0
   

ANYONE BUT WEBB

 
 
Reply Thu 12 Jun, 2008 04:15 pm
Anyone but Webb
Why Jim Webb would make an awful running mate.
By Timothy Noah
Posted Monday, June 9, 2008, at 6:41 PM ET

Sen. Barack Obama speaks at a rally while Sen. Jim Webb looks on
It's anybody's guess who Barack Obama wants to be his running mate, but the chattering class has fallen hard for Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va.

On paper, Webb is the perfect choice for veep. Is Obama too closely identified with the left? Webb is a former Republican who served in the Reagan administration. (Washington Times editorial, June 7, 2008: "[Webb] offers Mr. Obama … an opportunity to blur some hard-left positions that are certain to alienate large blocs of voters.") Did Obama lose big in the Pennsylvania, Ohio, Kentucky, and West Virginia primaries? Webb's family roots lie in Appalachia, and he's a bona fide expert on the flinty Scots-Irish who settled there, having published a well-received book about them in 2004. (Eve Fairbanks, the New Republic, June 25, 2008, issue: "Like Obama, [Webb] is not simply a member of a group historically important to the party; he is someone who embodies that group, someone who has turned that group's narrative into his own.") Is Obama too cautious and detached? Webb is famous for speaking his mind. (Elizabeth Drew, the New York Review of Books, June 26, 2008 issue: "Like a boxer or a military man, Webb decides on his targets and charges straight at them.")

It's this last characteristic that's the problem. Webb, 62, is a bit of a blowhard. Because he's a writer, he's left a paper trail. In a 1979 Washingtonian article, "Women Can't Fight," Webb wrote that it had been a mistake to open the military service academies to women:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Women's] presence at institutions dedicated to the preparation of men for combat command is poisoning that preparation. By attempting to sexually sterilize the Naval Academy environment in the name of equality, this country has sterilized the whole process of combat leadership training, and our military forces are doomed to suffer the consequences. … [T]he system has been objectified and neutered to the point it can no longer develop or measure leadership. …

Asked two years ago on Meet the Press whether he still believed this, Webb said, "I'm fully comfortable with the roles of women in the military today." He also said, "There's many pieces in this article that if I were a more mature individual I wouldn't have written." As late as 1992, though, Webb complained (in a New York Times op-ed that called the Tailhook investigation a "witch hunt"):

Military leaders are at best passive and at most often downright fearful when confronted by activists who allege that their culture is inherently oppressive toward females and that full assimilation of women depends only on a change in the mind-set of its misogynist leaders.

Such piggy statements won't endear Webb to the white female Hillary Clinton supporters who are threatening not to vote in the general election.

As Navy secretary during the Reagan administration, Webb was an ardent supporter of President Reagan's goal to create a "600-ship Navy," an ambitious benchmark whose urgency was unclear even at the height of the Cold War. By 1988, with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev's perestroika program well underway, justification for the rapid buildup was dwindling fast. But when Defense Secretary Frank Carlucci removed 16 aging frigates from an administration budget request, Webb went ballistic and resigned, grousing to reporters on his way out that Carlucci failed to provide "leadership" or "strategic vision." Even Reagan was taken aback, writing in his diary, "I don't think Navy was sorry to see him go." This episode doesn't inspire confidence in Webb's qualities as a team player.

Now that Webb is a media darling, able to make even The Nation's Katrina Vanden Heuvel swoon like a bobby soxer over his "blue-collar street cred," the dominant narrative has it that Webb has finally soothed the savage beast within. But in his new book, A Time To Fight: Reclaiming a Fair and Just America, Webb compares the U.S. Senate to "100 scorpions in a jar" and writes, "The jar needs to be shaken." No sooner was Webb elected in 2006 before he picked an utterly pointless fight with President Bush. At a post-election White House reception, Webb, who had ostentatiously declined to stand in a receiving line, was approached by the president, who asked, "How's your boy?" (Webb's son was serving in Iraq, and Webb had spoken of him often while campaigning against the war.) Webb replied, "I'd like to get them out of Iraq, Mr. President." When Bush replied brusquely, "That isn't what I asked. How's your boy?" Webb replied even more brusquely, "That's between me and my boy, Mr. President." Four months later, Webb's aide Phillip Thompson was arrested carrying Webb's gun into the Capitol. Asked at a subsequent press conference whether he, Webb, was in the habit of obeying a strict handgun ban in the District of Columbia, Webb replied defiantly, "I'm not going to comment in any level in terms of how I provide for my own security." They may love that in Appalachia, but is it wise to place on the national ticket a candidate who virtually boasts about violating the law? Even Webb's friend (and mine) James Fallows has expressed polite trepidation about a Webb vice presidency.

