(CNN) - Cindy McCain on Tuesday ruled out the possibility of serving in her husband's possible presidential administration.
Mrs. McCain, the wife of presumptive Republican nominee John McCain, told NY1 that while she would want be an "advocate" for issues like education as first lady, she has no plans to serve in an official post.
"I do not ever envision myself as being involved in the McCain administration, as it has been put, at all,"she said. "But my husband and I do talk and I want to be party to listening to what his ideas are too."
We, the progressive Democrats, have never before been as strong and organized. In this Presidential race we have the tools and the sizable base to fight back against the Republican attack machine. Not only should we defend our candidate, we will need to fight back as well.
The Vice Presidential Quest
It has not even been one week since Barack Obama clinched the Democratic Nominee title, that we now must listen to blather about Hillary Clinton being his VP nod.
I wrote earlier on Wednesday, that it is Obama's choice and his choice only. In fact, it was Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, a Clinton supporter, who stated with his eloquent charm that, "You can't leverage the President of the United States to make you Vice President. It's like an arranged marriage it doesn't work," said Rendell Thursday afternoon. "I don't think you're entitled. I think the presidential nominee has the right to pick someone he or she is comfortable with, compatible with." I hope the Clinton surrogates get and UNDERSTAND what Rendell said.
Obama has indicated strongly that the next time he talks of VP it will be when he announces the VP candidate. This had to be stated since the Clinton surrogates were hot and heavy handed in trying to force Obama's hand for VP selection by going to the media and hocking Clinton's name. This backfired as Obama announced his three team VP selection committee of Jim Johnson, Eric Holder and Caroline Kennedy. Thus, we saw a Clinton press release stating she is not interested or seeking the VP slot.
So, we all need to take Obama's lead and chill. If Clinton can pass the vetting process, along with her husband and if Barack feels she would be an asset to the ticket, then fine. What we don't want is a pressured candidate to accept a nominee as John Kerry was pressured to do with John Edwards. They were two different individuals who were not playing the same game during that campaign and it showed.
Barack Obama will pick the best and most qualified person to be his running mate, not the other way around. This will also include being in synch, the same vision, and no drama added going forward; an Obama MANDATE for what has made his campaign a success within, as well as outward.
Barack Obama was campaigning last October in South Carolina when he got an urgent call from Penny Pritzker, the hotel heiress who leads his campaign's finance committee. About 200 of his biggest fund raisers were meeting in Des Moines, Iowa, and among them, near panic was setting in. Pritzker's team had raised money faster than any other campaign ever had. Its candidate was drawing mega-crowds wherever he went. Yet he was still running at least 20 points behind Hillary Clinton in polls. His above-the-fray brand of politics just wasn't getting the job done, and some of his top moneymen were urging him to rethink his strategy, shake up his staff, go negative. You'd better get here, Pritzker told Obama. And fast.
Obama made an unscheduled appearance that Sunday night and called for a show of hands from his finance committee. "Can I see how many people in this room I told that this was going to be easy?" he asked. "If anybody signed up thinking it was going to be easy, then I didn't make myself clear." A win in Iowa, Obama promised, would give him the momentum he needed to win across the map -- but his backers wouldn't see much evidence of progress before then. "We're up against the most formidable team in 25 years," he said. "But we've got a plan, and we've got to have faith in it."
More than seven months later, that faith has been rewarded. The 2008 presidential campaign has produced its share of surprises, but one of the most important is that a newcomer from Chicago put together by far the best political operation of either party. Obama's campaign has been that rare, frictionless machine that runs with the energy of an insurgency and the efficiency of a corporation. His team has lacked what his rivals' have specialized in: there have been no staff shake-ups, no financial crises, no change in game plan and no visible strife. Even its campaign slogan -- "Change we can believe in" -- has remained the same. Time Magazine, continue
Portugal Builds Biggest Solar & Alt Energy Systems by FishOutofWater; What's Going On in the Oil Market? by bonddad; Hillary Clinton: A Personal View by DemFromCT; America should have listened to Jimmy Carter on Energy in 1977. by TomP; The six second video clip that mystified a nation by JedReport; Leaked memo: McCain is playing you, Clinton supporters by upstate girl; MUST READ: Whitey Hoax blown wide open by The Termite; If Clinton Really Wanted to Be VP... by MissLaura; Waxman Closing in on Cheney's Role in Outing Plame by emptywheel; Tonight, Congressman Robert Wexler spoke to his mostly pro-Clinton constituents by jdodsonvls; Friends of Bill Warn Obama: Do Not Trust Clintons by wisconsin girl; New Abramoff Plea is Trouble for McCain & the GOP by dengre
WHEN Barack Obama achieved his historic victory on Tuesday night, the battle was joined between two Americas. Not John Edwards's two Americas, divided between rich and poor. Not the Americas split by race, gender, party or ideology. What looms instead is an epic showdown between two wildly different visions of the country, from the ground up.
On one side stands Mr. Obama's resolutely cheerful embrace of the future. His vision is inseparable from his identity, both as a rookie with a slim Washington résumé and as a black American whose triumph was regarded as improbable by voters of all races only months ago. On the other is John McCain's promise of a wise warrior's vigilant conservation of the past. His vision, too, is inseparable from his identity -- as a government lifer who has spent his entire career in service, whether in the Navy or Washington.
Given the dividing line separating the two Americas of 2008, a ticket uniting Mr. McCain and Hillary Clinton might actually be a better fit than the Obama-Clinton "dream ticket," despite their differences on the issues. Never was this more evident than Tuesday night, when Mrs. Clinton and Mr. McCain both completely misread a one-of-a-kind historical moment as they tried to cling to the prerogatives of the 20th century's old guard. Frank Rich, NYT
It is over. Though not as it should have been, but it is over. Hillary Clinton conceded, Saturday, June 7, 2008.
