Thursday, May 22, 2008
Hungry For Seconds
So, following today's headlines that McCain is beginning the interview process for possible running mates, comes the leak that Obama is doing the same. I'm not so sure that giving the vetting job to the guy who helped produce Geraldine Ferraro and John Edwards is exactly the best idea. But, hey, I'm not a Democrat and I can't imagine the questions that have to be run through to narrow down the right person.
However, I agree with this post on Andrew's site. This shouldn't come as a surprise to those RT-ers who have seen my interest and admiration for the gentleman from Virginia for a couple years now (and apologies for not noting at the time that I used the same Webb pun-headline twice in a few months). Last fall, I predicted that a Clinton-Webb ticket would win the presidency. While that may no longer happen ("Wait, I'm not dead yet! It's only a flesh wound!"), there is just as strong a case to be made for Webb as Obama's running mate (except, perhaps, on the experience factor). For whatever it's worth, this would also be the most truly literary ticket presidential ticket in history.
The Corner notes Webb's strongly culturally conservative view of affirmative action, vs. Obama's more typical one. I think the combination could create a rather interesting honest intra-party Democratic debate on the question of preferences.
On the Republican side, McCain should certainly skew younger, though Louisiana's Bobby Jindal is too young (and only just got elected to the governorship). There is certainly a fair bit of support for Minnesota's Tim Pawlenty (who makes sense geographically and managed to survive the '06 Democratic tsunami). However, as a wild card, McCain might want to think about this guy. Yes, he's only House member, but he's smart, truly reform-minded and a friendly, good-looking guy too (hey, if McCain is running against Obama, it wouldn't be bad to include some aesthetic considerations). On similar reasons, I'd also suggest Ryan's colleague, Jeff Flake, but unfortunately, he has the bad luck of being from the same state as McCain.
UPDATE: NRO's John O'Sullivan lists Webb's positives on a ticket with Obama. Andrew worries that Webb's past statements on women would look like a slap in the face to supporters of a defeated Hillary Clinton. That's a slight risk that could be gotten around with coordinated support from many female Democratic elected officials (particularly those who serve with Webb and Obama in the Senate).
|
However, I agree with this post on Andrew's site. This shouldn't come as a surprise to those RT-ers who have seen my interest and admiration for the gentleman from Virginia for a couple years now (and apologies for not noting at the time that I used the same Webb pun-headline twice in a few months). Last fall, I predicted that a Clinton-Webb ticket would win the presidency. While that may no longer happen ("Wait, I'm not dead yet! It's only a flesh wound!"), there is just as strong a case to be made for Webb as Obama's running mate (except, perhaps, on the experience factor). For whatever it's worth, this would also be the most truly literary ticket presidential ticket in history.
The Corner notes Webb's strongly culturally conservative view of affirmative action, vs. Obama's more typical one. I think the combination could create a rather interesting honest intra-party Democratic debate on the question of preferences.
On the Republican side, McCain should certainly skew younger, though Louisiana's Bobby Jindal is too young (and only just got elected to the governorship). There is certainly a fair bit of support for Minnesota's Tim Pawlenty (who makes sense geographically and managed to survive the '06 Democratic tsunami). However, as a wild card, McCain might want to think about this guy. Yes, he's only House member, but he's smart, truly reform-minded and a friendly, good-looking guy too (hey, if McCain is running against Obama, it wouldn't be bad to include some aesthetic considerations). On similar reasons, I'd also suggest Ryan's colleague, Jeff Flake, but unfortunately, he has the bad luck of being from the same state as McCain.
UPDATE: NRO's John O'Sullivan lists Webb's positives on a ticket with Obama. Andrew worries that Webb's past statements on women would look like a slap in the face to supporters of a defeated Hillary Clinton. That's a slight risk that could be gotten around with coordinated support from many female Democratic elected officials (particularly those who serve with Webb and Obama in the Senate).
Labels: Barack Obama, Jim Webb, John McCain, Paul Ryan
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Immigration "Reform", R.I.P.
Bill fails 46-53 on cloture.
Immigration supporters couldn't even register a majority!
This front-pager in today's Times actually did a good job of intimating the tough road the bill faced in the Senate. Three moderate-conservative freshman Senators -- Jim Webb of Virginia, Jon Tester of Montana and Claire McCaskill voiced their opposition -- in ways that echoed conservative Republican concerns (not the liberal Democrat view that the bill was too harsh on undocumented workers); meanwhile socialist independent Democrat Bernie Sanders' had a unique take:
Anyway, today's vote means the immigration bill is dead for this year -- and most likely for the remainder of Bush's term.
|
Immigration supporters couldn't even register a majority!
