wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

For VP: Richardson, as has been mentioned elsewhere. His background is vast, and he would be a great support to Obama and an asset to any administration. He'd probably feel compelled to shave his beard, which is a shame. I think it suits him.

For Hillary, what's so awful about serving in the US Senate? With a Dem majority, she could be an extremely effective legislator and still be a national leader. But if she wants a "promotion" from Obama (and I'm not sure that that's what it would be), why not Sec'y of Health & Human Resources?

eva
don't speak for me! sexism is not my issue

Obama should not choose a running mate as a way to get more votes.
Even if such a move would be good for the general election, it could be very bad for the 4 years of leadership.

Obama needs to choose someone who "gets it" and can work well under him. If she's the best one for the job, fine. But if there's another person who better qualifies, that needs to be the choice.

#55, Voter
mc and hjs will probably rightly say that sexism is a lot more subtle than racism, and that domestic violence against women is understated and under-recorded
having said that, racism is also alive and frighteningly well in this country (check the prison stats for black men imprisoned for minor offenses), and I wholeheartedly agree with your final two paragraphs. HRC blew an early lead, in part through race-baiting, which may optimistically that the country is changing.

For the Senator Clinton supporters whom feel their candidate should be offered the vice presidency because she got a “raw deal” from being female. (Especially #37, Orla)
When were you last followed under suspicion or asked to leave a retail store because of your sex?
When were you last stop, frisked, pulled over, or made to lay face down in the street because of your sex?
When were you last lynched, wrongfully convicted, assumed guilty, or “warned” because of your sex?
When were you last denied a job or place to live based on your sex?

Senator Clinton hails from one of the biggest political brands in the country. Senator Clinton had name recognition far beyond that of Senator Clinton. Senator Clinton has the white skin she more than subtly made clear would make her far more palatable to the American public. Senator Clinton had the overwhelming assumption in her favor that she would be the nominee at the beginning of the process.

Senator Clinton was not at a disadvantage; between her and Obama, she had nearly every advantage. The senator does not deserve to be the VP nominee. From her behavior later in the primaries, she barely deserves to be the senator from the state of New York.

Kathleen Sebelius for VP. She's similar in ideolgy to Bam and brings executive experience to the ticket. Success in Novemnber doesn't require a woman VP but she's the best in my opinion (barring Edwards of course).

#50:
"His won't work."
Crystal ball? I don't know if it makes sense to pronounce that it won't work until he's had an opportunity to implement it.
What I do know, from past experience, was how Hillary tanked the health care project she should never have been given in the first place.
Nepotism was never a good idea, even when it favors a "victimized woman" and you're seeing the backlash now. A front runner with name recognition and more money at the start is now unable to concede and millions of dollars in debt.

I know Hilary's a lawyer, but has she actually ever issued a federal case opinion?

This would be a _very_ tough sell to Congress, and expend a lot of Obama early-admin capital, imho.

DC Federal Circuit Judge Gladys Kessler would be my choice to straighten up that screwy court. Also a tough fight, but at least she has a voluminous and sterling record.

#
#48, Miriam
Right on
#49, I agree that the "What does Hillary want?" line underscored the failure of her campaign to make it about "we the people."
Instead, it was all about Hillary. For some people, that really worked. But most people aren't into hero-worship, esp. if the "heroes" are the Clintons.
Obama's campaign was clever in asking us to get involved, and making it about what we can do going forward.
I gave 'em my vote THREE times. You live and you learn...

#26 and #41, cabinet level position to work for health care will only work if he comes up with a more workable plan. His won't work.

Are any of you people from New York? I recall just a few years ago HRC swearing on a stack of bibles that her greatest desire in life was to serve the interests of New Yorkers and fight for our jobs, etc.

Is being a Senator from NY such a dreadful job that "bucket of warm spit" is an upgrade? Even a cabinet post like HHS? Come on.

Last night, I heard HRC say something like, "People are wondering, 'what does Hillary want'?" You know what? I could care less what she wants. What did Jesse want? More to the point, what did Jesse get? What did his wrath cost us? Were we going to defeat Reagan in 84 if only Jesse had gotten what we wanted? Bush in 88?

The media is promoting a myth that there's some kind of negotiation going on. There is not. There are a bunch of ex-HRC staffers looking for work, and the BHO campaign has the good sense to woo her supporters over. Her one chance to help with unifying the party was tossed over-board last night with her ill-conceived and very un-leaderlike "No decision, but please go to my website" nonsense.

Best suggestion heard this a.m. was for Pres. Obama to appoint Hillary to the Supreme Court. She is just what the Boys and the country need.
It will be a great honor to her and a great service to us all.

Miriam

Helen and ab,

That's right, we, as women, are the voting majority. However, I find the assumptions put forth in this segment that women don't vote on issues, but for a woman candidate regardless of what her politics are, wrongheaded and even offensive. Examples are the ideas that (1) women are somehow disenfranchised if Hillary is not on the Democratic ticket, and (2) McCain's putting "a woman" on the ticket would draw the "women's vote". Many women identify with Obama's politics, and would never vote for McCain because of his. Putting a woman on the McCain ticket would not change what he stands for. Or, as ab so succinctly put it, "not all women vote as mindless drones just voting for a woman only because she is a woman".

