true non-partisanship.

dear barack obama,
We’re all curious who you’ll pick as your running mate. Both you and Sen McCain have big deficiencies with the electorate that need to be accounted for.

I feel pretty confident that Sen McCain, will end up picking Romney. After all he’s young and has got very solid economic credentials: Both weaknesses of Sen McCain.

Your biggest issue with the undecideds is likely your youth, and by virtue of that, relative inexperience. People freak out about inexperience when considering national security and foreign policy, so picking a grey-hair with good foreign policy credentials is crazy important. But there’s a chance for more. If America is going to regain her footing in a tough world, we’re going to need to stop the internal squabbling. Sadly, stopping our petty infighting is no small matter, and on it’s face, seems almost impossible. So far you’re saying all the right things and have avoided fanning the flames of partisanship. Now, I want you to take it one step further:

Pick Chuck Hagel as your running-mate.

That’s right, Chuck Hagel, R-Nebraska. He’s got the foreign policy experience and you share common ground on some issues (immigration, the war in Iraq) and differ on others (environment, abortion, etc). But Chuck Hagel gets what’s eating away at America: partisanship and the two-party system as a whole. And the fact that you disagree with Hagel on many issues is a great thing. It will mean that there will be a diverse discussion inside the White House, and the eventual policies and bills that a Obama-Hagel administration (assuming you used him as more than a token) supports, would, for once, actually mirror the positions of most Americans. Most of us, as you know, aren’t extremists on the issues. It’s just that we’ve been forced to the edges, and had to pick sides. This is a first step to stopping that BS.

If we’re going to truly enact real change, we need to stop being our own worst enemy. Democrats and Republicans arguing over the stupidest stuff is infuriating. It’s like a married couple arguing about their child’s bedtime while he’s outside playing in traffic. Anyway, I’m in danger of digression, and I get that you’re busy writing notes to Scarlet.

Throw America a bone? Hagel?

Wait a minute…Hagel’s policies are also far from Senator McCain’s policies. Maybe he can choose him and that would be close to a bi-partisan ticket. Maybe I should write him a let….

Love,
surya

P.S. Hagel! Hagel! Hagel!

5/27/13 – Palin & Biden! Ha. With hindsight, Romney would have been a good pick. While Hagel is now in the cabinet, and hated by Republicans, who knows what would have happened if we could turn back the clock.

5 thoughts on “true non-partisanship.

  1. Nooooooooo to Chuck Hagel. Obama is going to win no matter who the VP is and is probably looking at a dem controlled congress and senate. No reason to risk alienating the energized democratic base by picking a republican.

    Hagel will be too much of a doubter when it comes to "liberal policies" like universal healthcare(just an assumption, not sure where Hagel stands on healthcare). The last thing Obama needs is a VP who isn't commited 100% into his idealogy.

    I really don't think it matters who Obama picks for his VP. Obama is going to be the reason why people vote (or not) for him. The VP post, for election purposes, on the Obama ticket is fairly ceremonial, I think. That said, I would definitely NOT pick the following;

    1. Hillary(Too many negatives)
    2. Edwards(Should have never got that haircut)
    3. Gore(The ticket will be charaterized a too Liberal)
    4. Chuck Hagel or any other republican (Because he doesn't need to)

    He should just pick Wesley Clark or any other retired general and get it over with. The biggest advantage of that is the VP pick will (probaly)not be a target of attack by the repubs and right now(and going forward) the Obama camp can use a little non-attacking by the republicans so that they can campaign. And we all know what happens when Obama campaigns, he turns doubters into beleivers( ask Iowans or Hillary if you don't believe me)

  2. If he wasn't going to pick a Republican, and specifically, Hagel, I'd definitely agree with Clark. In fact, I assume he'll end up here. He has to pick someone with really strong foreign policy credentials, and Clark is a DLC moderate as well. We'll see…

  3. My world is so limited. All I was hoping for that he'd choose Hillary, but it might become a fiesta for the media seeing who between them is *really* in the role of president. 😛

  4. Surya – once again you nail it on the head. The biggest problem today with American politics is that it has gotten so partisan that nothing can get done. A symbolic move as you describe, to fight against that transformation, would get my vote.

    The two parties are so viscerally opposed that no one compromises or builds alliances. I've been told this by my friends on the Hill, past and present. Not sure who or what to blame. Maybe the spirit of the 1990s, the freshman Republican class of 1994, Rush Limbaugh, gotcha journalism, who knows? I recommend reading James Baker's latest book for an illustration of how politics used to be, and should be again.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *