Things Smackie Thinks You Need to Know...

So who do you see Hillary picking for her veep?

Who do you see Obama picking as his veep?

Originally posted by Mobius:
I can't imagine Obama would ever agree to run with Hilary. Obama has emerged has his own force, and its too late to subjugate that force - especially to someone who does not share his philosophical spirit. It would be infinitely disappointing to see Obama join forces with Clinton.

Edwards and Richardson are losers. No one even knows why they are in the race. The only explanation is they have strong finance teams. I doubt either Obama or Hilary respect either enough to pick them.

Picking a VP candidate is like making a good boxing match. Styles and personalities make fights. When Clinton picked Gore in 92 it was like "oh yeah, nice move." The ticket worked. When Gore picked Lieberman it was like "Um, no." You wouldn't buy that card on PPV.

I'm looking forward to a slugfest b/w Obama and Hilary. Obama's got phenomenal swag right now and Clinton's got the machinery, desire and cash to make it a battle for the ages.

Originally posted by Mobius:

Edwards and Richardson are losers. No one even knows why they are in the race. The only explanation is they have strong finance teams. I doubt either Obama or Hilary respect either enough to pick them.

oh, edwards is easy enough to figure out- if the union's want him in the race, he'll stay in the race. . .once the union's get satisfied with obama (as it appears they may be), then edwards' funding dries up (and since he took federal matching funds, he can't use his own money).

as for richardson. . .i think it's simply to become VP. . .he's been a rep, governor, ambassador and sec. of energy. . .short of becoming sec. of state or defense (which i doubt would happen), the vp is what's left for him. oh, and the skirts.

Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
So who do you see Hillary picking for her veep?

Who do you see Obama picking as his veep?

I don't know but next to the Electoral College, the number one thing that irritates me most about presidential politics is the role of the vice-president. A ticket should run as a TEAM. Two people working together to get things done. Like Batman and Robin. Or Hall & Oates. Not Peyton Manning and Jim Sorgi. I mean, can you imagine if Al Gore had done half of the stuff he said he WOULD have done when he was veep? President of the United States is a huge enough job as it is. The vice-president should be working on seperate policies and initiatives (that still have the tacit approval of the Prez.) Not just being "the backup."

I don't know about the Dems but for the Republicans, if McCain gets the nod (which I think he will) he MAY go with Huckabee to appeal to the base (although, outside of religion/cultural, Huckabee really ISN'T a "base" conservative) but I think he may go with Guiliani. Sure, that would be an ego hit for Mr. 9/11 but it could set things up well with succession. Even if there isn't a major terrorist incident between now and Nov. 4th, I think a lot of voters are going to go hawkish.

Would Bloomberg consider being a veep?

Brian

P.S. I'm wondering why "How Vansmack's wife allows him to go to strip clubs" hasn't been convered in "Things Smackie Thinks You Need To Know."

really don't know who the dem veep should be. but obama/hilary doesn't feel right. maybe its a personal bias b/c i'd see it as mcmurtry getting the lobotomy in cuckoo's nest or something. or maybe when it all shakes out they will end up being a powerful combination - but one that still doesn't appeal to much of america.

reality aside (since i have no idea who outside the prez candidates are possibilities) hilary/rendell would be interesting - although maybe just in the realm of 'eastern democratic boomer superstars'. hilary/tipper gore would be a bold move.

i'd like to see obama paired with another sharp progressive thinker. the gore to his clinton (i.e. someone of similar background who solidifies him rather than counterbalances him - i.e. the cheney/bush approach). but maybe he'd be best served finding a counterbalance - an lbj (experienced shrewd politician, better yet from a big state and of background more traditionally electable background) to his jfk. i don't know who in the democratic party fits that (either) bill. that's why i don't get a thread.

Originally posted by Brian Wallace:
P.S. I'm wondering why "How Vansmack's wife allows him to go to strip clubs" hasn't been convered in "Things Smackie Thinks You Need To Know."

First off, your use of the word "allow" does not compute in our household. And that's a two way road.

