Jim Webb is the best VP candidate? So no problems with his anti-women writings?

Every time I bring this up in VP threads, I get absolute silence, so lets try its own thread.

I'm from Virginia and am THRILLED that Jim Webb beat George "I can throw a football so vote for me" Allen. But aside from the Maccaca comment, the other HUGE issue in this race was Jim Webb's writings and comments on Women in the military. In the 80s, he made it clear that he believed they couldn't cut it, that it was bad for the military as a whole, and that anyways, their place was in the home, raising kids.

Now Webb overcame this stuff based on some real mea culpa speeches, but more from flat out incompetence on George Allen's part.

Given the problem Obama now has with women who are tightly wedded to Hillary, do we really want to see ads like this in the GE?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNlGEkMaCqQ

Do we really want to see excerpts from articles like this one, titled, "Women can't fight"?

http://www.washingtonian.com/articles/mediapolitics/2182.html


Just to be clear, I think Webb is doing a great job, and I'm proud to have him as a Senator. I'm proud to have contributed to his campaign. I just don't think he's right for Obama at this point. Tell me why I'm wrong.


EDIT: Just to be clear, for those not in Virginia, these ads and discussions about his 80s writings ran virtually non-stop.

But that's just me. :)

It will be one of those. Book it.

w/o anything but a stellar history with and for women.


That said, I don't think any but a tiny fraction of the electorate would hold this (20+ year old positions) against Webb, but it would still be nice not to have the distraction.

And Clark might help more in southern states in general.

helps in VA. Kaine would, but I digress...

Webb matches up well with those Southern Dems that Obama has issues with, as well as those Obamacans.

and there were many women working on his senate campaign. He been married 3 times so it's obvious he doesn't hate women.

especially after the contentious fight with Hillary, where so many women think Obama stole something that was rightly hers.

Yes he has fine answers for this, but is this really where we want the campaign to go the second he's chosen?

"Horny Woman's Dream" baby!!! Lets hear it 20 times a day!!!

Especially given Webb's statements since then.

having her being "shocked, shocked" over Webb's writings and subsequent comments? Me? I'd pretty much bank on them taking this course. That's what I'd do. If they can keep Hillary's vote at home, they will be thrilled.

I've also watched Webb debate, so I'm confident he'd handle it easily if directly confronted by an opposing VP candidate. I'm a woman who comes from a military family--and a diehard feminist, too--and I don't see this harming Webb as a VP candidate. I think the positives of having him on the ticket far, far outweigh any minor trouble this would give him.

"He been married 3 times so it's obvious he doesn't hate women."

Yeah, sure...

:puke:

Here, let me get them out of the kitchen and you can ask them for yourself. :)

These ads and discussions ran non-stop from the second the Meccaca thing came out, and it became clear Webb had a chance to win.

Sure, there were a few attacks about him doing a lousy job as SECNAV, but really, the anti-women writings went 24/7. Just imagine if McCain picks a woman after we pick Webb...

The Republicans are fairly dumb on occaision, but they aren't going to be running ads that they don't think have an impact. Webb would have won by an even greater share if not for the writings.

AND AGAIN...Obama has a need to bring women back into the fold. Webb is not the best choice to do this. He DOES have a problem here. Ads will be made to exploit it, as will McCain's VP choice.

I think a lot of women really wanted to see another woman be president. They had their first real chance this year. I think many would feel a little bit insulted if Obama put someone with a history of making some stupid comments about women on the ticket.

probably Olympia Snowe or that horrible Carly Fiorina. Snowe would piss of the conservatives though... hehe.

Obama-Sebelius!

Catholic one at that. I'd like to think it didn't matter but it does.

She's also fighting two new coal-burning power plants.

republican if he was in another position, such as VP.

I'm not worried about his position on women's issues any more. I think a little maturity may have helped his attitude.

for us even to have a chance. Lets leave Webb right where he is - I'd be VERY afraid of losing him.

Coupled with Warner winning John Warner's seat, this gives us TWO Dems in the Senate. I'd love to keep it that way.

Maybe you should have looked for more info than the right wing slam against Webb.

