Leak me a veep

July 5, 2004 11:47 PM

Veepfilter: The well-kept secret about Kerry's running mate might just have broken... on an aviation message board, of all places.
posted by moonbird (171 comments total)

Thank goodness, no nightmares tonight about waking up to find Dick Gephardt's mug on TV.
posted by inksyndicate at 11:56 PM on July 5, 2004

John Kerry has a 757? I thought he was a man of the people!
posted by Kwantsar at 12:02 AM on July 6, 2004

nice scoop, moonbird. How'd you find it?
posted by msacheson at 12:05 AM on July 6, 2004

Whaddya want, Jerry Brown? I don't remember Kerry ever claiming to be an impoverished, jet-less kind of dude.
posted by inksyndicate at 12:08 AM on July 6, 2004

That's a good ticket. We knew it had to be a southerner to counter Kerry's northerness (northernosity?). Edwards balances Kerry well. It's looking good. I don't care what plane he's in.
posted by wsg at 12:22 AM on July 6, 2004

The Post says otherwise....
posted by Silune at 12:25 AM on July 6, 2004

Gephardt is the kiss of death. If Kerry chooses him, he practically deserves to lose. Please, please let the [tabloid] be wrong.
posted by interrobang at 12:28 AM on July 6, 2004

Please, not Gephardt!
posted by wsg at 12:33 AM on July 6, 2004

I really do hope it's Edwards. I mean, between the two, Jesus. Edwards is just a blindingly better choice. I was a dean backer, myself, but edwards just has so much charm. Women will fall over themselves to vote for him.
posted by delmoi at 12:36 AM on July 6, 2004

Union guy, rust belt states at stake, unsurprising. Still, I'll believe it when I see it.
posted by trharlan at 12:37 AM on July 6, 2004

me too.
posted by Keyser Soze at 12:41 AM on July 6, 2004

Why is Geppy even in consideration, much less in the top two? Certainly vilskank, or just about anyone else would be better then geppy. How can someone that blond be expected to be taken seriously by the electorate?

(Never liked vilsack, As an Iowan, I think he's a tool. Still, I'd like ot seem him in the VP slot, simply because Iowa rocks. It's much nicer then the rest of the country. We deserve to rule over the rest of you. We have the caucuses, but that's not nearly enough. BOW DOWN TO YOUR IWOA OVERLOARDS)

/very drunk
posted by delmoi at 12:42 AM on July 6, 2004

If nothing else we could finally get rid of Vilsack ;)
posted by tonelesscereal at 1:07 AM on July 6, 2004

delmoi-- "at least drunks say funny shit."
posted by effugas at 1:11 AM on July 6, 2004

If Kerry has done any focus groups at all on this, he would would have to know that Gephardt makes people feel profoundly creeped out. Right?
posted by 4easypayments at 1:13 AM on July 6, 2004

When they "find" OBL at the end of October (I have Friday, Oct 29 15:30 hours Central in the office pool), none of this will matter.
posted by RavinDave at 1:26 AM on July 6, 2004

Women will fall over themselves to vote for him.

Yes sir, because all them women care about when they cast their vote is how good looking the VP is. ;)
posted by Joey Michaels at 1:55 AM on July 6, 2004

JM - You really should see how the ladies swoon over the guy. It's almost irritating, except he has this aura of "nice" around him that's hard to resist. Honestly, the guy looks like a cookie-cutter Young Republican, with the neat side-swipe hair-do, toothy yet honest perfect-teeth smile... he looks like he hasn't missed Sunday church ever, yet he's a Dem. Kerry could do a lot worse (hell, just look at the two of them together, for comparison).
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 2:05 AM on July 6, 2004

I really do hope this is true.

Not, of course, that the Big Silly Democrats are better in any real sense than the Evil Dumb Republicans. [/self-parody]
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:12 AM on July 6, 2004

... he has this aura of "nice" around him that's hard to resist ...

Which is really ironic, considering that he's made a small personal fortune by being "not nice" -- but with a smile...

If it is Edwards, I know how I'd attack: I'd pull out every lawyer joke in the book, and look for the nastiest, most resonant. Then I'd put out a set of 15x2 second donuts, with a different joke in every 15 second bit. They'd go something like this:

VO/on screen: What do you call 10,000 lawyers chained together at the bottom of the ocean?
[pause]
VO/on screen: A good start.
on screen: John Edwards...TRIAL LAWYER
VO/on screen: Vote Bush-Cheney...Take back America from the Trial Lawyers.

... Or, at least, that's what I think a Red spinmeister would think of.

I don't have any qualms about revealing that because I am pretty convinced of two things:

1 - Edwards could handle it. He'd just come back with some worse lawyer jokes, then look very sincerely at some person standing close to the camera (so it's not so obvious that he's playing to the lens) and explain that, yes, sometimes trial lawyers get over-zealous. But they play an important role, and for his part...yada.

2 - At the end of the day, American's love trial lawyers. They love the big twin dreams of revenge and wealth through Justice, and the Trial Lawyer is the hero of that story.

On Prev: Then again, at the end of the day, when has the NYP ever been wrong?
posted by lodurr at 3:11 AM on July 6, 2004

All I can say is I have never before seen an exclusive story on the front page of any paper without a byline. Something's wrong there.

Love the possibility that the news leaked from an airline hanger. Moonbird, how *did* you find that?
posted by CunningLinguist at 3:26 AM on July 6, 2004

I keep having the George Bush flashbacks (the "wimp", not the "chimp") back to when he tried to fabricate a media event and create such deep public anticipation in his veep choice. He gestured with an exaggerated flurry, intoned the name: "Dan Quayle" and broke out in flop sweat at the puzzled silence of the reporters trying to assay if it was a gag or not. His hand actually hung in the air as if he was trying to grasp why there wasn't thunderous (or even polite) applause.

If, in a like fashion, Kerrey chooses a knob like Gephardt after teasing the public, I will disclaim all further interest in his campaign.
posted by RavinDave at 3:41 AM on July 6, 2004

"NY Post" (found on atrios's blog).

*sob*
posted by RavinDave at 4:00 AM on July 6, 2004

Airliners.net - PIT Spotters: John Kerry's Plane Being Re-painted
Democratic Underground - VP/Seven Letters -- Hmm, who could it be?
Daily Kos - Kerry campaign plane repainted with Edwards logo

Either way, we'll (probably) know in a couple of hours.
posted by Silune at 4:05 AM on July 6, 2004

I'm for the Bush re-election, so I hope Kerry picks Edwards.

All in all though, I still can't believe how weak a candidate Kerry himself is. You have one of the most controversial presidents in a lifetime, and you come up with this useless replacement? That's one of the reasons why people care so much about his veep pick; they hope another person can add at least some interest to the ticket.
posted by dagny at 4:19 AM on July 6, 2004

If he has indeed picked Gephardt, I am going to spend the day laughing. Nice deep Republican laughs.
posted by konolia at 4:26 AM on July 6, 2004

All I can say is I have never before seen an exclusive story on the front page of any paper without a byline. Something's wrong there.