There is much to admire in Webb. He's smart, he cares about ordinary people, and I hear his novels are excellent. (I've never read any.) He recently pulled off a coup in the Senate by outmaneuvering John McCain on a veterans' benefits bill. Webb may yet turn out to be a great senator. (Though that raises another problem: He only arrived there last year! The Obama ticket doesn't need another rookie, and, setting aside Webb's deep knowledge and experience in the area of military affairs, Webb is a government rookie.)

But Webb's personal history has demonstrated time and again that he can't play well with the other children. A volcanic temperament is endurable in a novelist or an opera singer. It is not endurable at the bottom of a national ticket. Nominating Webb isn't worth the risk that he'll alienate important constituencies, embarrass Obama, or break with him outright, as John Nance Garner did with Franklin Roosevelt. He's trouble, and Obama's already had too much of that.

slate.com
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 2,492 • Replies: 55
No top replies

 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Jun, 2008 04:19 pm
So, Webb was rude to Bush - and that's a bad thing?

Bush NEEDS people to be rude to him. Constant fawning over his lame ass is what made him think he's above reproach. How this can be listed as a bad thing, I have no idea.

And I'm surprised that the writer takes umbrage at his characterization of the Senate, which from what I can tell, is basically true.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Jun, 2008 04:50 pm
I basically agree with you. Regarding women at the academies, he was right. Those at the academies are prepared, at great expense, to serve in the front lines, not in support positions (although many end up there). Women, by law (I think), are precluded from serving in the front lines.

I once read that he is not a good leader, and showed this when he was Navy Secretary. Also, his resignation, in a pout, showed he is unsuitable as a top leader.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Jun, 2008 05:13 pm
I was very happy when he beat out the Macaca guy (who otherwise was on track to be the Republican nominee).

He is considerably to the right on several issues for my taste. Besides that Webb is doing a pretty good job opposing the war (with some weight) in the Senate.

I think Obama can do better.

If Obama chooses to go the route of military leadership... Wes Clark would make me much happier.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Jun, 2008 05:26 pm
Me too, but from an electoral angle, he brings no state with him. Webb would flip VA immediately. A 26-point swing is nothing to laugh at.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Jun, 2008 06:05 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Me too, but from an electoral angle, he brings no state with him. Webb would flip VA immediately. A 26-point swing is nothing to laugh at.

Cycloptichorn


I'm not so sure that's true. Webb's favorable/unfavorable ratings both hover in the 40s pretty consistantly. People either love him or hate him (much like Hillary) and he just barely won his Senate seat as it is.

Head-to-head polls in VA show Obama squeaking past McCain by a few percentage points. When the same people are surveyed with possible running mates listed Obama's lead opens up when the running mate is to his left (politically! Razz ). When a possible running mate is listed with Obama that is to Obama's right, the polls shift to favor McCain. (Webb wasn't listed as a possible running mate in any of the surveys I saw...).

I suspect that Webb is more of a hinderance to Obama in VA than he is a benefit.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Jun, 2008 06:12 pm
Webb's senate victory was truly amazing. I think that very few people in VA knew him. However, Webb struck a chord, and he still does.

I think he would help Obama. However, I doubt that he would be good selection for the country considering that he would be only a heart beat from the presidency.

Wes Clarke would be a great VP, or Prez. But I am unsure that he would help Obama in the general.
0 Replies
 
Centroles
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jun, 2008 11:14 am
My top choices are...

1. Micheal Bloomberg
2. Joe Biden
3. Webb

I would be far happier with the first two, than with Webb though.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 11:34 pm
Obama will never choose Webb.

There is quite a strong faction among liberals who have no use whatsoever with the man. (The posted article is not the only anti-Webb diatribe published recently).

Webb would bring a military background to the ticket...period.

He would also invite an examination of the books he has written: violence and homoeroticism galore.
0 Replies
 
kuvasz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 07:10 am
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Obama will never choose Webb.

There is quite a strong faction among liberals who have no use whatsoever with the man. (The posted article is not the only anti-Webb diatribe published recently).

And I am not of that faction. Not only have I donated $500 to his 2004 Senate campaign while living 500 miles from Virginia, I actually wrote to the man in late 2003 while as a private citizen encouraging him to run for the senate seat.

Webb would bring a military background to the ticket...period.

He would also bring a working class attitude and values towards the issues of the day. Don't forget that 40% of the electorate are white males, and 70% of them are working class. Obama needs them to come out for him and only Webb or Edwards on the ticket can attract enough of those men to support a victorious democratic presidential ticket.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 08:35 am
A good thing about Webb is that he is very intelligent. However, this does preclude a lack of wisdom and leadership.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 08:42 am
BBB
Webb has been fascinating to watch since he ran for the senate but probably not the best VP candidate for Obama.

