Kennedy Wants Clinton's Senate Seat, But Some Cry Foul. Is All Fair In Politicis and Kennedys?

After more than a week of does she or doesn't she chatter, Obama supporter and childhood education activist Caroline Kennedy has made her intentions for Hillary Clinton's New York senate more clear. The New York Times recently wrote that Kennedy wants the job.

Some are surprised. Kennedy has spent nearly all of her life out of the political fray. While her cousins ran for office, she worked on her charities, wrote and edited books and mostly remained a political wallflower/family symbol as the only surviving child of President John F. Kennedy. While educated and politically curious, she simply didn't seem interested and who could blame her? Her entire family tree is littered with politicians, some successful, some not, some who like their Ambien and alcohol too much and some who faced an untimely demise.

Politics is an ugly business and you have to be one part Messiah complex, one part biggest ego in the world to withstand the dramarama that surrounds it. You have to be think you're Allen Iverson, that you're "The Answer" to the problems of your constituents. That you can deliver ... hopefully better than Iverson.

This is a compliment to Kennedy in the fact that I, quite honestly, did not think she had the ego for it.

Kennedy sank her gigantic familial chompers in for a huge bite of the political apple this year when she threw her reputation and last name behind Barack Obama for president. Apparently she is hungry for more.

But not everyone is skipping down Camelot memory lane. Especially those who supported Hillary Clinton in her presidential run (and that was the vast majority of New York Democrats), those who feel they've politely worked hard and waited their turn (that would be another family name, Cuomo, as in NY State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo) and those who involuntarily roll their eyes upon hearing the name Kennedy.

The United States of America doesn't have a monarchy, but that doesn't stop Americans to choosing to worship the political dynasties of their liking. The Republicans love the Bushes. Democrats still overwhelmingly love the Kennedys.

But the Kennedys are shrouded in desire and mystique because of when they came to political prominence and the life altering events that surrounded them. You can't get a much bigger backdrop than the 1960s, defined by war, civil unrest, injustice, violence, youth movements/youth culture and ideological warfare. If you couldn't make a name for yourself that decade it simply couldn't be done. But two assassinations shared by one political family was enough to wrap the Kennedy name up in romance. And so the name came to embody a certain American mythology. While the story is rooted in truth, the Kennedys are just people, extremely rich and influential people, but if all the boys and their alcohol/drug/women troubles have taught us anything, they are flawed.

A last name doesn't guarantee greatness.

But I suppose my larger point is -- why? Why does Caroline Kennedy want this job? Is this about the people, the party or the family name? Or is it all three? Are their individuals more qualified? Actress/activist Fran Drescher, quite strangely, wants the job. A reader floated Harold Ford Jr.'s name to me as a possible appointee for Clinton's seat. He was a supporter of her and has become more of a New Yorker, leaving his native Tennessee and his father's sphere of influence. (Yet another case for nepotism, but in New York the Ford name has less tread.)

Rev. Al Sharpton as endorsed Kennedy, yet a New York Democrat has compared Kennedy to "J. Lo," in the regard that they both have name recognition. How does this affect New York Governor David Paterson, who has to make this choice? Kennedy could definitely pull the money needed to hold the seat in 2010. And she has the name recognition. After all, Paterson would also be up for election in 2010 and it wouldn't hurt to have some attention grabber on the ticket, but ... what is this?

I was hoping Kennedy wouldn't want the job because you can't talk about Caroline Kennedy as a politician without talking about her family, specifically the mix of martyrs, tragedies and fuck ups that make up the Kennedy political graveyard. And Kennedy has no other political history to discuss other than the family history, turning us all into vulture voyers yet again. And people complain about "affirmative action" when it involves us at the bottom of the class warfare food chain, but isn't the potential Kennedy appointment the more classic case of "affirmative action?" As in, her last name is Kennedy therefore everyone acted affirmatively in her appointment?

