Another Sign Obama Will Choose Bayh?

It doesn't look like Sen. Barack Obama will name his running mate after all this week. It's hard to imagine him naming someone on Wednesday when he's leaving for vacation in Hawaii on Friday. But to add to the Evan Bayh speculation, there's this, from his birthday party-fundraiser in Boston Monday night:

Introducing Obama, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry said: "I asked Barack Obama what he wanted for his birthday. He said, 'Indiana, Colorado and Virginia,' " said Kerry, referring to three potential swing states Obama hopes to win in the Nov. 4 election.

Since both Colorado Governor Bill Ritter and Sen. Ken Salazar have said they haven't been asked for documentation, that says to me Obama will pick either Kaine or Bayh. It would be crazy to pick Kaine who is personally anti-choice and has backed abortion restrictions. Between the Hillary supporters he's alienated and others who won't vote for a wishy-washy on abortion candidate, Kaine's negative impact on the ticket is obvious. That leaves Evan Bayh.

I suspect he will drop hints at his joint appearance with Bayh today in Indiana. Then his campaign can do a final round of polling before he makes a final decision.

One question: What if his final polling results indicate it has to be Hillary? [More...]

In 2004, John Kerry announced that John Edwards would be his running mate three weeks before the convention. If Obama waits until he returns from Hawaii, he'll be two weeks out from the convention.

Obama's VP staff is sitting in Chicago, chomping at the bit to know who he chooses so they can get to work.

Both Obama and McCain have made huge ad buys for the Olympics. That would be a great time to air some ads showing the complete ticket.

So, will it be tomorrow or next week? Will it be Evan Bayh? Or will Obama cool his jets for a week and ponder his final choice and the latest polling results while in Hawaii? And finally, will McCain beat Obama to the draw and name his VP candidate while Obama's on vacation, or wait until the Democratic Convention in Denver to try to steal a little of the limelight from him?

< Jose Medellin Executed in Texas, No Reprieve from Supreme Court | Credit Card Company Abuse >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Bayh gets bad ratings on choice (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:11:09 AM EST
    too, from a couple of organizations.  Is he just somewhat better than Kaine on this issue?

    Yes, just somewhat (none / 0) (#2)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:16:18 AM EST
    He'll support the platform, though. He wants to be President, after all, and he'll have to really be pro-choice in 2012 if he wants to be nominated (best case scenario for him, of course).

    Why would he support the platform (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:20:48 AM EST
    when the Dems support candidates for Congress like Casey to vote on SCOTUS?  Or like presumptive nominees who want women to counsel with their spouses and ministers?  Etc.

    I prefer candidates who support my stance on the issues for solid reasons, not the platform just because it's there.  Platforms can go pffft anytime.  And even when they're platforms, they don't mean a thing to Dems who will do anything to win.


    I agree (none / 0) (#12)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:25:01 AM EST
    But honestly, Al Gore made the same kind of shift over the years. Bayh is a pol, not a moralist.

    Ah, then there may be hope (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:33:00 AM EST
    with only one moralist on the ticket.

    I think Obama is primarily a pol too. (none / 0) (#32)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:34:14 AM EST
    Snark? (none / 0) (#55)
    by Upstart Crow on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 05:26:49 AM EST
    That's a snark, right?

    and garden (none / 0) (#70)
    by weltec2 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:45:19 AM EST
    would you explain this please. What sort of shift did Al Gore make? Of course everyone shifts. It's part of our growth process. But what are you specifically referring to?

    The VP (5.00 / 3) (#58)
    by Steve M on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 06:32:17 AM EST
    can become President without being nominated for the office.  That's why people worry about someone who is squishy on choice.

    That argument applies to Kaine (none / 0) (#107)
    by waldenpond on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 09:52:55 AM EST
    also doesn't it?  Bayh was suggested when Kerry ran.  Bayh voted for Indiana's abortion counseling law (DU, see comment 43) and the Vitter amendment (02/08).

    He won't pick Clinton (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Valhalla on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:16:32 AM EST
    The campaign is like a gambler who's down on his luck but just knows the next turn of the cards will be the big win.  There really still seems to be that sort of faith floating around.  I think they still haven't fully left the primaries yet, where it seemed that everything Obama touched turned to gold.

    If he was 10 pts down in the polls sure, but but hovering around a tie isn't dangerous enough that he/they would think they can't pull it off without her.

