Later today, I’m going to highlight Chuck Hagel (R, Nebraska) as a VP for Obama, and either today or tomorrow, I will also highlight Clair McCaskill (D, Missouri) as a VP for Obama.

I look forward to keeping you updated!

From CNN:

[Bill] Clinton told People that after her mother lost the Iowa caucuses, daughter Chelsea “was upset, bawled, went to her employer and said, ‘Look, you got to let me go or give me an indefinite leave of absence. I’m not letting my mother go down like this.’”

Does the former president [Bill Clinton] think Chelsea Clinton would consider a run for elected office? “I don’t know. If you had asked me this before Iowa, I would have said ‘No way. She is too allergic to anything we do,” responded Clinton. “But she is really good at it.”

BARF factor times a google.

Now that’s a happy family:

“I think it would be highly unlikely for Obama to ask [Hillary Clinton] to take it,” Carter said. “Because I don’t see how it would help his ticket. I think he needs somebody like a [former Georgia Sen.] Sam Nunn, but I won’t name others.”

“But I think if he asked her, she would take it,” Carter added.

The former president also reiterated that he does not have direct contact with either campaign and is not privy to the VP deliberations.

Carter also said a unity ticket would likely help the party come together after the prolonged and at times divisive primary race. But he stopped short of saying such a ticket would be the strongest Democrats could field

“That would be the ticket the republicans would favor I think,” he said.

Carter, a Democratic superdelegate, has yet to formally endorse a candidate, but he has strongly hinted he is in favor of Obama.

So that led me to look up Sam Nunn, and he is, according to Wikipedia, as follows: (emphasis added)

Samuel Augustus Nunn, Jr. (born September 8, 1938 ) is an American businessman and politician. Currently the co-chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the NTI (Nuclear Threat Initiative), a charitable organization working to reduce the global threats from nuclear, biological and chemical weapons, Nunn served for twenty-four years as a United States SenatorGeorgia from (1972 until 1997) as a member of the Democratic Party. His political experience and strong credentials on national defense reportedly put him into consideration as a potential running mate for Democratic candidate John Kerry in the 2004 Presidential election, and have fueled rumors that he could become the running mate of Democratic frontrunner Barack Obama in 2008.

[...] Overall, Nunn was a moderate-to-conservative Democrat^[5] who often broke with his party on a host of social and economic issues. He strongly opposed the budget bill of 1993, which included provisions to raise taxes in order to reduce the deficit. He was also vehement in his opposition to President Bill Clinton’s proposal to allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military. He voted in favor of school prayer, capping punitive damage awards, amending the U.S. Constitution to require a balanced budget, and limiting death penalty appeals. On certain issues like abortion, the environment, gun control, and affirmative action, Nunn took a more moderate line. He consistently voted in favor of increased immigration.^[8] One of his most controversial votes was his vote against the Gulf War. ^[9]

[...] On August 3, 2007, Nunn confirmed that he has had discussions with New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg about the current political climate. He also stated that he hadn’t ruled out the possibility of declaring his own candidacy in the 2008 presidential election as an independent. However, Nunn indicated that he would decline any offers to run for Vice President by saying, “The only thing I would consider would be running for the big office.” On August 19, Nunn said he would not decide on a presidential bid until after the 2008 primary season, once the major parties have produced de facto nominees.

Speculation over a Nunn bid ended on April 18, 2008, when he endorsed Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama.

Despite having publicly declared his disinterest in being a vice presidential candidate, Nunn is mentioned by some political pundits as a potential running mate for Obama.

So, the positive points for Nunn: Lots of political experience, white male, from the south, strong on defense, and for some people, his moderate social views. For me, that’s a negative.

So I decided to look up some other candidates for Obama’s vice president. Next, I looked up Jim Webb, who is my personal pick.

James Henry “Jim” Webb, Jr. (born February 9, 1946) is the junior Senator from Virginia. He is also an author and a former Secretary of the Navy under President Ronald Reagan. He is a member of the Democratic Party.

A 1968 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, Webb served as a Marine Corps infantry officer until 1972, and is a highly decorated Vietnam War combat veteran. During his four years with the Reagan administration, Webb served as the first Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, then as Secretary of the Navy.