BBB
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 08:59 am
The Timothy Noah piece at the opening of this thread is largely accurate in my view. I have no personal interest in an Obama victory, in that I see him as just a polished up contemporary version of the left wing part of the Democrat establishment. However, I do believe that Webb would bring no net advantage to his candidacy. Wesley Clark could be even worse, but that's another subject. Finally, I believe it is highly unlikely that Obama will choose either of these two - though I don't claim to have the uncanny insight into the thinking of the Obama strategists that Cyclo, for example, so frequently claims to posess.

Jim Webb and Ollie North were classmates at Annapolis, and they fought each other in the boxing finals at the Academy. Ollie won.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 11:37 am
The stuff about potentially harmful old writings of his, and the fact that he might tend to attack on impulse worries me, but I think he might be reassuring to some factions as a running mate.

Lately I've started to wish it was someone like Chris Dodd, though.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 11:59 am
Could be. It is hard to guess the net effect, but I think his negatives or potential vulnerabilities outweigh the benefits.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 01:19 pm
georgeob1 wrote:
Could be. It is hard to guess the net effect, but I think his negatives or potential vulnerabilities outweigh the benefits.


Who, then?
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 02:33 pm
Now you're making it hard. I don't think that much about Democrat politics. :wink: Like most, I don't think an Obama Clinton ticket is feasible, for a host of reasons. All things considered I believe a candidate from the centrist wing of the party might present a balancing effect. Many suggest Gov. Richardson in this context, however I don't much admire him - too much of an opportunist, even for a politician. Moreover his Latino identification may appear to some as too much of an ethnic factor, though here I think there may be as much to be gained as lost. The thinking behind the choice of figures such as Webb and Clark is sound, in my view. However, I just think that these individuals may bring with them some baggage that Obama doesn't need.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 03:53 pm
kuvasz wrote:
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Obama will never choose Webb.

There is quite a strong faction among liberals who have no use whatsoever with the man. (The posted article is not the only anti-Webb diatribe published recently).

And I am not of that faction. Not only have I donated $500 to his 2004 Senate campaign while living 500 miles from Virginia, I actually wrote to the man in late 2003 while as a private citizen encouraging him to run for the senate seat.

Webb would bring a military background to the ticket...period.

He would also bring a working class attitude and values towards the issues of the day. Don't forget that 40% of the electorate are white males, and 70% of them are working class. Obama needs them to come out for him and only Webb or Edwards on the ticket can attract enough of those men to support a victorious democratic presidential ticket.


A good point. Although his "working man" attitude is not really genuine in the sense of him actually be a member of that class. Never-the-less, a military attitude is usually attractive enough.

If he is selected, it will not be a popular choice among a fair share of liberal intellectuals, and those that take their cue from them.

I'm not convinced VP candidates make a significant difference in presidential election results though---certainly not to an extent that warrants all the attention they get during the selection process.

Notable exceptions might be Hillary Clinton and Colin Powell. I don't think either will be selected though.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 04:45 pm
Conventional political wisdom holds that the ideal VP candidate for Obama will

1) Offset some of the "lack of experience" issues
2) Augment his paucity of foreign policy and national security experience
3) Put a traditionally "red state" in play
4) Attract a particular voter demographic
5) Free of negatives

Webb's scores:

1) D Another first term Senator and Sec. of The Navy is flimsy executive experience

2) B- He gets this high a grade simply because he has a military background

3) C He squeaked by a badly damaged Republican incumbant. He's hardly readily identifiable with Virginia, and the state may be leaning Democratic any way

4) C+ His military background is enough to make him more attractive to the working class than Obama, but the affinity isn't all that solid

5) F His selection will be criticized by a segment of his own party. He's written a number of pulpish books which contain writings that will shoved in his face

All over score: D Will not be picked.

Richardson:

1) A He's a popular governor, with an excellent resume

2) A Former ambassador to the UN, involved in key foreign policy negotiations. A whole lot of current global contacts

3) B. Arizona is more a swing state than a solidly Red state but Obama wants it and Richardson should be able to deliver

4) A The latino community in America is still young enough to be monolithic and very self aware. Voting for one of "their own" who has risen higher than any other is more than likely

5) B. He might have deserved an A, but he's been all over TV for years. A lot of video to search for Ooops moments

Overall; A. Should be picked

Dodd;

1) C Another career Senator; Washington insider

2) D Domestic experience, but that ain't whàt Obama needs

3) F. Obama will win CT with or without Dodd.

4) F. Who can he attract, the pitiful few who voted for him during the primaries?

5) D. VIP mortgage deal with a company Obama has flogged. A rumored history of wild drunken escapades with Teddy Kennedy.