I'm not saying Kennedy's not qualified. Qualifications for all elected offices are bare bones to make it easier for anyone to run. She's highly intelligent and politically astute and is easily the most likeable Kennedy, but 90 percent of her likeability is based in the fact that she is an activist who raises money for charities. She's seems nice and is non-controversial. But it's hard to get excited about this unless you like reruns. This isn't a "Great Gastby" scenario of the self-made politico, like Barack Obama or Bill Clinton, who had no name, money or status to trade for power. This is romance based on an old, doomed relationship in hopes it will be like the love before.

Will this be love redux or is Gov. Paterson about to potentially pass over better contenders to please those who can't get over our lack of monarchy? Is there someone else who would be better for the job? The answer is probably yes, but I'm almost positive that if Kennedy wants the seat it is truly hers to be had.

The name is still in demand.

Sheeeeee'ssss Baaaaaaaaaa-aaaaack!

The not-quite-South-by-the-way-of-Illinois-by-the-way-of-New York HAS RISEN AGAIN! She told you she'd be back! Like the Terminator. Only this time she's working for the O-Team. And since the saga over her possible appointment has been going on and on for more than two weeks now no one is surprised.

Every day President-Elect Barack Obama's potential cabinet keeps looking one-part "Team of Rivals" and one-part "Justice League." Could the names be any bigger? Could the egos surpass that girth? All I want to know is who is Batman and who is Superman and is Batman carrying his emergency kryptonite to keep Superman in check? Inquiring nerds want to know!

My thoughts on Clinton for Secy. of State? I'm ambivalent and bemused and fascinated. I want to see this play out. While it's obvious that Sen. Clinton really, really, really wanted to be sworn in herself come Jan. 20th, I don't think this is necessarily part of some Machiavellian plot to destroy the Obama Administration from within. By hitching her wagon to the Great Hopemongerer, she's now completed her transformation as "ride or die" Obama. As in, if Obama fails in his foreign policy she will feel that same stiff, cold wind that occassionally blows at the backs of Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell for their roles in the many fiascos of the Bush Administration as Secys. of State. This is make or break time.

As in, she needs to make this work for the good of the country and her own reputation.

In the end, as a politician (or as anything for that matter) all you have is your name. Once that goes, you go and there's no amount of wishful thinking (see, Bush, George W.) that will make a giant turd of a presidency blossom into wildflowers.

Clinton has chosen not to play passive in this and I'm not surprised. This is the first Democratic administration since her husband's and it's so damn historic presidential historians are having preemptive orgasms anticipating every ounce of minutae they will collect and preserve for prosperity. I half expect Doris Kearns Goodwin to pass out from a case of the vapors.

The only thing that's sticking in my craw is my beloved blowhard of MSNBC, Chris Matthews, who's foot-n-mouth disease knows no bounds. Last week I had to endour the most moronic conversation on Hardball where he (and strangely enough, other pundits who should have known better) batted around the notion of Bill Clinton running for Hillary's senate seat.

Bill Clinton. William Jefferson Clinton. Former president of the United States. Former "Leader of the Free World." Former Commander-In-Chief. Former HNIC and it's all about me, me, me where they played "Hail to the Chief" when he entered a room and everywhere he went was like TV's "Cheers" -- everywhere he went everyone knew his name. Bill "I'm a Rhodes Scholar with no impulse control who could not stop chasing tail because Prince's 'Pussy Control' was about me, man. The pussy is in CHARGE! I just follow the smell wherever it leads me. Don't tell Hillary! But it doesn't matter because I beat every mutha fucker who tried to impeach me! I am untouchable, the slickest of the slick and my dick is bigger than Gods!" Clinton.

That Clinton to run to be a junior senator from New York.

Seriously.

Bill will give up his charity for his wife's potential appointment, but after being president being senator is being Pope and choosing to go back to being a postulate and Bill is no longer the student. He is the teacher, you philistines! And the ego's on fire -- the Comeback Id would rather kick it with his Billionaire Boys Club wingman Ron Burkle for the next four to eight years, picking up chicks in Prague. Debating things like who would beat who in a fight -- Sam Jackson as Mace Windu from Star Wars versus Sam Jackson as the Octopus in The Spirit? Ruminating on all the girl's he's loved before.

