm

14. Veneman was even a former Public Defender! You can't possibly be too right-wing with that on your resume.

    Posted by Metteyya at 07/26/2008 @ 10:57pm

    At the GOP convention last summer, she was on the national steering committee of Farmers and Ranchers for Bush.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 11:09pm

15. Veneman was even a former Public Defender! You can't possibly be too right-wing with that on your resume.

    Posted by Metteyya at 07/26/2008 @ 10:57pm

    Among her clients was Dole Foods Co., the world's largest producer of fruits and vegetables.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 11:10pm

16. Veneman was even a former Public Defender! You can't possibly be too right-wing with that on your resume.

    Posted by Metteyya at 07/26/2008 @ 10:57pm

    Carol Tucker Foreman, director of the Consumer Federation of America's Food Policy Institute and former lobbyist for Monsanto, has praised the pick of Venemen as "a really good start" for the Bush administration. She said Venemen "will bring a modern view of the Department of Agriculture into that job."

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 11:11pm

17. Ann Veneman is another one who traveled the country handing out goodies before the election. Just weeks before the election this past November, she was in Columbus announcing a $207 million water clean-up project for Columbus, Ohio, which we know became the center of the disputed election. The USDA under Ann Veneman has basically been handed over to U.S. food and trade corporations. Her second in command is a man from the National Cattleman's Association, a trade group for those who distribute our meat. Are they going to take very seriously the threat to the food supply? I don't think so. But Ann Veneman has been convenient, very useful. When the mad cow disease scare hit, she went on television saying that she, as a woman, was going to be feeding steak, I think she said, to her family, at which point I pointed out at the time, as far as I could see, she only had a cat as family. Nonetheless, her use has been to reassure the public, "There's no reason to be concerned." Even as the administration--the USDA, which is supposed to be an entity protecting the consumer's interests and small farmers' interests--has been turned over to the largest corporations. We just heard as an almost parting note from Ann Veneman--the news out of Iraq is that Paul Bremer's instructions have now changed the law--the regulations put into effect before the appointment of the new so-called independent government. The new laws around the use of seed in the birthplace of agriculture, have been changed such that farmers can no longer use their seed that they have gathered from the year before and replant it as they have for millennia. Now, they must buy the seed from the U.S. corporations that made Ann Veneman's career possible. On a personal note, she has been fighting breast cancer, and that may have something to do with her departure. But she is somebody who has rotated in and out of the U.S. agriculture corporations--Monsanto, Cargill and all of the rest--and offices in public service, so-called. Whether she has been serving the public, I think is hugely in dispute. She has been serving those who work for corporations.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 11:14pm

18. oops,

    credit to laura flanders for that above.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 11:14pm

19. http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php?id=2768&name=Anne-Vene man

    next!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 11:21pm

20. Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 11:14pm

    FROSTY,

    Like I said in my first post, I don't think she is the best VP pick or even the best Republican pick, but her ENTIRE record, on balance, is not especially right-wing.

    Masters in Public Policy from UC Berkeley Public Defender from Modesto General Counsel of BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) On Board of Malaria No More Breast Cancer Survivor UNICEF Director

    Posted by Metteyya at 07/26/2008 @ 11:30pm

21. HAGEL! To buffer accusations that the Dem ticket is:

    ultra left-wing, far-left, progressive liberal communist wackos

    enemy aiding 'n abetting unAmerican unpatriotic socialists

    amoral lowlife pro-sodomite-homo, wimp, faggot, subhuman filth

    godless, flip-flopping, tax-loving, big-spending, terrorist-catering, Muslim-licking ineffectual hand-out seekin' parasites

    snobby, elite, windsurfing, pipe puffin', hobnobbin' highbrows

    drugged up, hysterical, bitchy moanin' groanin' welfare queenies

    haters of freedom, haters of heroes, haters of personal responsibility,

    Posted by winyahn at 07/26/2008 @ 11:36pm

22. In any event, McCain still gets my vote. He's looking stronger every day and is showing that he's more than ready for the fight. Posted by frankgrits at 07/26/2008 @ 10:20pm