Perhaps a byline strike?
posted by adampsyche at 4:40 AM on July 6, 2004

MSNBC and Fox News Channel both reporting Edwards is the pick, as of ~5:30 am, Mountain Time.
posted by davidmsc at 4:40 AM on July 6, 2004

CNN calling for Edwards as well.
posted by Silune at 4:43 AM on July 6, 2004

CNN just reported it was Edwards too. NYers: buy up copies of the Post - it's an instant collector's item.
posted by CunningLinguist at 4:43 AM on July 6, 2004

It's Edwards.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 4:44 AM on July 6, 2004

And props to Moonbird!
posted by CunningLinguist at 4:44 AM on July 6, 2004

NYtimes agrees, it's Edwards. Here we go!
posted by Outlawyr at 4:49 AM on July 6, 2004

Oh, and nice scoop, moonbird. I'm very impressed.
posted by Outlawyr at 4:50 AM on July 6, 2004

Looks like we all need to start hanging out around aviation message boards, huh...?
posted by davidmsc at 4:51 AM on July 6, 2004

I hope this gets confirmed! Here were Kerrys five criteria according to Mary Beth Cahill:

A proven leader with sound judgment on national security, economic prosperity and social justice. (Edwards is neither a proven leader nor has experience with national security)

Committed to Kerry’s issues and vision for the country. (Didn't seem too committed during the primary.)

Capable of inspiring confidence in voters from all parts of the country and all walks of life. (Sure, everybody loves an ambulance-chasing trial lawyer!)

Compatible with Kerry “on every level.” (Lots of rumours about personality conflicts between the two)

“Ready at any moment to assume the awesome responsibility of president.” (Eh.. a one-term senator?!)

I hope the pick of Edwards is true, he's going to go from "cute bombshell" to bomb very quickly.

posted by dagny at 4:52 AM on July 6, 2004

And to tack onto dagny's points: sitting senators have very slim chances of being elected President. Voters traditionally like to elect governors. So now, having two senators on the ticket...dunno how that will play in Peoria.
posted by davidmsc at 5:02 AM on July 6, 2004

Kerry on Edwards a short while ago:

"In the Senate four years, and that is the full extent of public life - no international experience, no military experience - you can imagine what the advertising is going to be next year," Mr. Kerry said of Mr. Edwards just before the Iowa caucuses, adding: "When I came back from Vietnam in 1969, I don't know if John Edwards was out of diapers then. Well, I'm sure he was out of diapers."

Is this the veep flip-flop?
posted by dagny at 5:06 AM on July 6, 2004

And to tack onto dagny's points: sitting senators have very slim chances of being elected President. Voters traditionally like to elect governors. So now, having two senators on the ticket...dunno how that will play in Peoria.

You know, I have this c-r-a-a-azy belief that people in Peoria are going to weigh in how Bush's economy cost them their job a bit more than how influential his opponents were in the State Legislature. But what do I know, I'm not one of the apparently 75% of people on the internet with a graduate degree in political science.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 5:10 AM on July 6, 2004

A veritable Dewey Defeats Truman moment for the NY Post. I love it. /ot

Honestly, Kerry didn't have much of a choice, did he? Gephardt had loser written all over him since at least this past winter when he didn't even show in the Iowa caucuses and Richardson brings nothing to the ticket in terms of electoral math. I don't know who else they were considering (Wes Clark?), but Edwards seemed pretty clear-cut to me.

On preview, as far as having two senators on a ticket, I think it may be different this time around. The fact that W ran as a "Washington outsider" last time around, a notion so laughable at the time it gave me apoplexy, I think that less people will care about the whole insider/outsider nonsense.
posted by psmealey at 5:11 AM on July 6, 2004

... can't believe how weak a candidate ... one of the most controversial presidents in a lifetime

You know, most of the people I associated with back in ought-zero thought the shrub was a pretty weak candidate... we were right, of course: He did lose the election, after all...

Of course, the "glad he picked Edwards" bit was a troll, and most of the folks here are enough better than me to not fall for it, but what the hell. By now (8:10am ET) it's clear that the Gephardt rumor was a plant to distract attention -- or maybe to make Edwards look that much better.

The truth is, Dagny, that if you put Dick Cheney and John Edwards into a debate, you'll pretty much have to create a rule that says Edwards has to use sign language in order make it an even fight. My great hope is that the Bushites remain as clueless as they have been of late, and fire Cheney right at him. That should be fun to watch.
posted by lodurr at 5:11 AM on July 6, 2004

“Ready at any moment to assume the awesome responsibility of president.” (Eh.. a one-term senator?!)

Eh... a one-term part-time Governor? (... and not even a successful law practice to point to!)
posted by lodurr at 5:14 AM on July 6, 2004

Kennedy was a one term senator too, no?
posted by CunningLinguist at 5:15 AM on July 6, 2004

Heh...Cheney will devour Edwards in a debate. Edwards won't stand a chance.
posted by davidmsc at 5:18 AM on July 6, 2004

You can't use naughty words on television, david.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 5:20 AM on July 6, 2004

Touche, XQUZYPHYR. I can almost picture it: Cheney snarling like an animal, Edwards whimpering and kneeling on the stage...Cheney advances and delivers the fatal blow: "Go F**K YOURSELF!" Edwards collapses in a puddle of quivering and tears.
posted by davidmsc at 5:22 AM on July 6, 2004

Post website now has the front page saying Kerry Picks Gephardt next to something saying "breaking news: Kerry picks Edwards to be running mate."

Someone take a screen shot.
posted by CunningLinguist at 5:22 AM on July 6, 2004

Right... a gruff, monosyllabic ideologue vs. a seasoned and eloquent litigator. No chance. Cheney's too dirty what with the energy policiy meetings (executive priviledge), duck hunting with Fat Tony scalia, deferred compensation from Halliburton... there will be no VP debate this time around unless the GOP dumps Cheney from the ticket.
posted by psmealey at 5:23 AM on July 6, 2004

Oh, hey guys- I found it (and forgot to attribute) on this thread at Kos.
posted by moonbird at 5:29 AM on July 6, 2004

See, the misconception here is that everyone will "hate" Edwards because "he's a trial lawyer."

I didn't study politics; I went to film school. And that's why I get it. Look at the guy. Don't you see? You "hate" lawyers when Tommy Lee Jones and the crusty old Southern man is playing them. Edwards is the good guy lawyer. He's FIGHTING the angry, nasty old man. He's Keanu, and Matthew McConnahey, and Tom Cruise! You look at and listen to Edwards and you want him to win the case, save the day, and impregnate Sanda Bullock. He can HANDLE THE TRUTH!

Foreigners: yes, Americans are really this dumb. This is actually how it works. American Idol? 100 million votes. Let's see that during an actual election.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 5:31 AM on July 6, 2004

Cheney will devour Edwards in a debate.

Not if Edwards drags him into the sunlight first.
posted by octobersurprise at 5:37 AM on July 6, 2004

posted by moonbird at 5:37 AM on July 6, 2004

Edwards won't stand a chance.

Edwards worked his way from poverty to millionaire going up against some of the worst kinds of scum and winning huge damages for his clients from said scum. I think Cheney will be right up his alley.