This front-pager in today's Times actually did a good job of intimating the tough road the bill faced in the Senate. Three moderate-conservative freshman Senators -- Jim Webb of Virginia, Jon Tester of Montana and Claire McCaskill voiced their opposition -- in ways that echoed conservative Republican concerns (not the liberal Democrat view that the bill was too harsh on undocumented workers); meanwhile socialist independent Democrat Bernie Sanders' had a unique take:
The three lawmakers, who find themselves in similar political situations after close election victories in states carried by Mr. Bush in both 2000 and 2004, compare notes on a variety of issues.
“I will confess I check Tester’s and Webb’s vote before I check Harry Reid’s,” said Ms. McCaskill, a former prosecutor and state auditor.
Of these three freshman Democratic senators, Mr. Webb has shown the most willingness to
entertain the idea of supporting the measure if it were revised to his liking.
“There is a lot of good in this bill,” Mr. Webb said Wednesday. But his proposal to limit the opportunity to gain legal residency to immigrants who have been in the country for at least four years was soundly rejected by the Senate, 79 to 18, making it unlikely that backers of the measure can count on his support.
“To include every single person who, with a few exceptions, was here in this country as of the end of last year I think violates the notion of fairness among a lot of people in this country,” Mr. Webb said. “And it’s one of the reasons why we have had such a strong surge of resentment toward the legislation.”
Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, a leading Republican opponent of the bill, said it was telling that some of the Democrats who had just won their seats were those pushing most strongly against the legislation.
“Some of the new members looked their voters in the eye and said they were not for amnesty and were for stricter enforcement,” Mr. Sessions said. “Now, if they don’t honor that, it is going to poison their relationship for some time.”
And that is just what the three lawmakers are determined to avoid, even though they will not be back on the ballot until 2012. “This was a big issue in Missouri,” Ms. McCaskill said. “I had a consistent and clear message during the campaign, and I feel obligated to act on that.”
Other Democratic freshmen like Senators Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island have been supporting the bill. Senator Bernard Sanders, a newly elected independent from Vermont who usually sides with Democrats, has been opposing the measure, arguing that it could be detrimental to American workers.
Anyway, today's vote means the immigration bill is dead for this year -- and most likely for the remainder of Bush's term.
Labels: George W. Bush, immigration, Jim Webb
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Can't Get There From Here
The right to bear arms shall not be infringed -- unless you're in Washington, D.C.:
While not directly, ahem, targeted toward this specific aspect of D.C.'s gun statutes, this case covering handdgun ownership can't get to the Supreme Court fast enough.
|
The arrest this week of Phillip Thompson, an aide to Sen. James Webb (D-Va.) who carried a loaded pistol into a Senate office building, brought to light a contradiction between the regulations governing the Capitol grounds and the laws covering District streets.Complete and total insanity, of course.
The Capitol grounds are federal property and not subject to the District's strict gun laws, which generally prohibit firearms.
Although some people are allowed to bring guns into the Capitol, they cannot legally get them there, said Lt. Jon Shelton, the longtime head of the D.C. police department's gun unit.
"They can't helicopter them in," Shelton said.
While not directly, ahem, targeted toward this specific aspect of D.C.'s gun statutes, this case covering handdgun ownership can't get to the Supreme Court fast enough.
Labels: gun control, Jim Webb, Second Amendment
Monday, January 29, 2007
Short Takes...
1) Andrew Sullivan on Jim Webb's new politics.
2) Ben Smith on Hillary Clinton's long memory.
3) Deborah Orin-Eilbeck, R.I.P.
|
2) Ben Smith on Hillary Clinton's long memory.
3) Deborah Orin-Eilbeck, R.I.P.
Labels: Hillary Clinton, Jim Webb
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
Bush & Webb States of the Union
George W. Bush's seventh State of the Union address was interesting.
Watching it, I thought the best thing about it was the beginning and the ending -- his very gracious recognition of Nancy Pelosi as "Madam Speaker", the first woman to hold that position. She seemed genuinely moved at the president's words -- particularly his noting of her father's service in the House. At the conclusion, the gesture to the "everyday Americans" has been a cliche at SOTU addresses for a quarter century now. However, putting all of them together made for a very powerful impact. It was especially nice to see New York "subway superhero" Wesley Autrey spontaneously send out a salute/kiss to Bush and then turn and hug fellow gallery guest Sgt. Tommy Rieman.
But, the rest of the speech didn't move me much.
However, later, actually reading it, I have to give Bush some credit: Putting aside the usual laundry list of domestic initiatives which will be either DOA under a Democratic Congress (the health insurance tax plan) or will be twisted beyond recognition (the renewal of No Child Left Behind). In contrast, the recount of the war on terror -- some of the actual victories combined with an assessment of what is going on in Iraq on both the Sunni and Shiite sides -- was quite refreshing:
It may not change any minds immediately, but, along with new Iraq operations chief Lt. Gen. David Petraeus' testimony at his confirmation hearing, it may presage a period of candor from the administration that might create enough time to get its new Iraq strategy under way.
But is it too late?
