The Candidates
I understand that this a bit off the beaten track, but there will be plenty of time to discuss the presidential race as we descend into five months of general election mayhem.
That said, I continue to be thoroughly impressed by the effectiveness, leadership, and pragmatism of Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The lone shining star of President Bush’s second term, Gates has managed to oversee a successful shift in Iraq strategy, has begun to root out deplorable conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, and fought to restore a reformist and efficient attitude at the Pentagon.
In recent days, Gates has announced a major shake-up in Air Force leadership following a damning report of the mishandling of nuclear arms. This development only echoes the Secretary’s candid rhetoric and realist manner. From advising President Bush to replace the divisive Peter Pace with the calm and collected Mike Mullen as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to his insistence that the “defense establishment” must focus its efforts on the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Robert Gates has displayed all the admirable qualities that Donald Rumsfeld never mastered.
We soon forget that Gates declined the President’s request for him to head the new Department of Homeland Security following the September 11th, 2001 attacks. I am left to wonder if the sluggish and heavy-handed agency would be in far better standing today if Gates had accepted the reigns. Sadly, we shall never know…
I do not mean to offend or smear Tom Ridge or Michael Chertoff; In fact, I call Pennsylvania home and the Ridge remains well-liked here as a former governor. Yet, who else here believes that Robert Gates would be an interesting pick for vice-president? I know what you are saying: Gates is closely tied to President Bush and would do nothing to reassure voters about McCain’s age. But for those who have bantered about Ridge’s name for McCain’s running-mate, consider: Robert Gates is only two years older than Ridge and can stake claim to the national-security issue just as much, if not more, than the former Pennsylvania Governor.
Just a thought…I am not saying it would be ideal.
June 7th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
Gates, as far as I know, is strictly a military man.
McCain has more than enough military experience for the ticket - he needs a person with economic experience, or someone who has plentiful experience dealing with domestic issues (like healthcare), or someone who has executive experience, or someone who is known as a Conservative crusador.
And Gates doesn’t do much to provide our party with a direction for the future.
June 7th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
Absolutely zero chance, c’mon.
June 7th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
Michael, great post. Gates has been an effective cabinet member. Was it not rumored that is was GHWB that pushed for his appointment, not GWB?
June 7th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
Given that we have not suffered another terror attack on our Homeland since 911, the DHS seems to be operating well without Gates.
I judge by results, not msm stories.
I agree Gates has done well at DOD.
June 7th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
Too bad nobody gives Rumsfeld credit for reshaping the military to handle the threats of the 21st Century.
June 7th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
#5, DOD funding was re-directed to pork spending, and now there is an equipment shortage, and let us not forget the battle with the CIA over control of the Afghan war (during initial stages), which let Bin Laden get away.
Oh, and what about ignoring the generals when they asked for additional troops prior to the Iraq invasion.
June 7th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
Can we elect someone who has actually run a business and has been successful at it. This is not a plug for Romney even though I would love to see him on the ticket. ANYONE WITH REAL WORLD BUSINESS EXPERIENCE PLEASE!!!
June 7th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
I think McCain would ask Gates to stay as SOD for atleast a year, but not VP.
June 7th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
Kristofer, the fact that mistakes were made does not deny #5. Rumsfeld was brilliant, and made some mistakes.
Actually, the CIA-lead Afghanistan war was brilliant, too, minus the snafu that let Bin Laden get away.
June 7th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
Gates would be a good pick for governance. Gates doesn’t add anything electorally. A lot of the other picks like Giuliani and Jindal likewise add nothing electorally.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
McCain needs Romney.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
#9,”minus the snafu that let Bin Laden get away”, would you not call that the biggest “snafu” since ignoring the warning prior to the Tet offensive.
Former CIA operatives have gone on record on the success of the CIA-led operations, but also how they were left hanging by DOD when Al Qaeda was cornered. I have watched the interviews, where they were begging for the Airborne troops to be sent in.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:04 pm
#11, I am not sure a traditional choice would work this year. Romney is not the best candiate for the election, but funny enough he might be the best choice for governing.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Gates IS the lone shining star in Bush’s second term. Brilliantly put. However, I don’t think enough voters would pick up on this nuance.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
Rumor is that Bob Rubin is going to back McCain in the next few days now that Hillary has drop out.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:12 pm
I actually agree that McCain needs someone with economic creds, though I fear that with Romney, we’d end up with all sorts of distractions as the MSM plays up “Romney the Generic Republican” instead of “Romney the Turnaround Artist.”