Don't let that schoolboy charm fool you.

The other thing is, when Edwards speaks, he doesn't have bugs crawling out of his mouth and snakes for hair, which is an advantage over Cheney.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 5:38 AM on July 6, 2004

I can almost picture it: Cheney snarling like an animal, Edwards whimpering and kneeling on the stage...Cheney advances and delivers the fatal blow: "Go F**K YOURSELF!" Edwards collapses in a puddle of quivering and tears.

would that impress you?
posted by mcsweetie at 5:40 AM on July 6, 2004

Misconception? Yes, I agree: But a really widely held one, I'll wager.

I'd bet money (which I damn near never do) that the "trial lawyer" thing was the biggest hurdle to nominating him, inside the Kerry camp. And I'd bet even more money that the Bushites will see that as his biggest weakness.

And the film analogy is dead-on. Add to that the fact that Edwards knows all this stuff -- I wouldn't be surprised if he studied the films at home!

This is also why the Republican right are such certifiable morons for alienating Fred Thompson. Again: Successful trial attorney, smart, could look good or tough depending on the role, good off the cuff -- but they let him slip away, back to Hollywood...
posted by lodurr at 5:41 AM on July 6, 2004

would that impress you?

Perhaps not so much impress as arouse....

[I'm bad, I'm sorry, I couldn't resist.]
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:48 AM on July 6, 2004

I can almost picture it: Cheney snarling like an animal, Edwards whimpering and kneeling on the stage...Cheney advances and delivers the fatal blow: "Go F**K YOURSELF!" Edwards collapses in a puddle of quivering and tears.

That's from the slash/fanfic section of the Bush-Cheney '04 website. Typical GOP/BDSM, N/C. Need a Kleenex to mop yourself up, davidmsc?
posted by stonerose at 5:49 AM on July 6, 2004

Graham from Florida would have been a good choice. From the little I know, he seems to have credibility, and he might have been able to deliver a key state...if you presume that the voting will be honest down here.
posted by Beansidhe at 5:53 AM on July 6, 2004

Heh...Cheney will devour Edwards in a debate. Edwards won't stand a chance.
posted by davidmsc at 7:18 AM CST on July 6

I assume this was a joke and I just didn't catch it.

Cheney speaks like a caveman. How many times has Cheney spoken publicly since 2000? 4? 5?

The only problem during a VP debate would be that perhaps Edwards wouldn't be able to stop laughing.
posted by Ynoxas at 5:53 AM on July 6, 2004

From Dailykos, "I have to admit I didn't find this on my own. I stole it from a post over on DU"

Ok, what's DU? Husker Du?
posted by Outlawyr at 6:02 AM on July 6, 2004

I hope the pick of Edwards is true, he's going to go from "cute bombshell" to bomb very quickly.

Yep. As history has proven, this will undoubtedly be the case. No way someone like that can get elected . . . can you imagine?
posted by aladfar at 6:02 AM on July 6, 2004

Outlawyr: Democratic Underground.
posted by stonerose at 6:11 AM on July 6, 2004

Heh heh heh. You people think that I'm damp with perspiration over the mock scene I scripted? You should look in the mirror and see YOUR reflection when imagining the debate between Cheney and Edwards. You all seem to think that Cheney is some sort of monosyllabic, mindless, robotic creature who is incapable of articulation or presentation of facts with passion.

You're very, very wrong. Cheney is arguably one of the smartest, most savvy men in political life today.
posted by davidmsc at 6:13 AM on July 6, 2004

Hee hee... CNN's holding up the NY Post noting "now, remember, this is the same organization that owns Fox News Channel."

I love the idea that of all the news outlets in the country that would have scooped Kerry's VP pick, people would believe the "sources" at the most right-wing, muckraking tabloid in America would be the most reliable.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 6:20 AM on July 6, 2004

Kerry quotes on Edwards before today:

Kerry Attacked Edwards’ Experience. “‘I think the American people want an experienced hand at the helm of state,’ said Kerry, who has spent 19 years in the Senate compared with Edwards’ five. ‘This is not the time for on-the-job training in the White House on national security issues.’” (Mark Z. Barabak, “Diverse States May Reshape The Democratic Race Today,” Los Angeles Times, 2/3/04)

Kerry Blasted Edwards’ ‘Lack Of Military And Foreign Policy Experience.’ “Kerry took aim at Edwards’s lack of military and foreign policy experience while responding to Edwards’s comment that both candidates shared similar plans to rebuild Iraq. ‘Well, I think he would like it to be that way,’ said Kerry, a decorated veteran, ‘but I think I have 35 years of experience in international security, foreign policy, and military affairs, and I think that makes an enormous difference here. I think that the world is looking for leadership that is tested and sure.’” (Raja Mishra, “Edwards And Kerry Emphasize Contrasts,” The Boston Globe, 2/23/04)

Kerry Mocked Edwards’ “Ambitious” Nature After Only One Term In Elective Office. “The veteran senator also questioned the former trial lawyer’s pursuit of the presidency after less than one term in elective office. ‘And people call me ambitious?’ a Globe reporter once overheard Kerry asking an aide.” (Glen Johnson, “Once a Rival, Edwards Staying Close to Kerry,” The Boston Globe, 6/10/04)

Kerry’s Stepson Voiced Concern Over Edwards’ Foreign Policy Credentials. “Kerry is likely to name a running mate within two weeks, [Chris] Heinz said, offering no inside information. ‘I was very pro-[North Carolina Sen. John] Edwards in the spring,’ he said. ‘But now I think we may need someone with stronger credentials on foreign policy.’” (Jack Kelly, “Chris Heinz On The Stump In City For Stepdad,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 6/17/04)
posted by dagny at 6:21 AM on July 6, 2004

Cheney is arguably one of the smartest, most savvy men in political life today.

Maybe. But we're talking about how he comes across on television, david. Which, as we all know, has nothing to do with how smart you are.
posted by The Card Cheat at 6:24 AM on July 6, 2004

Regardless - It's Edwards, and I think that site has it right.
posted by stew560 at 6:26 AM on July 6, 2004

Cheney is arguably one of the smartest, most savvy men in political life today.

Not a new idea, of course. The popular wisdom when he was first nominated was that he would constitute "adult supervision". My response to everyone who said that: "Are you nuts?!"

I suppose if you think that a chickenhawk with a history of second-guessing experienced military commanders -- whose military acumen has since been proven disastrously lacking, since he's had a chance to actually apply it -- ... I suppose if you think those things are strong indicators of intelligence and political savvy, then hey, yeh, I'm with you.

Or if by "smartest, most savvy" you mean "one of the best corrupt politicians since Teapot Dome", then yeh, great, I'm there, buddy.

But, seriously, man... the sky is not the same color in Dick Cheney's world as it is in mine. You may feel free to make the obvious rejoinder at your leisure.

