Hey, that’d be a great bipartisan appointment! And, of course, there’s no chance Russell would ever want to run for President himself, so he’d be a safe pick… 
Seriously, I think it just might be Jim Baker (despite a lot of Dems still loathing him for helping knife Dukakis in '88, and even more so for his role in the Florida recount debacle in '00).
Bush would be more likely to name Hillary Clinton as VP then pick his father or James Baker. Bush has spent decades trying to get out from his father’s shadow. To say he needed his dad to help him at this point would pretty much be an admission that his whole political career, and maybe his whole adult life, has been a failure.
And…?
Well it’s one thing to objectively argue that Bush’s entire life has been a failure.
But does George W. Bush strike you as the kind of person who would admit to it?
What we don’t know is how important the war is to Lieberman compared to social issues. If the continuing the war is the most important thing in his mind, then he might well consider abandoning the Democrats over it.
So, how do you explain Robert Gates’ appointment to replace Rumsfeld?
Here’s a possibility to mull over: How about if Bush appoints his brother Jeb to keep the ol’ Family Dynasty going (the Jebster would then presumably run for Prez in '08). Would George do it? Would Jeb take it? Would Congress approve it? Would the electorate buy it?
(My own WAGs: Wouldn’t surprise me - Who knows? - Maybe, maybe not - Too busy watching American Idol to give a fig)
I"m thinking it would be a no name schmoe from just east of the center of nowhere.
Why submit someone for confirmation that may actually know anything? Can you imagine the grilling Rice would get from the Senate? Can’t let too many cats out fo the bag at this late date - better to send Rep. Dick Donothing from the great state of Bland and Boring up and let him twiddle his thumbs 'til the clock runs out.
Dubya appointing Jeb would violate the Federal anti-nepotism law that was adopted after JFK appointed his little brother Attorney General. We had a similar discussion in another thread as to whether President Hillary might appoint Bubba to anything.
Gates was a member of the senior Bush’s administration but he was not a central figure like Baker or Bush himself was.
I’m sure that George W. loves his Dad but he has made a point of keeping his distance politically - he considers Reagan his political role model not his father. He certainly has never indicated that he has sought his father’s advice on any political issue or even that he asks himself “What would my father do in a case like this?”
And it works both ways. Old George has certainly never spoken out against anything his son has done. But he’s never given any major endorsements for anything either.
Offhand, the only statement I can think of that Bush has made in reference to his father was when he talked about how Saddam Hussein tried to kill his father. On the surface, the line was an example of filial loyalty. But when you think about the context, there is evidence of a divide. Bush Sr had gone to war against Iraq and many people complained that he left the job unfinished. Dubya by being at the forefront of calling for an invasion of Iraq was essentially endorsing this view. He was saying that he would do what his father hadn’t been able to do and that he would protect his father who, by implication, was unable to protect himself.
And James Baker was George Senior’s right hand man. He’s Bush’s alter-ego. And look at the two things he’s been called to do for this Bush. He was the person who ran the Florida vote challenge and the Iraqi Study Group. In the first case, George W. had to accept his leadership - he needed help in winning the legal challenges to his election. But years later, when Baker was called in to “straighten out” the situation in Iraq, Bush felt strong enough to publically reject any help Baker offered him.
Then he would likely be first VPOTUS in our history to be assassinated, and only the fifth to deserve it (counting Cheney himself, Quayle, Rockefeller, and Agnew; Bush I well deserves a horrible, violent death on a Pennsylvania Avenue lamppost, but did not play a prominent enough role as VP to warrant assassination).
Mods: I am predicting, not encouraging. Don’ gimme no shit. :dubious:
I wondered if there might be some sort of nepotism law. Course, the Decider might decide that that law doesn’t apply to a Constitutional Office, and maybe is doesn’t; I don’t know. (For some reason I have a hunch that Jeb may have decided that the rest of his life will be happier if he avoids politics and would turn down such an offer.)
BrainGlutton: My, my, aren’t we grouchy today. You forgot Aaron Burr. In fact, if I were to thumb through my copy of Bland Ambition I could probably find a few more veeps worthy of the honor you propose. (What was so bad about Rocky?)
I have to go along with plnnr. If Bush has a lick of sense (I know, I know, I’m assuming facts not in evidence) he would go with a nominee that could not be grilled to a crisp by Congress.
Dan Quayle is 60 years old – not too old to serve as VP for a short time, but probably out of the running as a serious presidential contender. I think Dubya could do a lot worse.
Quayle as his replacement Veep would REALLY confuse kids in American History class in 2035.
The first two names that come to mind are Rice and Lieberman which have been suggested.
A few others (placeholders):
Don Evan. Former Commerce Secretary and Bush’s buddy from Midland. If it is a do nothing job, why not give it to a buddy who you trust? Give him a front page mention in the Obit section when he dies.
Orrin Hatch- A well respected, Conservative Senator who would be confirmed in seven minutes. Too old to be in contention. The easy answer if you don’t want to waste energy on a confirmation fight. Hatch is confirmed 99-0 only after Joe Biden gives a three hour and fifty-nine minute speech on the Senate floor about himself and concludes with a one minute story about Orrin Hatch… that co-stars Joe Biden.
John Warner- In the same vein as Hatch, but with a little more credibility on the war from both sides if Bush wanted to take this moment to broker a deal on Iraq. Not sure he would take it. But, like Biden, he’d talk about it for days on end.
Rick Santorum- Let’s say Bush doesn’t want to mess with 2008 (it is getting too late), but has an eye to 2012 and wanted to resucitate the career of a favored ally, he could tab Santorum. I think Santorum could get 50% in the Senate, but the House would be a stretch. That said, I think the DEMS would get in a few shots but keep their powder dry on this confirmation. If something happened to Justice Stephens or Ginsburg, they need every bullet in their guns.
cough cough CHENEY cough cough
Seriously, though, you make some good points. I think Baker would probably decline. But the White House would be smart to ask him.
Oh, I just listed him on general principles, because he was Rocky. At the time there was a perception that he pulled Ford’s strings the way Cheney pulls Shrub’s, but I don’t know if there’s any hard proof.
What? No issues with Calhoun? The man probably did more to cause the civil war than any other American.
Don’t forget protecting the space-time continuum. Read the Constitution.
And Quayle did? :dubious:
So – mis-spelling “potato” should not be a capital offence?