Hillary open to VEEP seat

Hillary says she is open to becoming the VP canidate but will Obama take her?

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D912PS580&show_article=1

SHE CAN STILL MURDER HER WAY TO THE TOP. THE RACE ISNT OVER!

My thoughts exactly. Time for an official food taster at the White House!

It would be nice if she would do the job the idiots in my state elected her to do.

I can honestly say if she is on the ticket for anything, I will vote for anyone else to keep her as far away from the White House as I can.

nickel_dime wrote: I can honestly say if she is on the ticket for anything, I will vote for anyone else to keep her as far away from the White House as I can.

That is the same boat I'm in. Under no circumstances would I ever vote for Billery.

I'd like to see an Obama/ Biden ticket. Biden has the foreign relations experience Obama lacks. Biden would also be great during the V.P. debates.

If it is Obama/ Billery, I'm voting for McCain.

I suspect there's a lot of folks who feel that way, and I'd be pretty surprised if Obama picked her. I wouldn't.

If I were Obama, I'd be looking at Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius. Besides being a woman (and pulling a lot of the same woman voters Clinton would), she's has a proven history of getting along pretty well with Republicans (KS is a heavily republican state), building coalitions to get things done, and she's pretty smart and likeable. He could do worse.

I like Biden too, I think that's a good choice.

I'd vote for Nader before I'd vote for Hillary...

minimac wrote: It would be nice if she would do the job the idiots in my state elected her to do.

Or if her and her secret service attachment weht back to HER state and let someone who wants to do the job have it. As far as her not conceeding, who cares. She lost. If she does or does not admit it life will still go on.

Tim Baxter wrote: I suspect there's a lot of folks who feel that way, and I'd be pretty surprised if Obama picked her. I wouldn't. If I were Obama, I'd be looking at Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius. Besides being a woman (and pulling a lot of the same woman voters Clinton would), she's has a proven history of getting along pretty well with Republicans (KS is a heavily republican state), building coalitions to get things done, and she's pretty smart and likeable. He could do worse.

I met her. When I went to the Runoffs in '06, we had cookies and punch at her place. Seriously. She asked me and Steven Cole Smith if we'd like to see the backyard. Two minutes later, here's the governor of Kansas stomping through the bushes to show us how if you schrunch down at just the right place, you can see the top of the Capitol.

She's a pretty cool chick, isn't she? We could do a lot worse for a VP.

All i have to say is it would be nice to have NEAITHER a Clinton or Bush in either slot on the ticket in november, it would be the first time since 1976

blockquote>Tim Baxter wrote: She's a pretty cool chick, isn't she? We could do a lot worse for a VP.

yes we could

<

I'd have preferred Hillary...

But I'm fine with Obama.

Anyone but the jackasses that are in there now.

Yes, even Ron Paul would be better...or Pat Buchanan...or even my cat. (voting for Nader would be like putting Mahmoud I'm-A-Dinner-Jacket in charge).

I see Hillary is singled out as "leaving home" when she campaigns. Is it OK for the other guys to do it? Gee, if not, why single one person out? None of that is OK with me....doesn't matter which side. But i guess it's easier for McCain to sneak away, since his wife "donates" her biz-jet, neatly side-stepping some of the Campaign Finance Reform rules. Hmmmm?...let's see? Who was it that worked on those?

McCain? No thanks! He stole too much money from the American people when he was part of the Keating Five (and he never gave it back to us). Even Cindy doesn't trust him....she pinned him with a bullet-proof pre-nup. His vote on the Boeing Tanker Contract was unbelieveable. His pandering to the religious nuts and the chicken-hawks is truly sad.

Plus, I've actually read The Manchurian Candidate

If I were Obama I'd probably pick Webb, Sebelius or Biden as Veep....they'd all be great. But reality says that it will depend on deals that are cut. If Hillary ends up with Veep or a Cabinet postion, that's fine with me. I remember who was in charge when the economy was good, our military wasn't sent off on wild-goose chases and other countries supported our actions.

i wonder what McCains activation word is?

Well, Obama is for "change", of course he's never come out and said what he'd change, so I would guess Hillary would be a change.

Come to think of it he's never come out and said anything he's actually for specifically, he's always been nebulous about everything.

Here's hoping the voters are nebulous about voting for him.

if you want you can read his sweet webpage on what he wants to change.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

He also has a 64 page PDF if you want it in a nice printable verion. It amazes me that the press hasnt learned to use google yet to look up what hes about.

http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/ObamaBlueprintForChange.pdf .

minimac wrote: It would be nice if she would do the job the idiots in my state elected her to do.