BTW: I do hope it's dawned on you that it wasn't sweat that folks imagined you wiping off...?
posted by lodurr at 6:26 AM on July 6, 2004

Dagny, why not just provide the link instead of cutting and pasting?
posted by CunningLinguist at 6:27 AM on July 6, 2004

Oops, you did. Sorry.
posted by CunningLinguist at 6:28 AM on July 6, 2004

davidmsc has a point. It's getting so a public servant can't tell his opponents to fuck themselves without being regarded as some kind of morlock.
posted by octobersurprise at 6:29 AM on July 6, 2004

smartest, most savvy men in political life

people who can't distinguish "smartest" from "slickest", "savvy" from "corrupt" and "political" from "criminal" are fucking stoopit.
posted by quonsar at 6:45 AM on July 6, 2004

Well, Kerry passes his first major public decision. I would have preferred Graham, but apparently he's been out of the running for a while.

Cheney will devour Edwards in a debate. Edwards won't stand a chance.

LOLOL All I can say to that is, BRING IT ON!
posted by rushmc at 6:49 AM on July 6, 2004

Thanks NewsFilter for the Edwards selection story. I might have missed this otherwise.

For those who are apparently not paying attention: A) Cheney was thought to be smart and politically savvy...until it became apparent that his influence on this administration has been almost uniformly disastrous (both in the policy and political senses) and his polling negatives are incredibly, mind-bogglingly high; B) Richardson would have brought electoral college votes to the table—yes, New Mexico doesn't count because Kerry will already win it, but he'd pick up a bunch of Hispanic votes in some other SW states and maybe, possibly, enough to swing Florida. If Kerry hadn't been ahead as much as he has been in these places, and he's doing particularly well with Hispanics anyway, he'd have selected Richardson, assuming Richardson would have accepted. He may have refused as he is looking to 08 or 12 for Pres himself, without a doubt. Anyway, it's a moot point as Kerry was going to get most of those votes anyway. C) Edwards brings some Southern votes to the table and a bunch of charisma. It's been apparent for some time that Kerry would pick Edwards or someone not being discussed that would have been a surprise. There was little chance that he would have picked Gephardt. Thank heavens. But Kerry still would have won. Bush is doing that badly, he really is. His polling is going from awful to doomed, with no relief in sight.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 6:56 AM on July 6, 2004

You all seem to think that Cheney is some sort of monosyllabic, mindless, robotic creature who is incapable of articulation or presentation of facts with passion.

That's not a fair characterization. I also think he's also incapable of articulation or presentation of facts without passion. Or on a boat. Or with a goat. Or in the rain. Or on a train.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 7:12 AM on July 6, 2004

Thanks NewsFilter for the Edwards selection story.

Given that it was posted well ahead of the announcement, I fail to see the problem.
posted by adampsyche at 7:21 AM on July 6, 2004

Cheney will devour Edwards in a debate. Edwards won't stand a chance.

Oh. Oh dear. Someone has drunk far too much koolaid.
posted by jpoulos at 7:28 AM on July 6, 2004

Goodness ... he picked Edwards? I hadn't realized the Kerry camp was that desperate for something resembling magnetism. Those two hate each other.
posted by MidasMulligan at 7:39 AM on July 6, 2004

Oh goody, dagny! The quote game! Here we go:

"John Edwards has written movingly of people who were terribly wronged, and whom he helped seek some measure of justice with great skill, determination, and genuine compassion. He shows a perceptive appreciation in these accounts for the strength of his clients' character. And, in the loving portrait of his son, Wade, and the deeply touching account of his loss, John reveals the strength of his own character and gives the reader a look beyond a political biography into the heart of a good man."

-Senator John McCain. Over to you.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 7:40 AM on July 6, 2004

Dagny, remmerber these two words?: "Voodoo economics." You're kidding yourself.
posted by planetkyoto at 7:54 AM on July 6, 2004

yay! I'm so glad he went with Edwards--i was dreading Gephardt too. Now we're set. (and Richardson absolutely refused to be veep, EB--i think he's holding out to run himself at some point)

and Midas: Reagan and daddy Bush hated each other, and supposedly JFK and LBJ too.
posted by amberglow at 8:06 AM on July 6, 2004

Those two hate each other.

OMG! And they are totally wearing the same blue suits, too! Very perceptive, Midas!
posted by octobersurprise at 8:16 AM on July 6, 2004

everything midasmulligan touches turns to stew.
posted by quonsar at 8:22 AM on July 6, 2004

Cheney will devour Edwards in a debate.

That can't be good for his heart condition.
posted by PrinceValium at 8:28 AM on July 6, 2004

Cheney will devour Edwards in a debate.

bah. I doubt it, but who cares, really. those who remember Lloyd Bentsen's 1988 demolition of Dan Quayle know very well that vice-presidential debates don't usually do the winner a lot of good. LBJ governed for more than a year without a VP, anyway. unless Kerry wins and then gets killed/dies/resigns Edwards is only media fodder. I doubt normal people care about VP choices very much, unless the choice turns into an Eagleton nightmare or a Quayle joke

Thanks NewsFilter for the Edwards selection story. I might have missed this otherwise

*snores*
posted by matteo at 8:33 AM on July 6, 2004

For those trotting out Kerry's anti-Edwards quotes, hey Edwards isn't running for President, he's running for Vice-President; and, except in the case of the CEO presidency, the President's qualities are what really matters.

I'm really glad Kerry chose Edwards. When a blog lead me to believe Gephardt was the choice (I'm looking at you Owillis) I was dismayed, it would have been such a big strategic mistake.

As proof the Edwards choice was a good one, I offer this ancedote, my mom- who voted for Bush- is glad Kerry picked Edwards and plans on voting for them.
posted by drezdn at 8:55 AM on July 6, 2004

The GOP has done its homework on Edwards.
posted by trharlan at 9:01 AM on July 6, 2004

the President's qualities are what really matters.

I agree. You don't have to like the man to understand that he can get a specific job done in the end. Realziing that over letting your differences get in the way shows a lot of character (or maybe just some persuasive advisors).
posted by jmd82 at 9:02 AM on July 6, 2004

I always thought Bush Sr. picked Quayle as assasination protection. Even people crazy enough to kill the President aren't crazy enough to want that boob as President.
posted by Eekacat at 9:06 AM on July 6, 2004

You all seem to think that Cheney is some sort of monosyllabic, mindless, robotic creature who is incapable of articulation or presentation of facts with passion.

Now now. I'm sure if we dangled a single crisp dollar bill in front of Cheney, he'd spout-sing the greedhead equivalent of the Gettysburg address.

You just have to arouse his passion, don't you know.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 9:09 AM on July 6, 2004

I am thinking the debate with Edwards and Cheney will be quite interesting. The two are quite experienced and bright, with each background have a flair for tasting blood. This could be very interesting.

As far as who we want in the VP position, the Repubs should keep quiet because they have a walking defribrilation machine in the role right now; add a few scandals and I think being quiet and pushing the Bush - Kerry debates would be a better strategy.

McCain continues to be a disappointment.
posted by fluffycreature at 9:19 AM on July 6, 2004

Kerry and Edwards are both lawyers. Bush and Cheney are both crooks.

When they "find" OBL at the end of October...none of this will matter.

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

posted by kirkaracha at 9:28 AM on July 6, 2004

The GOP has done its homework on Edwards.

