The Numbers

Please read George Will's column in today's Washington Post. No way should Hillary Clinton get the VP slot:

"Which brings us to the dotty idea that Barack Obama should choose to have Hillary Clinton down the hall in the West Wing, nursing her disappointments, her grievances and her future presidential ambitions while her excitable husband wanders in the wings of America's political theater with his increasingly Vesuvian temper, his proclivity for verbal fender benders and his interesting business associates." --George Will, Washington Post, June 6, 2008.

A big waste of time, money, and space.
it's the choice of the nominee. END OF STORY.
is the media ever ever ever going to focus on McCain?

George Will writes the truth. No WAY she's the VP. No way.

The vice presidential choice should be the choice of the nominee. Clinton could potentially play a role in the campaign and possibly in an Obama administration, but I don't think she'd be a good VP choice. I think if she has a role, it really needs to be one that doesn't so directly involve her husband. She doesn't represent change, but equally important, I doubt that she (and her husband, in particular) could pass a serious and necessary vetting process that they would need to submit to. I can't see Bill Clinton being willing to turn over his financial business records, let alone provide any details about the contributors to his presidential library.

NO.
Hillary must say NO to VP position.
She doesn't need to join another loser
in november.
LOSERS
-------
McGovern
Mondale
Dukakis
Gore
Kerry
Obama[next loser]

When was the last time George Will's opinion mattered in the Democratic Party? Play with this lady and let others define her and McCain WILL BE PRESIDENT!

this seems like extortion by the news networks...

let obamas team go through the process, and why would hillary want this position anyway?

obamas not going to make the vice presidency as important as bush has and it would frankly be selling clinton herself short.

i think she has bigger plans then waiting for eight years to possibly run for the presidency

No way - Obama does not want her due to the fact her and Bill might arrange for "an accident" - similar to those of the 39 others who have worked for the Clintons have had!

NO Hillary as VEEP.

N-o-o-o-o-o-o-o! Please no!!!

Obama '08!

George Will; the Republican has a problem with Hillary being VP; oh yeah lets do what the Republican says.

a big yes for hillary as veep, there is no better option..

She's alreay a loser!

Hillary did not concede. She did not pledge her delegates to Obama (although most are switching anyway). She still believes that she will be the presumtive democratic choice in the end. She is still waiting for that next J Wright t show up and ruin Obama.

She is a snake in the grass and SHOULD NOT BE ON THE TICKET AS VP or play arny role in his office term!

She can not be trusted because of the way she ran a negative campaign. Trust me, she is up to something evil!

Obama is comletely embarrassing.

Hillary was abused by the media and the DNC.

Clinton supporters are embarrassed of Obama and his wife's anti American comments.

Obama is a community organizer with radical friends like Reverend Wright, Farrakhan, Nation of Islam Supporters, the 57 states of Islam and criminals like Rezko and William Ayers as coworkers.

Is this guy a joke or what?

The reason Clinton supporters will not vote for Obama is because they are embarrassed of him, his life, his unfair tactics and his beliefs. And they still don't know all about him.

They don't want a candidate that has been in a relationship with Reverend Wright and the Trinity United Church of Christ. The Church supports Louis Farrakhan, an anti Semitic racist.

They don't want to defend Black Liberation theology.

They don’t want a candidate that lies about his relationship with Tony Rezko, the Syrian Criminal that sold his property to Obama and supported his campaign.

They don't want a candidate that could work with a domestic terrorist, William Ayers.

They dont' want a candidate that didn't stand up for the voters of Michigan and Florida.

They don't want a candidate that is inexperienced.

They dont' want a candidate named; Barack Hussein Obama

He scares them to death.
He is embarrassing.
He is unelectable.

Hey Al from NJ

So what do we make of then-President Bill Clinton publicly endorsing the 1995 Million Man March? Who called for that march? Louis Farrakhan. Who was the lead organizer? Louis Farrakhan. Who was the keynote speaker? Louis Farrakhan.

After he was out of the White House, President Clinton also endorsed the Million Man March. Who called for that march? Louis Farrakhan. Who was the lead organizer? Louis Farrakhan. Who was the keynote speaker? Louis Farrakhan.

Did Sen. Clinton privately or publicly rebuke her husband for supporting a man whom she has determined to be hateful and divisive?

Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, who is national co-chair of Sen. Clinton's presidential campaign, once stood on stage with Farrakhan in 1997 -- at an event the Times said was "called to promote racial reconciliation after several recent high-profile crimes" -- and praised him for his commitment to ending violence in the black community. Rendell was the mayor of Philadelphia at the time.

According to the April 15, 1997, story in The New York Times, Farrakhan praised Rendell before 3,000 people at the anti-violence rally for ''his courage and strength to rise above emotion and differences that might be between us or our communities.''

According to the Times, Rendell, who is Jewish, commended the Nation of Islam for its emphasis on family values and self-sufficiency.