    I doubt McCain will announce his VP during the Dem convention -- that thing he did where he tried to give a big sort of 'kick off the GE' speech on the last day of the primaries really tanked.  Even Fox gave it the thumbs down, pretty much.  I wonder, if the McCain camp is thinking Bayh is a pretty sure thing, whether McCain won't go ahead and announce while Obama's on vacation and the competition for screentime/love and kisses from the MSM is lower.

    Just an aside, but why is Obama going on vacation? (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:17:28 AM EST
    I think it looks bad, and the campaign is happening NOW.

    I agree (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:21:13 AM EST
    It's probably the worst time to take a vacation, especially with Republicans calling for Congress to reconvene to pass an energy bill. McCain has been slamming vacationing congresspersons for two days.

    I suspect it's because his kids have to be back in school before Labor Day and he thought with the nomination sewn up, it would be his last chance before the election.

    Seems like bad timing to me though.


    Then Michelle can take the kids (5.00 / 4) (#27)
    by nycstray on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:33:07 AM EST
    I think they are both old enough to understand that dad has to "work". It's not just bad timing, but judgment. He's gonna have to make sacrifices as President, family vacations may be one of them.

    He doesn't want either of his daughters (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:34:30 AM EST
    running for President and claiming she was raised by a single Mom.

    lol!~ funny thing is (none / 0) (#43)
    by nycstray on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:44:01 AM EST
    as a child, my dad worked. Mom spent a lot of time entertaining us during school down time. That included Disneyland (I was an Honorary Mouseketeer!) and the beach (SoCal living). I also remember dad time after work and on weekends. I'd say that's pretty "typical". Obama may get some "ahhh's" if he uses his kids, but reality is that these are decisions families make all the time. Most don't have his luxury though.

    Meeska, mooska -- me, too.:-) (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:52:50 AM EST
    And now you've got me recalling how incredibly incompetent my parents were at taking us on vacation, as we did it so rarely.

    It's the stuff of infamous family stories.  The sibs and I once got started telling them at a gathering, and our kids' jaws just dropped.  They looked at us with new respect for our ability to survive family vacations from h*ll.  The stuff you see in the movies?  That's nothin'.


    My brothers once neglected to tell our folks (5.00 / 3) (#49)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 02:15:39 AM EST
    I hadn't climber into the back seat.  My dad drove 30 minutes, then they confessed and all returned to retrieve me from a gas station somewhere in CO.  

    couldn't happen now.... (none / 0) (#65)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:15:30 AM EST
    you would just have to TEXT Mom and let her know you didn't finish peeing yet.....

    Of course my Aunt and Uncle wouldn't stop for the kids to pee back in the 60's.  My cousins were both boys and their mother just made them pee in a bottle and she emptied it out the car window as they travelled down the road.  I don't think that convertible behind them was too pleased.


    Six boys in my family (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:40:54 PM EST
    so it was slow going.  Six overactive bladders (what is it with boys' bladders?:-)  At least my folks stopped -- but it meant a lot of stops along roads to send boys to bushes.

    I recall well the time that my mom freeked when she saw a lot of folks passing by, pointing and laughing.  The boys all had lined up -- but not facing the bushes.  Facing the road.


    um, (none / 0) (#69)
    by ccpup on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:41:45 AM EST
    no, we weren't.



    Very bad (none / 0) (#18)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:28:37 AM EST
    Democrats always seem to make this mistake.

    Really? I was wondering (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:34:11 AM EST
    how many have done this.  Kerry's windsurfing, I recall.  Was that several days or a week away?  I don't recall other candidates doing this, though.

    And certainly not twice in only a few months.


    To me it's three (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by waldenpond on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 09:57:12 AM EST
    I think of part of his European trip as a vacation.  All of the pictures?  It was like watching a relatives slide show of their vacation.

    I was also thinking of Ned Lamont (none / 0) (#42)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:43:52 AM EST
    Hmm, iirc the Kerry windsurfing (none / 0) (#96)
    by brodie on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:52:22 AM EST
    flap occurred when he was taking a few days off while the Rs held their convention.  A top aide cautioned him not to go out on his board, and JK assured her there would be no problem.

    He thought he'd given the press the slip, and went out on his board, only to be caught by photogs a good distance away with their fancy high-powered cameras.  Result was an immediate visual gift to the Goopers who had some fun with it at their confab and in a very predictable and effective ad.  

    Not a very smart pol.

    Fortunately, Obama doesn't windsurf, nor does Bayh.  So long as O stays away from bowling alleys, I don't think there'll be a Kerry type problem.  