"Those making endorsements included Lt. Colonel Kate Wilder (USAR ret.), Brigadier General Clara Adams-Ender (US Army ret.), Captain Barbara Brehm (USN ret.), Major Susan Kellom (USAR), Major Patricia Anderson (USAR), Major Susan Yamamato, Col. Barbara Lee (US Army ret.), Brig. Gen. Pat Foote (US Army ret.), and several others.

The women spoke eloquently and forcefully of their support for Jim Webb as a "man of integrity and vision" who has the "deepest respect for everyone." They also praised Webb as someone who, by opening billets as Navy Secretary to women in the Navy, started a "ripple effect" on all the services that was "crucial" and "has to be emphasized." According to Kate Wilder, "Jim Webb started the ball rolling and that's big."

http://www.raisingkaine.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=5203

My point is that he WILL be dealing with it again if we select him. Given the fight with Hillary, Obama ALREADY has a weakness there. Webb would provide the Republicans a golden opening to exploit.

Guaranteed McCain will come back with a woman VP candidate who is mortally offended by what Webb wrote. This is NOT the subtext we want in the GE.

This guy has a great response to a lame attack, he led the way for women's advancement in the Navy. His penis writing would be more difficult I would bet.

I think there are better candidates that Obama can choose, which won't have openings to further alienate women who love Hillary.

I think you over-estimate the fact that women have gone through these changes right along side men and have learned not to hold their stupidity against them. He learned, he changed, he did right by women in the end. That's what women want. I don't know who he'll pick, but there really aren't very many good choices out there.

will instantly exploit if he's chosen. I just don't think Obama wants the headlines the day after he picks Webb to be yet another round of discussions on whether Webb is a Neanderthal. This would serve as a poke in the eye to Hillary supporters who felt Hillary was robbed.

I think he'd be a good choice, and I don't even like him that well. But he is good on the military and he did run as an economic populist, although I haven't kept up with how he's voted.

his 80s writings and public comments did stick with some folks.

I think Virginia must be more sophisticated. I would bet there would be a lot of old religious ladies who would completely understand a man repeating military stereotypes, but never understand strange things in a novel. Luckily neither one would probably vote for a Dem anyway.

His whole point was that he was trying to write a realistic book, not a politically correct one. That seemed to reinforce his military "cred" more than it hurt him. That said, I'm not a woman, let along an old religious one, so perhaps this did affect those folk.

I already thought he had the double whammy of being another inexperienced Senator. This makes him totally unacceptable. Putting him in as a VP would be a terrible choice.

That said, I am happy that he has rethought his position (which was very common amongst the military people I served with in the early 90s). I am also happy that he is a Democrat and working in the Senate.

When he paved the way for women's equality in the Navy. This is so much ado about nothing. Women are not this petty.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5943401&mesg_id=5943401

I do fully admit to being biased. I LOVE the idea of having two Dems in the Senate from VA.

I also don't think he'll pick a female veep mainly because Ferraro tanked so badly. I think Richardson is looking better and better. They seem to complement each other, kind of like Clinton and Gore.

Its about as good a reason as saying that Jesse Jackson didn't do well, so why pick Obama?

husband's problems shows there isn't much attention to detail in our party. It made us look bad.

Mondale was a good Progressive candidate but the DLC and the media didn't want him. I still like him.

but the sad fact is they made for a weak ticket. I just don't think Obama will risk repeating the results of that experiment. Maybe in his second term?

I'm reaching a point where they should have their own division again.

I think Webb should apologize unless he has information as to his comments being true.

I REALLY don't think we want this debate in the GE...that's all I'm saying.

You are right to wait.

If Papa Bush can win with a moron like Dan Quayle, then Obama should be able to win with Webb. Although he is not my first choice for VP, I support Richardson, I doubt that an Obama/Webb ticket would suffer much over something that he wrote twenty-five years ago and subsequently apologized for.

Lieberman.

There is no reason why Gore should not have won that election by a landslide. The economy was good. Our debt was being paid off. We didn't have big wars, etc.

He would have won by a landslide without Lieberman. Everyone in DC liked him but few outside the beltway did. He never met a war he didn't like.

