Why This Ticket Is Brilliant

There are generally two main fears that occupy the minds of those who are leaning giving Obama a vote in November:

1. Lack of experience
Though I believe this argument is moot, (Abraham Lincoln was less experienced than Obama when elected President and turned out to be arguably the greatest in American history) it understandable to be apprehensive. This is probably what keeps most Clinton supporters from choosing Obama (or the fact that she has a vajajay, and you probably do too.)

2. He's a Democrat
This is a fear that resides amongst most conservatives who are thinking about voting for Obama (notably me). I like Obama as a person, and his foreign policy sounds as if it will be top-notch (barring Samantha Power doesn't rejoin the campaign), but I fear that he will spend too much, increase the size of the Federal government, and Socialize the healthcare system. Of course, a person could retort that Bush has been more of a Democrat than either Hillary or Obama, but like I said, I'm a conservative, not a Neocon.

The easiest way for Obama to calm these qualms is to take on Bloomberg as his running mate. He has the conservative credentials: he's shown that he can fiscally manage the largest city in the country and has been able to introduce some competition into the city's public schools. His success in the business world will lure economically-conscious conservatives, while he could also win over the Wall Street elites, who tend to vote Republican.

Bloomberg is also a manager, while Obama is lauded for his depth of vision. It would be a remarkable pairing of an "administrator" with the "idea man." Obama could have the ideas; Bloomberg can make them happen.

I know that I personally would be voting for Bloomberg if he was going to run as an independent, and would certainly vote for an Obama/Bloomberg ticket without hesitation. In fact, I'd probably still vote for Obama/Bloomberg even if I had to pay first. Not only that, it would be a pairing of New York and Chicago, two of the most urban cities in the country. It would be a sweeping change from Texas and Arkansas based presidencies.

But in reality, the only mistake Obama could make when it comes to electing a veep is picking Hillary Clinton.

The Woman Is a Liar

If you want to relive Clinton's embarassing Bosnia gaff, TPM has a great video:



She may be "ready on day one," but she may not be bringing any of that alleged "experience" she claims she has, because as we're finding out, she doesn't have any.

Obama's Healthcare Plan: Change We Need?

Michael Raigin at the American Thinker is apprehensive:

"Obama's plan also calls for a ten billion dollar federal investment in health care information technology over five years. He purports this will improve quality and save money. Will it? The data suggests otherwise. A study published in The Archives of Internal Medicine showed information technology did not make a quality difference. Comparing practices that used an electronic medical record with those that did not, investigators found no difference in 14 quality measures, improvement in 2 outcome measures, and a worse outcome on 1 measure. This is hardly a sweeping endorsement. Incorporating such expensive and unproven methods within his plan is flippant.  It demonstrates a lack of understanding of the issue at hand."

I'm skeptical of any plan that smacks of "universal" language. The world has yet to see a country of 300 million people soundly run a federal health care program. While Obama's plan is most certainly preferable to Hillary's, since (smart) Americans will have the option to opt out of his health care plan, it would be most preferable to leave health care to the marketplace and let government tidy up some of the loose ends.