    But I don't want him to pull a Lamont -- if he's out too long the Rs will be certain to fill the media vacuum with their propaganda and probably pull out another round of stupid juvenile negative adverting.  


    windsurfing (none / 0) (#102)
    by Little Fish on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 09:24:25 AM EST
    I just looked it up, it was 4 days over Father's Day weekend.  

    I think it makes sense. (none / 0) (#90)
    by Jerrymcl89 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:40:31 AM EST
    If Obama really needs a few days off the trail, the first couple days of the Olympics are the time to do it. Nobody would be paying attention to him anyway.

    Wouldn't it be something (5.00 / 3) (#30)
    by weltec2 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:34:10 AM EST
    if he were having cold feet. As Senator he got to run for Pres and he hadn't even done that much. In fact, he spent very little time actually being Senator. But now, he is very closed to being Pres. Running for this and running for that... he was good at that. But now he will actually have to setle down and BE something. Pretty scary for someone who has never actually been any one thing for very long.

    Vaguely (none / 0) (#14)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:25:46 AM EST
    Reminiscent of Lamont taking time off right when Lieberman was hitting him the hardest.

    Dear Sen. Obama (none / 0) (#15)
    by Little Fish on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:26:13 AM EST
    Please don't windsurf.


    Little Fish.


    what difference does it make (none / 0) (#95)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:50:49 AM EST
    whether it is "wind surfing" or frolicking on the beach in Hawaii?  There will be pictures published.  Weren't there pictures from his spring beach vacation as well?  And, don't you think the repugs will be able to make good use of the pictures from both of these vacations to help gain support from the hard-working blue-collar dems who would prefer to see their politicains working to make life here better (and earn their taxpayer provide paycheck) instead of always being off on vacation, or fact-finding junkets, or clearing brush in Texas?

    well (none / 0) (#103)
    by Little Fish on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 09:25:59 AM EST
    I feel this is ill-timed and linked to a video pointing out what happened the last time a dem presidential candidate took a vacation before the election.  I suspect this will get a lot of play in repub-land this next week and beyond regardless of what he does.  

    It's just not good timing.


    add to this (none / 0) (#104)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 09:33:06 AM EST
    Obama's claim that he doesn't have time to hold joint town hall type meetings with McCain because tere just hasn't been the time available for it.  And, that Barack can better spend his time goimg out speaking directly to the voters.

    I guess he spent a lot of his recent time speaking directly to the voters in Germany, France and the UK.  I won't say anything about Iraq and Afghanastan because he had to do that based on McCain's attacks.  But, I don't recall McCain suggesting his resume was lacking a recent trip to Paris.

    But, there are voters in Hawaii he can speak to.  So, let's see how much of that he does there.  Hawaii is  a swing state this year right?  He needs to make sure he carries the lectoral votes there, right?


    Because, andgarden, events have taught (none / 0) (#99)
    by prittfumes on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:57:40 AM EST
    Obama that he can do whatever he wants whenever he wants.

    Hoosier spouse says Bayh (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:49:45 AM EST
    is a major proponent of expanding the death penalty, Jeralyn.

    Not gonna be Clinton (5.00 / 2) (#56)
    by ruffian on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 06:23:25 AM EST
    Admitting he needs her to win would be the same as admitting he should not be the nominee. He'd rather lose than do that.

    As time goes by, I get less and less enchanted with any of the non-Hillary alternatives except Clark.

    Bayh or Clark (none / 0) (#61)
    by andrys on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:00:19 AM EST
    would be incentives for me, as reasonable, experienced (in governing or leading) candidates.

      When Clinton said that Iran leaders planning a nuclear attack on Iran should 'remember' that we have the power to obliterate them and that though it was a terrible thing to say, this could deter them from actually dropping a nuclear bomb on Israel and making a tragic mistake -- Bayh defended her statement, rewording it in the best possible way (against its being wildly and lovingly misquoted).  I remember thinking he was very good.

      What Clark said about McCain's time as a prisoner not really being experience that would count toward being commander in chief (outside of basic character), he said what many of us were thinking and it just seemed common sense to me and I was glad he stuck by what he said, even if Obama didn't.  The guy's got experience Obama could use in the GE but doesn't seem to be on his short list at all.


    Whoops - Iran plans to attack ISRAEL (none / 0) (#62)
    by andrys on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:01:10 AM EST
    I guess I was thinking Iran leadership could be self-destructive  :-)

    When I see Bayh I do like him (none / 0) (#66)
    by ruffian on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:19:54 AM EST
    He seems very practical, and makes sense to me, and his credentials are good as an ex-gov and 10 yr Senator.  I'm sure I would be fine with that choice.  Maybe I'd get excited as they build him up during the campaign.

