Veepstakes Bric-a-brac

Item: MAC: MIKE STILL IN VEEPSTAKES

Analysis: The question is: On which issues do Bloomberg and McCain agree? Not that many...

Item: Camille Paglia thinks Kathleen Sebelius would be an ideal VP choice because she "is a polished public presence who epitomizes that cordial, smoothly reassuring, and blandly generic WASPiness that has persistently defined the American power structure in business and government and that has weirdly resisted wave after wave of immigration since the mid-19th century."

Analysis: Can you imagine Paglia as a vetter? "Did you ever read Michel Foucault?"

Item: The New Republic's Michael Crowley makes the resume case for former Sen. Sam Nunn (D-GA).

Analysis: A compelling case. But what's missing from this profile is what's missing from every veepstakes profile: evidence of whether Obama likes Nunn, trusts Nunn, knows Nunn, and could work well with him for eight years.

Comments

Michel Foucault, Marc. Not Michael.

Cuz he's Franch.

Posted by scold | June 11, 2008 1:16 PM

That's got to be the first positive thing that Paglia has said about WASPiness in her lifetime.

Posted by goethean | June 11, 2008 1:22 PM

Sam Nunn is only a popular choice with the Broderites. It would not go over well with Obama supporters at all.

Posted by Joe Klein's conscience | June 11, 2008 1:30 PM

Sebelius looks good on paper, but she is a bad choice. If you are going to pick a woman with appeal to moderates and rural voters, who is part of a political dynasty and perhaps got there in part because of her famous name, why not pick the one that will help you win West Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Arkansas instead?

Posted by J.R. | June 11, 2008 1:38 PM

Uh, how is the Foucault crack "analysis" of Paglia's esentially unexceptionable insight that, for all the 'revolution' of running with a female VP candidate, the choice of Sebelius would be very reassuring.

Posted by schmed | June 11, 2008 1:48 PM

Is it possible to be a WASP when you are not the P? Considering she's Catholic, which something ten seconds on Google - sorry, a Google as John McCain says - Paglia sounds rather clueless in her assessment.

Posted by Mark Haverty | June 11, 2008 2:05 PM

J.R.,

That's somewhat flawed logic. People who voted for a white woman to a large degree because she wasn't a black man are unlikely to then vote for a black man and a white woman, especially when the alternative is a white man and probably another white man.

Posted by James | June 11, 2008 2:10 PM

Off topic, but thanks to Marc for bringing back comments!

Posted by Seth | June 11, 2008 2:22 PM

My logic wasn't about racists not voting for Obama. Unlike other Obama supporters, I don't think all Clinton supporters are racist. I think many of them had strong preferences for Hillary Clinton, especially the women who voted for her. My point is to put yourself in the shoes of a Clinton supporter. How many times did you hear "I'd love to vote for a woman presidential candidate, just not Hillary. I want to vote for a woman who got there on her own merit." While I can quibble with this argument, why would Obama pick Sebelius, who is basically Hillary Clinton without the pizzazz, followers, and ability to help in swing states?

Posted by J.R. | June 11, 2008 2:26 PM

Good heavens, Paglia and I are on the same side about something.
I like Sebelius. And I think the message that calm reassurance was the quality for the veep wouldn't be a bad idea--there are lots of able attack dogs who would be better not saddled with veephood. (e.g. Biden as Sec State, Webb as Sec Defense or both keeping Senate roles that might be more to their liking than veephood.)
I also like Schweitzer--more Schweitzer! As noted by someone, that leaked list was missing Westerners.

Nunn is out for the same reason Jindal is out--undercuts the age-related critique of the opponent.

Posted by Deborah | June 11, 2008 2:26 PM

I could see a Nunn--or a Graham--or even Biden--as a placeholder for Sebelius. Let him win with an older, seasoned pol, who'll then step down in four years or less and let Sebelius or another younger candidate step into the slot.

But I'm betting he can win with Sebelius on the ticket now, so maybe the point is moot.

Posted by KathyF | June 11, 2008 2:28 PM

Sebelius is intriguing, I need to learn more about her. But I agree with J.R. Why would Obama pick Sebelius, since she is someone less qualified than Hillary Clinton?

Posted by Regina | June 11, 2008 2:39 PM

Regina: Sebelius is every bit as qualified as Clinton, plus she reinforces Obama's message of change. She's done a tremendous job in Kansas especially with the budget, and she's gone toe to toe with George Bush on the National Guard troops, as CIC of Kansas Nat'l Guard.

She also very subtly reminds people of Obama's own Kansas roots, plus she has Ohio roots of her own.

Check out her Wiki for more, plus links to articles about her.

Posted by KathyF | June 11, 2008 2:51 PM

I will try to find out information about her, but not from Wikipedia. Those sites are filled with misinformation about politicians: usually outright negative falsehoods or else super-inflated positive comments that exaggerate. But Hillary Clinton has foreign policy experience, which is why I'm thinking Clinton is more qualified. Does Sebelius?

Posted by Regina | June 11, 2008 2:54 PM

Sebelius is quite different from Clinton. Sebelius's father was a 1 term governor of Ohio. She is a popular liberal 2-term governor of a solid red state. As insurance commissioner, she was ranked as one of the country's top public officials. She was ranked by Time magazine as one of the top five governors.

To me, comparing the 2 is like comparing Bill Gates to the Rockefellers. They both came from wealthy families, but Bill Gates's current wealth can't be attributed to his inheritance. Likewise, Sebelius's political success can't be attributed to her father.

Posted by Kevin | June 11, 2008 2:59 PM

Oh brother. Say it with me now!

CLINTON.DOES.NOT.HAVE.FOREIGN.POLICY.EXPERIENCE.