Good link, TRHarlan. Yes, they have; they've produced this exhaustive document that shows that Edwards is more qualified to run for VP than GW Bush was to run for President...brilliant manouver, wot?
posted by lodurr at 9:44 AM on July 6, 2004

The NY Post yanked its boo-boo from its website, but you can always count on The Smoking Gun to document stupidity.
posted by pmurray63 at 9:58 AM on July 6, 2004

Thanks NewsFilter for the Edwards selection story. I might have missed this otherwise.

Yawn. Didn't your pony used to have multiple tricks?

Oh, and I'll bet you $5 that Kerry loses (or, at least, doesn't become president). Never underestimate the power of human stupidity.
posted by rushmc at 10:12 AM on July 6, 2004

I'll take that bet, rush. How about $20?
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 10:13 AM on July 6, 2004

This will make for an interesting summer. Lurch/Breck-Girl vs. Homespun/Scary for the leadership of the free world.

I want a do-over, all-around. Anybody else for a do-over?
posted by Dreama at 10:15 AM on July 6, 2004

Well, Bligh, you can get better odds on intrade, where Dubya is an 11:9 favorite.
posted by trharlan at 10:20 AM on July 6, 2004

Gephardt is the kiss of death. If Kerry chooses him, he practically deserves to lose. Please, please let the [tabloid] be wrong.

Please, not Gephardt!

I really do hope it's Edwards. I mean, between the two, Jesus. Edwards is just a blindingly better choice. I was a dean backer, myself, but edwards just has so much charm. Women will fall over themselves to vote for him

I don't really get the Edwards thing. He's good-looking and well-spoken - but seems to lack much depth and experience.

As for a "Southern strategy" - does anyone really expect the Dems to win anywhere in the South? Maybe NC with Edwards on the ticket, maybe WV . . . but neither have enough electoral votes to worry about. Florida is up for grabs, but isn't really considered a "typical" Southern state - and I don't think Edwards is a big help there (Floridian Democrats tending to be minorities or Northern transplants who will vote Dem pretty much no matter what.)

Don't forget - this election comes down to about 5 borderline states. It doesn't really matter who is popular nationally. Gephardt is a yawn, but he's huge with unions. The only borderline states that matter - Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, and long-shot Missouri - are all heavy union states for the Dems. (Along with Florida - but the Dems don't need Florida if they can take Ohio.)
posted by sixdifferentways at 10:20 AM on July 6, 2004

If he has indeed picked Gephardt, I am going to spend the day laughing. Nice deep Republican laughs.

I'm hearing lots of little, frightened, republican squeaks today. Hee.
posted by Space Coyote at 10:46 AM on July 6, 2004

Us northerners like Edwards--he has that Clintonesque charm and charisma (something Kerry lacks, and certainly something Bush and Cheney lack). I just read somewhere that Kerry was the best product, and now we've gotten the best salesman (Edwards) to push that product. And Edward's wife is a sweetheart too--no Tipper there.
posted by amberglow at 10:50 AM on July 6, 2004

As for a "Southern strategy" - does anyone really expect the Dems to win anywhere in the South? Maybe NC with Edwards on the ticket

North Carolinians despise Edwards, even the Democrats, and rightly so — his record of not showing up to vote as a Senator because he's been too busy fellating the DNC has really pissed people off.
posted by IshmaelGraves at 11:04 AM on July 6, 2004

North Carolinians despise Edwards

No they don't. I'm a North Carolinian, and while they're quite divided over him, to say they despise him is pretty wrong. Try again.
posted by oog at 11:07 AM on July 6, 2004

Edwards probably won't win much for Lurch in the South; he didn't impress much in the primaries, and many dislike their senator because he's so flagrantly had higher ambitions all along rather than working for the state he was supposed to represent.

Edwards is a male bimbo -- didn't Seinfeld call them "mimbos"? -- picked for his good looks. While I do admit that he sure is a cutie, that's all he is, an empty smile.

Can hardly wait until the Dem convention in liberal Mass with liberals Dean, Kennedy and Gore. Ahh, what an incompetent campaign... even a kid could do better than the Dems against this administration.
posted by dagny at 11:07 AM on July 6, 2004

How's this for a slogan:

Kerry-Edwards'04: A metrosexual and a mimbo!
posted by dagny at 11:09 AM on July 6, 2004

dagny, stop with the bullshit. it sounds like you're trying to convince yourself more than the rest of the thread.
posted by oog at 11:11 AM on July 6, 2004

Lurch/Breck-Girl

I'm sorry. No. It's already been established that John Kerry is actually an Ent.
(On preview: dagny, hon? You're trying too hard. It's all in the timing. Lighten up. Smile a little. Thx. )
posted by octobersurprise at 11:20 AM on July 6, 2004

my wife has gone from somewhat disinterested to "definitely voting for kerry" now that edwards has been selected for vp
posted by jacobsee at 11:30 AM on July 6, 2004

No they don't. I'm a North Carolinian, and while they're quite divided over him, to say they despise him is pretty wrong. Try again.
posted by oog at 2:07 PM EST on July 6


Honestly, it depends on who you ask. But it is very true that a lot of North Carolinians are really ticked off at him. On the other hand, being a Republican, him not voting doesn't upset me a bit ;-)
posted by konolia at 11:33 AM on July 6, 2004

Sure, don't listen to me. What about Chris Heinz, less than three weeks ago: "I was very pro-[North Carolina Sen. John] Edwards in the spring," he said. "But now I think we may need someone with stronger credentials on foreign policy."

At least I trust I won't hear the "chickenhawk" argument anymore on MeFi, as a result of Edwards being added to the ticket... :-D
posted by dagny at 11:35 AM on July 6, 2004

What's going to feed the ugliness of this campaign season is that they're both Senators, and Senate or Congressional voting records are just too easy fodder for the Republican attack machine. Vote against a good bill because of an unacceptable rider? They nail you on the bill and call you anti-american (or whatever). Vote for a good bill despite an unacceptable rider? They nail you on the rider. Google "Wellstone" and "Seaweed". Or Max Cleland / Saxby Chambliss on just about anything,
posted by George_Spiggott at 11:35 AM on July 6, 2004

didn't Seinfeld call them "mimbos"?

Uhhh, no, it's "himbo". "Mim" wouldn't mean much, would it?

Sheesh, what a dimbo.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 11:36 AM on July 6, 2004

How's this for a slogan:

Kerry-Edwards'04: A metrosexual and a mimbo!
posted by dagny at 3:09 PM AST on July 6


squeak squeak.
posted by Space Coyote at 11:40 AM on July 6, 2004

Um, I'm in NC, and I know people a-go-go who love Edwards, some Repubs. I think Eddie-baby could conceivably tip the state.
posted by moonbird at 11:43 AM on July 6, 2004

Edwards's boyishness makes Kerry look more distinguished and Presidential by comparison.

His trial lawyer chops will enable him to go for the jugular in the VP debate. That will be the fun one to watch.

