Do Not Try to Disarm

I was reading a long today about potential vice presidential candidates for Obama. A common theme in every article regarding vice presidential candidates is how each candidate neutralizes potential attacks against the top of the ticket. For example, some folks say Obama should choose Wes Clark or Jim Webb because they will help inoculate him against attacks on his foreign policy credibility. Another example is that Obama should choose McCaskill or Sebelius to help himself with women. This type of reasoning is flawed for a number of reasons. Perhaps the greatest problem with this reasoning is the belief that simply having a person who has military experience or is a woman is enough that one will not be attacked on that issue. John Kerry proved this not to be the case. Anyone can be attacked on any point regardless of what that person specifically embodies. The attack isn't what is important, the given candidate's response is the crucial matter. Relatedly, simply being a war hero (using that term in the loosest possible sense as most in the media and politics do) or being a woman doesn't forward a winning political argument in and of itself. This is best seen in John McCain in the current cycle, but John Kerry and Al Gore also embody this point. Specifically, relating to McCain, what about flying attack aircraft (the awesome A-1 Skyraider and the A-4 Skyhawk), getting shot down, and spending years in a POW camp does not seem to me to provide any relevant experience to being President of the United States. The only tenuous link is to the commander in chief powers, but flying aircraft, getting shot down, and spending years in a POW camp means one specifically does not have the experience leading large groups of people similar to being the civilian commander of the armed forces. Now, I realize that McCain retired a Captain, and his Navy career extended beyond his time in Hanoi, but the point is still there. It is incumbent upon McCain to make the argument why that experience matters. Simply having it means nothing. Ultimately, Democrats should stop making this mistake, and instead should seek a Vice Presidential nominee who is going to best make the arguments (read as rhetorical skills) the Democratic Party needs to win the White House and increase our majorities in Congress. It doesn't matter if that person has a great biography.

On a similar note, regarding the connecting of experience to arguments, Obama does this very well when talking about his experiences as a community organizer exposed him to all sorts of people and helped him gain a greater understanding of what people face on a daily basis in this country. This is a great example of what we need in a candidate and vice presidential candidate. Just being a community organizer or a war hero means nothing on its face.