I always saw Bill as being Henry Hill from "Goodfellas," the real life gangster who moved up within a crime family but was brought down by his own excesses. When the party was over he griped that he had to live like a regular "schnook."

Senator Bill Clinton ain't happening because Big Willie ain't gonna be nobody's schnook. He's not about to return to Washington, DC only to be Sens. Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer's bitch. He'd rather kill himself. Or them. Hell, that's probably one of the reasons why Hillary bounced from the senate anyway. Ted Kennedy was cock blocking her on health care reform because it was his baby first. So the Clintons like to win and Hillary's decided to take her toys and go join the winning team.

Unfortunately, there will be drama, real and imagined. I put a big emphasis on "imagined." The main accusation and criticism of the Clintons, both Bill and Hillary, is that their ambition is wild, ever reaching and starkly naked. While it is true, they know how to play the game better than most and can manipulate the press with the best of them -- all politicians are flagrantly and brazenly ambitious.

Barack Obama's ambitious. He's just a master of his own domain. He has slayed his dragons. He is in control of whatever demons he may possess, or perhaps he vanquished those demons long ago. He is not a man starved for sex, affection and approval and he is not a woman married to that mess, dealing with her own self-doubts and calculations.

He's in "control." If there were ever a salacious, unhinged, kinky scandal surrounding the O-Man I would be the first one calling "bullshit," only to be followed by shock and horror. But if Bill Clinton gets caught playing "grab hands" with Kim Kardashian tomorrow I'm not going to feign indignation.

Barack is in control and he's in control of this selection of Hillary Clinton.

She knows the drill. He's her boss. The Secy. of State's job is the execute the president's vision. Yes, she can offer insight, but as Colin Powell will tell you, even if you think the president is really taking an "L" there, you have to either get on board or resign.

Very few resign.

And if for some reason she doesn't know the drill and the media circus, Matthews, et al, becomes too much it will be up to Obama to say he's had enough of life under the big top.

Either way. I really don't think folks should spend too much time worrying about it. Obama's got this.

Women for Obama -- Except For One Who'd Rather Cut Off Her Nose to Spite Her Face

You take two steps forward and one step back in the dance of the die hard Clintonista.

Most are smart women. They measure their odds. Do they want the guy who beat their gal, but shares her platform, or Mr. Can't Answer A Question About Contraception and Insurance Companies? There's really not much of contest here. If you like your women's rights movement with pro-reproductive rights, pro initiatives for the healthcare of women and children, plus some equal pay for equal work you're stuck rooting for the team with the "D" on their chest.

That's what several women's rights groups did Tuesday -- drawing the line in the sand and joining Sen. Hillary Clinton in chanting "No way, no how, no McCain, no Palin."

Six organizations -- the Feminist Majority Foundation, the National Organization for Women, Business and Professional Women/USA, the National Association of Social Workers, the National Congress of Black Women and the Women's Information Network -- all came out for Team Obama and against the woman Arianna Huffington dubbed a "Trojan Moose."

Don't let the vagina fool you. Women actually vote with their brains.

WASHINGTON - Women's rights groups endorsed Barack Obama for president Tuesday, asserting the historic selection of a female Republican vice presidential candidate does not make up for John McCain's lack of support on issues important to women.

"We don't think it's much to break a glass ceiling for one woman and leave millions of women behind," said Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority Foundation ...

NOW backed New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in the primaries. "We join with her in saying 'no,'" said NOW President Kim Gandy, referring to a line Clinton used at the Democratic convention last month. "No way, no how, no McCain."

Gandy and Smeal dismissed polls that suggested McCain has received a boost in support from white women after he picked Palin.

"The die is not cast yet," Smeal said.