Many have not liked the way that the Clintons have conducted themselves during this primary season. Point noted.
Many did not like how the dog whistle tactics were used against Barack Obama. Point noted.
Many did not like how the Clinton surrogates had behaved, and there were many. Point noted.
Many are very angered at Hillary Clinton for not recognizing the historical moment of Barack Obama's win. Point noted.
Many are still livid that she did not concede until four days later and was still plotting to hang around. Point noted.
But in the end, she did the right thing, even though she was pressured to do so. The only thing that matters is unity, Democrats with our Independent and Republican friends, standing side-by-side to defeat the Republicans in the fall. Our leader is Barack Obama, we are his army, his coalition, along with the Clintons.
So, let's move on. It is time to write about defeating John McCain and the Republicans. The issues are too grave to let this squabbling continue. It is over. Barack Obama is the Democratic Presumptive Nominee and we need to get it together to win in November.
Why Hillary Lost? By some of the best political front pagers in the blogosphere......
Why Clinton Lost (And Why Obama Just May Win Big In November) by georgia10
Why Clinton Lost: She Fought the Last War, With the Wrong Generals, and Not Enough of an Army by DHinMI
ok, i am not gonna lie. i have become the al rodgers, jr. of the slides. can't help it. with so many pictures to pick, it is only right. hail to the master al, though. it has been a HELL OF A WEEK. barack securing the nomination, hillary don't want to leave yet, hillary being pushed off the stage, hillary meeting with barack and hillary finally endorsing obama fully. man, is it that hard to lose? this is a primary race that many books will be written about, and it will all focus on the skinny, 2 year u.s. senator from illinois beating the clinton brand. that is the story for years to come. ok, we are onto mcsame, and it is time to go after him in earnest. we know by november it will not be all sugar and spice. whatever you are doing, remember to continue to stay engaged and focus on obama and not the drama....
Some people doubt that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama could peacefully cohabit the Presidency and Vice-Presidency, but a little thought suffices to chase away those shadows!
Begin with the delightful picture of Wild Bill canoodling interns and peeking at top secret memos in the Oval Office. Who else could balance Barry's android persona with all the messy fleshiness of human nature at its most human?
Meanwhile Hillary and Michelle could amuse an exhausted nation with an unending series of sexy cat-fights! It wouldn't take much staging to transform the White House into an entertainment venue on a par with the WWF or Friday Night at Porky's! Mud-wrestling in the Rose Garden! What a great distraction from our worthless currency, collapsing infrastructure, quagmires in Iraq and Afghanistan, etc, etc...
Chelsea could babysit the Obama girls while Bill and Barry chugalug Bud Lites and Michelle pulls Hillary's hair completely off her head!
"Die, you bald-headed bitch!"
"Eat a cheeseburger, you bloodless android!"
Get ready for a gorilla hootenanny in the White House! It's waaaaay better than C-Span!
When a rumor about a tape of Michelle Obama ranting and raving at Trinity first hit the blogs, we wondered if there was any truth to it. So, we just used Google to try as best we could to piece together her public schedule for the last few years, cross referencing that with the other clues that started coming out about what Michelle supposedly said, and who was with her when she said it. We just looked for times she was in Chicago before the national media would have been paying any attention to her (so, basically, everything prior to Barack Obama's speech at the DNC Convention in 2004: logic dictates she would be less inclined to rant and rave in public after she and her husband had a national profile). The break came when it was noted on the blogs that Michelle made her remarks with Mrs. Farrakhan at a panel discussion at Trinity. Having that, another Google search turned up the Jet magazine article, a trip to the Library to check out the microfiche of that issue got the photo of Michelle and the other panelists (with all their names), a Google search of those names all together got the schedule of events for the 2004 Rainbow/PUSH Coalition Conference, and that schedule ultimately led to the rest.
We have no idea if we are right, because we've never seen the tape. But, we don't understand why a journalist couldn't get the tape of Michelle's panel discussion to check if she does, in fact, rant and rave on this panel the way it's been described.
It doesn't seem to need a Woodward or Bernstein: just someone who knows how to use Google and who can sit down with a pad of paper and figure out when Michelle Obama would have had an opportunity to do something like this. Once that is known, journalists just need to get the tapes from her appearance at the 2004 conference to see what she said and how she said it.
Do we still have any journalists in this country?
That last bit is a very good question. Please note that at no point did they make any attempt to prove that the remarks actually occurred, they just found a point at which Michelle Obama and Louis Farrakhan were at the same event (which, considering it also had Bill Cosby and Clinton, isn't that remarkable). If the tape exists, then now we know where to get it, either to debunk or prove these charges. But then again, even if someone does, it doesn't matter, because then it just becomes somewhere else that these comments were made. A different time, different place, different attendee, different google search.
UPDATE: I just did a search of my own... on LexisNexis. Found that JET article. Michelle Obama is not named ONCE in the article. That picture they have is the only evidence to be found. And there's no other mention in any other publication I can find. So perhaps there is video of this meeting, perhaps there is some sort of evidence that something was said. Somehow I don't think so. The fact that No Quarter jumped immediately onto this bit of gossip speaks volumes.
UPDATE 2: Thanks to soyousay for providing a link to the program that debunks this thing even further. Ms. Farrakhan was not featured at that conference. Here is the list from the program:
M.C.s: Cheryl Burton and Karen Jordan, ABC 7
Keynote Speaker: Reverend Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.
Shoshana Johnson, Retired United States Military
Michelle Obama, University of Chicago
Not only was the keynote speaker Jesse Jackson, Michelle Obama is listed as a special guest. Not even as the actual host. Kinda hard to believe she would be allowed to ramble on for half an hour, huh?