“I think we did a less than effective job in managing the conflict following the collapse of Saddam Hussein,” the former Massachusetts governor said at a news conference. “I think we were under prepared for what occurred, understaffed, under planned, and, in some respects, under managed.”

He is Clearly doing a better job than Hillary….

Of the Blue states (States the Democrats should win)
Hillary has won

Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, California, and Rhode Island

All by 17% or less

Obama has won

District of Columbia, Illinois, Connecticut, Maryland, Vermont, Hawaii, and Washington

All by 15% or more

Of the Swing states (State that can go Reb or Dem)

Hillary has won Big with
Pennsylvania and Ohio by 10%, and West Virgina by 41%

And slim victories in
New Hampshire by 3%, New Mexico by 1%, Nevada by 6%,
All of which Obama can claim in the general election…

Obama has won big with

Minnesota by 34%, Colorado by 35%, Virgina by 29%, Louisiana by 21%, Wisconsin by 17% and North Carolina by 14%

And a slim victory in Iowa by 9%

the media wants you to believe its going to be hard for Obama in the General election. There job is to bend the truth but dont believe them… look the facts up for yourself..

How to Pick a Veep
Jun. 23, 2008 | By KAREN TUMULTY
…to picking vice-presidential nominees…of Vice President should tell…three-star running mates. The right…
1591 words | view cover

So who might be pizazz choices for this year’s contenders? McCain might turn to his longtime hero Colin Powell, the former Secretary of State and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
===========================================

One of the stranger ironies the Constitution has bestowed on American politics is this: some 50 million people just finished choosing the parties’ two nominees in a grueling, yearlong primary campaign that cost millions of dollars and captivated the world. But when it comes to picking vice-presidential nominees, only two people on the planet get a vote: John McCain and Barack Obama. Between an explosion of democracy in the spring and an even bigger explosion of self-determination in the fall is a brief interlude of, well, something that Vladimir Putin could probably live with.

Related Articles

The Keys to McCain’s VP Pick
When you are running for President, you can’t exactly just have a few friends over on the weekend, e…
Wooing New Hampshire’s Undeclared
The guy in the purple “I’m a health care voter” shirt stands up to ask a question at a John McCain t…
Romney Frees McCain for New Fight
When Mitt Romney stepped forward to announce his endorsement of former rival John McCain, the former…
McCain: Frail with the Far Right
John McCain emerged from Super Tuesday the undisputed heavyweight in the fight for the Republican pr…

Everyone knows that the main qualification for the vice presidency is being ready, at a moment’s notice, to step into the most powerful job in the world. But what qualifies you to do the job and what qualifies you to get the job may involve two completely different calculations.

Both McCain and Obama have their selection committees already at work scouring candidates’ financial and personal backgrounds, voting records and public statements. In a sudden setback that could slow the Democratic nominee’s search, Obama lost his top Veep hunter, Jim Johnson, after the former Fannie Mae executive came under scrutiny for accepting preferential mortgages from a lender linked to the foreclosure crisis. Both camps will finish their work by early August, if not sooner. When they do, the choice of Vice President should tell us something — maybe a lot — about how McCain and Obama think and how they could run the government. There are a lot of ways to choose a Vice President, and each comes with risks. Here are five of the most reliable:

1. Play to Your Strength
Perhaps the fastest way to send a message about who you are is to pick someone who appears to be … just like you. In 1992, Bill Clinton picked another Southern baby boomer with a moderate record and a full head of hair. Then Clinton, Al Gore and their wives took a bus trip that looked like a rolling scene from The Big Chill. Picking Gore reinforced Clinton’s claim to be part of a new generation of Democratic pols, liberated from the tired (and losing) politics of the past.

If McCain were to take a similar approach, he might pick a No. 2 who has strong national-security credentials or another maverick who defies party labels — perhaps someone like independent Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman. By this standard, Obama might opt for a partner who is young and charismatic and also breaks a historic barrier of race or gender — perhaps Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius — or one who transcends partisan politics, like Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska.

2. Look at the Map
An old-fashioned road atlas is a good Michelin guide for three-star running mates. The right choice can add balance to a nominee whose roots may seem a tad too effete to go over well in the heartland — or add some coastal glitz to a rural candidate’s prairie-flat steadiness. As it happens, the last two candidates to make their picks with geography clearly in mind — John Kennedy in 1960 and Michael Dukakis in 1988 — were both from Massachusetts. And they both picked Texas Senators — Lyndon Johnson and Lloyd Bentsen — for the second spot on their ticket.

More narrowly, the map can help a nominee make a play for a state that is crucial in November, though that is never a sure bet. Kennedy, with Johnson as his running mate, squeezed by Nixon to win Texas with a margin of merely 46,000 votes, in what turned out to be one of the closest elections in American history. But Dukakis got swamped in the Lone Star State, where Bentsen’s considerable popularity was no match for the thrill of having another Texan, George H.W. Bush, in the Oval Office.

