Dan Quayle, 1988.

Very soon, a VP nominee will be selected. This has been a topic of much speculation, but it's important, I guess to keep some perspective about what lines like "I want someone who can be President" really mean. Here is what was written by the New York Times about Dan Quayle in 1988, quoting Jim Baker:

The Vice President's strategists said they hoped the Senator, who was introduced by the 64-year-old Mr. Bush as a ''dynamic young leader,'' would add strength in the Middle West and among women. James A. Baker 3d, chief of the Bush campaign, asserted that the Vice President had sought and found ''someone who is extremely well qualified to be President, someone who would be compatible with the President, someone who hopefully would help the ticket but, in any event, would not hurt it.''

http://query.nytimes.com/...

Watching the CNN bio of McCain brought it home to me in spades: McCain wouldn't just be more of Bush, McCain IS Bush, all over again.

Actually, since he's older than Bush, he was probably Bush even before Bush was Bush.

What is it that is perceived as so attractive, politically, about these smart alec bullies, these privileged bad boys who skate by on legacy and have the skids greased for them. Why do so many see their frat boy sniggering as humor, their veneer of bravado as courage? What makes these guys immune from the consequences of lying and cheating?

The Happy Happy Joy Club
By David Glenn Cox

Being the youngest of three children I grew up cynical, it was only natural. After being used and manipulated a number of times by my siblings, I learned to read the fine print.

"Mom says we can have some cookies if you go get them."

"David! What are you doing in that cookie jar? You know better than that! You know that you have to ask first! Now get out of there!"

"But, Mom?"

"Don’t but mom me, get out of there!"

An interesting news article can be found on the BBC News website (actually many can, but that's outside the scope of this diary) noting that a Deal on US troops in Iraq 'close'.

However, From what Condoleeza Rice says in the article, the President will have to repudiate the article:

In a joint news conference, Mr Zebari and Ms Rice said they had agreed timetables should be set for a withdrawal, adding that a framework was close, but not final yet.

"We have agreed that some goals, some aspirational timetables for how that might unfold, are well worth having in [the Status of Forces Agreement]," Ms Rice said, after meeting with Iraqi officials, including Prime Minister Nouri Maliki.

Image: Blank Black Screen for 3 seconds
Audio:Tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick (Old alarm clock/bomb style ticking sound twice per second. Ticking continues thru ad.


Announcer(soft non-attack voice): "Which John McCain are you going to vote for?"


Image on screen for 15 seconds: Boots/Helmet/Rifle fallen soldier image.
Text overly: 4144 american heroes dead
Audio: only the audio clips of John McCain: "Bomb bomb bomb Iran" "Iraq" "Russia" "War" "War" "War" "That's not too important. What's important is the casualties" "Q:Troops in Iraq for 50 yrs? A:Make it a hundred...that would be fine by me." "...cold war. This is an act of aggession"


Image on screen for 9 seconds: Distraught 50yr old couple at kitchen table with bills image.
Text overlay: # Jobs lost
Audio: only the audio clips of John McCain: "The issue of economics is not something I've understood" "Q: At what point do you move from middle class to rich A:How about $5 million"


Image on screen for 3 seconds, split screen: One side McCain hugging Bush, other side McCain and Bush holding birthday cake.
Text overlay: Large ? mark in middle of screen.
Audio: Old alarm clock goes off ringing loudly.

Just a quick diary.

How is it that Republicans think they can get away with proposing a candidate who was viewed by them as so inadequate in 2000 that he lost to Bush Jr?

It seems to me that the Reuters/Zogby poll, the LAT/Bloomberg, and RCP electoral college showing McCain cracking 270 mean one thing: we need to change the debate.

Energy has worked for McCain: accepting the gang of 10 proposal and then moving the story line towards HEALTH CARE is a key way to gain traction on the economy. Sen. Obama can not only talk about energy and green jobs but also universal health care and education grants. Real money in the pockets of americans that will translate into real change in their lives.

That would be an easy way of gaining back the votes of not only women but seniors.

The Ninth Circuit ruled that a person can challenge the inclusion of their name on the government's no fly list. Sounds pretty obvious that you should have that right, but that isn't the Bush Administration's position.

The Case is Ibrahim v Department of Homeland Security and it was decided by a two to one decision of the Ninth Circuit Court if Appeals.

Ms. Ibrahim was a Stanford student on a student visa from Malaysia, who also happens to be a Muslim. When she tried to fly home from San Francisco, she was blocked from boarding the flight, detained and handcuffed in front of her fourteen year old daughter, and taken to a police station. Two hours later she was released and she was permitted to fly home the following day after being subjected to "enhanced searches."

So I was watching McCain at SaddleBack, and I was thinking to myself, "This guy is awful.  How dumb does he think we are?"  Then I watched the after-debate analysis and I couldn't believe what I heard.  McCain was being praised for giving simplistic, stump speech answers.  Thinkers around the country observed that McCain's intellectual curiousity was shockingly low.  Meanwhile, pundits praised it as "clear," "simple," and "straight-forward."  I was puzzled about the dichotomy until I remembered a conversation I had back in 2002.