This is similar to one of the best arguments I’ve read against McCain choosing a veep who is anything other than solidly pro-life. No matter how much the pro-choice veep doesn’t really care about the issue, supports things like PBA ban and conservative judges, etc, etc, the MSM will frame the pick as “McCain’s Pro-Choice Veep” even if a more accurate description is “McCain’s Veep Who Happens To Be Pro-Choice.” Then we’ll read all sorts of articles in Newsweek and such about how McCain is kicking pro-lifers out of the party, even if that’s the farthest thing from his intent.
Similarly, Romney would trigger all sorts of MSM pieces about how McCain is cynically playing for the base by picking a primary opponent, not how McCain is trying to up his economic know-how or win suburbanites in Michigan.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
There are so many aspects of this up coming election that are unpredictable. The only thing I can predict is if McCain does not choose someone with an economic background and that can also give conservatives a reason to vote in November - he will be TOAST.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Romney has too much Mormon baggage, especially with the recent LDS sect nuts publicity. Gates is damn good. McCain could go a long way with him. There are lots of good Republican economic people he could get. How about Paul O’Neill?
June 7th, 2008 at 10:22 pm
#18 It’s amazing our country has made head way with racial ignorance but not religous.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:22 pm
#17, the Republican base (Registered GOP voters) is so small this year that McCain does not actually need to pander to them. He has a larger potential voter pool with Indy’s and centrist Dems.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
#16: Great point.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
#19: That’s because religious beliefs are chosen. Bigotry refers characteristics that are UNchosen.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
#15, are you kidding?
Robert Rubin is the greatest. I know as a Republican I’m supposed to dislike him, but I can’t. He was the best economic adviser any President has had in my lifetime.
If Robert Rubin really is open to McCain, he ought to be considered for VP. He would be the perfect economic expert to balance out McCain.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
I completely agree that McCain needs to address economics and energy issues with his VP choice. I was only throwing out Gates’ name for discussion and I hope, if McCain wins in November, that the Defense Secretary continues on in some role.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
#22. There is bigotry with religion religion. How can you say there isn’t.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
minus 1 religion
June 7th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Um, I gave the explanation.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
I think the recent resignations of AF COS and Secretary as a result of the findings of the investigations into the nuclear flight and the nuclear weapon nose cone detonators to Taiwan was just the straw that broke the camel’s back.
Earlier in the year, during a speech, Gates lamented the lack of cooperation, and seeming unwillingness, of the Air Force to focus on the wars at hand.
Seems this face off between SecDef and Dept of Air Force was a pot that was ready to blow it’s top.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:40 pm
Gramm, Fiorina, Whitman and Rubin as his ecomonic team? I presume that would ensure tax, spending and regulation reduction.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
I think Metro uses different definition for bigot than the dictionary. He thinks bigot means “a person prejudiced against a group”.
The word actually means: “a person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own.”
June 7th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
So tell me Metro, have you ever read a DICTIONARY???
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
big·ot·ry Audio Help /?b?g?tri/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[big-uh-tree] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -ries. 1. stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one’s own.
Wow, so when someone doesn’t vote for a Catholic, Mormon, or Babtist because of their religous beliefs it is considered _________. (I’ll give you a hint: It rymes with Bigotry.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
That would be Baptist.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:47 pm
#22 According to the Metro Republican Dictionary.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:47 pm
Romney displayed bigotry toward Muslims. He said they weren’t allowed in his cabinet. HA! Remember that one? Gosh, I almost miss the primary season.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
If Romney was going to run into anti-Mormon bigots, it would be in the south - and he came #@%^ close to winning GA, and led at certain points in SC. You don’t get much more southern than that.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
“Romney displayed bigotry toward Muslims. He said they weren’t allowed in his cabinet. HA! Remember that one? Gosh, I almost miss the primary season.”
Did we ever get audio of that?
If I remember the situation correctly, Romney [reportedly] said that “the % of pop. that muslims make up doesn’t justify having one in the cabinet” - and that the person doing the questioning seemed to be pushing for a Muslim, not “could a muslim serve in the cabinet” but it seemed to me that the position of the questioner was that we should have a muslim in the cabinet.
