<p>"Make no mistake about this," Biden responded. "Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president of the United States of America. Lets get that straight. Shes a truly close personal friend, she is qualified to be president of the United States of America, shes easily qualified to be vice president of the United States of America and quite frankly it might have been a better pick than me. But shes first rate, I mean that sincerely, shes first rate, so lets get that straight."</p>
<p>Good stuff. McCain, if I read correct, supports stem cell research (I'm sure he's getting sick and tired of the cancer) while his VP doesn't support it. I read the same on global warming for them as well along with creationism.</p>
<p>So, are you rich, religious, or mentally ill?</p>
<p>Smug, this is not the hate on Palin thread, k? Liberals never listen, geez. But I will entertain you :D</p>
<p>She opposes embryonic stem cell research government funding, and if you weren't going to vote for her because of her firm abortion views, I don't see how this matters. Science always progresses, with impediments and support by the government, k?</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Sarah Palin was the undisputed most-qualified candidate in the entirety of Republicandom? </p>
<p>Debating whether or not Hillary or Biden is more qualified is like debating whether Larry Bird or Magic Johnson was the better basketball player. Meanwhile, Sarah Palin vs. random Republican potential VP is more like an undrafted rookie with two bad knees being compared to Michael Jordan.</p>
<p>Embryonic is viewed as the most important. What a tard she is.</p>
<p>Science would progress a lot further if there weren't holistic disregards against it by the general ignoramus population that has no use for it until it hit hits home. Nancy Reagan and Sandra Day spring up to mind when Alzheimer's hits home.</p>
<p>Silly Republican. You just sit there and think you know, but you have absolutely no idea.</p>
<p>I just wish Palin's daughter's baby's daddy was black. I wonder where the hell that would have sprung.</p>
<p>So much for evangelicalism.</p>
<p>Toot that thang up mami make it roll. Pop lock drop it baby let it show. I dunno.</p>
<p>Why exactly do you care about human life so much? As soon as that child is bored, they're on their own in a sense, especially if the parent(s) can't afford the child. You don't want your tax dollars helping them out in any sense. When they do something bad, you want them locked up for ever. If their parents are poor, you believe they should be punished for it.</p>
<p>I just don't get it. I mean get a hanger and get it out of there. No reason for why the child should suffer.</p>
<p>In addition, you don't seem to be worried about killings all around the world? Your relativist minds don't seem to work in locations outside the US. Why is that?</p>
<p>What's your point in posting this? You obviously don't support Clinton. Either would have been excellent choices, and Biden is humble enough to admit that. (Or he's just trying to make himself look good. Who knows?)</p>
<p>Now that the Clinton/Obama party is united, does anyone else think that it is almost logical that Obama should shift to Hillary for VP? </p>
<p>I think Biden would have to be the one to "initiate" it - claiming more forcefully that he is withdrawing because he does not feel he is a right fit for this new campaign and nominating Hillary so that it is not on Obama's shoulders.</p>
<p>While it would draw guffaws from the right wing dominated media commentators, it would show an incredible level of judgment on the part of Obama to adjust to new realities.</p>
<p>Biden would just have to be honest. The reality is that the stunt choice of Palin changed the game and people everywhere are ignoring the extraordinary hypocrisies of the assertions that she reads off teleprompters and buying into the flat out lies and slanders being spread by the "Straight Talk Express". </p>
<p>It is clear that in this particular race, Biden is not the asset he otherwise would have been. I guess like others in the blogosphere, I hope this meeting with Bill is about this subject. It would end this contrived surge.</p>
<p>Well, Hillary at the top of the ticket would cement Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Arkansas, put Florida more in play, West Virginia. What is Obama's best chances? Colorado, Virginia...yikes! He wants to flip red states when he can't even hold strong leads in traditional blue ones. Hillary would've been able to get WV, AR, but Obama won't get GA or Alaska.</p>
<p>Who knows. Maybe Obama will make the ultimate sacrifice and offer the nomination to Hillary. Talk about a game changer. I don't know if there'd be enough time to let that settle in, though. A lot of angry Obama supporters.</p>
<p>Perhaps that, more than just taking her on as VP, would be the most selfless act a presidential candidate has done since Washington resigned so that the new nation would not be ruled by a single king.</p>
<p>Hillary chances for VP were pretty much nulled when she was running for the nomination and criticized Obama as not being ready to be president, etc. If you were running for president, you wouldn't choose someone who's criticized you just recently.</p>
<p>shrizto - you underestimate how impersonal politics is. </p>
<p>They'll go with whomever they have to to win. From Kennedy to Bush 41, hard fought primaries have led to joint tickets that forced former rivals to eat a lot of words. Whatever it takes to get the votes.</p>