Although he was elected to the Senate by very narrow margin, Webb is often mentioned as possible Vice Presidential Democratic nominee in 2008,^[43] due to his experience and moderate positions. More importantly, he has vast military experience, not to mention a son currently serving in Iraq. This could serve as a shield against Republican attacks on Obama’s lack of military experience. ^[44]

Additionally, Webb was against the Iraq war from the start, which would provide a lot of consistancy with Obama’s position. Furthermore, he is also a white male from the south, and is super in favor of gun owner’s rights, which could be a key issue for a lot of voters. Sounds like a perfect guy, right? Well, not entirely. He wrote an article called “Why Women Can’t Fight,” about not allowing women in the military. A few days ago he also said he wasn’t interested in being the vice president. Also, he is said to be an incredibly loose cannon who has a temper. An amusing story about Webb follows:

On November 28, 2006, at a White House reception for those newly elected to Congress, Webb declined to stand in the line to have his picture taken with the president, whom Webb often criticized during the campaign. The president approached Webb later and asked him, “How’s your boy?”, referring to Webb’s son, a Marine serving in Iraq. According to Congressman Jim Moran of Virginia, aides warned the President to be “extra sensitive about talking to Webb about his son, since Webb’s son has had a recent brush with death in Iraq.”^[26] Webb replied “I’d like to get them out of Iraq, Mr. President.” Bush responded, “That’s not what I asked you. How’s your boy?” Webb responded, “That’s between me and my boy, Mr. President.” Webb was so angered by the exchange that he was reportedly tempted to “slug” the president and later remarked, “I’m not particularly interested in having a picture of me and George W. Bush on my wall.”

And finally for now, another person that has been thrown around a lot as a vice presidential candidate, Kathleen Sebelius. Her information:

Kathleen Gilligan Sebelius (born May 15, 1948), viewed by many U.S. political commentators as an articulate rising star in the Democratic Party, is currently serving as the 44th Governor of Kansas.^[1] She is the second female governor of Kansas, the 2008 respondent to the State of the Union address,^[2] and chair-emerita of the Democratic Governors Association.

Sebelius gave a well received Democratic response to the 2008 Presidential State of the Union address, and is closely allied with Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama.

During the 2004 election Sebelius was named as a potential running mate for John Kerry.^[17] In the aftermath of Kerry’s defeat in the 2004 presidential election, some pundits named Sebelius as a potential candidate for the Democratic nomination for President in 2008. Sebelius’s supports abortion rights and opposes capital punishment. Many contend that her appeal would be broad among her fellow Midwesterners. ^[18]As of 2008, speculation remains that she will be a contender for the vice-presidential slot on the Democratic ticket this year, if headed by Barack Obama.^[19] The Washington Post has listed her as the top prospect for the 2008 nomination.^[20] James Carville has also mentioned Sebelius’ name.^[21] Speculation that the Vice Presidential nomination lies in her future was heightened by the fact that she was chosen by the Democratic Party’s congressional leaders to give their party’s official response to Republican President George W. Bush’s 2008 State of the Union Address.^[22] The next day, she endorsed Obama’s campaign, one week before the Kansas caucus on Super Tuesday.^[23] Obama won the caucus easily, with 74% support.^[24]

Also, due to Sebelius being term-limited in 2010 and owing to her being a popular Democrat who has achieved election to statewide office in the heavily Republican state, Sebelius is also speculated as a possible Democratic candidate for the US Senate seat currently held by Republican Sam Brownback in 2010, who has said he will not seek reelection. Michael Moore also speculated on his website MichaelMoore.com that she may run for President in 2016.

Sebelius is a former chair of the Democratic Governors Association, a popular launchpad for those with national political ambitions

While Sebelius isn’t my top pick, I think she is the most likely to the vice. Her pro and con: she’s a liberal woman from the midwest.

A link to the Washington Post article listing their top five picks for Obama and McCain is here.

The top five for Obama interestingly don’t include Webb, but are instead as follows: 1. Kathleen Sebelius, 2. Ted Strickland, 3. Hillary Clinton (ewww), 4. Tim Kaine, and 5. Sam Nunn.

I have to disagree with Strickland as number two, he is way too big a Clinton supporter.

Full story from CNN:

A day after Sen. Hillary Clinton declared that the Democratic nomination fight was “nowhere near over,” polling data released Tuesday suggest Clinton is losing ground with key demographic groups that have powered her campaign so far.

Sen. Barack Obama’s 16-point lead over Clinton in the latest Gallup daily tracking poll of Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters comes from even higher support among groups that have been supporting him throughout the primary race, and from newfound support among several groups that have backed Clinton.

Obama leads or ties Clinton among women, Easterners, whites, adults with no college education, and Hispanics, with the New York senator’s support now below 50 percent in each group, according to Gallup. Both are backed by 47 percent of white voters surveyed, and Obama is essentially tied with Clinton – 47 percent to 46 percent – among Democrats whose education level is a high school diploma or less.

Clinton’s advantage among women overall seems to have evaporated, with Obama now holding a lead within the survey’s three point margin of error, 49 percent to 46 percent. Hispanics favor Obama over Clinton by 7 percentage points, 51 percent to 44 percent. And Obama now leads among voters in Eastern states by 9 percentage points over Clinton – 52 percent to 43 percent.