    Didn't McCain just say on Friday that Obama's plan for a 16 month withdrawal wasn't looking so bad? Of course it depends on the situation on the ground.... Which essentially means he is backing it but can't say it for fear of looking weak. Hmm. Looks like McCain is already starting to voice change in his policies in order to pander to get votes. Straight talk my ass.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/26/2008 @ 11:51pm

23. I some point in the new President's term in office, he will have to forget the next election for a while and govern. This mean you have to have competent people in government who know their job. To fix the American economic mess, you must control the American economy. "Free Trade" is economic anarchy, and you cannot control it. I am afraid we are looking at 8 more years of economic idiocy regardless of who is elected.

    Posted by P. J. Casey at 07/27/2008 @ 12:03am

24. Posted by winyahn at 07/26/2008 @ 11:36pm

    You forgot that "DEMS WILL BE THE MAJORITY PARTY IN THE WHITE HOUSE AND IN CONGRESS FOR THE NEXT 30 YEARS!

    Looks like it is time for you to move to some deserted island and live out your right-wing, hate-mongering, selfish fantasies by yourself.

    Posted by Metteyya at 07/27/2008 @ 12:29am

25. Mett, Winyahn is one of the biggest liberals on this board. In that context, her post is quite a satire, and pretty funny.

    Posted by yutsano at 07/27/2008 @ 12:34am

26. C'mon, non-story.

    Obama has yet to make a single big dumb move.

    Given his dazzling performance so far, don't hope for him to flub vp choice.

    Posted by sloper at 07/27/2008 @ 02:14am

27. If you need DEFINITIVE proof that Obama won't pick Hillary as Veep?...

    "It'll be Hillary."----Posted by frankgrits at 07/26/2008 @ 10:50pm

    Is it.

    Oh and keep that in mind as FRANK's prognostications for McCain keep coming too!

    LOL

    Posted by Maskdelta at 07/27/2008 @ 07:08am

28. Uh, I think obama will be forced to name Hillary as his VP. He hasn't persuaded any of her supporters to jump on the Obama express yet.

    Posted by frankgrits at 07/26/2008 @ 10:20pm

    Frank do you ACTUALLY believe that he has one 0% of Hillary voters. I would say he already has anywhere from 60-80% of them. There are maybe 10% who are now voting McCain. Then another 10% who are voting third party, not voting or are undecided. I don't know where you are getting your numbers from but you are so biased you can't even acknowledge reality right now. He has already won the big chunk of Hillary supporters without Hillary being on the ticket because not enough Hillary supporters are cultish enough to allow Bush 3.0 to be in office just because their specific candidate couldn't be the champ. However I digress. To this ravenous belief that you have that all or even most of Hillary's supporters have not already gone to his side I have to say you are wrong.

    http://tinyurl.com/5gz6m7

    Some of her donors.

    http://tinyurl.com/626y8j

    He is seven points ahead in gallup which means he HAS to have most of the Hillary supporters. The math doesn't jive Frank. He has most of her supporters as is. There are a few hold outs but some of them drank enough kool-aid that they can't vote for him. Those are lost but they aren't large enough in number to matter. Keep practicing self-deception Frank. You are so angered that Obama is still winning that you can't even see the facts in front of your face.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/27/2008 @ 07:13am

29. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/27/2008 @ 07:13am

    What's funny is FRANK was chastising somebody on the thread below about "Not seen the latest poll,huh?"...

    when the latest poll shows the number of Hillary voters who would stay home or vote McCain has HALVED in the weeks after Hillary dropped out and will likely halve again before the Convention.

    He's losing it.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 07/27/2008 @ 08:23am

30. Daily Pop Quiz:

    Can any of you NYT-educated lefties guess why Edwards is NOT being considered for Veep? Hint: It goes: Waaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh!

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 10:54am

31. You know, one of the things that is so amusing about the Left is they consider 'free trade' and 'free market' policies to be just another theory, on a par with human constructs such as 'fair' trade (the latest name for protectionism) and other 'progressive' (the latest name for liberalism, which was a rehashed form of watered-down socialism) and other long debunked statist policies of the left. In coming generations, if the human race is lucky, you folks will be looked at with the disdain now held toward the Roman Catholic Church for threatening Galileo. History repeats itself, but some people never learn.

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 10:58am

32. Posted by Zero at 07/27/2008 @ 10:51am

    "You're all a bunch of damn leftist terrorists!"

    'Terrorists' is too strong a word; you flatter yourself. Terrorists at least have the guts to pick up a gun and get shot at. All you folks have the guts to do is sit here and whine about how society is not giving you what you want.

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 11:00am

33. Oh, yeah. I almost forgot. More good news for America (i.e., bad news for the left). Victory now pretty much official in Iraq. A product of the surge, of course, that Obama opposed strenuously opposed, and which he now hopes to take credit for because the success of the Surge makes his otherwise precipitous and irresponsible politically based withdrawal timetable feasible. Yes, unfortunately for you folks, people actually noticed that!

    (note: when evem the AP finally accepts defeat, it's over).

    "Analysis: US now winning Iraq war that seemed lost

    By ROBERT BURNS and ROBERT H. REID – 1 day ago

    BAGHDAD (AP) -- The United States is now winning the war that two years ago seemed lost.

    Limited, sometimes sharp fighting and periodic terrorist bombings in Iraq are likely to continue, possibly for years. But the Iraqi government and the U.S. now are able to shift focus from mainly combat to mainly building the fragile beginnings of peace -- a transition that many found almost unthinkable as recently as one year ago.

    Despite the occasional bursts of violence, Iraq has reached the point where the insurgents, who once controlled whole cities, no longer have the clout to threaten the viability of the central government.

    That does not mean the war has ended or that U.S. troops have no role in Iraq. It means the combat phase finally is ending, years past the time when President Bush optimistically declared it had. The new phase focuses on training the Iraqi army and police, restraining the flow of illicit weaponry from Iran, supporting closer links between Baghdad and local governments, pushing the integration of former insurgents into legitimate government jobs and assisting in rebuilding the economy.

    Scattered battles go on, especially against al-Qaida holdouts north of Baghdad. But organized resistance, with the steady drumbeat of bombings, kidnappings, assassinations and ambushes that once rocked the capital daily, has all but ceased.

    This amounts to more than a lull in the violence. It reflects a fundamental shift in the outlook for the Sunni minority, which held power under Saddam Hussein. They launched the insurgency five years ago. They now are either sidelined or have switched sides to cooperate with the Americans in return for money and political support.

    Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, told The Associated Press this past week there are early indications that senior leaders of al-Qaida may be considering shifting their main focus from Iraq to the war in Afghanistan."

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 11:09am

34. Has anyone has any doubts that the whole democratic scheme is as rotten as ?the republican

    Posted by pachonegro at 07/27/2008 @ 11:20am

35. I like the idea of "official" victory in Iraq. I thought the official victory was given by Bush in a cockpiece a few years ago. How many US soldiers have died since then? I am sure soldiers that are still in Iraq are happy about victory number...shit, I am not sure how many times victory has been declared.

    I'll believe it when we are not murdering more Iraqis.

    Posted by onthehelm at 07/27/2008 @ 11:22am

36. Can any of you NYT-educated lefties guess why Edwards is NOT being considered for Veep? Hint: It goes: Waaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh!