Indeed, but not everyone got the memo on (or got over) the Clinton v. Obama slapfest being moot. Namely a wealthy Democratic Party operative, Lynn Forester de Rothschild. According to CNN, Forester de Rothschild is a prominent Sen. Clinton supporter and member of the Democratic National Committee’s Platform Committee.

She is the CEO of EL Rothschild, an international holding company and is married to international banker Sir Evelyn de Rothschild. CNN reported, "Forester is a member of the DNC’s Democrats Abroad chapter and splits her time living in London and New York."

And now this wealthy woman of status and means is endorsing John McCain.

Why, you ask?

Steady yourself for the most hypocritical, pot calling the kettle black and the skillet"uppity" statement ever.

In an interview with CNN this summer, Forester did not hide her distaste for eventual Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.

“This is a hard decision for me personally because frankly I don't like him,” she said of Obama in an interview with CNN’s Joe Johns. “I feel like he is an elitist. I feel like he has not given me reason to trust him.”

He's an elitist and she's an insanely wealthy former "Hillraiser" who generated more than $100,000 in funds for Clinton's failed campaign. A person who travels and lives abroad and is married to a guy who has sir as a title.

Je accuse!

What is up with elites calling Obama "elitist?" Is this woman for real? Really, really real, son. Want raw deal, son, if it's really real, real? She kicks back at the dive downing shots of tequila while field dressing a moose and talking about Toby Keith albums and NASCAR? She's down with the NRA and OPP and the STD or whatever banal stuff people like Forester de Rothschild think us regular dumbasses are down with? How hood can you be when your name "Forester de Rothschild?" It even sounds like it belongs next to Richie Rich, the Roosevelts, the Rockefellers and Archduke Ferdinand.

And how could she support Hillary? Hillary and Bill Clinton became "elitist" the moment they were proclaimed President and First Lady of the United States. Next to being the Pope I don't know if there's a more elite office on the planet. And some would even argue the Clintons became elites before that. And what is up with hating people for being educated and refined? I thought elites liked the idea of people like them being in charge? Sort of like an American version of an aristocracy, falling in love with powerful political families like the Kennedys and the Bushes.

But let's just keep it real, Ms. Insanely Rich Lady With Elitist Sounding Last Name, this really isn't about Barack's Ivy League education and ability to pronounce "nuclear." Don't make up a fake hypocritical reason. Just say you are so blinded by bitterness over Clinton's loss (or racism, whatever, it's you're party, rich elitist lady) that you don't care. You're willing to let your house burn down because you don't like the fireman who came to put it out.

All those issues you claimed to love didn't really mean anything after all. At the end of the day you couldn't accept the loss that even both Clintons have worked their way through. You're still holding on to hate. Enjoy yourself because if McCain wins, pulls a William Henry Harrison and you're living under the theocratic fiefdom of Queen Pink Pony Princess Polar Bear Killer President-for-Life Sarah Palin, where you have to go to Mexico to get your birth control pills and the Supreme Court rolls the Constitution back to 1787 and I have to move to Canada because I'm not down with being anyone's slave, we'll rest easy knowing that you didn't vote for that elitist Obama. No. You chose the lazy son of an admiral who is married to a wealthy heiress who can just drop $300,000 on an outfit.

*Thanks to reader Dexter T. for the tip!

Hillary Clinton Died For Sarah Palin's Sins

HRC, your legacy is under threat by a barn-burning, "Feminist For Life" from Wasilla, Alaska. Whatcha gonna do?

As I watched Alaskan Gov. Sarah Palin's "Pitbull with lipstick" speech Wednesday night I wondered, "What is Hillary Rodham Clinton thinking?"

I only say this because I can't imagine that it sets well that Palin, a woman who is diametrically opposed to almost everything HRC professes to believe in, is taking her "18 million cracks" and running with them. And as she grasps the crown as the new political princess her defenders in the party and in the media cry sexism over every critique of Palin's qualifications and past.