I think he made a pretty smart pick overall. Hopefully they both hit the road and work those swing states.
posted by anser at 11:43 AM on July 6, 2004

So the Bushies are smugly quoting what Kerry said about Edwards during the primaries. Do they appreciate the irony that they are now bragging about an ad with John McCain, whom they viciously smeared in South Carolina during the 200 primaries?

I didn't think so.
posted by pmurray63 at 11:46 AM on July 6, 2004

"Republican" has two more letters than "Democrat," yet the abbreviation "Dem" has no obvious counterpart.

May I suggest: "Rub?" as in, "the Dems are gonna beat the Rubs."

Or just shitcan that and start calling them "shirts" and "skins." Which begs the real question: which one of these tickets do you want to see naked to the waist? You know you don't wanna gaze upon those pudgy Rub moobs. Cheney's left one pulsates grotesquely, I hear.
posted by scarabic at 11:49 AM on July 6, 2004

That GOP oppo page has some pretty good stuff on it.

Edwards Has “Never Done Any Serious Farming.”

Edwards Doesn’t Follow Weekly NASCAR Races, Adds He “Doesn’t Follow Anything Except Politicking.”

Edwards Hasn’t Hunted Or Fished “In Years.”

Edwards Has “In The Past Been A Country Music Fan.” (Tim Funk, “Q&A With John Edwards,” The Charlotte Observer, 5/26/03)

Edwards Can’t Even Remember Make Or Model Of His Own Truck.

We know rednecks. Rednecks are friends of ours. And you, John Edwards, are no redneck.
posted by swell at 11:51 AM on July 6, 2004

If Edwards is smart, he will tie most of his lawyer talents up with rope, shove them in the closet, and lock the door. For better or worse, most Americans hate attorneys.
posted by ParisParamus at 11:53 AM on July 6, 2004

"most Americans hate attorneys"

Which poll are you citing. Oh yeah, the one that exists in your mind.
posted by Outlawyr at 12:03 PM on July 6, 2004

Yeah, Clinton was really unpopular.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 12:05 PM on July 6, 2004

"most Americans hate attorneys"

not the kind of attorney Edwards was--he helped people after they were hurt and/or killed by big corporations:
Until he moved to the Senate, Edwards was a personal injury lawyer---the kind people most love to hate---and a very talented one. More than half his cases were medical malpractice suits. Many involved infants born with brain damage or other serious conditions that entail a lifetime of expensive medical care. Edwards also won cases against hospitals, cities, and corporations. ...In 1997, Edwards successfully sued a doctor for $23 million on behalf of the parents of a baby severely brain damaged by oxygen deprivation during labor.

The defining case in Edwards' legal career wrapped up that same year. In 1993, a five-year-old girl named Valerie Lakey had been playing in a Wake County, N.C., wading pool when she became caught in an uncovered drain so forcefully that the suction pulled out most of her intestines. She survived but for the rest of her life will need to be hooked up to feeding tubes for 12 hours each night. Edwards filed suit on the Lakeys' behalf against Sta-Rite Industries, the Wisconsin corporation that manufactured the drain. Attorneys describe his handling of the case as a virtuoso example of a trial layer bringing a negligent corporation to heel.

You could say he's a good guy (and he is, especially compared to Cheney--a visible symbol of bad corporate cronyism and behavior)
posted by amberglow at 12:13 PM on July 6, 2004

GOP warns of Kerry bounce. You know, if the Bushies managed the country or the war with 1/1000th of the commitment, attention and professionalism they give their politics, I might even vote for them.

But as John DiIulio discovered, for the Mayberry Machiavellis that's not even an option.
posted by George_Spiggott at 12:18 PM on July 6, 2004

We know rednecks. Rednecks are friends of ours. And you, John Edwards, are no redneck.

posted by swell at 11:51 AM PST on July 6


*dies laughing*

thank you, swell.
posted by lazaruslong at 12:19 PM on July 6, 2004

Cheney must be relieved that they won't be debating about his energy task force. He owes Scalia another hunting trip.
posted by homunculus at 12:33 PM on July 6, 2004

Well judging solely on the amount of right wing vitriol being spewed here it seems like Edwards was an excellent pick.

Considering that Cheney has all the presence and personality of Darth Vader I'm really not too worried about seeing him matched up with John Edwards. In more ways than one it could be a rematch of the Kennedy/Nixon debates.

Sure a trial lawyer won't win any neo-con, "greed is good", "I'm for the haves and have more" types, but was that who Kerry was picking for? Anyone who saw Edwards in the primaries knows that this is a person who can connect with average working people and has a message that is surprisingly upbeat and inclusive.

In Edwards Kerry has picked a nice guy that people tend to like when they see and hear him.
posted by aaronscool at 12:39 PM on July 6, 2004

Or just shitcan that and start calling them "shirts" and "skins." Which begs the real question: which one of these tickets do you want to see naked to the waist? You know you don't wanna gaze upon those pudgy Rub moobs. Cheney's left one pulsates grotesquely, I hear.

Jeebus, scarabic, give a guy nightmares, why don't ya.
posted by ChrisTN at 12:54 PM on July 6, 2004

Sorry ChrisTN!

However Edwards' credentials and experience qualify him to govern, we shouldn't overlook the fact that he's now campaign-talking-head #1, and he'll likely do an amazing job of that on behalf of Kerry. He's a great speaker & charismatic as hell, qualities I'm sure his lawyerly background helped to forge. His pretty face is an asset, if only because the press will love running pictures of him. His "inexperience" can and will come across as fresh energy, the antidote to the Bush/Cheney insider stench (not to mention the stagnation of the DNC).
posted by scarabic at 1:07 PM on July 6, 2004

Edwards Doesn’t Follow Weekly NASCAR Races, Adds He “Doesn’t Follow Anything Except Politicking.”

Unlike that rabid NASCAR fan Dick Cheney.
posted by pmurray63 at 1:09 PM on July 6, 2004

ah, found it: So this was the dilemma: Edwards was the best salesman, but Kerry was the best product. If you had to choose one or the other, I thought it was more important to pick the salesman, since the consequences of losing the election were far more serious than the consequences of electing the less qualified Democrat. The logic made sense, but the premise was mistaken. Democrats didn't have to choose. They could get the best product along with the best salesman, if Kerry had the wisdom to pick Edwards.--from Saletan in Slate
posted by amberglow at 1:12 PM on July 6, 2004

I'll take that bet, rush. How about $20?

Geez, what do you think I am, a rich Republican?

Edwards is a male bimbo -- didn't Seinfeld call them "mimbos"? -- picked for his good looks. While I do admit that he sure is a cutie, that's all he is, an empty smile.

Edwards is no Quayle, sorry.

lol Dreama re: "Breck-girl."
posted by rushmc at 1:21 PM on July 6, 2004

I'm sorry, I have to say it, Edwards reminds me of Damien Thorn.
posted by tetsuo at 1:24 PM on July 6, 2004

Everyone keeps saying he doesn't have a chance..just like they said a few months ago, when he almost ran away with the nomination. I hope he continues to surprise his detractors.
posted by tetsuo at 1:27 PM on July 6, 2004

Chimpy had 6 years in 'governing' Texas- Eddie-baby has six years in the Senate. Chimpy is somehow a 'national security' candidate. Why can't Edwards? Stoopid dichotomy and short memories I'm hearing in the media.
posted by moonbird at 1:28 PM on July 6, 2004

Some people might call what Bush did in Texas governing, and some of us wouldn't.
posted by Orb at 4:22 PM on July 6, 2004

   didn't Seinfeld call them "mimbos"?

