See other Neocon Nuttery Articles
Title: McCain weighs a Lieberman surprise
Source:
Yahoo - Politico
URL Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080819/pl_politico/12646
Published: Aug 19, 2008
Author: Alexander Burns, Jonathan Martin, Mike A
Post Date: 2008-08-19 18:11:59 by Rotara
Keywords: None
Views: 1194
Comments: 48
2 hours, 24 minutes ago John McCain is seriously considering choosing a pro-abortion-rights running mate despite vocal resistance from conservatives, with former Democratic vice presidential nominee Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) very much in the mix, close McCain advisers say. Under strong consideration: former Pennsylvania Republican Gov. Tom Ridge, and Lieberman, who was Al Gore’s running mate in 2000. Multiple GOP sources say that party officials in Washington and in the states have been contacted by the McCain campaign in the past two weeks and asked about the fallout from such a choice. One person familiar with the calls said the party was being instructed to prepare for different candidate prototypes — including one in the mold of Lieberman, who is an independent but still caucuses with the Democrats. One obstacle for Lieberman may be legal. A GOP official said that since he is not a Republican, Lieberman may have a challenge being certified on some state ballots. But GOP sources say McCain and his close friend Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) still haven’t given up hope on making what some believe would be a game-changing decision by tapping Lieberman. Lieberman’s office declined to discuss the topic. “Those questions are best left to the McCain campaign at this time,” said Erika Masonhall, Lieberman’s Senate press secretary. Ridge also appears to still be on the short list, GOP sources say. McCain likes the fact that Ridge is a Vietnam War hero with a working-class background. Ridge worked in the White House as Bush’s homeland security adviser before becoming Secretary of Homeland Security, and could help McCain with his further reform of the nation’s intelligence apparatus. “He’s McCain’s kind of guy,” said a close friend of the candidate. McCain, who in the past had said it would be hard to choose a supporter of abortion rights, told Steve Hayes of The Weekly Standard last week that he would not rule it out. One source close to the campaign who is sympathetic to such a plan sketched out a scenario in which Lieberman was the choice. “First, if your instinct is to run on experience, it doesn’t hurt to have a vice president who’s got it, too,” said this source, a conservative. But more than that, according to this source, picking Lieberman would dramatically support McCain’s theme that he puts “country first” above all else. “It would fit well into the narrative of his not having any politics in the White House,” said the source. “No more Dick Morris, no more Karl Rove — we’re governing here. It’s an easy, natural message for McCain and it implies a one-term pledge without actually saying it.” As for the inevitable blowback from the right, this person acknowledged the convention would be “a messy week,” representing a “shock to the system of a pro-life party.” But would it be worth it? “The question is: On Sept. 15 or 25, is he in better shape or not?” the source asked. McCain allies are hopeful that the candidate’s strong statement on abortion Saturday night at Rick Warren’s California church could assuage any concerns from the right-to-life community about what a supporter of abortion rights on the ticket would mean. “I will be a pro-life president and this presidency will have pro-life policies,” McCain said at Saddleback. “That's my commitment; that's my commitment to you.” Others in the party — including several veterans of President Bush’s past campaigns — say such a choice would be untenable and are dreading the prospect of what Lieberman, or perhaps even Ridge,would mean to a base that is already less than enthusiastic about McCain. “Lieberman would blow things up,” said the American Conservative Union’s David Keene. “That would be like Obama picking some right-winger that agrees with him on one thing.” As for the convention, Keene said Lieberman’s selection would set off some sort of “protest” among the party’s rank and file. Tapping Ridge, Keene said, wouldn’t be as bad, but would still “overshadow” St. Paul. Already, one website has begun a petition aimed at dissuading McCain from tapping a supporter of abortion rights. “Please keep Senator McCain and his key advisers in your prayers as he nears a decision on his VP pick, and please sign the petition and pass on to like-minded pro-lifers,” Billy Valentine, a young Republican and former supporter of Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback’s presidential bid, writes above the petition on “Catholics for McCain.” Other Republican regulars, speaking anonymously so as not to anger the party’s nominee, warn of the consequences. Another well-placed Republican official who is in regular contact with McCain’s campaign predicted a contentious gathering in St. Paul. “You will not have a unanimous vote at the convention, that much I can tell you,” said this source. “There will be some blowback.” Many leading conservatives have strongly pushed back on McCain’s suggestion that he might choose a pro-choice running mate. For the third day in a row, talk radio guru Rush Limbaugh castigated the idea Tuesday on his radio show, saying the mainstream media — “the drive-by media,” in his parlance — is enthralled by the idea. “The drive-bys are just hoping for it, because they know the base will totally turn on McCain if this is the case,” Limbaugh said. “If he picks a pro-choice running mate, it’s not going to be pretty, and the drive-bys know it." “The question is how to get the message to McCain," he said. "You don’t get in McCain’s face and say, ‘Don’t do it.’ That’s a dumb thing to do. [You have to say something like] ‘Sen. McCain, we know you’re smart … and we know you don’t want to lose.’” The answer to what McCain is thinking could come soon. Republicans were told that barring a change, McCain plans to appear with his pick at an arena in Dayton, Ohio, on Aug. 29 — a week from Friday, and the day after Barack Obama accepts the Democratic nomination in a Denver stadium. Campaign advisers said Obama’s performance is likely to be so strong they think it will “scare” Republicans, and they’re eager to change the conversation to their own No. 2 the next morning. Obama is likely to make his pick this Friday, Saturday or Sunday, according to advisers. But they warned it could come any time. ALSO DRIVING THE VEEP CONVERSATION: • Tom Ridge gets hit from back home, as Diane Gramley, president of the American Family Association of Pennsylvania, says the GOP would not accept a vice president who supports abortion rights. Gramley: “The last time I checked [there] was still…a pro-life plan in the platform, so he needs to do some research, I believe, in where his party stands on the issue of life.” • Obama hasn’t notified his future running mate of his decision. • The Associated Press reports Minnesota Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty is headed East this weekend on what looks like one more leg of a veep audition tour, heading to Ohio and Pennsylvania to stump for McCain. • Obama refers to “my friend, Sen. Joe Biden,” in a passage about Georgia in his VFW convention speech. • In Michigan, Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius declares: “Women are the key to this election.” • Pelosi fave Rep. Chet Edwards speaks up on veterans issues on behalf of the Obama campaign. • Bobby Jindal talks up his accomplishments as governor. • Former H-P CEO Carly Fiorina keeps campaigning on economics in Pennsylvania. • AP has a problem with Joe Lieberman. • Lynn Sweet reports that the Obama team has reserved the Springfield, Ill., Old State Capitol for an event with the running mate-to-be this Saturday.
Poster Comment: 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 35.
#2. To: Rotara (#0)
Which country does he put first? Israel?
Israel, same as your Savior Obummer. All on the same team. Bayh wants to give Israel MORE money, that should make you overjoyed. More money for home.
Can I change my screen name to Rabbi Essostein? I wanna get in on this action and lap up some of the gravy.
Years ago when Bushski one day declared on live tv..."We will defend Issrul"... and Congress passed a resolution of support for Israel 390 or so to 6.. Anyone paying attention knew for sure who was in control of the American government. And to have voters come here in support of any system candidate is beyond comprehension.
and Congress passed a resolution of support for Israel 390 or so to 6.. Bushski and Congress can blow their lovey dovey resolution out their hairy butts. Happy faces and chest slams - what resolutions amount to- have no legal standing in contract law. There exists no signed mutual defense treaty. Not that US presidents have not tried to get the Israeli gov't to sign one, because US Presidents know that they have no legally binding contract in force that gives them the right to waste American blood and treasure in Israel's defense. The Israeli gov't has repeatedly refused to sign a mutual defense treaty because the Israel gov't wants Israeli blood and treasure to be used to defend Israel and Israel alone. End of story.
Nope... Israel slaughtered men of our military and our government covered it up. They are in charge. Why should they sign a mutual defense pact???? Nothing in it for them. they exist ONLY because the world knows Israel can call us to their defense for FREE. Jews will die only for Jews.
Cyni, regardless of the Israel Lobby's very strong influence on foreign policy, if no mutual defense treaty exists it is a significant problem for Bush or whomever to jump in to defend Israel in war. It's one thing to invade Iraq for a number of fuzzy reasons, one of them commonly understood to be for securing Israel's defense, but it is quite another thing to jump into a war for the purpose of defending a nation that is not a treaty ally. That's why everyone heaved a sigh of relief when they reflected back on how serendipitous it was that Germany had deep-6'd Georgia's NATO membership dreams earlier this year. Because if Germany had done not this, then NATO nations would have been treaty obligated to come to Georgia's defense on August 8 when it got itself into the military mess with Russia. Believe me treaties are very very significant and that's why various Presidents in the past have all tried to twist Israel's to sign onto a mutual defense treaty. The US Presidents did not need Israel's help - it was because without a mutaul defense treaty in force, a US President is not able to waste American blood and treasure for a war that does not involve the US. That's why Israel and the Israel Lobby have been standing on their heads trying to get the US and Iran in a direct military confrontation with one another so it's not a case of the US jumping in to defend Israel after the war has started but rather that the US and Iran have been involved from the start and the US is defending itself.
OK..good logic. But Scrap, lets face reality and facts, to my mind if anyone bombs or invades Israel, we will not have a declaration of war by this country until AFTER the fact of our retaliation. When Bush said we would defend Israel, there was not ONE dissenting voice from Congress nor the media. To me that suggests they agree with me.
There are no replies to Comment # 35. End Trace Mode for Comment # 35.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestBut more than that, according to this source, picking Lieberman would dramatically support McCain’s theme that he puts “country first” above all else.
#3. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#2)
#5. To: christine, Cynicom (#3)
Bayh wants to give Israel MORE money...
#8. To: Esso, christine, jethro tull (#5)
#18. To: Cynicom, Esso, christine, jethro tull (#8)
Years ago when Bushski one day declared on live tv..."We will defend Issrul"...
#21. To: scrapper2 (#18)
End of story.
#31. To: Cynicom (#21)
#35. To: scrapper2 (#31)
Replies to Comment # 35.