You’d have to dig up the old thread.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
Well, then I take exception to the definition, which violates proper rules for definition by grouping essentially different things under the same concept.
It makes perfect sense to have a word that lumps together racists, misogynists, and others who hate groups based on unchosen traits.
It makes no sense to lump in with those intolerance of those with opposing ideologies, otherwise all conservatives and liberals are bigots. All theists and athiests.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
#36, yes but Romney was endorsing the absurd bigotry of political correctness and affirmative action in saying so.
And he made it ten times more absurd by being in a < 2% minority himself, begging the question why a Mormon would qualify for the Presidency if a Muslim would not for the Cabinet.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
Metro, you need not be intolerant of someone you disagree with. For example I’ll tolerate a liberal to speak about the wonders of bureaucratic federal agencies before I politely disagree.
June 7th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
The LDS and Muslim population in the country is roughly the same. Worldwide, Muslims outnumber LDS 100-to-1. Muslims - unacceptable/LDS - acceptable. My my, what rank hypocrisy!
June 7th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
Defending Romney, my guy McCain stated, “We live in a Judeo-Christian nation”. The lefites hammered him for that, so in a way Romney and McCain are not far apart. Of course there are people who do believe being LDS is not Christian.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
#38 We all know Romney was making the point that whoever the President would be needs to be qualified whether they are 1% monority or the 99% minority. Let’s not blow things up out of proportion.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
#42: No, the point he was making directly contradicted that, supporting quotas rather than merit. D’uh.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:09 pm
#43 D’uh is coming from mister ‘KNOW IT ALL’ that makes up his own definitions and gets owned by http://www.dictionary.com. D’uh.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:10 pm
40.
When was the last time a Mormon knocked down two towers in NY and killed thousands of people, bombed military barracks and openly seeked the destruction of the state of Israel? That might be the answer to your Question. I guess if you decided Good Vs. BAd based on percentages, than you could come to an awful lot of interesting conclusions.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
44. What’s even more funny is that the word Bigot originates from a religious meaning.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
#44 Doesn’t change Romney’s quote or its meaning. D’uh.
#45 That’s a fine argument, but that was not Romney’s argument.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
Kevin, Let it go. Metro finds you incapable of understanding where he’s coming from because you haven’t read enough George Will and Milton Freeman.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
47. I am not defending Romney today.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:14 pm
Bob, I don’t think LDS is Christian but that’s got nothing to do with elections or politics. I’m sure they don’t care what I think anyway.
I’d vote for a Mormon or a Muslim or a Budhhist for President if they was the wisest candidate.
Religion doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with the duties of a President.
That’s why Romney’s comment was either clumsy or offensive. The duties of a Cabinet member don’t include representing religious groups.
We don’t have an atheist Cabinet post. Atheists are 12% of the population, more than any group except Baptists and Catholics.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
45, I remember a certain September 11 where Mormons slaughtered hundreds of innocent civilians. But don’t worry –I don’t hold Romney or you, or Mormons in general accountable for that. It kinda sounds like you hold the religion of Islam accountable for 9-11.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
Actually the Dude who asked that question of Mitt is a die hard Dem and a Fox xommenator who has been caught lying before. He planned on the question before hand, yet didn’t bother to record it, and I have it in a personal email from a very well known Muslim writer who probably many here know that the guy makes things like this up often.
Romney’s answer as he reported seems pretty reasonable.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:19 pm
It appears to me that Romney is a divisive figure (based on this blog), heated debates originate, when the streams are not even about him.
Something to think about. Sarah Palin is not divisive.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:19 pm
Jason, would you clarify what Romney claims he actually said?
June 7th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
OK Sampo, you got me. You were able to push out a one line drivel about MM massacre, which I am pretty positive you know little about by what you just wrote and really doesn’t correlate. And it’s an event that happened 125+ years ago that ended in the death of about 100 people. Whereas 9-11 is this decade and killed thousands and launched us into a war.
Yep, very good.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:22 pm
EGS, I would really have to search around for that one.
Kristof, Who isn’t a dicey figure on this site. McCain won the primaries for pete’s sake, he’s pretty divisive.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
Didn’t we slaughter thousands of LDS church memebers in MO and IL?
June 7th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Jason,
It seems as if we are either absolutely hot to Romney as VP, or sub-zero cold to him.