Listening to Jim Webb (launch the video player), it was perfectly clear why the Democrats chose him to deliver the Democratic response (again, this sounds like it had Chuck Schumer's fingerprints all over it). As a number pundits mentioned afterwards, he tore up the original speech that the Democrats wanted him to deliver and wrote his own: Very good idea. It was personal, philosophical and political. He mixed in a photo of his Dad serving in World War II and made a generational connection to his own service and that of his currently serving son:
It was a speech that would appeal to men and women equally.
Jim Webb can sure make a persuasive case for the need to address economic disparity. Republicans might call it "class warfare," but a man like Webb can inspire more people than you might think to enlist on the side of the workers rather than on the side of the CEOs. Hmmm... wonder how John McCain felt to hear Webb swipe Teddy Roosevelt as an example of a president who saw the need to address economic inequality?
Whoever the Democratic presidential nominee is, that person would be a fool not to ask Jim Webb to their running mate.
|
Watching it, I thought the best thing about it was the beginning and the ending -- his very gracious recognition of Nancy Pelosi as "Madam Speaker", the first woman to hold that position. She seemed genuinely moved at the president's words -- particularly his noting of her father's service in the House. At the conclusion, the gesture to the "everyday Americans" has been a cliche at SOTU addresses for a quarter century now. However, putting all of them together made for a very powerful impact. It was especially nice to see New York "subway superhero" Wesley Autrey spontaneously send out a salute/kiss to Bush and then turn and hug fellow gallery guest Sgt. Tommy Rieman.
But, the rest of the speech didn't move me much.
However, later, actually reading it, I have to give Bush some credit: Putting aside the usual laundry list of domestic initiatives which will be either DOA under a Democratic Congress (the health insurance tax plan) or will be twisted beyond recognition (the renewal of No Child Left Behind). In contrast, the recount of the war on terror -- some of the actual victories combined with an assessment of what is going on in Iraq on both the Sunni and Shiite sides -- was quite refreshing:
Our success in this war is often measured by the things that did not happen. We cannot know the full extent of the attacks that we and our allies have prevented, but here is some of what we do know: We stopped an Al Qaeda plot to fly a hijacked airplane into the tallest building on the West Coast. We broke up a Southeast Asian terrorist cell grooming operatives for attacks inside the United States. We uncovered an Al Qaeda cell developing anthrax to be used in attacks against America. And just last August, British authorities uncovered a plot to blow up passenger planes bound for America over the Atlantic Ocean. For each life saved, we owe a debt of gratitude to the brave public servants who devote their lives to finding the terrorists and stopping them.It seemed for one of the rare times in the last few years that Bush was actually in command of the details of what is happening in Iraq. That's not the same as being in command of the events on the ground, of course. But unlike his many pedestrian Iraq-focused speeches of recent years, this one seemed more grounded, with little grandiose statements of what would be happening.
It may not change any minds immediately, but, along with new Iraq operations chief Lt. Gen. David Petraeus' testimony at his confirmation hearing, it may presage a period of candor from the administration that might create enough time to get its new Iraq strategy under way.
But is it too late?
Listening to Jim Webb (launch the video player), it was perfectly clear why the Democrats chose him to deliver the Democratic response (again, this sounds like it had Chuck Schumer's fingerprints all over it). As a number pundits mentioned afterwards, he tore up the original speech that the Democrats wanted him to deliver and wrote his own: Very good idea. It was personal, philosophical and political. He mixed in a photo of his Dad serving in World War II and made a generational connection to his own service and that of his currently serving son:
I was proud to follow in his footsteps, serving as a Marine in Vietnam. My brother did as well, serving as a Marine helicopter pilot. My son has joined the tradition, now serving as an infantry Marine in Iraq.He then followed that up with a list of all the strategic and tactical errors the administration has made on Iraq. Unlike the average Democrat who might have given this speech, there wasn't the usual cant. There weren't the typical histrionics. His tone was straightforward, yet forceful. Confident without being arrogant.Like so many other Americans, today and throughout our history, we serve and have served, not for political reasons, but because we love our country. On the political issues those matters of war and peace, and in some cases of life and death we trusted the judgment of our national leaders. We hoped that they would be right, that they would measure with accuracy the value of our lives against the enormity of the national interest that might call upon us to go into harm's way.
We owed them our loyalty, as Americans, and we gave it. But they owed us sound judgment, clear thinking, concern for our welfare, a guarantee that the threat to our country was equal to the price we might be called upon to pay in defending it.
It was a speech that would appeal to men and women equally.
Jim Webb can sure make a persuasive case for the need to address economic disparity. Republicans might call it "class warfare," but a man like Webb can inspire more people than you might think to enlist on the side of the workers rather than on the side of the CEOs. Hmmm... wonder how John McCain felt to hear Webb swipe Teddy Roosevelt as an example of a president who saw the need to address economic inequality?
Whoever the Democratic presidential nominee is, that person would be a fool not to ask Jim Webb to their running mate.
Labels: Democrats, George W. Bush, Iraq, Jim Webb, Republicans