Must Clinton repudiate and denounce Rendell's past comments and association with Farrakhan?

Former Republican Rep. Jack Kemp is a huge supporter of Sen. John McCain, and he also has a Farrakhan story.

In 1996, when Kemp was the vice presidential running mate of Kansas Sen. Bob Dole, he told reporters that he wanted to meet with Farrakhan and praised his organization's focus on economic empowerment, family values and its pull-yourselves-up-by-the-bootstrap message -- right in line with the GOP talking points. Kemp said he wanted to speak at the Million Man March.

Kemp summarily criticized Farrakhan's comments about Jews and whites, but he didn't take his words back. By the way, Hannity pressed every African-American supporter about Farrakhan, but he never got in Kemp's face about his comments. I wonder why?

Must McCain repudiate and denounce Kemp's past comments and association with Farrakhan?

When it comes to homosexuality, no Clinton or Obama supporter should think of criticizing the other campaign's black ministerial supporters because that means most of their own would have to be disassociated from their campaigns.

On CNN's "The Situation Room," Paul Begala mentioned "hateful" things said about gays by the Rev. James Meeks, founder and senior pastor of Salem Baptist Church of Chicago, and an Obama supporter. Meeks has made no bones about his firm opposition to homosexuality (and abortion), which is one of the reasons he's very close to many of the nation's white conservative pastors. (I know him well; I'm a member of Salem).

But Clinton also has her own issues with anti-gay pastoral supporters.

The Rev. Harold Mayberry, pastor of the First African Methodist Church in Oakland, has voiced for years his opposition to homosexuality. In fact, some have said he has compared homosexuality to thievery.

When Mayberry came out in support of Clinton, her campaign touted his endorsement, sans any mention of his anti-gay rants.

She has also received a $1,000 contribution from Bishop Eddie L. Long of the mega-church New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in Lithonia, Georgia, who previously led an anti-gay marriage march in Atlanta.

Of course, when it comes to McCain, it wouldn't be a story if his ministerial supporters are anti-gay. It would be news if any of them actually supported homosexuality.

The bottom line: Everyone has an association that is open for scrutiny. Our real focus should be on the candidates and their views on the issues, because one of them will stand before the nation and take the oath of office and swear to uphold and protect the Constitution of the United States.

I, like many supporters loved having William Jefferson Clinton as President. The fact that the Republicans were tripping all over themselves trying to get him on anything and everything to end his Presidency and they failed, made my support of the Clintons that much stronger. How nice to have people like Bill and Hillary who really stand up to certain forces and accomplish most of what they promise for the people. Our admiration and respect is deep because we know them and the good that they are capable of in spite of vigorous attacks to stop them. Hillary's toughness amongst the unprecidented calls for her to quit made my support grow deeper. Naturally I want her on the ticket regardless of what a "dead end" job people think VP is; Hillary will surely redefine the role as only she could and our country would be better for it.

Honestly, why does the media try to push this idiotic idea, that HRC should get the VP position as some kind of consolation prize for her trouble? This issue is not and never was about what percentage of Democrats think this may be a favorable idea. There are way too many negatives in this pairing to even begin to think about putting them together. At least 25% percent of HRC supporters constantly stated during the primary phase that they would not vote for Obama under any circumstances, including HRC being on the ticket. At least as many Obama supporters say that won't support a ticket that has HRC on it. So just for that issue alone, he should not ask her to be VP candidate. Second, their messages are totally different. How in the world can someone who's been campaigning as an "outsider" now take on someone who's been in control in Washington for twenty years and been in Washington for thirty-five years? It just would make him look like a wishy-washy hypocrite. Third, how in the world could he possibly take on a couple who clearly have a penchant for blazing their own path? Much of Obama's time would be spent trying to reign in or apologize for Clinton's words.

I think it's totally disingenuous for the media to keep pushing this idea that somehow HRC should be the VP nominee. It's inappropriate for the media to continue trying to affect the course of the election. Can't you simply report on the news instead of constantly sending up all of these trial balloons? HRC is clearly not a good candidate for Obama to choose. And why are you focusing only on Obama's running mate anyway? Why haven't you sent up similar trial balloons with respect to John McCain. I really wish the folks at ABC news would get out of the business of trying to set the tone for the election and just start reporting on what's going on in the elections.

I am sick and tired of Obama supporters not wanting Sen. Hillary Clinton on the ticket with thier beloved Obama. We, Hillary Clinton voters, really don't care to be connected with any of his people. It's very simple, put her on the ticket, win in November, don't and Obama will crash and burn. You, Obama people, can not ignore 18 million votes, if you do, Obama will join the ranks of such losers as Kerry, Dukakis, Gore and Mondale. I ask everyone to join me....HILLARY DEMOCRATS FOR McCAIN!!!! Or the OBAMA HE'S A JOKE RIGHT!!!

Mmmm some real bitter Hillary supporters out there..going to be more bitter if McCain gets in ...