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 10:54am

    have you always been faithful in every relationship?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2008 @ 12:38pm

37. such as 'fair' trade (the latest name for protectionism)

    by plonti

    dude,

    do you enjoy exploiting people so you can save 23¢ on your tupperware?

    oh, i forgot.

    exploitation is what made america great, ¿right?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2008 @ 12:41pm

38. History repeats itself, but some people never learn.

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 10:58am

    quagmire, anyone?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2008 @ 12:42pm

39. All you folks have the guts to do is sit here and whine about how society is not giving you what you want.

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 11:00am

    you mean "what you pay for".

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2008 @ 12:44pm

40. This amounts to more than a lull in the violence. It reflects a fundamental shift in the outlook for the Sunni minority, which held power under Saddam Hussein. They launched the insurgency five years ago. They now are either sidelined or have switched sides to cooperate with the Americans in return for money and political support.

    Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, told The Associated Press this past week there are early indications that senior leaders of al-Qaida may be considering shifting their main focus from Iraq to the war in Afghanistan."

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 11:09am

    sure thing pay 'em off. and when the money stops?

    hooray, we're winning!

    to bad all those thousands of dead and maimed people and the millions of refugees are the losers.

    but hey, maybe if we flood the market with iraqi oil, we can drive our suvs in peace again.

    and that certainly makes it worth it.

    al qaeda? nonsense. 200-300 people.

    pissed off, unemployed men. millions.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2008 @ 12:48pm

41. Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2008 @ 12:38pm

    "have you always been faithful in every relationship?"

    Uh, noooooooo...but I'm not running for VP.

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 1:33pm

42. Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2008 @ 12:44pm

    "you mean "what you pay for"."

    I'm sure you get a lot more than you pay for, FROSTY. You've already admitted more than once that you couldn't afford health care if the government (i.e., other people) didn't pay for it. Ditto for most of your fellow whiners on the left. I think you're fairly typical.

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 1:35pm

43. Posted by frosty zoom at 07/27/2008 @ 12:42pm

    "quagmire, anyone?"

    Ah, the faithful parrot.

    QUAGMIRE!!!!!!.....BAGAWWWKKKKK!!!.....QUAGMIRE!!!

    Reading comprehension is apparently not your strong point, FROSTY. The war in Iraq is won (by the US, the good guys, I mean). Your guys lost. Get over it.

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 1:37pm

44. Also, FROSTY, you missed the point, again, about Edwards. The LA Times, for example, actually ORDERED its bloggers not to discuss the Edwards scandal. This, after printing thousands of words of a rumored inappropriate relationship of McCain's on the front page over several weeks. Evidence of media bias, anyone?

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 1:40pm

45. Not too long ago, a member of the corporatocracy stated that in the future, people will pledge allegiance to corporations rather than nation states. Remember Monsanto sued a guy for just IMPLYING that their products weren't beneficial by his NOT using them or any others & stating that (generically) on his labels. What's next? GM seeds pharmacologically engineered for dual purpose use... for sheep & people?

    Posted by Sorelish at 07/27/2008 @ 3:14pm

46. A clarification please.

    Posted by frankgrits at 07/27/2008 @ 2:03pm

    Clarification?

    With all of the "mysterious" deaths of people the Clintons wanted out of the way, like Vince Foster, who had the goods on Hillary's "File-gate" episode, and the numerous individuals below from the Clinton Chronicles, Obama would be STONE CRAZY to select Hillary Clinton as his VP. Being a "heartbeat away from being president" would take on new meaning. If Obama needs Clinton's voters, he should select a "different woman", one who is not "crazily" addicted to power like the Clintons. Kathleen Sebelius, the governor of Kansas, would be a GREAT choice!

    SINCE AUGUST 1991, AN ALARMING NUMBER OF CLINTON ASSOCIATES HAVE DIED OF UNNATURAL CAUSES. THE FOLLOWING IS A "PARTIAL" LIST...