Clinton’s standing with whites has fallen by five percentage points during the month of May. With Hispanics, Clinton has lost eight percentage points in the same time period. Clinton’s support with Easterners has fallen by seven percentage points and with women, Clinton has last four percentage points in May. Women age 50 or older is the only major demographic group where a majority, 52 percent, still support the New York senator.

Obama’s support among voters with postgraduate education, voters with monthly incomes of at least $5000, and men – has grown to the point that, he now leads Clinton by a margin of 2-to-1. Among voters 29 or younger, Obama leads Clinton by a margin of nearly 3-to-1.

Gallup’s results released Tuesday are based on a survey of 1,261 Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters using combined data from May 16-18, 2008. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points. Gallup’s May 1-13 daily tracking poll results are based on a survey of 5,474 Democratic or Democratic-leaning voters. The May 1-13 survey results have a margin of error of plus or minus one percentage point.

Amid reports that the Democratic Party’s leaders and largest fundraisers are beginning to take steps to try to bring their party together after a long, hard-fought primary campaign, the latest Gallup daily tracking poll suggests Democratic voters are beginning to coalesce around Sen. Barack Obama.

Obama holds a 16-point lead over Sen. Hillary Clinton in Gallup’s latest daily tracking poll released Monday. He has the support of 55 percent of Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters while Clinton’s support is at 39 percent.

Previously, Obama’s largest lead over Clinton was 11 percentage points, in daily tracking polls conducted in mid-May and mid-April, according to Gallup. Prior to John Edwards’s exit from the Democratic nomination race, Clinton held a 20-point lead over Obama in mid-January.

The results are based on a survey of 1,261 Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters using combined data from May 16-18, 2008. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points.

This is great news, in my great opinion.

Yesterday, over 72,000 people gathered in Oregon to see Obama, the biggest campaign event yet.

Some picture highlights:

And my favorite:

Companies would no longer be able to use genetic information like a person’s predisposition for breast cancer, sickle cell or diabetes to make insurance or job decisions under a bill passed by Congress on Thursday.

The House voted 414-1 for the legislation a week after it passed the Senate on a 95-0 vote. The bill would bar health insurance companies from using genetic information to set premiums or determine enrollment eligibility. Similarly, employers could not use genetic information in hiring, firing or promotion decisions.

Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, was the only member of Congress to vote against the bill.

President Bush is expected to sign it into law.

Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-New York, said that for years doctors have been forced to tell women whose families have a history of breast cancer to refuse genetic testing for fear of discrimination.

“They have recommended to them that until a bill such as the one we are passing today becomes law in this country, they should not put at risk their health insurance,” Slaughter said.

The use of genetics to determine insurance and benefit eligibility is not unprecedented.

In the 1970s, several insurers denied coverage to blacks who carried the gene for sickle cell anemia. The Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California secretly tested workers for their disposition to such crippling afflictions as cystic fibrosis, Huntington’s disease or Lou Gehrig’s disease.

“Currently the fear of misuse of genetic information is preventing people from getting these important genetic tests done,” said Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas. “The refusal to utilize effective genetic tests hurts individuals, researchers, and doctors alike. Lack of testing denies individuals important medical information that they could otherwise use to be proactively managing within their health with their doctor.”

Wowsers.

Many think this cross-over of republicans is what won Hillary Clinton the Texas voting primary.

An interesting statistic regarding voters and the Indiana Primary follows, from a Time Magazine article titled “Clinton’s Faltering Case for Staying In”: (for those of you who don’t know, the Indiana primary is an open primary where all voters, regardless of party affiliation, can vote)… emphasis added.

Perhaps the most disturbing indicator for Clinton was the fact that 15% of those who voted for her on Tuesday said they would not back her in November (7% of Obama voters said they would not support him in the general election). Some conservative commentators like Rush Limbaugh have urged Republicans in the remaining primary states to prolong the process by casting votes for Clinton, who they think would be an easier opponent for John McCain. Numbers like this, whch some pundits claimed meant that Limbaugh’s “Operation Chaos” helped put Clinton over the top in Indiana, are watched closely by superdelegates and do not ease their concerns about Clinton’s electability.

CNN Reports:

The Obama campaign estimates 7 percent of Clinton’s vote in Indiana could be attributed to cross-over Republicans. According to Indiana exit polls, Clinton did win the Republican vote by 8 percentage points…

CNN continues that Rush Limbaugh considers the operation a success because it has divided the democratic party:

“We have done our part to expose Obama through our support of “Operation Chaos,” effectively using the Clinton campaign as our foil, and Obama and the Democrat Party are the weaker for it,” [Limbaugh] said. “Every objective has been met and surpassed.”

All I can say is, the republicans impeached (Bill) Clinton, they aren’t exactly fans of universal health care, so I doubt they are voting for Hillary because they agree with her policies, eh?