It happened almost completely out of the blue, a stunning example, as if we needed it, why American foreign policy under George W.Bush has not only been a disaster for America, but for the entire world.

Where is President Bush?

Look, I wish we never had to see him again. Hell, I can't stand the man. But finding The President in a news report about the campaign or in a campaign commercial recently has been like playing Where's Waldo? It's that absence at this critical hour that's pissing me off.

Watching the general election campaign so far, you'd think the incumbent Republican President didn't have a 30% approval rating. You'd think he wasn't reviled by over 50% of the American public. That's because John McCain is hiding the President and Barack Obama is letting him.

That needs to end. It needs to end now.

Why should anyone assume that John McCain is anymore "ready" or "able" to be President than Barack Obama?  Finally,  Jack Cafferty and Frank Rich are starting to ask this obvious question.

I am worried and am putting this out there to see if maybe I'm overreacting. I need some Kos help!

Until recently I was excited about the prospect of watching the Democratic National Convention. Now I am less sure. We all know that the Obama and Clinton camps have come to some sort of an agreement and have decided to enter Hillary’s name into nomination. Then a floor vote will be taken.  Of course Hillary has not yet released her delegates, and some say they need a "catharsis".  Will they in the end support Barack?  Some will, but how many? Will this vote be a sad parenthesis in the proceedings?

I felt on Feb. 5th that we could have a dream team for the Democratic Party. It was pretty exciting at that time to have two great candidates. We know how that went down. And now some kind of terrific team seems less likely.  Who will the V.P. be?  We need someone great. Is someone there in the wings, and did Obama pick him or her?

You all remember when Bush met Putin and came away saying that he got a "sense of his soul." This led Bush's famed "gut" guide to believe that he could work with the Russian President. It was the meeting that set the tone for the US-Russian relationship during the Bush administration.

Well, Glenn Kessler, the Washington Post’s Pulitzer Prize winning reporter, said people at the State Department aware of the conversation felt that Putin played Bush using an old KGB tale about a cross. Also, according to Ron Suskind, the CIA warned Bush that Putin "was a trained KGB agent ... [who] wants you to think he's your friend."

If what I've just read is true, the John McSame Public Relations Department hasn't learned a thing. Or, they're honing in on those ignorance is bliss skills. Either way:

Marc Ambinder:

What's the wisdom in John McCain's pre-announcing, to conservative-friendly media, the date (August 29) and location (Dayton, Ohio) of your vice presidential announcement?...Next week, it ensures that the press pays at least mild attention to McCain.

Really, John McCain? REALLY? August 29? As in, the third anniversary of the worst natural disaster in U.S. history? The response to which the worst president in U.S. history botched?

The following parody news story appeared seven years ago today. It was published and distributed by Yossarian Universal News Service (YU), the world’s first satiric news syndicate founded in 1980.

YU News Dispatch 037
Yossarian Universal News Service 081801
3:01:30:05 PM PST
START

WORLDWIDE POLL SHOWS MANY BELIEVE BUSH TO BE MISSING GREY MATTER
Pretend President Disputes Data And Tries To Cut Down Giant Sequoia With Plastic Spoon

Paris (YU) --A new joint survey released today, conducted by the International Herald Tribune and Yossarian Universal News Service, found that a majority of the world's citizens who were polled earlier
this month regarding their opinion of Presidential Pretender George W. Bush, overwhelmingly chose the word "lunkhead" when asked to pick a word that best described him.
        The survey of about 1,000 people in each country is the first of its kind to measure the attitudes of the international community toward an American leader.

Whodda thunk that Pakistan has a more vibrant democracy than the good ol' USA?  Perhaps there's a slight angle to this argument, but consider the roles of Bush 'the Guardian of Democracy' & Musharraf 'The Generalismo'.  Now, consider the following:

1.  Pakistan actually sees demonstrations that aren't composed of vapid demonstrators simply wanting personal attention.  In Pakistan the attention often comes from suicide bombers or zealot policemen, yet the heroic lawyers protest on!  When's the last time you saw a group of 1000 climbing fences and sucking tear gas in America - other than spoiled brat (F)anarchists?

2.  The protests actually mean something, as witnessed by the resignation of Musharraf on charges that he violated the constitution.  Charges?  Back in the good ol' USA the we have legislation (FISA again) which officially acknowledges wrongdoing, but there's nary a twitch on the protest line.  

Combine the above with news about the dismal state of American electorate involvement and ability and it suggests that we need a kick in the pants.  Hmmm...Musharraf '08?

More hmmms...HS civics students graded on protest involvement?  Civil disobedience arrests as pre-req for Polisci degrees?

Cross-posted (with some mods from MuslimMatters.org)

A new chapter in the long and painful saga of the "War on Terror" has been revealed to the public. The facts are murky, the details impossible to confirm.

While there are several possibilities, there is one that most will find almost impossible to believe. We are not ready to believe that Dr. Aafia is a star terrorist-- a claim that is ironically being jointly pushed by both the US Government and Al-Qaeda. Why are these opposing sides pushing forth this nearly consistent portrait? The answer lies in each group's malicious agenda.