    (1) Dan Casolaro Journalist Investigating ADFA and Mena "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Suicide, 8/10/91

    (2) Victor Raiser and son Chairman, Clinton's Presidential Campaign Finance Committee "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Plane Crash, 7/30/92

    (3) C. Le Bleu / T. McKeahan R. Williams / S. Willis Clinton Bodyguards "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Gunfire during raid on Waco, 2/28/93

    (4) W. Barkley / B. Hassey S. Reynolds / T. Sabel Clinton Bodyguards "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Helicopter Crash, 5/19/93

    (5) John A. Wilson Washington D.C. Councilman preparing to expose Clinton "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Suicide, 5/19/93

    (6) Paul Wilcher Washington D.C. Attorney investigating Mena "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Suicide, 6/22/93

    (7) Vincent Foster, Jr. Deputy White House Counsel Clinton's childhood friend "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Suicide, 7/20/93

    (8) Jon Walker Senior RTC Specialist investigating Whitewater "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Suicide, 8/15/93

    (9) S. Heard / S. Dickson Members, Clinton's Health Care Advisory Committee "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Plane Crash, 9/10/93

    (10) Luther "Jerry" Parks Chief of Security, Clinton's Campaign Headquarters "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Murder, 9/26/93

    (11) Ed Willey Manager, Clinton's Presidential Campaign Finance Committee "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Suicide, 11/30/93

    (12) Herschel Friday Member, Clinton's Presidential Campaign Finance Committee "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Plane Crash, 3/1/94

    (13) Ronald Rogers Killed while en route to interview for this film "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Plane Crash, 3/3/94

    (14) Kathy Ferguson Former wife of Clinton bodyguard Danny Ferguson "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Suicide, 5/11/94

    (15) Bill Shelton Arkansas State Police Officer, Fiancee of Kathy Ferguson "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Suicide, 6/12/94

    (16) Calvin Walraven Police informant in Jocelyn Elder's son's cocaine distribution trial "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Suicide, 7/28/94

    (17) Alan G. Whicher Clinton's Chief of Security, former Clinton bodyguard "OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH" Oklahoma City blast, 4/19/95

    How could ANYONE trust Hillary Clinton as Vice President with this kind of record of "mysterious" deaths?

    Posted by Metteyya at 07/27/2008 @ 3:35pm

47. Posted by frankgrits at 07/27/2008 @ 2:03pm

    Actually FRANK, I think METTE should worry more (if, very unlikely, Obama picked Hillary as Veep)...

    about some nutty, obsessive Hillary cultist would take a shot at Obama...you know, somebody who was willing to set aside all of their principles and morality, to do ANYTHING, even something destructive, to see to it that she achieved the Presidency due to misplaced even self-destructive idolism!

    Fortunately somebody like that probably doesn't exist....

    Uh.....

    Hmmmmmm????

    heheh

    Posted by Maskdelta at 07/27/2008 @ 5:40pm

48. Posted by frankgrits at 07/27/2008 @ 6:04pm

    FRANKGRITS,

    Would YOU feel comfortable with Hillary and Bill in the White House a heart beat away from the presidency if YOU were president, knowing what we know about their blind ambition and mysterious deaths of those who would stand in the way of such ambition?

    Posted by Metteyya at 07/27/2008 @ 6:23pm

49. Come on, FRANK, you sold your soul and are now best buddies with LVLIB, PONTI, HAPPY, etc.

    That hard to imagine you taking the "next step"...a moment of self-sacrifice (either in a life sentence or a Secret Service bullet) to grant your Dark Goddess her rightful Throne should the Usurper Obama pick her as Veep????

    Would you not do "what is necessary" to save the country....as only Hillary can do???? Or at the least protect it from the unmitigated disaster of epic proportions that would be Obama as Prez????

    Posted by Maskdelta at 07/27/2008 @ 7:25pm

50. Posted by frankgrits at 07/27/2008 @ 6:33pm

    It's JUST TOO MANY PEOPLE!

    Maybe a couple of them can be explained, but most of them look like professional jobs made to look like natural deaths.

