This is just a simple observation, but I've seen two diaries posted in the past few days that attack John Edwards for infidelity, based on some right-wing smear. The first diary I saw stated that Edwards was wearing a "blue dress" as he tried to enter the hotel secretly. The second diary, entitled "I am STUNNED" referred to John Edwards as "Jon Edward" in one sentence. Both were based on a recent article in "The National Enquirer," which as everyone knows is factually based and a trusted source of political information. Both reported having previously been fans of John Edwards, but because of the article they had lost faith in Edwards, and simply wanted to point out to us all what a douchebag Edwards truly is.

    Sam Stein, in the Huffington Post (a publication I respect less and less for its tawdry "TMZ"-type infotainment, but that's another story...), revealingly notes in his article Webb: I Couldn't Speak Openly If I Were V.P. that Jim Webb, everyone's favorite killer senator from the Old Dominion, doesn't want to be considered as Barack Obama's Vice-President because...

    he doesn't like power?

    he doesn't like "Vice"?

    he's afraid he'll morph into Richard Bruce Cheney?

    --No, it's because, the article says,

...In essence, he was concerned about his ability to speak openly. ...

    But can something be done about this?

    (more)

Back to life, back to reality.

Tonight on The Daily Show: Richard Bitner, author of Confessions of a Subprime Lender. Tonight on The Colbert Report: Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA). Tonight's Sausage Grinder of Snark setting: exhausted.

The following exchange took place on the eve of the FISA vote, July 8th, between myself and Virginia Senator James Webb.  You can listen to this exchange at The Seminal.  

All emphasis is mine.

Josh Nelson:  You mentioned the role the blogosphere played in your Senate campaign.  I was wondering if you could elaborate on that a little bit.  And also tell us what type of role you would like to see them play in legislative fights in the future.  

Welcome back for more speculation! Today we'll be polling the the top possibilities for Obama's v.p. with experience in foreign policy/national security. I did not include state chief executives, who are commanders-in-chief of their states' National Guards, but who will be considered separately in two threads' time.

I'm still alternating "break-out" polls with the top 14 average vote-getting candidates in these threads' polls, averaging in each day's votes as we go. I'm going to do the top governors/former governors before cutting 14 names to narrow the field to just two tiers--that's if Obama hasn't decided by then, of course. I'll reset the averages then, too, and run a single-elimination poll each day going through the two remaining tiers of 14. So that'll start three more threads away from today.

Please discuss any v.p. candidates in the comments. The correct format would be to simply state their name, unless you have further comments, in which case, "I believe ___ ___ should be Obama's v.p. running mate because..." "Oh my God, where's Jane/Johnny Politician?!" would be a bit alarmist, don't you think? I'm sure they're fine. I'm happy to hear all ideas, and of course I'm no official gatekeeper, so play nice.

(continued below the fold)

5 years and 1 day ago my life changed. It was July 7, 2003, and I was getting back into politics after a long period where I followed it but wasn't really involved. A big part of the reason for my re-engagement was where I saw George W. Bush taking the country - off the cliff, in my opinion - after he had been "selected" by the Supreme Court as president in the hotly disputed 2000 election against Al Gore. Almost immediately, it became apparent that Bush would NOT keep his promises to govern as "compassionate conservative," a "reformer with results," etc. It became obvious that he would NOT run a "humble" foreign policy.  And it became depressingly clear that Bush would not "change the tone in Washington" for the better, only for the (far) worse.  

    I'm not trying to freak out, but see HuffP, Jim Webb: "Under No Circumstances" Will I Consider V.P. Role.
    This is extremely serious.

    If you don't think Barack can lose in November, he very much can. Sebelius is fine (see my old "Sebelius/Webb '08" diaries), but she has no military experience. I don't think Richardson does either, among his other problems. Sam Nunn, too old school. Etc.
    And if you think Joe/Jane Voter doesn't really care about the "war hero" thing, re both McCain and Webb, I'm not sure you understand American politics.

    Jim Webb is essentially what John McCain should have become if McCain had made the right moral and political decisions. And Webb playing "Achilles sulking in the tent" now is not helping this country at all, I have to say. It's time for Webb to hear from the netroots who helped him so much.