Overall: F. Not a chance in hell

Hillary Clinton;

1) B+ Doesn't deserve this high a score but the mythos is firm

2) B+ See #1

3) B. Debateable, but she fared better in key states than did Obama

4) B+ Most of her supporters would vote for Obama without her on the ticket, but she will attract a fervent base.

5) C. She is afterall, Hillary Clinton. There's probably nothing new to dredge up, but her negatives are already very high

Overall: B. However she gets an F because of item #6: Obama can't hate the person.

It should be Richardson, but I hope it's not. Go Obama/Webb!
0 Replies
 
kuvasz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Jun, 2008 11:55 am
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
kuvasz wrote:
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Obama will never choose Webb.

There is quite a strong faction among liberals who have no use whatsoever with the man. (The posted article is not the only anti-Webb diatribe published recently).

And I am not of that faction. Not only have I donated $500 to his 2004 Senate campaign while living 500 miles from Virginia, I actually wrote to the man in late 2003 while as a private citizen encouraging him to run for the senate seat.

Webb would bring a military background to the ticket...period.

He would also bring a working class attitude and values towards the issues of the day. Don't forget that 40% of the electorate are white males, and 70% of them are working class. Obama needs them to come out for him and only Webb or Edwards on the ticket can attract enough of those men to support a victorious democratic presidential ticket.


A good point. Although his "working man" attitude is not really genuine in the sense of him actually be a member of that class. Never-the-less, a military attitude is usually attractive enough.

If he is selected, it will not be a popular choice among a fair share of liberal intellectuals, and those that take their cue from them.

I'm not convinced VP candidates make a significant difference in presidential election results though---certainly not to an extent that warrants all the attention they get during the selection process.

Notable exceptions might be Hillary Clinton and Colin Powell. I don't think either will be selected though.


Your own remarks about Webb ought to be held in relief against the following remarks made in that bastion of liberal-Marxist thought, The Wall Street Journal.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121400455088993487.html?mod=special_page_campaign2008_topbox


Quote:
Sen. Webb, a politician for less than two years, could be a risky combatant for the Democratic party. The 62-year-old lawmaker and novelist has a zeal that sometimes defies political niceties: He didn't shake President Bush's hand when the president asked about his son's deployment to Iraq. Some of his views aren't politically correct. He contends that "poor whites" are an oppressed class, and defends Confederate soldiers for fighting for state sovereignty.


Quote:
Descended from Scottish-Irish settlers who became pioneers in the Virginia mountains, Sen. Webb was born in Missouri into a military family that moved some 20 times during his childhood. He graduated from the Naval Academy in 1968 and went into the Marine Corps, where he served as a rifle platoon and company commander in Vietnam. He earned several medals for valor including the Navy Cross, one of the military's highest honors, in part for using his own body to shield a fellow soldier from an exploding grenade.


As to your remarks about webb's disaffiliations of working class credentials,

Quote:
Some of his views aren't politically correct. He contends that "poor whites" are an oppressed class, and defends Confederate soldiers for fighting for state sovereignty.


Noted as well, that like the working class his military experience is analogous, viz., he too carried the heavy load while Mccain was a member of the military elite as a pilot who did not get his hands dirty until being shot down.

Quote:
During Senate debate recently over the legislation( new GI Bill), an interesting dynamic emerged between Sens. Webb, McCain and Hagel -- all three Vietnam vets who had differing experiences of the war. Sens. Webb and Hagel were combat soldiers, whereas Sen. McCain (who originally opposed the bill) was a naval pilot and longtime prisoner of war. The three got to know one another only after returning to the U.S. in the 1970s.

"Not to denigrate John's five-and-a-half years in prison, but Jim and I have the perspective of being on the ground, doing the dirty work and seeing terrible and bloody suffering," Sen. Hagel says. "Jim and I have always been focused on the bottom ranks who are carrying the load."


As well, promoting his liberal, elite tendencies that cut against the grain of working class males;

Quote:
Until his run for the Senate in 2006, Sen. Webb says he never officially affiliated with a political party. Married three times, he has five children ranging in age from 1 to 38. In what he calls a rite of passage like a "Southern bar mitzvah," he says that, except for his toddler, "I've taught all my children how to shoot."


So you got a Marine who won a Navy Cross for valor and an Emmy Award for journalism, who thinks poor white people are getting the shaft, and who walks around with a pistol and teaches his own kids to shoot guns, yet consider him a dilettante who is just affecting working class values?

nhuh huh, friend. Webb is the guy who ought to be sitting in the Oval Office, but I'll settle for VP at the moment.

If one is looking for a 21st century avatar and amalgum of JFK and RFK, James Webb suits the bill.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » ANYONE BUT WEBB
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/10/2024 at 03:13:56