Some analysis of the pros and cons for Obama of choosing Jim Webb as his running mate:
Though the media is now full of chatter about whether Barack Obama will select Hillary Clinton as his running mate, the betting markets say that Jim Webb is about as likely a choice for Vice President. There has been heated discussion about whether Webb would be a wise or disastrous pick, with most pundits coming down firmly on one side or the other. Now, with Obama’s Vice Presidential Search Committee already at work, the time has come for a sober assessment of Webb, balancing his strengths against his weaknesses.
Webb’s assets as Obamas potential running mate are considerable:
1. In a party often perceived as soft on defense, Webb is a genuine war hero with considerable experience in managing the military. For his service as a Marine in Vietnam, he was awarded the Navy Cross the second highest decoration in the Navy and the Marine Corps for “extraordinary heroism” as well as a Silver Star, two Bronze Stars and two Purple Hearts. Quite simply, this is not a record that can be “swift-boated.” And Webb has extensive service on the civilian side of military affairs, having served as first Assistant Secretary of Defense for Rescue Affairs and then Secretary of the Navy under the Reagan administration. In 1988, Webb resigned as Secretary of the Navy on a matter of principle; at a time when the Pentagon was under pressure to reduce the budget, he refused to cut the size of the Navy.
2. Webb was an early and prescient opponent of the Iraq War. In an Op-Ed in the Washington Post in September 2002, he argued that there was no “absolutely vital national interest” that would justify a “unilateral war” and asked bluntly whether such a war would “actually increase our ability to win the war against international terrorism.” Webb delivered the Democratic response to Bush’s State of the Union address in 2007, offering an eloquent and moving critique of Bush’s conduct of the war.
3. Webb has been a powerful critic of the growing class divide in America. In a stunning piece entitled “Class Struggle” published in of all places the Wall Street Journal, he denounced “our society’s steady drift toward a class-based system, the likes of which we have not seen since the 19th century.” Noting that “the average CEO made 20 times what the average worker made” when he graduated from college in the 1960s but now makes “400 times as much,” he denounced the “sense of entitlement … bordering on hubris” that “has set in among elites.” This theme of economic fairness also figured prominently in his response to Bush’s State of the Union address.
There are some pretty big down sides too. Click through to the article to read those, including his somewhat bizarre views about the Confederacy.