Veep Creep

In which our man Durst poses the only interesting question left in the 2000 election cycle: What bozos will be tapped for vice president?

Image: Nader photo courtesy of nader2000.org, Kevorkian photo courtesy

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


The election has reached a fevered pitch, as we try to guess which lame shirt Al Gore is next going to parade around in, puffed up like a poisoned blowfish. Unless we soon learn that George Dubyah has executed a family member by mistake, perhaps it’s time to turn our attention to the burning question of potential running mates.

Of course the editorial cartoonists and political comedians are all hoping George the Younger follows in Daddy’s footsteps and replucks Dan Quayle from whatever depths of obscurity he has sunk to — “Hey, it was good enough for Pop, and besides, think of the money we’ll save on bumper stickers.” And I think I speak for all of us when I say we are agreed that no matter who Gore picks, its bound to be a better choice than the one Clinton made.

But in the spirit of Monday Night Football’s decision to go with Dennis Miller and Heinz introducing a green ketchup, maybe the year 2000 is the perfect time to go outside the box in selecting the person who will spend the next four years a mere chicken bone away from the presidency.

America doesn’t need safe. That’s such 20th-century, “Greatest-Generation” crap. And yes, I am talking about Sens. Tom Daschle and John Danforth here. What we need is a fresh, unique take on the whole political front. And I’m here to help. The only real requirements are that the candidate be 35 years old and born American.

(Yeah, yeah, I know: Ralph Nader has already announced his ticket-buddy — Winona LaDuke — but there’s always time for even third parties to come to their senses.)

Al Gore:

Gov. Jesse Ventura. They dress alike. They walk alike. At times they even talk alike. You could lose your mind. And the Dems could be the first party ever to crow, “Our vice presidential candidate can put your vice presidential candidate’s eyes out with his pecs.” Although maybe not the last.

Hillary Clinton. Oh, what the hell, let’s go for it: Tipper.

Samuel L. Jackson. He’s a bad mutha, and could lend a badly needed edge to Gore’s campaign. “Shut your mouth.” Right on.


George W. Bush:

Dr. Laura Schleschinger. She’s feisty. She’s popular. She’s purportedly a woman. And let’s not kid ourselves, the Log Cabin Republican Caucus isn’t much of a threat: The entire group could meet in a non-smoking double at a Key West Days Inn.

Bill Gates. Or just sell the spot to the highest bidder. And tell everybody. Time to stop pretending.

Sylvester Stallone. Needs a hit role bad. Probably willing to take second billing.


Ralph Nader:

Dr. Jack Kevorkian. These two really do look alike, and it would make Nader seem like an orphaned puppy dog in comparison.

Crispin Glover. Don’t ask. It just makes me laugh.

Sunny Von Bulow. Twenty years in a coma is perfect preparation for the job.


Pat Buchanan:

Sharon Stone. A new son, a new image — why not a new career? Could prove to be box-office magic for Pat, and the Bipartisan Commission on Presidential Debates might not only suspend the 15 percent rule, but make all participants sit in low-slung plastic interrogation chairs.

Kenny G. Smooth mellow sounds soften Buchanan’s high cackle.

David Duke. (See Ralph Nader and Jack Kevorkian, above.)

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate