June 12, 2004 (New York Times)
WA****NGTON, June 11 -- John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic nominee
for president,
has repeatedly and personally asked Senator John McCain, the
independent-minded Arizona Republican, to consider being his running
mate, but Mr. McCain has refused, people who have spoken to both men
said Friday.
Mr. Kerry, the Massachusetts senator, made his first direct overtures
to Mr. McCain about three weeks after locking up the Democratic
nomination in March and approached him again, in person or by
telephone, as many as seven times, as recently as last week, according
to one person who has discussed the issue with both.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/12/politics/campaign/12MCCA.html?ei=5007&en=22de10fcb50e67f3&ex=1402372800&partner=USERLAND&pagewanted=print&position=
"It was always artfully phrased, but he asked him on several occasions
to serve as his running mate," the individual said. "He'd say, `I
don't want to formally ask because I don't want to be formally
rejected, but having said that, would you do it?' or `I need you to do
it,' or `I want you to do it.' "
"It was always phrased in such a way as to give both men plausible
deniability," the individual added.
Neither Mr. McCain nor Mr. Kerry could be reached for comment on the
rare cross-party running mate discussions. Stephanie Cutter, Mr.
Kerry's communications director, said, "Senator Kerry and Senator
McCain are good friends and have spoken during the course of the
campaign, including when Kerry called McCain to thank him for standing
up and defending Kerry against baseless political attacks."
Aides to Mr. McCain did not return repeated phone calls on Friday; his
chief of staff, Mark Salter, told the Associated Press, which first
re****ted the discussions, that "Senator McCain categorically states
that he has not been offered the vice presidency by anyone."
Less than a month ago, Mr. McCain denied having even casual
discussions with Mr. Kerry on the subject.
Word of Mr. Kerry's personal entreaties, and Mr. McCain's flat
refusal, may bring an end to the persistent, and at times fevered,
speculation among Democrats and others about the potential of a
bipartisan ticket, with the two friends and Vietnam veterans matching
up against President Bush and Vice President Cheney, neither of whom
fought in that war.
Mr. McCain's testy relation****p with President Bush, whom he ran
against in 2000 for the Republican nomination, fueled the speculation,
even though Mr. McCain has repeatedly denied being interested in the
job. He said as recently as last week on a late-night television show
made clear his lack of enthusiasm about being No. 2, "I spent several
years in a North Vietnamese prison camp, in the dark, fed with scraps.
Do you think I want to do that all over again as vice president of the
United States?"
But his denials did not stop prominent members of Congress - including
Senator Bill Nelson of Florida, himself considered a potential Kerry
running mate - from suggesting that a Kerry-McCain ticket would be
unstoppable in the fall. Mr. McCain showed in 2000 that he could draw
Independent voters. A CBS News poll recently found that a Kerry-McCain
ticket had a 14-percentage-point edge over Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney
among registered voters, 53 percent to 39 percent, compared to most
head-to-head polls that show Mr. Kerry alone tied or slightly ahead of
Mr. Bush.
Some Democrats have warned it recent days that the talk about McCain
threatened to make whomever Mr. Kerry did select look unexciting by
comparison. Among the many potential running mates, those mentioned
most frequently include Senator John Edwards of North Carolina,
Representative Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri and Gov. Tom Vilsack of
Iowa. Indeed, the person who has spoken to both Mr. Kerry and McCain
said he believed Mr. Kerry's campaign had deliberately leaked the
story on Friday afternoon so it would be lost in coverage of Ronald
Reagan's funeral and in the thinly read Saturday newspapers.
A friend of both men said Mr. McCain's rejection of the idea came down
simply to his disinterest in being vice president, no matter who is in
the White House.
"Kerry and McCain have been close for some time, for years, and there
is a comfort level between them," this friend said. "But remember, the
first responsibility of a vice president is to be ready to be
president, the second is to be comfortable with the president, the
third is to know your place. One and two work for McCain, but three
doesn't. And I think John McCain knows that he could not be vice
president to anyone, whether it be John Kerry or a Republican."
The person who has spoken to both men gave a slightly different reason
for Mr. McCain's refusal to consider the job: "At the end of the day,
he's a Republican, he sup****ts President Bush's re-election, and while
he and John Kerry agree on some major issues, they disagree on more
than they agree," the person said. "But the first two of those are
more im****tant than the last."
Mr. McCain and Mr. Kerry's relation****p began as an acid one; the
Arizona senator, a Navy bomber pilot who spent more than five years as
a prisoner of war in Hanoi, was outraged by the antiwar activities of
Mr. Kerry, a Navy Swift boat commander who famously led protesting
veterans in throwing their medals away in 1971.
Mr. McCain campaigned against Mr. Kerry in his first race in 1984, but
the two men made peace and worked together during the Clinton
administration to resolve the fates of American prisoners of war and
service members missing in action, and to normalize American relations
with Vietnam.
On the campaign trail until now, Mr. Kerry has cited his friend****p
and collaborative work with Mr. McCain as evidence of his own ability
to reach across the partisan aisle to get things done.
He even used Mr. McCain's image in one of his recent campaign
commercials, showing a picture of the two senators side-by-side.
Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company
On Mar 30, 7:54 am, Neolibertarian <cognac...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> In article
> <74c9d774-047b-4ceb-a324-770a60699...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> "Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names" <PopUlist...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > John McBush says he wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years.
>
> > Where will we put the monument with the names of the dead from the
> > Bush-McCain war? The Mall in Wa****ngton is not big enough for all the
> > names.
>
> 4,000 X 14.5 = 58,000
>
> Ergo, it will take 14.5 Operation: Iraqi Freedoms to equal one Vietnam.
>
>
>
> > "Who is to blame for this wall in Wa****ngton
> > that's made of cold black granite?
> > Why is my father's name etched here in it
> > in this wall in Wa****ngton?"
>
> Chairman Mao, of course.
>
> Sure, you can blame the French, Ike, Kennedy, Johnson and McNamara,
> too, but somewhere along the line that kind of reasoning wears mighty
> thin.
>
> The fact of the matter is, anywhere you chose to fight will be a bad
> place. Gettysburg, for instance, was a particularly rotten place to have
> a cataclysmic battle.
>
> Was it Lee's and Meade's fault it was fought there? Sure it was. Was it
> Lincoln's and Davis's fault it was fought there? Sort of.
>
> In the end "who's fault is it?" is a meaningless, pointless question.
> Truly, the only relevant question is always: "whatchya gonna do about it
> NOW?"
>
> --
> NeoLibertarian
>
> http://www.elihu.envy.nu/NeoPics/UncleHood.jpg
|