It was surreal watching Gloria Berger and Campbell Brown parse Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's statement where he called Palin "shrill," pointing out the sexism when I recall a lot of sitting on hands over Clinton. As Democratic commentator Paul Begala pointed out, Clinton was referred to as a "bitch" on almost every cable news network, including CNN and it's affiliates, yet no one had boo to say and every pundit was telling Clinton and her throng of followers that she needed to suck it up if she was going to run with the big boys.

Now those same individuals who relished in trashing Clinton are rushing to Palin's defense. You can't really blame Begala's disgust. As a Clinton supporter he was among the many Clintonistas and feminists who felt they were dismissed as "whiners" in the face of the mocking of Clinton's voice, clothes, looks, record, sexuality, "victimhood," tears and morals.

But now it seems all the efforts of women and men to fight the sexism that dogged Clinton was only for Sarah Palin's benefit. Republicans have gone from "women who play the 'victim' card are whiners" to rallying around Palin and crying sexism at detractors.

And everything is sexism.

Question Palin's thin resume? You're a sexist. Question Palin's integrity in the light of "Troopergate?" You're a sexist. Question her dedication to ultra conservative, anti-abortion causes? You're a sexist. Mock her failed beauty queen storyline and Hockey Mom narrative? You're a sexist.

Question if McCain only picked her for the most cynical of reasons? You're a sexist.

Listening to Clinton Hater Dick Morris cry that no man would ever be questioned about their ability to parent while governing is almost vomit inducing. Hearing Sean Hannity behave as if he actually gave a crap or understood feminism made my head swim. Everything is relative, and now the Clinton Campaign Crucifixion on the cross of feminism has become Palin supporters' "Remember the Alamo."

Like the real battle for the Alamo, the men inside sent word to their leaders that they needed reinforcements, but barely got anything. The leaders deciding that the Alamo was fated to be lost.

Now Republicans, who hate both Clintons and fought them using everything from bogus charges that they murdered Vince Foster and countless Arkansans and various "bimbos of the week," are holding up Hillary as a martyr. "Remember Hillary!" they shout, following their new Femme Fatal Republican icon, Sarah Palin, an NRA, gun toting frontiers woman.

Unlike the Texians fighting for the Alamo in old San Antonio, Hillary Clinton is not dead. Her campaign is, but Sen. Clinton lives -- and so do her supporters who remember the rude jokes, jibes and digs that helped doom her campaign. Will they stand by as Palin becomes the no. 1 benefactor of their political dreams? Will Hillary stand silent while another woman takes her place as the most visible female politician on the national stage? Will feminists for reproductive rights stand idle while the right worships a "Feminist For Life," aka an anti-abortion candidate who wants to make abortion illegal? Will they all remain silent as their legacy is stolen by a Palin Come Lately steals their proverbial cracked glass ceiling?

Will the real Hillary Rodham Clinton please stand up so Sarah Palin and her posse can shut up?

There's a new line drawn in the sand and Palin crossed it. How long will it be before Clinton's pride and ego compels her to take back what was hers?

It's the Issues, Stupid: Part Deux

Here is the actual video for anyone who missed it. I wrote about it after Hillary's speech.

It's garish in so many ways and has been played several times on CNN already. This is frustrating for me on so many levels because I'm sick of the media playing up what boils down to a fringe group of hardcore Hillary dead-enders who really, at this point, hate Barack more than they actually love the issues they claim they are for.

I'm also tired of the constant stream of haterade from Barack supporters about Hillary supporters and the Clintons in general. Theses are politicians. You can't get emotionally invested in them. You can like them. You can admire them. You can support and vote for them, but once you get lost to the pique of a back and forth campaign you start poisoning your own rationality.

No matter how the press hyped it, the Democratic Primary was not nearly as negative as past Democratic Primaries. Almost every blow between the two candidates was off-kilter, coded or passive aggressive. This was mostly because both candidates were running in Democratic Primary where the field is full of potential land mines of groups you could offend. One gaffe and every gay, black, Latino, feminist, blue collar, Ivy League intellectual, single mother, Liberal, progressive, populist, union member will hate you. Clinton tried whatever she could to stop him, dancing on the edge of knife wanting to win, but not wanting to be called a racist and in the end losing on both fronts.