If they wanted a Jewish VP candidate Wellstone with his liberal and progressive record would have been a better choice. I loved Wellstone and miss him in the Senate. At least Democrats liked him. Gore lost his own state because of Lieberman. Have you even been or lived in Tennessee? There are few Jewish or even Catholic churches there.

it was the Supreme Court that cost Gore the election, not Lieberman. Remember, I didn't say the VP candidates have not cost votes. I said that they have not been the cause of election losses. And however unpopular Lieberman might have been, Gore really did win that election.

A candidate does not always win half the votes or close to it. Gore should have won by a landslide. The Supreme Court would not had any reason to make a decision because the race would have been won easily by Gore. Why did Gore only insist on a few counties being recounted when the law of Florida was for all countries to recount if the vote was closer than 1% or something. It was less than that in places because of fraud, etc.

Our country was in good shape but people could see they still wanted changes. Lieberman was a disaster to the ticket. No one said it or was allowed to say it.

When Republicans were so cheered and supportive of Lieberman running you knew they thought they had a chance to once again win the back the country for their own power. Lieberman was a disaster to the Gore campaign. We here in Chicago heard it over and over on RW radio.

I'm not defending Lieberman. Far from it. And perhaps Gore should have won by a landslide. But it is not required to win by a landslide to assume the office of the presidency. At least Gore clearly won a narrow victory but he was not allowed to take office because they stole it from him.

He'd be okay for Hillary, but Obama needs to win over women voters/Hillary supporters the most, Webb would be a huge turn-off

He's a little too far to the Right for me and a few million others. He was also a signatory to a PNAC support letter back before things started going all WORNG with the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq, so I have the same issues with him that I have with HC. Not something that is irrepairable, mind you, but these folks just need to speak up about their fatal errors in judgement, that is, unless they don't feel that way, in which case I guess this IS an ir-repairable problem for me on both counts (Webb and HC).

Those secret organizations are illegal under the Logan Act. By ignoring their influence and power...we give them power over us. They never act in our best interest so it's a slap in the face to democracy is it not?

But he did sign a letter expressing support for the principles Project for a New American Century was based upon. I expect he's a good man and we must admire his ability to admit how mistaken the whole thing is, especially since he WAS one of their fair-haired boys. But you've got to wonder about that impulse toward gun-boat diplomacy.

That stuff is 100% asshole fascism and that's the respectable term. :mad: :mad: :mad:

As a representative in a democracy he is not representing us in a fair and open manner. We have no idea what they do in our name and with our power and wealth.

NO NO NO NO. NO MORE 911s, no more nasty surprises, no more fake terrorism, no more shithole CIA Tricks!!

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Seems you believe it is just a figment of "space alien" imagination. No it's real and becoming more powerful everyday.

Not quite sure if that's what you think, but PNAC is basically the neocon playbook and we've had quite enough of that. That's one reason I hope he doesn't let the Clintons anywhere near the WH.

Now this right wing garbage that came straight fro the RNC's propaganda factory is being peddled here.

whether the Republicans will use it in the GE if he's the VP candidate. Contrary to the other thread, I am NOT slandering Jim Webb here. I am QUESTIONING whether he is a good candidate for Obama's VP choice based on the attacks the republicans will use against him. He is my senator - I both voted for him AND contributed to his campaign. I think he's doing a great job and will GLADLY vote for him again when given the chance.

Is that clear, or do I need to repeat this a 16th time?

The European and Canadian newspapers talked about them. Protestors were in the street outside. Of-course our media won't show it.

We should not elect anyone who is a member of these groups to be President or VP that's the issue here.

something entirely different. Nor was I bashing Webb, but was (again) attempting to have a conversation as to whether he would be a good VP candidate. I guess that's not allowed here, ey?

But has anyone mentioned Russ Feingold? I've always been a pretty big fan of his, and apart from picking a governor from a swing state I haven't seen names offered up yet that I'm crazy about. I think its going to be Hillary's if she wants it but discounting that, what about Russ?

I wouldn't trust him in the spotlight of a long, national campaign. It's inevitable that he would end up punching a reporter or something.

I will say that I thought it was a pretty skewed unfair attack on him. He had said it so many years ago, and had since changed his mind. But presidential campaigns are never fair.