You're kidding, right?

I bet huge bucks Republicans wouldn't believe this gift even in their wildest dreams.

Celebrity and the Windsurfer. What a pair.

Is Biden on the list?

There is a report that Obama is going to be changing some of the speakers times - and that it would be easy to 'slip' the VP choice into the appropriate time.

I think Kerry would be a fine pick, typically Democratic loser-bashing aside (Democrats eat their own, unlike the GOP which let both Nixon and Reagan run twice).

He's experienced, good friends with Obama, has a war record, and is not seen as a machine politician with big lobbyist ties. He's spent most of his time in the senate doing investigations, not legislation. And he's been fully vetted. Spare me the handwringing about how the GOP will use this or that attack from 2004. Old attacks never work, and in fact won't be tried. Case in point: Monica Lewinsky, White Water and Travelgate were NOT issues for the Clintons in the primaries. Attacks only work ONCE.

Finally, Kerry came 100,000 votes in Ohio from the Presidency. He won some 40 million + votes. You sneering self-hating Dems need to remember that. Kerry was a flawed candidate, but the media environment was also poisonous in 2004 (with the MSM lapping up swift boat attacks and still showing hero worship of Bush). In war time, almost without precident, he came 100,000 votes from unseating a warmongering bully who had the entire media on his side. Joe Biden or anyone else has no such achievement, ever.

Picking Kerry is like throwing in the towel before the fight starts. Not smart. Kerry is a looser.

Biden is the guy. He knows his stuff and says what he thinks. He would be a credible attack dog for Obama and give national security and foreign policy credentials.

I agree, for reasons pointed out by observer2, that Kerry would be a fine candidate and first-rate VP (and would have made a very good president). We now know that he had a harder task than we were aware, given his discomfort with Edwards and Edwards' then-puzzling failure to live up to his promise as a VP candidate.

I will always resent the DUMPING that was done on Kerry after a hard, well-run campaign and a life story that may show ambition but also shows a LOT of courage. -- Maybe you had to be there to understand what he did for the anti-war movement and the understanding/mind-set of 'average' Americans. I was there and and until John Kerry spoke to Congress, this country was hating the soldiers as much as they hated the war. That may seem too-simplistic and rather unbelievable now, but the activism of former soldiers, esp Kerry, brought about one of those mind-changing, growing-up moments of the '60s.

But on to 2008, however --- I think Biden is a better choice for VP: less of an 'elite' image and in fact Biden is very good with blue collar voters, less 'oddity' as there would be in having a presidential candidate come back in 2nd spot, and in my opinion Biden is a bit more articlate and 'feisty' and deeply-competent in foreign affairs. ------------ My hope is that Biden will be slipped into the VP spot and Kerry will be slipped into Biden's spot.

You can count on there being a good, and big, role for Kerry. He's the most recent nominee, he was an early and important backer of Obama, and he's been a good, hard-working surrogate. If not slipping into one of the Wednesday spots, I'd guess giving the nominating speech or introducing Obama on Thursday.

Seeing as the Republicans started this in 2000, let me suggest that the VP is going to be . . . Caroline Kennedy!

Think about (only half-seriously): that would bring a lot of excitement.

When is Kaine speaking? I did not see his name either.

If you think Kerry is a great choice your head is so far up your ass it will never come back out.

WTF is wrong with you? extra 21st Chromosome perhaps?

Kerry yes, Kerry no, Clark yes, Clark no, Biden yes, Biden no, Bayh yes, Bayh no, etc., etc., etc., and probably more to come.
These and other soundings of potential candidates are (I think) merely misdirection. It gets the MSM running around looking in all the wrong places, and gives Obama the freedom to consider and to set up the decision well. Floating a number of persons serves also to allow him to guage public and press reaction without the intense critical scrutiny that would attend candidates on a "short list". And, it gives the Republicans no clear target for their slime machine.
As a political maneuver, it also makes sense. It serves to effectively raise the profile of those mentioned before they they fan out to support Obama in the fall.
One of the crucial factors in the success of an Obama administration may be whether or not we can garner a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. I hope that he doesn't choose a Senator!