Posted by Natascha | June 11, 2008 2:59 PM

Hillary Clinton has been ranked in numerous magazines as the top 100 lawyers in America, the most respected woman in America, etc., etc. Beats Sebelius there.

I am interested in Sebelius's experience in office though, not these rankings. I will read about her time as governor.

Also, according to the bio I just read of her, her husband is a well-known judge in Kansas and his father was a Republican U.S House rep. It seems like she benefited quite a bit from the famous name.

Posted by Regina | June 11, 2008 3:15 PM

Well, it seems like the Sebelius boosters are out in full force today. She's not getting VP--her SOTU response was a joke. She's like Lieberman without support in Florida--VPs need to be attack dogs. She will likely run for president in 2012 or 2016 though, and she will probably lose when she is castigated as too moderate and mainstream by HuffPo style liberals.

Posted by John | June 11, 2008 3:19 PM

Not trying to pick a fight here, but what VP were attack dogs save LBJ and Nixon?

Cheney isn't an attack dog in the sense I think you mean.

Posted by James | June 11, 2008 3:24 PM

Of course Bloomberg makes sense for McCain's VP, because he instantly wipes out Obama's enormous financial lead. Billionaire Bloomberg can legally spend his own fortune getting elected. Bonus points for saving McCain's team from spending another minute fund-raising.

Other obvious choices:

Crist: brings Florida

Huckabee: brings evangelical vote

Posted by Oberon | June 11, 2008 4:12 PM

I think Al Gore was a great attack dog as VP in '92 and '96. In fact, it may have hurt him in 2000 because he was tagged with being mean. While it wasn't during the campaign, remember Gore's very smart and very strong attack against Perot on NAFTA?

I thought Bentsen was good too. He could attack with a smile. Remember the Dan Quayle quip? And I think everyone now agrees Gerry Ferraro has some attack dog in her (still, unfortunately).

Posted by John | June 11, 2008 4:18 PM

Good morning,

I figured you would be interested in viewing this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXfiOSCfY44

Kristofer

Posted by Kristofer | June 11, 2008 4:39 PM

Kristofer, I like Sarah Palin and Sebelius. Both very interesting.

Posted by Regina | June 11, 2008 4:42 PM

Why would Obama pick Sebelius, since she is someone less qualified than Hillary Clinton?

Because Sebelius isn't married to Bill Clinton?

Posted by goethean | June 11, 2008 4:49 PM

Regina, I think the "most respected" ranking is unfair to use as that has a lot to do w/ name recognition. I'm not sure if being the daughter-in-law of a former US rep and wife of a judge helps much in becoming governor given that it's a higher office than either. That's different from being related to the President and becoming senator. I'm not trying to bash Clinton. I just think that when your political accomplishments are greater than anyone in your family, it's a little unfair to say that you're just part of the dynasty.

I do agree that her biggest deterrent is her speaking ability, though her SOTU rebuttal was well below average for her.

As to the attack dog role, I think that Claire McCaskill has been the only one that's really fit that role. She would make a good pick, but having 2 first term senators on the ticket may be a bit much.

Posted by Kevin | June 11, 2008 5:27 PM

To Deborah, further up-thread, I agree 100% on Brian Schweitzer. He would be the best pick, by far and away. He would easily neutralize the perception of McCain as a "straight-talker." Furthermore, his oratorical style is very down-to-earth and direct, and that will go over well in every region of the country, not just the West. Schweitzer's presence on the ticket will help fend off the "elitist" label that sticks to Democrats too often. And Schweitzer is also brilliant when it comes to specific policy issues-- he sees the clear link between mideast policy, energy independence, and global warming, and has a long-term, well-crafted plan to address those problems. And, at age 53, Schweitzer is young enough to be Obama's successor in eight years. I hope he's the dark-horse pick that the campaign is keeping secret until the day of the announcement. Obama/Schweitzer '08 is a ticket that can't lose!

Posted by The Caped Composer | June 11, 2008 6:00 PM

Sebelius's name was big in Kansas. Her step-father, also named Sebelius was a House rep. Kansas only has 4 congressional districts, so that means 1/4 of the state had voted and liked that name. A big help for her. She's great, don't get me wrong. But her name clearly helped her get where she is.

And I am pretty sure Hillary Clinton has more foreign policy experience. I don't think the Kansas governor makes any foreign policy decisions, unless you count keeping peace with Nebraska. Clinton is on the Armed Services committee. She is liked and respected by most of the military brass and soldiers she has met while abroad.

Posted by John | June 11, 2008 8:13 PM

Unlike Clinton, Sebelius actually has a resume of solid achievement. I never bought into this myth that Clinton was somehow "experienced" -- unless that was shorthand for being savvy about below-the-Beltway gamesmanship. Clinton is a junior senator period. She's never run anything. Sorry, a couple tours as First Lady doesn't cut it. By that logic, Gisele Bündchen could be starting QB for the Patriots.

Posted by PJ | June 12, 2008 1:09 PM

To PJ, I think 7 years as U.S. senator is experience, not even thinking about first lady. It is more than Edwards and Obama.

Posted by John | June 12, 2008 3:50 PM

To John, yes the Obama supporters will point to his time as a state legislator and community organizer as 'experience', yet ignore the fact that Hillary Clinton has been in the U.S. Senate for 7 years (and elected twice). They don't think being first lady is meaningful, but I guess helping social workers in Chicago counts (but community organizing that Hillary Clinton did in Arkansas and South Texas also doesnt' count!).

Obama is simply one of the least prepared candidates for president. In the modern era, our other inexperienced presidents included GW Bush and Jimmy Carter. Ugh.

Posted by Chris | June 12, 2008 4:00 PM