I'm tired of the conspiracy theories about the Clintons. I can agree that they can be arrogant and self-absorbed, but I have no desire to hear old, rehashed Republican talking points from the 1990s coming out of the mouths of Barack supporters. The same supporters who are fighting Republican talking points of Barack being a secret Muslim who studied at a Madrassa.

I guess I want both Hillary Clinton and her supporters to be gracious in their defeat and I want Barack Obama and his supporters to be humble in victory.

He won. She didn't. Can we call for a moratorium on reliving the Hillary Hate of the primaries now that it's all over?

And can this woman in the video please, catch a clue? I want to shake her violently and scream for her to be rational. Barack Obama isn't the Antichrist anymore than Hillary Clinton is the devil. Can't people see that the hardliners are cut from the same idealogical cloth? Care more about your life and your community. I am tired of such childishness.

For the blog AroundHarlem.com I wrote the post "Un-Break My Party," (set to run later today) which basically sums up my points here. Any lingering angst is just poisonous. It's time for everyone to kiss and make up.

I wonder if the speech was enough to bring about some calm reflection and rationality to the waring tribes of the Democratic Party. I hope people who love Barack can feel proud and solid in him being the nominee without still worrying, obsessing or foaming at the mouth over the Clintons. I hope people who love Hillary can feel proud of the job she did and do what she asked of them.

It's the Issues, Stupid

She came. She saw. She didn't disappoint.

But as wonderful and stirring as Hillary Clinton's speech was Tuesday night there was another image not wonderful and not stirring that was going on in the background.

If you watched the speech on CNN, after Clinton left the stage with a resounding call for her supporters to vote for Barack Obama, a reporter amongst the delegates stopped one quavery voiced black woman and asked her opinion on Clinton's speech.

What followed was a surreal scene of a weepy, recalcitrant delegate who said she felt no connection to Obama. Who said she felt that in watching Hillary she saw a president on the stage. Who said she was going to cast her vote for Hillary as a delegate and was not sure what she would do in the coming months. She swore that she would never vote for John McCain, but Obama had "two months" to bring her around.

This woman's statements were amazing in the since that they were amazingly dumb. I am empathetic with people who loved Clinton and were upset when she lost. I am patient and understanding as I know many black people would be just as upset if this were the other way around. But this was childish and disgusting. This was like a spoiled child refusing to go to bed, insisting on being given ice cream or to have another story read or to watch television.

Clinton, in her speech, asked a very pointed question of her supporters: Was this race about her or about the issues she represented?

It was consistently remarked in the press and by party members that the platforms Obama and Clinton were running on were near identical. They agreed on virtually ever policy decision. They voted the same on any number of issues.

To this weepy-eyed woman I ask: If your house is on fire do you care whether it is the county or the city fire department who comes to put it out?

Far too often voters get caught up in a cult of personality and lose their logic. I've seen it happen with both Obama and Clinton supporters. To see people go so blind for a candidate that they could not be reasoned with, that you could not appeal to their logic for they were lost in the jabs and spats of the race. Everything was personal because there was no policy to debate. All Obama and Clinton had to fight over was tone and personality, the mythical "experience" versus "judgment" debates that were largely meaningless. In the Democratic Primary you voted on who you liked, loved, admired or identified with because there was no meat to quarter.

Healthcare, housing, education, civil rights, the economy, the war, judges, justice, environment, women's rights, gay rights, worker's rights, unionization, international diplomacy, abortion rights, poverty and racism. If these were your concerns and you liked them handled with a populist and/or Liberal slant you only have one place to go and that's the Democratic Party. For better or for worse. It's like having a bad meal at Applebee's and going on to forsake all food. That one meal did you wrong, therefore all meals were wrong. You'd chose death over a slider from White Castle.