I was also referring to his LDS faith, I count this as the sixth stream that it has been brought up. This is sad, but a true fact. I am sure this blog reflects views of many GOP voters and activists.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
#56, ok. I didn’t want to slander Romney and I was curious what he claimed to have said. I just figured the grand poobah of mymanmitt might have that stuff at his fingertips.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
Romney was the most disliked candidate to run. Virtually every single poll showed this.
http://www.pollingreport.com/R.htm#Romney
59, i’ll find it for you
June 7th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Does anyone have any information on the Governor of Oregon endorsing McCain?
June 7th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
great tip 60!
A Democratic governor puts wind in John McCain’s sails
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/05/a-democratic-go.html
gotta love it. reminds me of the southern politician who’s scared to death of obama’s endorsement
June 7th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
I wonder if john lynch of NH could endorse mccain too?
June 8th, 2008 at 12:03 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Li21zQHPttg
Clinton supporter, or new McCain supporter.
June 8th, 2008 at 12:11 am
Sampo, there was a line in a Novak column from 2 weeks ago regarding Joe Lieberman speaking to unnamed Democrat’s about joining McCain. No names mentioned, and no further details. The next three four will tell.
June 8th, 2008 at 12:22 am
I told you guys this would happen.
Like Sean was saying the other day, most of us are educated young people who only spend time with other educated young people. That skews our perception of reality. We assume that all Democrats are crazy liberals like most of our friends.
But they aren’t. There are millions and millions of moderate Democrats of various stripes. Culturally conservative, economically populist Ed Muskie Democrats, along with socially liberal but fiscally centrist DLC Democrats all have a problem with Barack Obama. These moderate Dems are attracted to McCain, who they view as only a few notches to the right of themselves.
June 8th, 2008 at 1:14 am
I love that when someone says “Romney’s going to have a hard time because he’s a mormon,” the Rombots come out of the woods and say “BIGOT! Why are you so INTOLERANT? I CAN”T BELIEVE THIS!” Bigotry might say something else in the dictionary, but the public tends have tightened the definition to things that aren’t chosen- race, gender, sexual orientation? (not a debate for now)- while people are often forced to face the consequences of their life choices. May not be right, but Christians, Mormons, Muslims- they are all forced to eat what the fringes of their religion do.
Any who, I think it was E Doggg that said it best a couple weeks back on the post about Romneycare hurting Mitts chances for VP in likening it to the scene from Tommy Boy where Chris Farley asks David Spade if his suit makes him look fat, and David Spade replies “No, your face does.” Romney’s religion is going to be far from his downfall.
June 8th, 2008 at 4:15 am
#60, 61 The Gov of Oregon endorsed Obama on Friday.
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/1212803717214750.xml&coll=7
June 8th, 2008 at 5:17 am
I am late coming into this post, but I like to say that agree with Metro with regards to Mr. Rumsfeld. Maybe, he should not be VP, but Mr. Rumsfeld is a very great and brilliant man!
June 8th, 2008 at 6:56 am
If we used percentages, only (3) Christian religions in the USA have more members than LDS:
Roman Catholic, United Methodist, and Southern Baptist. So, I guess we’ll have to only elect one of those from now on? If someone wants to go back in history over a hundred years for an atrocity, why not go a few hundred years and talk about the inquisitions? An inestimable number of people were beaten, imprisoned, and burned at the stake for merely having a personal belief somewhat variant to what the church of that day held them to. And, yes, literally thousands of people LDS were driven from their homes, beaten, raped, and murdered, not to mention thousands more dieing on the plains after being forced out of Illinois to head West.
How many cabinet positions are there? It seems to me that a statement that Muslims do not make up a large enough segment of the population to be ‘forced’ to appoint someone to the cabinet position makes perfect sense. In retrospect, I assume if he had it to do over, he could have worded it more perfectly, so those waiting to pounce on him for making what they perceive to be a bigoted answer would have nothing to stand on.
June 8th, 2008 at 9:24 am
Lindsey Graham just ripped John Kerry to shreds on ABC. I’d actually like to see him as vice president.
June 9th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
#8 I like that idea. It’d be a good message reinforcer. And I agree that Gates has done a good job. #71 Graham was pretty good, especially on his “McCain has actually sacrificed and fought for change.” That will be a good theme for McCain this fall.