Secondly, Smackette will never participate in this board because she, rightly so, thinks we're mostly retarded.

Thirdly, I will ask her to reveal her thoughts on the issue, but I may or may not post it, for fear that you will all find her much more entertaining than me, and unlike the Sports Guy, my ego could not handle that.

Originally posted by vansmack:

Thirdly, I will ask her to reveal her thoughts on the issue, but I may or may not post it, for fear that you will all find her much more entertaining than me, and unlike the Sports Guy, my ego could not handle that.

too late.

Originally posted by Brian Wallace:
Would Bloomberg consider being a veep?

[rhetorical]Would Jeff George consider being a backup QB?[/rhetorical]

Originally posted by vansmack:
For the record, an Independent in the Union's largest state, California, is only allowed to vote in the Democratic Primay. This will be a HUGE boost for Barack Obama.

The Sac Bee has finally caught on to my theory, so I expect the other rags to catch up by Friday. There are 3 Million independent voters in CA (compared to 6.6 Million Dems and 5.1 Millions Republicans) who are not being polled, but can only participate in the Democratic Primary. Do you really think Clinton still has a double digit lead if you're not polling independents?

Originally posted by vansmack:
Thirdly, I will ask her to reveal her thoughts on the issue, but I may or may not post it, for fear that you will all find her much more entertaining than me, and unlike the Sports Guy, my ego could not handle that.

And just like the Sports Gal is better at picking football games than her husband, I'm sure smackette has better musical taste than you, too.

Brian

Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:

Originally posted by Brian Wallace:
Would Bloomberg consider being a veep?

[rhetorical]Would Jeff George consider being a backup QB?[/rhetorical]

Ah, touche. I love Jeff George. You're right. Why be a veep when you can be Lord of New York?

Brian

Drunk History vol. 1 - Featuring Michael Cera

The fact that Michael Cera still makes home videos with his buddies is great.

Originally posted by Brian Wallace:
P.S. I'm wondering why "How Vansmack's wife allows him to go to strip clubs" hasn't been convered in "Things Smackie Thinks You Need To Know."

So says Smackette:

So I think with men you just have to pick your battles. You can only squeeze so much out of them so you really have to decide what is important to you. They can only handle so much nagging, so you must ration it wisely! So if he decides that he wants to waste his money being teased by women he can never sleep with who have a smaller rack and larger waist then myself….then go for it. Honestly, I would rather spend time fighting for a clean bathroom.

And besides, any night that either starts with or ends with [Vansmack] at a strip club always yeilds a good story…. and I do love a good [Vansmack] story. Sweetie, did you tell them about the time you and I went to a strip club in Mexico?? Now THAT was a good story.

Originally posted by vansmack:
So says Smackette:

So I think with men you just have to pick your battles. You can only squeeze so much out of them so you really have to decide what is important to you. They can only handle so much nagging, so you must ration it wisely! So if he decides that he wants to waste his money being teased by women he can never sleep with who have a smaller rack and larger waist then myself….then go for it. Honestly, I would rather spend time fighting for a clean bathroom.

And besides, any night that either starts with or ends with [Vansmack] at a strip club always yeilds a good story…. and I do love a good [Vansmack] story. Sweetie, did you tell them about the time you and I went to a strip club in Mexico?? Now THAT was a good story.

pwned.

Brian

But if I go outside, I might offend the Smokers

St. Louis councilmember seeks to ban swearing in bars, along with table-dancing, drinking contests and profane music.

Originally posted by vansmack:
Sweetie, did you tell them about the time you and I went to a strip club in Mexico?? Now THAT was a good story.

We're waiting…..

Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
We're waiting…..

OK, but let me get China and Pakistan off my chest before I tell the Mexico story.

I think Bloomberg is missing the mark here in comparing the effects of the US Economic slowdown with the Chinese slowdown.