Ooos. OK, Cheney is only 5 years older than Bush. But he sure _seems_ "much older."

I can see peoples' point that Obama would be wisely Lincolnesque to have Clinton inside the tent. That would be some feat of candidate-wrangling!

Her campaign decisions, especially this last ungraceful exit, no matter the pressure, makes me fear how well she would make decisions as Pres.

Yes: Caroline #35 and Eva #44, I aggree

But I don't think this needs to be her only shot at the oval office. as a VP she could have another chance at it after Obama.

Caroline #35
you're totally spot-on

#39, Gene
"unyielding sycophants"
sycophants, toadies, and "go-with-what-got-you-there"-thinkers are how Hillary lost
She ran a dinosaurus campaign. She worked her ass off, but it was like trying to fly in a brontosaurus.
I give her credit for working her ass off. She needs some time to heal. This was a rough campaign, and she had an incredibly savvy opponent, who was younger and had a lot more energy. The guy is a force of nature, but in a different way than bill was.

I don't think that Obama should offer the vice presidency to Clinton; she's got too much baggage and is too controlling.
I was also surprised at the comments of the the last woman caller when she indicated that Hillary Clinton has been the victim of both ageism and sexism. I'm a woman over the age of 40 and a democrat and I disagree. Hillary Clinton gives the impression that she cares about herself, first and foremost. The American people need a leader who is concerned about serving the population first, and providing a strong figurehead to the rest of the world. We don't need another leader who is interested in only their own agenda.

Yes, Senator Clinton should be Veep. Everyone says Senator Obama should pick his own veep, one his staff can work with. Well, guess what. If Senator Obama wants to be president he is going to have figure out how to bring "warring" groups and people together to resolve issues. So why not start with making peace with the Clinton supporters. Prove his abilities to unite and also show that he is committed to winning. Because without Senator Clinton, her supporters are looking at Senator McCain very closely. I am convinced they are mature enough and smart enough to work together well.

The HHS Secretary can do little to further universal health care. That's an administrative position. Legislation is required.

That last pro-Hilary woman represents _exactly_ the kind of fanaticism we're all afraid of in the Hilary supporters.

"Ageism" to select someone older as VP?? Good luck, John McCain, in finding someone older to be VP. Cheney's _much_ older than Bush, and doesn't look insulted.

Hilary, who I am not against despite some ugly campaign missteps, is acting much too coy now-- partly, perhaps, because she's surrounded by such unyielding syncophants.

#36

I THINK she meant that not all women vote as mindless drones just voting for a woman only because she is a woman

It would be a bigger change for America to have nominated a woman for president than an African American man. The U.S. would sooner vote for a man with a tail than any woman and we won't see an Angela Merkel here in my lifetime.
This in response to Brian underscoring the supposedly monumental change Obama represents.
I couldn't make this comment by phone, being coralled exclusively into the issue of vice president.

to bklyngrl-

Check your facts. Women are a indeed a substantial voting block. I believe they may even vote in greater percentages than men, at least in some age groups.

I don't find the office of Vice President to be demeaning. I just find it to be a waste of Hillary's talents. I think this was her one shot at the Presidency. It didn't pan out. I would rather see her concentrate her efforts in the Senate. She should become a legendary senior Senator in the tradition of Sen. Edward Kennedy.

#23
Tell that to the second to last caller who seems agist herself as well. "America is not under 40"...what a STUPID comment, so are we all NOT part of America?...We somehow don't count???? More arrogant baby-boomer nonsense...the reason Hillary lost!

To that caller: Get it through your thick baby-boomer skull: Experience does NOT equate to judgement!!!! Just look at Cheney, Rumsfeld et al, nuff said!

I think Hillary should be VP...
that way,,, all the democrats who wanted
either candidate will be represented.
It used to be that the President would be
the winner and the vice president would be
the runner up.... again both sides are represented. I think there is something
inherently unfair and divisive about a "winner
take all" and the loser take the hindmost policy.

Politically doesn't it make sense to Have HC as VP? She controls close to 1/2 the democratic party and nearly half the delegates. The only people who can't envision this are the fringe loonies who don't understand politics. Froth at the mouth you blockheads. Go Obama/Clinton

second last caller was upset

Derek, #13,
I think you're missing the point. Of course either candidate winning would be historic. But we are barred from celebrating his victory because the loser refuses to concede, and is threatening to run as an independent, despite all the honors that we, as Democrats, handed the Clintons, including 8 years in the white house and more time as senator than was rightly deserved, given that she 1) voted to take us into war and 2) failed to bring the promised upstate jobs, ostensibly that not being her fault, either, according to her, because to do that she would have had to have a Dem in the white house.
Sighhhhhhhhh

She should be VP - she's a bulldog able to take on the republican dirty tactics and machine. She can be bad cop to Obamas good cop. Let Obama elevate the dialogue and let clinton go after the republicans who dont play nice.