    (Action info below)

First, John McCain tried to take credit for Webb's GI Bill after vigorously opposing it. Then George Bush followed suit.

Now Mike Turner (R-OH), who voted against the bill, is also claiming support and credit for its passage. Think Progress documents his statements:

It is our responsibility to provide [veterans] with more than just recognition for their service: we must also make certain that they have the skills they need to accomplish their next mission once they return to civilian life. That is why I was proud to support recently passed legislation that expanded the Montgomery GI bill to provide more funding for veterans to receive a college education. [...]

With the huge impact the GI bill has had on America and the debt that we all owe our nation’s veterans in mind, I was proud to support recent legislation that dramatically expanded the scope and scale of the educational benefits available to our veterans. [...]

I am proud to have supported legislation that will directly provide this benefit for military families and look forward to further working on their behalf in the future.

Webb's GI Bill may well turn out to be the most popular piece of legislation not supported by conservatives ever.

WOW.  Big news in Veepstakes land.  Senator Jim Webb just removed his name from consideration:

"Last week I communicated to Senator Obama and his presidential campaign my firm intention to remain in the United States Senate, where I believe I am best equipped to serve the people of Virginia and this country. Under no circumstances will I be a candidate for Vice President."

Hmm...this is certainly narrowing down the field. Bad news/good news based on your perspective. I promise to update with more news as I get it.  Full statement below:

"Kerry says McCain lacks judgement" - CNN

Last week I wanted more from Wes Clark. This week I want less from Kerry, for 2 reasons:  

1.  Clark has more credibility - he served a president that had no military experience and they turned the Balkan's religious war into soccer clashes.

2.  Kerry is a blast from an ignomonious past.  Kerry's military experience is as old as McCain's and less heroic - and he's tainted.

Without doubt, McCain's military judgement should be put into question.  The question is, who is the best surrogate for that role?  Clark or Webb can stay on message and still stay fresh - I have yet to hear either use tired old lines like 'Bush's 3rd term'.

As evidence of the verbal mastery, Clark's 'getting shot down' response wasn't overly sensitive, but it is a convincing and memorable argument.  Furthermore, Clark is more a military than political figure, so he has the liberty of digging hard while being dispassionately analytical.  Voters expect our Generals to be tough.  

This is an ongoing series from the national tour for THE UPRISING. You can order The Uprising at Amazon.com or through your local independent bookstore.

LAFAYETTE, IN - Jim Webb has gotten a lot of attention lately in the veep speculation game - the one that has substituted for real political reporting over the last month. Most stories focus in on his military and government career, but what I've always found so intriguing about Webb is the thing that makes him such a unique political animal: namely, that he comes from the world of writing, rather than from professional politics.

Welcome back for more veep speculation! Last thread we considered the top military veteran candidates to be Obama's v.p. Averaging in those votes yielded the same top 14 average vote-getters overall as the thread before that, so we'll consider them again in today's poll.

I'm still alternating "break-out" polls with the top 14 average vote-getting candidates in these threads' polls, averaging in each day's votes as we go. I'm going to do the top possibilities experienced with foreign policy/national security issues and governors/former governors before cutting 14 names to narrow the field to just two tiers--that's if Obama hasn't decided by then, of course. I'll reset the averages then, too. So that would be three or four more threads away from today.

Please discuss any v.p. candidates in the comments. The correct format would be to simply state their name, unless you have further comments, in which case, "I believe ___ ___ should be Obama's v.p. running mate because..." "Oh my God, where's Johnny/Jane Politician?!" would be a bit alarmist, don't you think? I'm sure they're fine. I'm happy to hear all ideas, and of course I'm no official gatekeeper, so play nice.

(continued below the fold)

Which John McCain are we supposed to believe? It seems to this blogger that he has shown so many faces he makes Sybil look sane.

He rants when retired Gen. Wes Clark makes the comment "riding around in a jet fighter and getting shot down," isn't, " a qualification to be President."

When Jim Webb (D-Va) calls on him to "simmer down", McCain and his camp scream conspiracy. Yet he doesn't have a problem taking money from the same "Swift Boaters" he denounced in 2003-4.

With one face he tells supporters he is a "mavrick" and has America's best interests at heart, but with the other one he threatens to have Union members arrested for protesting his record against working families.