    A professional is NOT going to make it look like a murder, as this would defeat the purpose.

    ALL of theses people had the power to hurt the Clintons politically.

    Posted by Metteyya at 07/27/2008 @ 8:00pm

51. I wouldn't worry too much about this. She ain't going to be the nominee. They're just making nice with the Feminists by pretending a woman is under serious consideration. For better or worse, no woman is under serious consideration (least of all Hillarious Herself), but they want to create the illusion otherwise, for the purposes of political expediency. Barack Obama is, after all, just another normal American politician, albeit a less horrible one than that senile old coot from Arizona.

    Posted by Kevin_OKeeffe at 07/27/2008 @ 8:26pm

52. Posted by frankgrits at 07/27/2008 @ 9:34pm

    FRANK, I know things like "facts" don't stand in the way of a FRANKGRITS analysis or prognostication...

    but the polling shows

    (A) Hillary supporters are by and large already turning to or turned to Obama. Less a few nutjobs.

    (B) He's up 9 points in the Gallup poll after the trip overseas. Seems McCain's "Big Mo" (as you put it)...and mo'ing.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 07/27/2008 @ 10:02pm

53. Metteyya, you are definitely a republican. Dillweed you're definitely, well just plain off your rocker. Posted by frankgrits at 07/27/2008 @ 9:34pm

    Frank according to your theories every single person on this site is Republican or works for the nation except for you. Even though you have used some of the most Rovian, Republican tactics I have ever seen. Maybe you are the Republican and you accuse others to keep the heat off.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/27/2008 @ 10:02pm

54. Reading comprehension is apparently not your strong point, FROSTY. The war in Iraq is won (by the US, the good guys, I mean). Your guys lost. Get over it.

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 1:37pm

    congratulations!

    you've killed thousands of kids!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/28/2008 @ 12:02am

55. I'm sure you get a lot more than you pay for, FROSTY. You've already admitted more than once that you couldn't afford health care if the government (i.e., other people) didn't pay for it. Ditto for most of your fellow whiners on the left. I think you're fairly typical.

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 1:35pm

    actually,

    i couldn't afford american style insurance scams.

    i pay my taxes and use far less in medical services.

    it seems pathetically greedy on your part not to want to help your less fortunate countrymenandwomenandkids receive medical care when they need it.

    however, in some ways i DO receive a lot more than i pay for. a stupid war in afghanistan for a gas pipeline, for example.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/28/2008 @ 12:07am

56. Uh, noooooooo...but I'm not running for VP.

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 1:33pm

    so, you WON'T be voting for mccain, then?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/28/2008 @ 12:08am

57. Your guys lost. Get over it.

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 1:37pm

    my guys?

    you mean the millions of refugees and dead.

    yeah, my guys lost.

    oh, well.

    enjoy your gasoline.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/28/2008 @ 12:10am

58. This, after printing thousands of words of a rumored inappropriate relationship of McCain's on the front page over several weeks.

    Posted by pontificus at 07/27/2008 @ 1:40pm

    so, you WON'T be voting for mccain, then!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/28/2008 @ 12:11am

59. that senile old coot from Arizona.

    Posted by Kevin_OKeeffe at 07/27/2008

    you should be so lucky to be as strong as sen. mccain is at his age.

    careful with that karma.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/28/2008 @ 12:16am

60. did mask get a job or arrested or married or run out of masky names or take up the cello or.....?

    Posted by winyahn at 07/28/2008 @ 12:47am

61. did mask get a job or arrested or married or run out of masky names or take up the cello or.....?

    Posted by winyahn at 07/28/2008 @ 12:47am

62. Good plot line but you haven't been around long enough to connect the dots. Posted by frankgrits at 07/28/2008 @ 12:08am

    Or I'm not so crazy enough to be that paranoid.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/28/2008 @ 01:58am

63. RE: 9-point Lead after World Tour ...

    Isn't it a mad mad world? he did the talk and didn't do anything further than the talk.