     It just would be nice to have someone that did not have to be "sold" to people.


    Clark (none / 0) (#68)
    by weltec2 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:41:06 AM EST
    is waaayyy too strong and way to experienced for Obama. Obama would be completely overshadowed. No, Evan Bayh is just fine by himself. What really makes me nervous is the fact that Evan is overshadowed by Susan Bayh... UC Berkeley & USC Law School. She is a very bright lady and her influence with pharmaceuticals would probably overshadow any attempt by Obama to provide affordable medication for those who need it.

    Clark has virtually no (none / 0) (#98)
    by brodie on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:56:30 AM EST
    political experience, just a few months in 03-4 mostly not in the spotlight since he'd skipped IA.  His remarks about McCain's military experience just weren't politically smart -- too easily spun in the McC-loving media as a personal attack on his military career.  It was an unfortunate distraction from the TeamO message, a rookie mistake by Clark.  

    He might be a nat'l security advisor or SecDef in the 2d term for O, but not VP.


    Clark has tons (none / 0) (#113)
    by oldpro on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 05:36:54 PM EST
    of what I would call political experience...both in the White House and at NATO...not to mention in the US Army (there is no more political organization than the military).  Those experiences also add up to political/diplomatic experience in spades.

    Perhaps what you meant was that Wes Clark has very limited campaign experience, especially in running for office as a candeidate himself.

    With that I would agree.

    He's been on the campaign trail for the past 4 years, tho...mostly helping congressional and gubernatorial Democratic candidates in their campaigns.

    I  wouldn't underestimate him at this stage of his 'political' development.


    Excuse me... (none / 0) (#115)
    by weltec2 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 10:55:23 PM EST
    but when you are a General it is all political all the time. You do not get to be a General if you are not political.

    I'll say it again (5.00 / 5) (#75)
    by Steve M on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:56:19 AM EST
    Three Democrats voted for Bush's 2003 tax cut, which passed the Senate 51-49.

    Ben Nelson, Zell Miller, and Evan Bayh.

    Even John McCain voted against it!

    This is not a pick progressives should be content with.

    Also, (5.00 / 2) (#83)
    by pie on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:13:34 AM EST
    from 10 Things You Didn't Know About Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh:

    8. In 1998, Bayh won one of the state's U.S. Senate seats. He won re-election in 2004 with 62 percent of the vote. He is known as a centrist who is able to connect with conservative voters. From 2001 to 2005, he was chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council.

    Hmmm.  Why should dems want a candidate who connects to conservatives?!  Conservatives don't connect to my democratic ideals.


    So we can (none / 0) (#81)
    by pie on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:06:26 AM EST
    put part of the blame for this economy on Bayh? ;)

    I wonder if he regrets that vote.  Probably not, since he was reelected in 2004.


    As I say, Bayh is a pretty bad pick, (none / 0) (#100)
    by brodie on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 09:02:26 AM EST
    except for most of the rest.

    Your Biden wouldn't be bad, except that he's been in Washington since even before Sam Ervin started looking into Watergate.  Not exactly someone who's going to be consistent with the winning theme of Change -- the Rs would have a field day with that one.

    He also has a gaffe problem, something not uncommon with people who love to talk.  

    As for HRC, Bill's comments of the other day should put that one to bed permanently.  Only way this happens is if O waits to choose, and in the next 2 wks or so his poll #s in key states really start to tank.  Not likely to happen though.


    Heh (none / 0) (#106)
    by Steve M on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 09:52:21 AM EST
    Well, if you think a good reason to reject the best candidate for VP is "something Bill Clinton said the other day," then I'd respectfully suggest that your eye is not on the ball.  This pick is a test of whether Obama can focus on winning and look past all the random slights and faux outrages that his supporters just can't seem to get over.

    The idea that there is no one out there more acceptable to progressives than a centrist tax-cutter who would cost us a Senate seat is just ridiculous.  You seriously think the Republicans, who are running John Frickin' McCain, would be able to run effective ads that say "Obama claims he wants change, but his VP nominee has been in Washington a long time?"  Give me a break!


    I guess at this point all we can do (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Anne on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:09:47 AM EST
    is wait for the other shoe to drop; for all we know, Obama's trying to time this so that everyone's on vacation, NBC is busy with the Olympics and the coverage on the it's-not-Hillary backlash will be nonexistent.