Welcome back for more speculation! Today we'll be polling the the top military veteran possibilities for Obama's v.p. This includes all candidates who served in uniform (service branch is indicated after names in poll), not including state chief executives, who are commanders-in-chief of their states' National Guards, but who will be considered separately.

I'm still alternating "break-out" polls with the top 14 average vote-getting candidates in these threads' polls, averaging in each day's votes as we go. I'm going to do the top possibilities experienced with foreign policy/national security issues and governors/former governors before cutting 14 names to narrow the field to just two tiers--that's if Obama hasn't decided by then, of course. I'll reset the averages then, too. So that would be four more threads away from today.

Please discuss any v.p. candidates in the comments. The correct format would be to simply state their name, unless you have further comments, in which case, "I believe ___ ___ should be Obama's v.p. running mate because..." "Oh my God, where's Jane/Johnny Politician?!" would be a bit alarmist, don't you think? I'm sure they're fine. I'm happy to hear all ideas, and of course I'm no official gatekeeper, so play nice.

(continued below the fold)

Short one today.  I caught this on TPM while doing my usual stroll through Leftwing Blogosphereia, and I immediately had a smile on my face.  This is precisely what we want out of the McCain campaign:  Old Man Yells at Cloud.

Jim Webb essentially said that McCain should help stop the politicization of the military matters.

What was McCain's answer?  Oh, no, you're  one of them!  You're out to get me as part of a coordinated effort on Obama's part!  Knowing Jim Webb, his answer to our counterpart party's nominee should be fairly interesting.

McCain's actions prove General Clark right.

The events which unfolded following General Wesley Clark's appearance on Face the Nation this Sunday, have exonerated the General and proved conclusively that he was correct.  The General praised John McCain's heroism and patriotism and then argued that his military experiences were insufficient in themselves to provide the judgment necessary to lead the free world.

The McCain campaign pounced and denounced Clark.  The media hyperventilated calling it a "Swift Boat" smear.  MoveON.org and Vote Vets defended Clark.  McCain and his surrogates throughout the traditional media belittled and berated them.  Others, notably Jim Webb, suggested that McCain should calm down, that the politicization of the military should be reduced.  The McCain campaign, again supported by media surrogates, decided that their best bet was to put on the tin-foil hat, proclaim the whole thing a coordinated attack and play the victim.  You almost expected his campaign surrogates to break into tears.

But then a funny thing happened.  

Welcome back for more veep speculation! Last thread we considered the top Western candidates to be Obama's v.p. Averaging in those votes yielded the same top 14 average vote-getters overall as the thread before that, so we'll consider them again in today's poll.

I'm still alternating "break-out" polls with polls of the the top 14 average vote-getting candidates from these threads, averaging in each day's votes as we go. I'm going to do the top military veterans, those experienced with foreign policy/national security issues, and governors/former governors before cutting 14 names to narrow the field to just two tiers--if Obama hasn't decided by then, of course. I'll reset the averages then, too.

Please discuss any v.p. candidates in the comments. The correct format would be to simply state their name, unless you have further comments, in which case, "I believe ___ ___ should be Obama's v.p. running mate because..." "Oh my God, where's Johnny/Jane Politician?!" would be a bit alarmist, don't you think? I'm sure they're fine. I'm happy to hear all ideas, and of course I'm no official gatekeeper, so play nice.

(continued below the fold)

"Bitter" North Carolina rednecks who are tired of corporate capitulation and politicians that bow to the mean voter "theory," the intelligent design to real electoral political theory.

How does Obama get off as being progressive while John Edwards and Jim Webb do not?  Like so many problems in this country, they are endemic to every part of this country.  All the while, Democrats from the South are conflated with "Southern Democrats," and the South remains the scapegoat caricature for racism, economic darwinism, and any other form of parochialism.  

I'm damn bitter that Democrats fell for the smoke and mirrors of the Obama campaign because of a speech in 2002.  When Jim Webb does the same thing, but capitulates on telcom immunity (which I'm none too thrilled over), "progressives" stick a fork in him.  Edwards runs the most progressive campaign in at least 28 years (and in all of my time), and explicitly admits his errors from 2002 (something Obama-bot Kerry still won't do), and we stuck a fork in him.