This year, given the closeness of the race and the importance of winning a few battleground states, McCain and Obama will keep at least one eye on the Electoral College map right through November. That means Obama will be considering choices like Ohio governor Ted Strickland (though Strickland says he would turn down the offer) or one of three possibilities from Virginia — Governor Tim Kaine, former governor Mark Warner or Senator Jim Webb. Or perhaps a Westerner like Montana governor Brian Schweitzer. McCain might get an Electoral College boost by picking Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty, Pennsylvania’s ex-governor Tom Ridge or former rival Mitt Romney, who has family roots in pivotal Michigan.

3. Shore Up Your Weak Side
On the other hand, the nominee might need a partner who compensates for his vulnerabilities or perceived weaknesses. That was plainly what George W. Bush had in mind in 2000 when he picked **** Cheney, a seasoned Washington insider with a long foreign policy résumé (who also happened to be heading up Bush’s vice-presidential-selection process). And Gore knew that in picking Lieberman, who had been one of Bill Clinton’s harshest Democratic critics during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, he was buying some distance from the incumbent Commander in Chief.

In McCain’s case, any doubts that voters have about electing a 72-year-old President might be allayed if he tapped someone far younger. And it wouldn’t hurt, in a year when gasoline prices and financial jitters have moved past the Iraq war to the top of voter concerns, to look for a sidekick who is more comfortable than McCain is with economic policy. It may well turn out to be someone about whom the conservative base, which is a little leery of McCain, is more enthusiastic. Some possibilities the two might want to consider as hedges against their shortcomings: McCain could pick Romney or Pawlenty, both of whom have executive experience and relative youth, or perhaps an economic-policy expert like former Ohio Congressman Rob Portman, who served as both budget chief and trade representative for Bush.

Obama, however, might want to address concerns about his youth and inexperience by picking a running mate who is older and has strong national-security credentials. He could turn to seasoned, silver-haired foreign policy experts like Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman Joe Biden or former Senate Armed Services chairman Sam Nunn. Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell or former South Dakota Senator Tom Daschle would add some experience as well.

4. Hug Your Rival
Even after a long, hard primary fight (and sometimes because of it), the ultimate winner almost always has to consider bringing the loser aboard the ticket. That’s what Ronald Reagan did when he picked George H.W. Bush in 1980 and how John Kerry came to choose John Edwards in 2004. Sometimes party unity simply demands it. “We ended up with the obvious choice,” says adviser Bob Shrum of Kerry’s decision to tap Edwards. “People in the party overwhelmingly wanted him.”

Then again, a former adversary can have extra baggage. For one thing, there will be lingering tensions and suspicions that former rivals still harbor ambitions of their own. The other party is certain to dredge up every damaging sound bite — “Voodoo economics!” — that your former rival hurled in your direction back in February. These worries are usually overcome. Already it’s hard to miss the steady thaw in McCain’s once frosty relationship with Romney as the former Massachusetts governor throws himself — and his formidable fund-raising operation — into campaigning for the man who beat him. And Hillary Clinton’s supporters — starting with her husband — are letting it be known that they expect Obama to give her serious consideration.

5. Hire Some Pizazz
Some nominees find themselves in need of excitement. That explains why Walter Mondale tapped Geraldine Ferraro, the first woman on a national ticket, in 1984. “This is an exciting choice,” he said at the time. Within weeks, Mondale did not see it that way.

Given their difficult history of tangling over just about everything, hardly anyone would have expected Bob Dole to pick Jack Kemp as his running mate in 1996 — least of all Kemp. As little as three weeks before he was selected, recalls Dole’s campaign manager, Scott Reed, Kemp was grumbling in GOP circles that he hadn’t been given a speaking spot at the party’s convention. So why did Dole pick him? “We were going for oxygen, heat and energy,” Reed says. “We went through the traditional list, and we just weren’t happy with what we were coming up with.” Kemp later turned out to be far more complicated a partner than Dole or Reed had imagined.

So who might be pizazz choices for this year’s contenders? McCain might turn to his longtime hero Colin Powell, the former Secretary of State and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Excitement is hardly what Obama needs, but he could pick a woman, such as Sebelius or Arizona governor Janet Napolitano, who might force McCain to spend more time in his otherwise safe home state.

But if you venture too far out of the box, voters will scratch their heads sooner or later — and eventually you might too. George H.W. Bush seems to have entered his Veep wish list into one of those dating computers back in 1988. That year he stunned nearly all his advisers when he tapped someone whose Midwestern roots were an antidote to his privileged Kennebunkport background, who was young to his old, who could balance his moderation with a dose of conservatism, and came up with Dan Quayle. The ticket beat the Democrats that fall, but by 1992 even Bush was trying to nudge him off the ticket. The ploy failed. Which is a reminder that however you choose a running mate, another rule will always apply: hard as it is to find a good one, it is sometimes harder to get rid of a bad one.