Uhhh, no, it's "himbo". "Mim" wouldn't mean much, would it?

Sheesh, what a dimbo.

Wrong. The Seinfeld episode The Stall has the following dialog::

Jerry: "Elaine, he's a.. he's a male bimbo, he's a mimbo"
Elaine: "he's not a mimbo, he's an exciting, charismatic man. he just happened to have a perfect face"

See also The Seinfeld Glossary

But I guess you would agree with this page:

The word "himbo" is the result of a linguistic sex-change operation that sutured the male pronoun him onto the usually feminine insult bimbo. (Although bimbo is often dressed in a gender-neutral suit that gives it a meaning similar to bozo; i.e., a stupid or useless person.) It's a better blend than the less intelligible mimbo (male bimbo) mix that was coined in a Seinfeld episode.

posted by gluechunk at 4:54 PM on July 6, 2004

I can almost picture it: Cheney snarling like an animal, Edwards whimpering and kneeling on the stage...Cheney advances and delivers the fatal blow: "Go F**K YOURSELF!" Edwards collapses in a puddle of quivering and tears.

I feel so *dirty* having seen that little bit of self gratification. Goodness.

You know you don't wanna gaze upon those pudgy Rub moobs.

Scarabic, you're not helping... ;)
posted by dejah420 at 5:09 PM on July 6, 2004

CNN did a funny thing today, they listed the talking points released by the RNC for their surrogates to use to attack Edwards. Then right afterward they had Mitt Romney (republican governer of massachussets) on and asked him about Edwards. He mentioned just about all of them. In order.

How do MAers feel about having a governer who doesn't seem to enjoy speaking or thinking for himself?
posted by Space Coyote at 5:42 PM on July 6, 2004

I can almost picture it: Cheney snarling like an animal...

...clutching his chest, keeling over, using his last foetid lungfull to curse the drug addict who gave him a clean bill of health...
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 6:06 PM on July 6, 2004

Ok, who wants to bet Bush dumps Cheney for McCain?
posted by amberglow at 6:58 PM on July 6, 2004

Won't happen. Maybe if he'd announced last year sometime that he was retiring, it'd have been a splendid idea. Now, though, it would look bad. And anyway, Cheney calls the shots, not Bush. :)
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 7:24 PM on July 6, 2004

I don't know...this has them scared. I'm thinking if they keep tanking in the polls, they'll have to.
posted by amberglow at 7:31 PM on July 6, 2004

I've been saying that same thing for a week or two, amberglow, ever since McCain started tossing Bush's salad. (I figure McCain remembered he needs the Republican Party when he woke up with Jim Jeffords' head in his bed.)

So Cheney bows out, claiming health problems. Bush announces McCain, wins. McCain gets anything he wants short-term, plus a shot at the presidency in '08 and maybe '12. And, Bligh: Cheney still calls the shots.
posted by nicwolff at 7:37 PM on July 6, 2004

Just an aside - is there anyone else outside the U.S. that has trouble browsing http://www.georgewbush.com?

I can't get to it from any of my computers (work, home, etc.) in Japan.

Conspiracy?
posted by bashos_frog at 7:42 PM on July 6, 2004

also, i'm thinking that Cheney's gotten all he can out of the Veep slot (Halliburton-wise), and can go right back to the company. Even if they got a second term (which Bush/Cheney won't), they wouldn't be able to get away with what they did this first term. Cheney can bow out at any time before the convention, which is shaping up to be bad for them anyway.
posted by amberglow at 7:42 PM on July 6, 2004

Okay, I agree that some sort of an "emergency" announcement concerning Cheney's health might be believable enough not to look like the desperate tactic that it would actually be. However, all indications are that Cheney runs this administration, it's hard to imagine him bowing out. Although, true, Powell, his nemesis, is leaving. But my intuition tells me that there's very little real political chance of this happening. I mean, I suspect that if you floated this to people who really know, they'd laugh and laugh. And, anyway, it wouldn't be enough to make the difference for Bush anyway. Not even McCain, prolly. Well, maybe. Hmm, no, I don't think it would. And although McCain may be carrying water for Bush right now, he still hates him with a passion and the things he wrote in his book were burning bridges sorts of things. No way, no way would Bush want him and McCain couldn't work with BushCo. "Not gonna happen" in the words of Bush pere.

Yah, they're desperate. That's good, though, because they're very stupid and have a long history of misjudging the political effects of their decisions. They're more likely to do something really stupid that nail the coffin shut. I don't think anything will help them, certainly capturing Osama won't help enough at this point. An attack on US soil won't help, contrary to many people's assertions. It'd probably hurt, since this election will be decided by the swing voters and they'll lose even more confidence in Bush after another attack.

Amber, I wouldn't worry overmuch about what the GOP is gonna do. Whatever it is, it's not going to help. It's too late to pull this one out.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:22 PM on July 6, 2004

lol Dreama re: "Breck-girl."

Wish it were mine, but it's not.
posted by Dreama at 8:25 PM on July 6, 2004

Amber, I wouldn't worry overmuch about what the GOP is gonna do.

Actually, i'd rather worry about them replacing Cheney than what i'm really afraid they'll do when they get desperate.
posted by amberglow at 8:37 PM on July 6, 2004

I've been doing a happy-dance all day ever since I heard the news this morning.

I think most swing voters can look over the disaster this presidency has become and immediately see that Kerry is far more compentent. But Kerry just wasn't giving anybody anything to get excited over. I think Edwards will turn this right around. I agree with Amber on what a great salesman for Kerry he will be.

And today for the first time, I find myself agreeing with EB's confidence and optimism.

Can't wait to see the next polls!
posted by marsha56 at 9:15 PM on July 6, 2004

Wish it were mine, but it's not.

Eeewwww...you made me laugh at Rush Limbaugh (and not in the usual way)...I feel so dirty...thanks a lot!
posted by rushmc at 9:25 PM on July 6, 2004

I think most swing voters...

All three of them?
posted by rushmc at 9:26 PM on July 6, 2004

I think most swing voters...

All three of them?

This race has been so tight, I think it will be up to those three swing voters, Tim, Dick and Harriet to decide.
posted by marsha56 at 9:36 PM on July 6, 2004

Actually, i'd rather worry about them replacing Cheney than what i'm really afraid they'll do when they get desperate.—Amberglow

Funny you should mention that.

I scared myself and a friend a few weeks ago when I remarked that it is not entirely fantastical to wonder if the admin might try to somehow suspend the election. This should be unthinkable; but with this administration, and with their near martial-law attitude about this never-ending "war on terror", it's not. It's thinkable.

This scared me and my friend because I'm very, very much not a conspiracy-theorist-leftist kind of person prone to such paranoid or near-paranoid thoughts. Michael Moore irritates me more than not, for example.