We aren't electing Gods. We're electing men and women. Hillary isn't a golden calf in a pantsuit. But if you, my weepy friend, for some sick reason, see Sen. Clinton as the sun and sky and worship her brilliance, if you find her to be mother, daughter and the holy spirit, aren't you committing a sin against Goddess Hillary if Goddess Hillary tells you to get over it and vote for the guy with the "D" after his name? Aren't you defying her will if you continue to be indolent to Goddess Hillary's desires to see Barack Obama as president of the United States?

Did you really ever follow her at all? Because she's going on to Obama's side and you, weepy delegate, you aren't following. You're acting like a child.

This should be about the issues, not pouting or personalities. A voter should never let their heart get in the way of the right mind.

Don't let the house burn down to spite the fireman.

CNN Plays the Veepstakes

Since this morning CNN has ruled out Tim Kaine and Evan Bayh as Obama's prime picks. Joe Biden's house is a flurry of activity and James Carville and Paul Begala are a little harrumpfffed that Barack Obama's people didn't even bother to ask Hillary Clinton her opinion on the veepstakes, let alone offer her the chance to turn the job down.

Bayh is apparently taking it like a man since Maury Povich stopped by the house just to say, "Evan Bayh! You ARE NOT the vice presidential candidate for the Democratic Party!"

A source close to Evan Bayh expressed disappointment with the decision. "We are all sad," the source tells CNN. "But Evan was cool with this, whatever happened. He understands what he's got — a family, and a life he's very happy in."

It's like the Oscars. It was an honor just to be almost nominated.

As for the Clinton snubbing, it amazes me that people are surprised by this. The presidency only has enough room for one ego at a time. That's why George let Dick do all the serious conjuring. Besides, at this point they probably can barely stand each other. Do we need to repeat Kerry-Edwards where they both hated each other but gave it the college try anyway? I'm for it if everyone can bury the hatchets in other places but their backs, but the amount of aerodynamics required to pull a Clinton veep off would take the theorems of quantum physics to come to fruition.

All respect to Carville and Begala, but the Obama people were probably annoyed with the whole notion that they should have to placate anyone who was trying to beat the tar out of them a few months ago. The Clinton people are probably still mad over ... um ... probably everything. Pick something. Mark Penn. How the shizz went down. Sexism. Vanity Fair Magazine. MSNBC. Losing to the newbie. YouTube. Half their friends joining the Obama camp. Having black folks call them racists. Chris Matthews enjoying a fine meal of Hillary Hate night after night. And I'm sure she's mad at Bill for something, he was a double-edge sword. Once again. Lots of reasons to be mad.

But hey, it could still happen. Politics makes strange bedfellows, but I'd be wary of doing anything that could cause Chris Matthews to OD on reading the Starr Report for old times sake. Getting high off all that grossnesss.

Who's Your Veep?

It seems our dear Barry has made up his mind, only he hasn't let us in on the secret yet. The press is guessing the announcement may even come today. Until that happens though, The Snob is still in speculation mode.

Who's America's Next Top Democratic Vice Presidential Candidate? Who will be the one to inquire everyday how future President Obama is doing? Is he sick? Does he need me to do anything? Is there a tie vote that needs to be broken in the senate? Who, Obama? WHO! Will it be? Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh, Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, Sen. Joe Biden or Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine?

If you ask me, that sounds like a whole lot of boring (with hot headed Joe being the one thing that does not belong with the others)

Asked what he wanted in a possible president-in-waiting, Obama said:

"Obviously, the most important question is: Is this person ready to be president?" Obama said in an interview aired Friday on "The Early Show" on CBS. Second, he said, was: "Can this person help me govern? Are they going to be an effective partner in creating the kind of economic opportunity here at home and guiding us through some dangerous waters internationally?"

And, he added: "I want somebody who is going to be able to challenge my thinking and not simply be a 'yes person' when it comes to policymaking.