    I sometimes have to marvel at the fact that a year ago, I was convinced that the Democrats could, with confidence, nominate a candidate who would be a real, honest-to-God Democrat, who, in turn, could pick a VP who would strengthen that brand, not blur it further.  Bush's ratings are in the basement, 80% of the country is unhappy with the direction of the country, and instead of a nominee strongly moving a Democratic agenda, all we've seen since the end of May has been movement to the right, willingness to abandon promises made during the primary, and talking points that could be coming right out of the GOP's mouth.  Why?  And now, the nominee-in-waiting is looking at a VP who may be a sop to too many right-wing issues.  Swell.

    Yeah, yeah, I know all about balance, and since Obama has been wrongly labeled ultra-liberal (makes no sense to me), he thinks he needs someone who clearly isn't, but the reality is that we have one nominee who is center-right-and-still-moving-in-that-direction looking to pick someone as a running mate who doesn't balance that, but mirrors it.

    If I was sure I was going to sit out the presidential vote, nothing Obama is doing in picking a VP is moving me to change my mind.

    Kaine: born in MI, lived in MO, (none / 0) (#7)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:21:42 AM EST
    missionary to Honduras, fluent in Spanish.  

    Born in Minnesota. Dad was a welder (none / 0) (#11)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:24:46 AM EST
    and owned a small business.  

    Sorry, but Kaine's an awful choice (none / 0) (#51)
    by SueBonnetSue on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 02:35:06 AM EST
    He's not very popular in Virginia now and he's got that weird wandering eyebrow thing.  

    Of course Hillary is the best choice.  THE BEST


    I agree re Clinton. Just (none / 0) (#111)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 11:10:07 AM EST
    pointing out some qualities of Kaine that may appeal to voters and/or Obama in making his choice for VP.

    Huh? (none / 0) (#9)
    by Maize on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:21:59 AM EST
    Kaine is pro-choice.

    No he isn't. (none / 0) (#10)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:24:08 AM EST
    Yes he is (1.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Maize on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:25:02 AM EST
    He is personally pro-life and legislatively pro-choice. In that regard, he is no different from John Kerry and Bill Clinton.

    In 2005 he said (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:29:04 AM EST
    "I have a faith-based opposition to abortion" link

    What does that mean to accept the law of the land? If we get another right-winger on the Supreme Court and Roe v. Wade is overturned, won't that be the law of the land and won't he be anti-choice again?


    Also (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:31:02 AM EST
    More recently

    He backs a parental consent law in Virginia which has a judicial bypass. He supports a ban on "partial birth abortions so long as there is an exception for the life and health of the mother". The Obama vice presidential prospect also favors an "informed consent provision" in Virginia which requires abortion providers to "give women information about a whole series of things, the health consequences, et cetera, and information about adoption."

    "Those, I have supported," said Kaine.  "But I don't think ultimately we ought to be criminalizing abortion."

    Bayh initially voted for notification (none / 0) (#109)
    by waldenpond on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 10:18:07 AM EST
    Bayh initially voted for S. 406 Child Custody Protection Act on July 25, 2006, then was 1 of 8 that flipped in (I think) Sept.

    Indiana's abortion counseling law, Bayh signed in 1995 even though the Dems had enough votes to uphold his veto, and it was upheld in 2003.


    Or, more likely (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:41:58 AM EST
    than completely overturning Roe v. Wade, which the Repubs need almost as much as women do, it will face further restrictions.

    And then my concern is that guys like Kaine and Bayh -- and Obama -- won't fight further restrictions.

    The restrictions allowed already have left Roe v. Wade almost nonexistent for most women in many states, including mine.


    I'm trying very hard not to be sexist here, (5.00 / 8) (#59)
    by samanthasmom on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 06:42:59 AM EST
    but I do think that women understand the nuances better here. I am personally against abortion so I have never had one. I was faced with a difficult pregnancy health-wise and opted to continue the pregnancy. It was my choice and although I certainly discussed it with my husband, that, too, was my choice. I think every woman should have that same opportunity to decide for herself when the situation presents itself, and I would not judge her badly for making a different decision than I. That's being pro-choice. Being pro-choice does not necessarily make you a cheerleader for abortion. It just means that someone else's decision is none of your business. When a candidate starts asking for rules that limit a woman's choice, then he's interfering in her personal business, and he's not pro-choice. I don't care who that puts on the "wishy-washy" list.

    That was very (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by pie on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:55:40 AM EST
    well put!  It's not so hard to understand, is it.