The substitute bill, sponsored by House Minority Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia and Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan, ranking Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, would create 6.2 million jobs through 2010, according to its Republican backers, compared with just 3.2 million jobs claimed under the House Democratic bill to be voted on Wednesday evening.

Democrats rejected the analysis, saying the plan’s reliance on tax cuts amounted to the same old song we always hear from Republicans, according to Rep. Richard E. Neal, Massachusetts Democrat.

But the analysis by the Ways and Means Republican staff relied on a formula used by Christina Romer, chair of Mr. Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, to estimate that Republican-backed tax cuts of nearly $400 billion over the next few years would produce at least a 6.1 percent increase in GDP.

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/28/republicans-say-their-plan-better-jobs-machine/

Using a jobs formula endorsed by Mrs. Romer and Jared Bernstein, now Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s top economic aide, that GDP boost translates into 6.2 million jobs over two years.

these people are screwing the AMERICAN taxpayer
and getting away with it

BARNEY FRANK STRIKES AGAIN
Last seen running political interference for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as they pumped up and then popped the multi-trillion dollar housing bubble, Congressman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) is now making sure that our tax dollars are bailing out an inept but politically connected bank in his home state:

Troubled OneUnited Bank in Boston didn’t look much like a candidate for aid from the Treasury Department’s bank bailout fund last fall.

The Treasury had said it would give money only to healthy banks, to jump-start lending. But OneUnited had seen most of its capital evaporate. Moreover, it was under attack from its regulators for allegations of poor lending practices and executive-pay abuses, including owning a Porsche for its executives’ use.

Nonetheless, in December OneUnited got a $12 million injection from the Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP. One apparent factor: the intercession of Rep. Barney Frank, the powerful head of the House Financial Services Committee.

Mr. Frank, by his own account, wrote into the TARP bill a provision specifically aimed at helping this particular home-state bank. And later, he acknowledges, he spoke to regulators urging that OneUnited be considered for a cash injection.

* * *

The bank that Rep. Frank of Massachusetts went to bat for, OneUnited, saw its capital level sink in early September after the U.S. took control of the overextended mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. OneUnited, a closely held Boston-based lender with offices in Florida and California too, held large amounts of Fannie Mae preferred shares. Their value plunged after the U.S. put Fannie and Freddie into a federal conservatorship, acquired preferred shares in them and took warrants entitling the government to nearly 80% of their common stock.

The moves left OneUnited’s capital badly depleted. A measure called “Tier 1 risk-based capital” equaled only 1.88% of assets at the bank, versus a desired level of about 6%. A OneUnited lawyer, Robert Cooper, says he called Rep. Frank and Rep. Maxine Waters of California, both Democrats, to complain that the Treasury’s move had hurt the bank.

Rep. Waters heads the House Financial Services subcommittee on housing, and until last spring her husband, Sidney Williams, was a OneUnited director. Rep. Frank, besides heading the Financial Services Committee, has longstanding ties to OneUnited, and recalls having had a deposit account at a predecessor bank in the 1960s.

Later that month, Rep. Frank was intimately involved in crafting the legislation that created the $700 billion financial-system rescue plan. Mr. Frank says that in order to protect OneUnited bank, he inserted into the bill a provision to give special consideration to banks that had less than $1 billion of assets, had been well-capitalized as of June 30, served low- and moderate-income areas, and had taken a capital hit in the federal seizure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The TARP bail-out program is beginning to look like nothing but a political scam — on a grandiose scale. The government takes hundreds of billions of our money and then doles it out to political cronies like OneUnited Bank. Meanwhile, less well connected banks like National City are thrown to the wolves — and thousands of people lose their jobs.

With unintentional irony Frank pinpoints the cause of this entire mess:

“I did feel that it was important to frankly try and save them since it was federal action that put them into the dumper,” Mr. Frank says.

Frank’s escapades provide further proof of Ronald Reagan’s maxim that the most terrifying words in the English language are, “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”

Since federal action (with Barney Frank as its #1 cheerleader) put us “into the dumper,” the Feds and Frank should get their grubby, incompetent hands off the economy and our wallets. Both will recover far quicker and more efficiently on their own than they will with any number of politically directed federal bail-outs or “stimulus” packages.

Is Massachusetts a closed primary? I read something somewhere that you cannot switch parties, but would unaffiliated/independents be able to vote in the primary?

Massachusetts is a liberal state, the only state to go for McGovern, and Romney is a Republican.

He’s also a Mormon. I am not aware that Massachusetts has a large Mormon population.