    ----------

    Gallup Daily: Obama 49%, McCain 40%Third day with Obama holding a significant lead over McCainUSA Election 2008 Gallup Daily Americas Northern America PRINCETON, NJ -- Barack Obama now leads John McCain among national registered voters by a 49% to 40% margin in Gallup Poll Daily tracking conducted July 24-26.

    Posted by HelenDAO at 07/28/2008 @ 03:13am

64. Posted by frankgrits at 07/28/2008 @ 12:57am

    I have to say...John Hinckley loved Jodi Foster...

    and you love Hillary.....so....just saying.

    heheh

    Posted by Maskdelta at 07/28/2008 @ 09:01am

65. We need drastic changes, starting with universal health care and complete military withdrawal from Iraq. We are not going to get it with Obama. Since the primary, he has made it clear that progressives are dispensable. The Democrats have made a big mistake in eliminating every candidate who would have made the changes we need. Instead, we are stuck with a rock star with no commitment to anything but his own political career. I think a lot of his boosters are realizing that now, but it is too shameful to admit.

    Posted by mansobravo at 07/28/2008 @ 10:53am

66. Posted by mansobravo at 07/28/2008 @ 10:53am

    Let me guess...."progressives should vote for Ralph Nader"...right???

    Posted by Maskdelta at 07/28/2008 @ 11:18am

67. Oh come on John, only a centrist would believe a Democrat would put one of their own second in the line of succession - that's a Lieberman/Harold Ford Jr. /Pat Buchanan wet dream.

    Hagel is my champion -as a Sec. Def. only.

    Bayh- too empty and passive. BORING!!

    No, what the Obama team needs is a compatible figure of respect, boldness and strength - a Dick if you will.

    Hagel has all of the right qualifications - just wrong party.

    My suggestion is someone like Richard Clarke. He's a tough SOB, likes Obama's positions and defends him well - will kick the Right's asses - won't be electable in 8 years - and has the best security and diplomatic credentials to go anywhere to represent America - which draw in lots more Independent and Republican voters!!

    I no of no one else who can top him and create such a killer ticket.

    And he's a DICK TOO -a win win all around! :D

    Posted by hazmaq at 07/28/2008 @ 12:00pm

68. Posted by hazmaq at 07/28/2008 @ 12:00pm

    Plus, imagine the humor at the Republican Convention where they defend Bush (who was wrong) and attack Clarke (who was right)!!!

    Posted by Maskdelta at 07/28/2008 @ 12:09pm

69. maskdelta......I am not willing to vote for Ralph Nader because he has no chance. On the other hand, I am frightened to think that Obama may appoint Supreme Court justices. With his move to unity, who would he chose, Alberto Gonzales?

    Posted by mansobravo at 07/28/2008 @ 1:28pm

70. Your missing the bigger point here. Why would you even consider putting a republican on the ticket? Why can't democrats be strong, and quit bowing down to the right? The republican party has screwed up so much in the last eight years, surely then we don't need anymore of them in office. Its like being voted in to end the Iraq war in 2006, then bowing down to pressure from the right. Quit being pussies. Be a leader.

    Posted by swarming21 at 07/28/2008 @ 1:48pm

71. Posted by mansobravo at 07/28/2008 @ 1:28pm

    Oh, come on. "Purest of the pure progressive" or GOP poser...

    you REALLY think Obama's picks for the Supreme Court are going to be to the Right of Souter or Anthony Kennedy?!?!??

    Posted by Maskdelta at 07/28/2008 @ 3:15pm

72. maskdelta,.I don't know what Obama would do if he had the chance to appoint a Supreme Court justice. As the press says, he is steadily moving to the center. In the United States, the center means right-wing. I am simply tired of the left caving in to every right-wing policy without a fight.

    Posted by mansobravo at 07/28/2008 @ 5:38pm