China has become much less dependent on exports in the last 10 years, and much more interested in investment. If you take exports further, they are much less dependent on cheap exports today then they were 10 years ago (opting for electronics over toys) and much less dependent on the US today than they ever have been (Asia and the Middle East accounted for more than 40% of China's export growth in the first ten months of 2007, North America for less than 10%). Approximately 5% of China's GDP is dependent on net exports, where 40% of China's GDP is dependent on investment. Sure, exports effect the ability to invest, but a weak dollar and a slow economy make the US a better place to buy low.

Anyhow, the US effect on China may be a boon for China's over-heating economy and not a sign that Chinese market has reached it's peak.

So I've been thinking about Pakistan, but was waiting until I could fully process the assassination of Benazir Bhutto before sharing my thoughts.

While most of the media focused the first couple of weeks after her assassination on who killed her and how she died, I've decided that I don't care (well, it's not that I don't care, it's more that I don't think it's the most important angle). Originally, the interesting stories to me were (1) the lack of succession in Pakistani poltical parties, (2) the effects of moving the election to February, and (3) the overall effect on Pakistan. But lately I've become more intrigued about (4) the effects it has globally, because after all, the only reason we're more concerned about this particular Muslim country and it's problems over other Muslim countries is one thing: they possess a nuclear weapon.

(1) Succession: Pakistani's, even the well educated ones, can't get past their tribal allegiances. That is the simple answer for why everyone is looking to the Bhutto family to take over the PPP, even if that means a crook (Bhutto's husband, Asif Ali Zardari) or a 19 year old kid (Bhutto's son, Bilawal). It's a shame really because after the lawyers took to the streets to defy Musharraf, not one of them is seen as capable of running the PPP simply because his last name is not Bhutto. Zardari is blamed for Bhutto's corruption charges and isn't well liked, while Bilawal is still in college. Things are not looking good for the PPP for the next ten years.

(2) Elections: Despite the (shocking) calls from the west(ern media) to postpone the elections, both opposition parties (Bhutto's PPP and Sharif's PML) were opposed to changing the date. I wish I could say that they, like me, feel that democracy is bigger than any one person and the elections must go on. But no. They know that any more time given to Musharraf would allow him to put the security forces in place to rig an election. Postponing the election was not a good move.

(3) Pakistan's Future: More riots. Simply put, no matter who loses the election, they will take to the streets. Depsite a small precentage of Islamic extremists, they are quite effective in keeping Pakistan from becoming a true democracy. Add to that a Military dictatorship with a well entrenched military-intelligence program, and the likelihood of free elections creating a consensus of Pakistani's feeling like the government is one they can trust with a military that will protect them from the extremists is all but gone with the death of Bhutto.

(4) Global effects: This one matters most in my eyes. The death of Bhutto stopped two key strategic advances. One, she was going to rat Musharraf out to the American Congress ahead of the election so that election monitors would no what to look for ahead the (then) January election. And second, and perhpas more important, she had promised to turn over Abdul Qadeer Khan, the former head of Pakistan's nuclear program who has been selling nuclear secrets to China, Libya, Iran, North Korea, the Taliban in Afghanistan and, perhaps, Al-qaeda. I am looking forward to reading "The Nuclear Jihadist," a fascinating tale about the Man Who Sold the World's Most Dangerous Secrets...And How We Could Have Stopped Him.

Vansmack, I just have to ask. And don't take this the wrong way. After all, I myself am the guy who has 15K posts or something like that. But mine are mostly one line gibbersish comments fired off while I'm awaiting the results of a program I wrote, or something like that.

But do you have a job where you actually do work? Or is writing well conceived analyses about just about any topic under the sun part of your daily workload?

Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
Vansmack, I just have to ask. And don't take this the wrong way. After all, I myself am the guy who has 15K posts or something like that. But mine are mostly one line gibbersish comments fired off while I'm awaiting the results of a program I wrote, or something like that.

But do you have a job where you actually do work? Or is writing well conceived analyses about just about any topic under the sun part of your daily workload?

He lives in San Francisco and his wife (who allows him to go to strip clubs) is the main breadwinner. They don't let you into San Francisco with being able to "write well conceived analyses about just about any topic under the sun." They're not as tolerant as you think.

Brian