    Or fight to get rid of any restrictions (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by Valhalla on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:44:54 AM EST
    It's easy to support Roe v Wade in 2008 with how well it's been gutted over the years.  Not criminalizing it doesn't mean a whole lot.

    I was looking at Bayh's NARAL ratings a bit last night.  In 2003 he was scoring in the mid-fifties, then by 2006 he was up to the 80s.

    That's not nec. a big positive, though.  As anti-abortion activists and Presidents have chipped away at Roe, the legislation to be voted on has grown more and more blatantly restrictive, and easier for someone who's against it but not psychotically so to get a more positive score.

    Tepid support of the right to choose just isn't good enough.  I want someone who will not only hold the line, but work to reverse some of the worst restrictions, esp. the ones where Congress votes to restrict funding, which affects access, and then turns around like the cat who swallowed the canary and says 'Who Me??  I'm pro-choice!'.


    To flesh that out (none / 0) (#23)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:31:34 AM EST
    Kaine, a Roman Catholic who worked as a missionary in Honduras reiterated his personal opposition to abortion, but maintained the practice should not be outlawed.

    When asked if he'd like to see the Supreme Court overturn Roe the Governor answered, "I don't think the Supreme Court should." He continued, "Roe vs. Wade is ultimately about saying that there is a realm of personal liberty for people to make this decision."

    While saying that he supports Roe and that he does not want to criminalize abortion, Kaine voiced support for three abortion restrictions.

    He backs a parental consent law in Virginia which has a judicial bypass. He supports a ban on "partial birth abortions so long as there is an exception for the life and health of the mother". The Obama vice presidential prospect also favors an "informed consent provision" in Virginia which requires abortion providers to "give women information about a whole series of things, the health consequences, et cetera, and information about adoption."

    "Those, I have supported," said Kaine.  "But I don't think ultimately we ought to be criminalizing abortion."


    We also have to remember their apointments (none / 0) (#35)
    by nycstray on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:37:12 AM EST
    off the courts. Especially when you get into expanding faith based funding. Look how Bush played that one.

    Kaine has said (none / 0) (#24)
    by Maize on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:32:09 AM EST
    No, he and too many Dems (5.00 / 4) (#36)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:38:30 AM EST
    support the successive Supreme Court restrictions on Roe v. Wade.  That is not supporting Roe v. Wade.  No matter what he says.  We can think for ourselves.  

    Substantively, he is different (none / 0) (#16)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:27:58 AM EST
    Neither Kerry nor Clinton supported notification laws, just to name one thing.

    Kaine is a dealbreaker ... (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:44:15 AM EST
    for a lot of Dems.  Not only does he support parental notification, but he also opposes the right of gay couples to adopt.

    Obama would be stupid to pick him.  


    That second issue is a serious problem for me (none / 0) (#45)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:46:09 AM EST
    Heck, even Bob Casey changed his mind about that. (I suspect Kaine would too if he were to get the nod).

    And he's also (none / 0) (#71)
    by lilburro on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:47:29 AM EST
    a gay-baiter.  

    This kind of crap in 92 is one thing, but in 2008 I expect a lot more from Dems.


    Kaine, not really (none / 0) (#52)
    by SueBonnetSue on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 02:38:25 AM EST
    Kaine is the not really candidate.  He says he's pro choice, but not really.  He says he supports gays, but not really.  He says he's anti increasing taxes, but not really.  We here in VA are not too happy with our Governor.  His latest bone headed idea was to raise taxes on GAS, of all things.  He's not the sharpest tool in the shed.  

    But (none / 0) (#64)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:15:12 AM EST
    hey doesn't he sound like the perfect choice for Obama then?

    But Kaine has explicitly said (none / 0) (#20)
    by Maize on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:30:13 AM EST
    that he supports Roe v. Wade.

    He has also sd. he favors parental (none / 0) (#22)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:31:28 AM EST
    notification and supports banning partial birth abortion.  

    Exactly (none / 0) (#25)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:32:16 AM EST
    And my definition of pro-choice does not include room for those issue positions.

    BTW, Bayh is just about the same on the issue (none / 0) (#28)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:33:19 AM EST
    And so he isn't really pro-choice either.

    Two-thirds of Americans (none / 0) (#29)
    by Maize on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:33:35 AM EST
    want to ban partial-birth abortion. Does that make two-thirds of America anti-choice?