With Mad Joe and "The Uninteresting Foursome From Dullsville," I have to admit all these choices are safe and borderline negligible as a plus or negative for the campaign. The register a negative 9.5 on the Richter Scale. Although if picked, Biden will bite off some heads.

The press has ruled out other potential and more "colorful" veep candidates like New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, Sen. Chris Dodd, former Sen. Tom Daschle, former Vice President Al Gore, self-imploding former candidate John Edwards, Virginia Sen. Jim Webb and, of course, the 2,000 ton elephant in the room, Hillary Rodham Clinton. (Yes she will, indeed!)

I suppose he could shock the shit out of us and pull a Cheney, picking the person heading up his veepstakes -- Caroline Kennedy. But she has no executive or foreign policy experience.

But her last name is Kennedy! Nostalgia vote!

And there's still time to pick Will Smith, Barack! He's a war hero. He totally punched that alien in the head, then all smooth-like growled, "Welcome to Earth!" And he was a fighter pilot in that movie. He saved the freakin' world ... TWICE if you count "Men In Black." Thrice if you count "Hancock." It's never too late! Obama and Willie Will in '08!

I can see the Obama girls playing with the Smiths' kiddies on the White House lawn right now. I may pass out from the adorableness. And come on. Second Lady Jada Pinkett-Smith would be awesome. Imagine the fun she and Michelle would have joking about the height disparity alone.

Make my dream of an all black first and second family come true, Hope Man! I'll be awaiting my text message.

Obamas Going On Vacation, Heading to Hawaii

Nothing like a little break before the convention. And don't the all just look adorable per usual? These pictures were taken by The Associated Press at O'Hare International Airport in Chicago. Hawaii's going to throw a little welcome home bash for their quasi native son.

I'll keep my eye out for additional pictures of the Obamas in Hawaii and post them as I find 'em. If you find any, send them my way!

This is a good time for a breather. It's August. It's dull. The cable news and its punditocracy are so bored they're back to getting a woody over every fart and gurgle coming out of the Clintons' mouths.

Honestly, I just don't find what Hillary says to a small group of her most hardcore supporters captured on a cell phone news, especially since we all know she isn't going to do jack crap. This "Showdown at the OK Corral" speculation is just that -- speculation. I didn't even find Bill's inability to be all "rah, rah, sis cum bah" for Barack in that ABC interview very relevant either. Mostly because their passive-aggressive moaning means absolutely nothing.

Unless the two plan to immolate themselves in front of Invesco Field during Obama's acceptance speech I just don't give a fahrvergnügen. MSNBC's Chuck Todd just can't make me care just because Mike Barnicle is chanting "Fight! Fight!" while they guestimate what Bill is thinking based on facial ticks and voodoo.

But they have nothing to say when no one actually fights. When the Clintons throw out some faint praise. When Obama plays it all down and dismisses it all, pundits balk. Surely this is trickery! The media wants a repeat of the primaries, agitation for the sake of agitation. But no one will give it to them therefore the hype must be manufactured.

Everyone speculates that Obama will squeeze out the Clintons' roles at the convention and then news leaks that Bill Clinton will speak in the Wednesday slot. As if the last two term, popularly elected Democratic president, no matter how big of a douche he's been lately, was going to be boxed out of the convention. What? And give these morons MORE to speculate about?

At the end of the day, they'll still be up there, skinnin' and grinnin', because they both are party people ... Democratic Party people. And no one's throwing a party where they're not invited. All those cameras and pomp and circumstance. Bright lights. Big city. And he's a former president for Jeebus sake! Why was it ever a debate whether or not he'll be there? George W. is toxic and he'll be at the RNC convention. Probably not near McCain, but he'll be there.

Normally I try not to blame the messengers, but it seems like the messengers want to spin their way into some DNC disharmony hoping for any controversy during the convention when I doubt there will be any.

Why can't we just call the Clintons drama queens and move on? Why the over analyzation. It's not that complicated.