You guys deserve this for electing her in the first place. I actually lived in NY the first time she was elected (but as a student, so I didn't have a vote.) I was appalled then and NY deserves to suffer for its collective stupidity.

We do deserve what we get, and the choice of her or Guliani, the only noticable difference was one had hair was nausiating. the only thing worse was gulianni's replacement.

Wowak wrote:

minimac wrote: It would be nice if she would do the job the idiots in my state elected her to do.

You guys deserve this for electing her in the first place. I actually lived in NY the first time she was elected (but as a student, so I didn't have a vote.) I was appalled then and NY deserves to suffer for its collective stupidity.

I was absolutely astounded when i she ran for senator in NY. She basically lived their for 2 or 3 months then ran for Senate. How can you learn about a state and its issues in TWO TO THREE MONTHS? In most states you have to live in the state 4 to 5 years before you can run for office. The two exceptions that i know of, and their may be more, are NY and California. That kind of E36 M3 would never fly in the Southern States. Because A) we are not crazy, b) we vote for the right party unless it is a local election, and C) we would never trust an outsider. We have enough Good Old Boys down here that you have to be one of us to get elected and no out of state transplant would work. That said i really don't know any think about how things work in NY so maybe i am missing the point. But it was still a shocker when she got elected.

The sour grapes I'm seeing from Clinton supporters is making for a comfortable nights sleep for me. The Lizard Queen is done. I remember who fiddled away the interns while the economy was booming and did nothing to help prevent the bubble from bursting before leaving office.

The more I read about Obama, the more I'm convinced that no one is paying attention and that he has no idea what he wants to do.

He wants to leave Iraq, but increase the size of the military, deploy more troops to Afganistan and other locations in the Middle East, supports attacking into Pakistan and Iran, etc. Who's the hawk? He wants the Fed to get directly involved in education, no thanks they've got enough things they do wrong. He wants to create and new half trillion dollar national health care system. No thanks, i don't want the government controlling this directly either. McCain wants to approve tax credits for families to buy health care who do not have it available from their employer.

My biggest problem with him though is he hasn't don't ANYTHING yet. He hasn't even served a full term in the Senate yet! McCain was a POW longer than Obama's been in national politics. He has NO record. No one really knows how or what he will do other than give a hell of a better speech than Bush or McCain. I might like him if he actually had experience. Hell, JFK was considered extremely inexperienced and he had been in Congress 4x longer than Obama.

And boo hoo McCain's wife has money. I'm sure the Clintons and Obamas both fly Southwest, take hippie-powered rickshaws to appearances, and shop at Goodwill for their suits.

More importantly to me though, as my state is unfortunately heavily democrat, MD's current waste of skin Governor appears to have backed the wrong horse (Clinton) in this race and will hopefully be without support in two years when he's due for re-election.

Hillary wasn't the first. New york will elect anyone with a famous last name with a D next to it.

I was young at the time so maybe i wasn’t paying attention but i dont remember anyone crying for someone to burst the tech bubble. BTW what did Bush do to pop the housing bubble? What was done about the 80's real estate bubble? I dont think any President that im aware of has ever intentionally done anything to slow down the economy during their own term in office. Im not even sure if they could do anything about it. What was Clinton supposed to do? Tell everyone that the stocks they were speculating on were over valued?

I think Bush actually contributed greatly to the housing bubble.

I'm oversimplifying, but I think he kept the interest rates artificially low to spur home sales, which were pretty much the one reliably sunny economic indicator under his watch. He needed those numbers so we wouldn't notice things have been pretty shaky for a long time. Anyway, the pressure is on to keep the rates low, which spurs a home-buying feeding frenzy, and nobody is willing to rein it in because other than housing the economy was in the crapper years ago.

GlennS, your BHO web page has nothing but propaganda. Also conspicuously absent are BHO's policy toward Constitutional Ammendment Number Two, which he has previously done everything he can to eliminate, and his policy on executing small children who are "inconvenient" or might "mess up the mother's life."

Tim Baxter wrote: I think Bush actually contributed greatly to the housing bubble. I'm oversimplifying, but I think he kept the interest rates artificially low to spur home sales, which *were* pretty much the one reliably sunny economic indicator under his watch. He needed those numbers so we wouldn't notice things have been pretty shaky for a long time. Anyway, the pressure is on to keep the rates low, which spurs a home-buying feeding frenzy, and nobody is willing to rein it in because other than housing the economy was in the crapper years ago.

Busch didn't keep rates low, the Fed did. The Federal Reserve is an independant institution that's (nominally at least) free of direct political influence. You need to blame Greenspan.