Absolutely
Barack did not win any primaries in key electoral states. He does not have a mandate in New York, Florida, California, Pennsylvania, Ohio... Without these states he can NOT win the election in november. Hillary on the ticket will greatly help deliver these states to Obama esp. the swing states Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania

There are plenty of women in the military who may be available, say, a general or admiral. He needs to shore up his security and military credentials.

If Hillary Clinton really cares so much about universal health care, she will accept the position of Secretary of Health and Human Services in the Obama administration.

Oh yeah, Supreme Court would be great for Hillary -- although is there even likely to be a spot in the next 4 years? (Showing my ignorance here.) High level cabinet post for sure.

She's better off taking Secretary of Defense. She'd be great.

Women are not such an essentialist voting block so as to support a female candidate simply because she is a woman.

Brian, the Fineman comment last night included the precursor that the CLinton camp was NOT interested in the VP nomination. That did not come across in your statement.

I like Richardson too. A woman would be nice, but I don't know who would fit the bill. DEFINITELY NOT HILLARY THE BULLY THO.

Second Bill Richardson.

McCain/ Condie

He should promise Hillary to be on the top of the list for Supreme Court if she'll pledge her support to him.

I'd like to see Bill Richardson as Veep - I think he helps the ticket in quite a few different ways. He provides the experience that Obama lacks, and it should help with the Hispanic vote.

No. No. No. Sen. Clinton comes with a lot of baggage (namely, her husband), and we'll need votes from Democrats, Independents, and some cross-overs from the Republican party. Also, If he wins, he won't have just 1 vice president, he'll have two, Hillary and Bill. How could he run the country with those two at his heels? Give her an important job in the Cabinet.

I think former Virginia governor Mark Warner would be the perfect VP for Obama.

HELL NO!

Should she be his VP nominee? No. He needs someone who can really leaven his lack of national security experience, and she's not the best for that (despite her campaign points). Wesley Clark, Joe Biden, maybe even (this would be bold) Chuck Hagel.

But one point: everyone talks about what a historic moment this was, an African-American becoming a party nominee. But if the result had been reversed, it would have been equally historic moment, wouldn't it? The first woman as a party nominee? I'm an Obama supporter, and male, but even I'm getting fed up with the sexism that accords his historic accomplish more weight than what hers would have constituted.

and yes, this is an incredible historic moment, no matter what side you are on

I agree 100% with caller #1, for the reasons she stated

is it possible that her comment "i know that obama will be a friend to isreal..." could be in a vice presidential capacity. she left it a bit vague, as if to suggest such a possible outcome...

No to Hillary as VP. She is against his message, she is trying to bully her way on to the ticket, and she does not balance the ticket the way he needs. But she is an awesome individual with great abilities and she deserves some plum job - like Supreme Court Justice. That is a great job, especially for any Yale Law School grad.

The Clintons have always been selfish and couldn't care less about the greater good. Bill dragged the country through the tortuous period of Monica/Impeachment to hang on to the presidency. Hillary couldn't give a damn about what happens to the Democratic party if she's not the nominee and would like to see Obama lose in November so Lady Macbeth can come back in 2012.

By the way, I'm a Reagan Republican (and a WNYC member--believe it or not). I have been amused seeing the Democrats (who I was told are ones that aren't mean-spirited like the Republicans, right?) being at each other's throats. I NEVER voted for Bush, either in 2000 or 2004. I'm looking forward to John McCain restoring the Republican party back to its Reagan roots of peace, prosperity and global leadership, and disassociating itself from Bush forever (kind of like what the Democrats did with Carter). I'll agree with my fellow WNYC listeners on this point: Bush is the worst president ever; Bill Clinton has moved up to second worst ever.

NO to Hillary as VP. It will make Obama look like he caved to pressure and he would have the wildcat Bill Clinton to worry about during his entire term. The more demanding Hillary appears the more convinced I am that I voted for the right candidate.

I prefer she get back to work as a Senator from New York where she could be a very powerful player in implementing all the programs she claims to care about.

Hillary will only be announced as the VP candidate if Brian goes on vacation

People voted for Obama because they were ready to clear the cobwebs out of the highest levels of our government. As capable a politician as she is, Hillary is, and always will be, a part of those cobwebs.

I think it would be selfish for Hillary and Obama to not make this happen. The picking of Vice Presidents in this country is NOT democratic and as democrats we should be trying to make our party well more democratic.

It is true, this is an historical moment. It is amazing, it is unreal that Obama did this. Now is the moment and unfortunately it could not be appreciated or respected and is in many ways ruined by the internal party dischord.

This should be sung in the style of Jon Stewart: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Hillary should be Veep. I also think that Barack Obama should offer Sec of Def to Colin Powell and Sec of State to Bill Clinton. This way President Obama can keep the Clintons close.