But these folks are both desperate and incredibly morally self-satisfied and certain. (Not Cheney, he's just The Beast and very self-interested.) I can easily believe that some of them—including, significantly, dubya—are capable of convincing themselves that a Kerry victory would mean a loss for America in the "war on terror" and that this would be simply unacceptable. That doesn't mean it will happen, or is likely to happen.

But this is the one Al Qaeda attack on US soil scenario that does really scares the hell out of me. (Concerning the election, of course. Generally, any possible attack scares me.) I can see it being used as an excuse for the above.

Maybe, though, I've been touched by the paranoid flu. Probably so.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 10:37 PM on July 6, 2004

Eeewwww...you made me laugh at Rush Limbaugh
<Nelson Muntz> Ha ha! </Nelson Muntz>
posted by Dreama at 10:47 PM on July 6, 2004

It's not going to matter at all.

The Republicans are going to rig this election just like they rigged the last one. And they'll get away with it too, no matter how many black people in Florida are pissed that their right to vote was denied them.

Goodbye Democracy.

Hello Fascist Amerika!

(I hope I'm wrong, but I'm afraid I'm right.)
posted by geekhorde at 11:07 PM on July 6, 2004

dagny, stop with the bullshit. it sounds like you're trying to convince yourself more than the rest of the thread.

Oddly ... a good number of those posting in the daily leftist MeFi threads might do well do consider this.

not the kind of attorney Edwards was--he helped people after they were hurt and/or killed by big corporations

Which certainly is the Trial Lawyers position (the Trial Lawyers, of course, being one of the top two or three doners to the Democratic Party in the past several elections).

Of course, in the growing number of states where it is becoming nearly impossible to get an OB-GYN or pediatrician in rural counties - because malpratice insurance is now so high that doctors are simply leaving - that whole notion of "helping people fight The Man" may seem a tad questionable.

But of course, the fact that for every one person that has be "hurt or killed" by big corporations there are hundreds of thousands that have been helped - and that these people are all paying more money for the products and services that benefit them so that the John Edwards' of the world can do their noble work ... probably won't get mentioned as even part of the picture.
posted by MidasMulligan at 11:19 PM on July 6, 2004

But this is the one Al Qaeda attack on US soil scenario that does really scares the hell out of me.

Or an attack from the homegrown version.
posted by homunculus at 11:24 PM on July 6, 2004

Dang, EB, tear off the tinfoil, willya????
posted by konolia at 4:23 AM on July 7, 2004

MidasMulligan's right, what's a few disemboweled babies matter when there's business to be done?
posted by Space Coyote at 5:28 AM on July 7, 2004

Dick Morris says DISASTER IS LURKING: apparent positives could be overcome by big-time negatives if the trial-lawyer donations blow up in Edwards' face
posted by dagny at 6:22 AM on July 7, 2004

But of course, the fact that for every one person that has be "hurt or killed" by big corporations there are hundreds of thousands that have been helped - and that these people are all paying more money for the products and services that benefit them so that the John Edwards' of the world can do their noble work ... probably won't get mentioned as even part of the picture.

What Space Coyote said.

Why should corporations actually doing what they're supposed to--not killing or maiming people with their products--get mentioned at all? Isn't that a no-brainer? And isn't it a sin and a shame that corporations often don't bother with safety until someone actually is hurt or killed? Too bad for them if they don't like the bad publicity or that they have to pay--it still doesn't compare to the horror and pain people affected undergo. We pay extra for all the advertising and promotion that corporations (and doctors and hospitals and drug companies) do--why not pay extra for insurance and to cover their fuckups? (I won't even start on doctor and hospital fuckups)
posted by amberglow at 7:01 AM on July 7, 2004

But these folks are both desperate and incredibly morally self-satisfied and certain. (Not Cheney, he's just The Beast and very self-interested.)

Be careful: this is a potentially serious misunderestimation, IMO. (You know, it's actually a pretty apt term sometimes...)

You can't assume that because someone is intensely self-interested, they're not also deluded and fanatical. One of the great evolutionary advantages of modern post-calvinist protestantism is that it schools its adherents in how to live with contradiction. So Dick Cheney can both be absolutely convinced that he's acting in the morally right way, and absolutely believe that's where his motivations are, and yet the whole time be acting clearly and obviously to further his own financial interests in contradiction of is stated moral aims.

This isn't a slam at Christianity, per se, BTW. It's an observation about this certain variety of master-morality American Capitalists, of which The Dick and Dubya are really excellent examples.
posted by lodurr at 7:44 AM on July 7, 2004

Dick Morris says

Thank you, we can stop there.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 7:48 AM on July 7, 2004

I guess this kind of trial lawyer is ok for some people, huh? Chester James Doles, a former Klansman and the Georgia leader of the National Alliance, admitted Monday to illegal possession of a dozen guns.
During the 1990s, Doles was sentenced to multiyear terms for battery and burglary in Maryland. Federal law forbids possession of firearms by those who have been convicted of a crime and served more than a year.
Former U.S. Rep. Bob Barr, one of Doles' lawyers, said he expects Doles' sentence to be no longer than 10 years.
posted by amberglow at 7:53 AM on July 7, 2004

Konolia, you're right, that's pretty paranoid. It's not like me at all. I know you like these guys, but surely you can see why things like the torture memo and many other things have some of us not-paranoid types becoming more paranoid? There really is a constant subtext from this administration that in this time of national emergency, the executive branch is beyond congressional authority and judicial review (and entitled to keep anything and everything secret). Rhetoric from Bush to Ashcroft has been a steady "civil liberties and the rule of law are for peace time, not war time". And then there is this constant rhetoric that Dems are essentially unAmerican and all that. Put it all together and it seems to me that lots of people could convince themselves that a Dem victory in the election would be so disastrous for the US that suspending the election would be justified. Especially if there were another attack shortly beforehand.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:46 AM on July 7, 2004

EB, konolia still trusts them. Based on what, i don't know.
posted by amberglow at 8:51 AM on July 7, 2004

XQUZYPHYR, how about this:

from DCNights.com:

DickMorris says, "Mysty Love is extremely sexy, accomodating, and quite frankly a bargain. From BDSM to attending a State dinner, she's a pro—a class act—all the way. (Huge tatas!)"

Would you read that? You have to admit, the man can speak authoritatively on many, er, "inside the beltway" topics.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:53 AM on July 7, 2004

EB, konolia still trusts them. Based on what, i don't know.

Faith, of course!
posted by rushmc at 9:16 AM on July 7, 2004

And of course, thanks to Diebold we now have faith-based voting; because casting a ballot with one of those machines is technically indistiguishable from prayer.
posted by George_Spiggott at 10:12 AM on July 7, 2004

Speaking of inexperience
posted by homunculus at 11:41 AM on July 7, 2004

"The Sept. 11 commission, which reported no evidence of collaborative links between Iraq and al Qaeda, said on Tuesday that Vice President Dick Cheney had no more information than commission investigators to support his later assertions to the contrary."
posted by homunculus at 11:45 AM on July 7, 2004