    Yes (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:36:12 AM EST
    Well, okay then (none / 0) (#37)
    by Maize on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:38:34 AM EST
    Assuming you can make that kind of judgement (none / 0) (#38)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:40:06 AM EST
    from answers to a poll. And you cannot.

    If you ask people (none / 0) (#39)
    by Maize on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:41:22 AM EST
    if they favor "abortion on demand," two-thirds say no. If you ask people if they favor a woman's right to decide whether or not to terminate a pregnancy, two-thirds say yes.

    Like it or not, it's that middle third that swings elections.


    But not on that issue alone (none / 0) (#41)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:43:07 AM EST
    and so there is absolutely no reason to settle for a candidate (we have not, BTW) or a running mate who isn't 100% pro-choice.

    Third Way Activism for Obama (none / 0) (#48)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 02:12:39 AM EST
    Who knew?

    Truthfully, I agree with this.  You ask people the same question framed differently, they give different answers, what's sad is those who have decided now that politics is a battle for framing questions in ways that most benefits your political ambition.

    I think people are smarter than that.


    When are the Olympics over? (none / 0) (#17)
    by nycstray on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:28:08 AM EST
    Would he announce during? And they BOTH have ad buys?! Oy. Are Olympic buys nation or can they just buy the swing states?

    I don't know why there would be a joint appearance with Bayh just for hints. He's not that exciting, so it will be non news quick. Hillary campaigning for Obama while he's on the beach will prob get more on the cycles. Can he wait until the Olympics are over? If it's Bayh or a couple of his other possibles, I don't see enough of an excitement level to challenge the Olympics. Just watching news cycles these days as an "average" person, Campaign coverage is mid broadcast and not so much. Unless they have something "good".

    Here's the deal. Obama and family (none / 0) (#50)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 02:17:00 AM EST
    go to Hawaii on vacation.  On a Friday night during the Olympics, John Kerry announces the VP pick is Hillary Clinton.  

    Im ok with that. (none / 0) (#53)
    by Thanin on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 02:51:50 AM EST
    Yeah me too (none / 0) (#54)
    by SoCalLiberal on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 03:24:13 AM EST
    Not me (5.00 / 2) (#63)
    by cmugirl on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:04:53 AM EST
    He is toxic for her.

    With Pelosi standing by his side (none / 0) (#77)
    by Lahdee on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:59:03 AM EST
    From an interview with Reuters
    Pelosi was asked whether the Obama campaign had signaled Clinton was out of the running because the New York senator and ex-presidential candidate has been slotted to speak on the Tuesday of the Aug 25-28 Democratic convention. <snip>

    "I think convention schedules can be changed," said Pelosi, who will chair the Minnesota convention.


    Republican convention is in Minnesota (none / 0) (#89)
    by gram cracker on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:31:25 AM EST
    Ha! So Pelosi is chairing the Republican convention.  Now that is really reaching across the aisle.  

    Guess this campaign has (none / 0) (#91)
    by Lahdee on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:42:28 AM EST
    gotten long for even Reuters.

    Barak Obama running mate (none / 0) (#57)
    by katyfitz on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 06:30:13 AM EST
    Because it is so important to have an overwhelming majority in the Senate, I wish that Obama would choose someone who is likely to be replaced by another Democrat (should he choose a senator as his running mate). Choosing Bayh might well lead to the election of a Republican in his place. Wouldn't want that!!

    to avoid that problem (none / 0) (#73)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:52:01 AM EST
    Obama would probably be just as comfortable selecting a Republican senator.  How about Susan Collins?  It looks like she will be re-elected.  We could get her out of the senate and Obama could have his female running mate.  Susan claims to be a moderate anyway.  Sounds like a win-win

    Obama is going on vacation (none / 0) (#67)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:35:08 AM EST
    because the Olympics start on Friday.  And, MSNBC (the chief media arm for the Obama campaign) will have to cover the Olympics to earn revenue.  They won't have time to spend cheerleading for Obama 24/7 for the next two weeks.

    I just have a really bad feeling (5.00 / 3) (#72)
    by ccpup on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:50:22 AM EST
    about this.  He got away with his trip to the Caribbean in May because it WAS after a bruising Primary Season and, okay, the Primaries were still going on and it's okay for him to take a break (although Hillary soldiered on and took her break AFTER the Primaries actually finished, but I digress).

    But that was before the Obama as Celebrity eg. someone who gets a lot for having done nothing Theme started.  That was before his missteps and flip-flops and before the Republicans started turning their sights on him.  This is NOT the time to take a break.  Especially when most Americans -- you know, the votes he needs? -- CAN'T even drive to the Grand Canyon or Disneyland let alone jet to the Caribbean or Hawaii.

    This decision of his -- 'cause it certainly wasn't his campaign's (and if it was, the Dems are in worse shape than I thought) -- plays into the evolving Dilettante/Celebrity/Inexperienced (as in "can't handle the pressure") theme the Republicans are constructing.  And Barack is giving them more ammunition!

    At least the SDs will have a chance to see a real pro at work as Hillary hits the stump and plays the Good Soldier.

    Expect Barack's numbers to dip after she leaves and he returns.


    Don't worry..... (5.00 / 5) (#76)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:58:52 AM EST
    Michelle will take care of everything when they come back.  She'll just go out and talk about how they feel the average person's pain.  She will be able to talk about how difficult it is financially after you have finished paying $10,000 for your kids music and dance lessons to be able to take them on a regular little standard american vacation to Hawaii.  I mean, everyone jets off to Hawaii for a little refresher now and then, right.  But, it's just getting harder and harder now with the prices going up.

    Maybe the press will be able to get a pic of Michelle in Hawaii spending her stimulus check on the nice set of $600 earrings she talked about.  I mean the media did tell us all about Condi's shoe buying trip during Katrina, right?

    Oh, and remember when the BIG complaint was how the primaries just HAD TO END becaus ethere was so LITTLE time to campaign against McCain?


    remember? (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by ccpup on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:04:48 AM EST
    I still find myself moving into a rage induced fetal position at the mere thought of it!

    Ugh and Grrrr just don't cover it anymore.  I'm now reduced to Sigh.


    Incredible point!!!! (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by Shainzona on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:28:36 AM EST
    "Oh, and remember when the BIG complaint was how the primaries just HAD TO END because there was so LITTLE time to campaign against McCain?"

    But that was then and this is now...when words and hope and change no longer magtter.


    Hmm... could this trip be part of (none / 0) (#101)
    by prittfumes on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 09:23:48 AM EST
    acting presidential? Maybe O has already made his VP decision and now he can go off on vacation, leaving the announcement to an underling. I still don't believe it will be Hillary and if he were to offer it to her, I don't think she would take it.

    McCain will take his time in his VP choice. (none / 0) (#80)
    by Saul on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:05:37 AM EST
    Some say he will pick his VP at the convention.
    So if Obama does not pick Hilary then who should McCain pick?  McCain will try to pick someone out there that will bring the Hilary voters over.

    Anybody got list of possible choices for McCain that would lure the Hilary voters?

    Heh (none / 0) (#87)
    by cmugirl on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:26:53 AM EST
    That would get people to WATCH the convention - the suspense.

    Although the printing bills alone on printing up several variations of signs with the VP's name on it would be astronomical.  Good thing the RNC has plenty of money.


    I believe if Obama (none / 0) (#105)
    by americanincanada on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 09:42:29 AM EST
    does not pick Hillary and goes with a man, McCain will buck the conventional wisdom and pick a woman. there are several he could choose from but my thought is that it will be Gov. Sarah Palin. She already, as recently as yesterday, went at Obama on energy.

    I think it will be Palin, too, (none / 0) (#110)
    by samanthasmom on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 10:34:24 AM EST
    and this recent skerfuffle about her former brother-in-law to me shows that some people are nervous about her being the choice.

    Champing... (none / 0) (#85)
    by incaseofrain on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:23:00 AM EST
    The colloquialism is champing at the bit, not chomping.

    Just sayin'...


    As I said on Monday (none / 0) (#92)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:44:20 AM EST
    I don't think he is announcing anything today.  

    I think Jack Reed is still a possibility.  As is Wesley Clark.  

    I don't think that Hillary is an option at this point, unless Bill simply cannot keep his mouth shut at all anymore.  

    What about Jem Webb (none / 0) (#94)
    by downtownted on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:45:37 AM EST
    If he decides against HRC, and it seems he will, what happened to the guy who gives him Virginia and the chance to bring home the "Scots-Irish" of Appalachia. You know those white guys (and white women of Pennsylvania, Ohio, W.VA., etc.

    Webb (none / 0) (#97)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:53:49 AM EST
    said he didn't want the job.

    Teresa is correct... (none / 0) (#114)
    by oldpro on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 05:48:16 PM EST
    AND...he barely won a Senate seat we might have a terrible time regaining...want to give that up?

    No guarantee Senator Webb gives the ticket anything but military and 'grownup' creds.