Had Nunn showed a similar hostility to Israel 15 years ago as he did gays but was now willing to "reconsider", does anyone believe Crowley would be writing this?  Anyway, Nunn is 70 years old -- why blunt one of your strongest (if unspoken) weapons against McCain?

lymon -- It's fair to say that attitudes about Israel were not significantly more hostile 15 years ago than they were today. That's certainly not true for gays in the military.

Or did I just make your point for you? I'm not sure.

The Obama VP choice will be under 60.  Period.

Nunn can always be advertised as a "senior adviser."

Personally, I don't mind if we let Israelis serve in the Army, but I don't think they should be allowed to get married to each other.

I thought this old bag of bones was dead....

He is an absolutely awful choice, and only partly because of his age (70 is really not that old). He has a good track record on setting up overview and tracking of biological weapons. Other than that, he is somewhere to the right of Lieberman or Breaux -- although he was against the Gulf War I think; but there is a reason he is so beloved by his republican buddies. He voted AGAINST a balanced budget in 1994 and voted FOR prayer in school. That says it all for me. Perhaps secretary fo defense, but lets keep this guy away from fiscal policy and civic matters.

Isn't "Nunn's most obvious political liability" the fact that he hasn't won an election since 1990? And if not that, wouldn't it be the fact that nobody would view Nunn as a potential elected successor, which is exactly why Dick Cheney doomed Bush to an entire second term of lame-duck status? Under the Twenty-Second Amendment, a president in his second term relies on the implicit threat of a "third term" under his VP to maintain his influence over his own party in Congress. Nunn would either cripple Obama in a second term or he would have to be dropped from the ticket in 2012, which would be a high-risk move.

Roz -- in retrospect I should have picked something else to make my point -- Israel always comes to mind because TNR devotes so much to it, but it carries a whiff of "Jewish double-standard" which I don't intend.  My point here is that I think Michael Crowley is being too dismissive of Nunn's former, very public hostiity to gay rights -- I think he'd be a non-starter had it been almost any other group.  And in light of Obama's previous friction with the the gay community over that pastor, I'd pass.  

Now, with those disclaimers, I'd say that attitudes about Israel were somewhat more hostile if not 15, 17 years ago, with George H.W. Bush claiming to be under seige from the pro-Israel lobby and otherwise pressuring Israel.  

Ratner:  Hilarious.

"From what I can tell Nunn seemed less personally offended by the idea than duty-bound as chairman of the Armed Services Committee to represent the strong feelings of the military brass. (There also seemed to be some power politics at play, with Nunn asserting his committee feifdom against the new president and his defense secretary, Les Aspin.)"

So, his qualifications include having set out to undercut the last newly elected Democratic president, perhaps on behalf of "the military brass" (when he should have been defending the president's authority OVER the brass) or perhaps in the interest of his own "fiefdom." Just what you want in a VP, I totally agree.

Nunn seems to me to fall into a category with the likes of Biden, Daschle and a few other names on the speculative list; more likely Cabinet officers or White House advisers than veeps.

Barry just might select someone over 60 as his veep candidate. Why? Experience and gravitas. Though cspencef will probably prove to be correct.

I have to side with my gay friends on this one - screw Nunn.

Neil

What about Gary Hart? He's like Sam Nunn, only better. Hart's got less political scandal (Donna Rice isn't as big of a deal as being an obstacle to the last US civil rights hurdle), is more exciting, and is just as solid on foreign policy. His regional appeal is to put into play the Western states leaning blue. A proven campaigner. Obama's "change you can believe in" owes a lot to "new ideas," so why not bring on the guy who "was Bill Clinton before Bill Clinton was Bill Clinton" to the ticket? The one knock is age, 71, but if that's not a reason to eliminate Nunn from consideration, then there's no reason not to choose the better version of Obama's Cheney.

This statement just out: "Last week I communicated to Senator Obama and his presidential campaign

Oddly, despite his endless cheerleading for Sam Nunn as a potential Obama V.P. over at the Stump, Mike