From Yahoo! News, Obama’s campaign bussed students to early voting in order to increase voter turnout:

More than 160,000 voters cast their ballots early [in Indiana], with large numbers coming in from Obama strongholds in Lake (Gary), Marion (Indianapolis) and Monroe (Indiana University-Bloomington) counties.

The Obama campaign tried taking full advantage of this option at Purdue and Indiana University, where classes concluded last week, by shuttling students to the county election site. “The traffic was so heavy that the county clerk agreed they would bring the polling place to the center of campus for two days,” Hanson said.

The Yahoo! News article continues regarding what to look for in tonight’s primary results in Indiana:

Obama needs to pile up large margins in Indianapolis in the middle of the state and in Gary’s Lake County in the northwest corner, which is part of the Chicago media market.

Both areas boast significant African American populations. Gary, a city of 100,000 residents, is 84 percent black. Indianapolis, population 780,000, is 25 percent black.

A good night for Obama would mean 10- to 20-point margins in both areas, analysts said.

Obama will also need 20-point margins in college towns such as Bloomington and West Lafayette, analysts said.

Clinton must rely on the Ohio River towns in southern Indiana along the Kentucky border. Obama drew 8,000 people to rally in Evansville, and picked up key endorsements in this area, such as Congressman Baron Hill and former Rep. Lee Hamilton, a revered figure. But Clinton is nevertheless favored to win the region by double digits. She spent the final hours of the campaign Monday in New Albany, a city of 37,000 with 7 percent black population, and Evansville, a city of 117,000 that is 11 percent black.

Clinton also hopes to pad her lead in east central Indiana. Economically-distressed cities with union influence, such as Anderson, Muncie and Richmond, present favorable terrain for Clinton, but they also have African American populations of between eight and 15 percent, Howey said.

Places to watch. Kokomo’s Howard County is the bellwether to watch, Howey said. It is urban and rural, with a mix of African Americans and blue collar workers, some employed in the Chrysler plants. According to Howey, it tends to back the winner in gubernatorial, congressional and state legislative races.

The South Bend area drew significant focus from both campaigns. It is home to the University of Notre Dame, which bodes well for Obama, but there are also many Catholics and a “strong tradition of blue collar Reagan Democratic voters” that would favor Clinton, said Hanson.

The wealthy Republican suburbs north of Indianapolis also received attention from the campaigns, suggesting that both candidates are looking for crossover votes, Howey said. A poll conducted for the Howey Politics Indiana found that up to 20 percent of Tuesday’s turnout could be non-Democrats.

And finally, CNN reports that Hillary Clinton and McCain still can’t get it right with the gas tax:

What are the chances 200 economists would know more about the gas-tax holiday proposals of John McCain and Hillary Clinton? Clinton and McCain would like to buy your vote for somewhere between $28 and $70, which is how much you would save if their idea ever happens… which it won’t. If it does, I will eat an Exxon station.

The economists – including four Nobel Prize winners, advisers to past presidents and Republicans as well as Democrats (some of whom are Clinton supporters) – signed a letter rejecting the candidates’ plans for the summertime tax relief.

They say it would simply generate major profits for oil companies, instead of significantly lowering prices for consumers. Also, they say it would encourage people to keep buying expensive imported oil, instead of conserving. Lastly, they believe such a tax holiday wouldn’t provide much relief for families who feel squeezed by current economic conditions.

Barack Obama has said all along this is nothing more than a political “gimmick.” Top House Democrats – including Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Chairman of the Financial Services Committee Barney Frank – have also come out against these proposals.

But, Clinton and McCain don’t seem to be paying much attention to the critics. Meanwhile Goldman Sachs is out with a report today that crude oil could rise to as much as $200 per barrel within the next 2 years. Where are Clinton and McCain on that? The answer is: nowhere. They’re trying to buy your vote for 18 cents a gallon for three months.

Read:

The YouTube clip is hard to hear at first, but thankfully, the main character is clutching a microphone. In the 90-second video entitled “Madison audience Defend Chelsea Clinton,” a crowd member asserts that the former first daughter’s phone calls to superdelegates on behalf of her mother’s presidential campaign are somehow “unethical.” And then Chelsea launches into what, to my ear, sounds like one of those perfume-scented, floral-patterned Mother’s Day greeting cards:

“Well, I disagree,” she replies. “I’m, I’m so proud of my mom,” she says, her voice softening. “There’s no one in the world that I love more or respect more. . . . I’m so proud of my mom. I hope that your daughter is as proud of you or your children are as proud of you as I’m proud of my mom.”

The Wisconsin crowd was applauding, but I was scratching my head. This is a 28-year-old with degrees from Stanford and Oxford. This was the best she could do?

Chelsea has been winning kudos in this campaign as an effective surrogate for Hillary Rodham Clinton, but I keep wondering whether she’s an effective representative for us. Like me, Chelsea’s a twentysomething (28 to my 29), a member of the generation that, as it happens, I spend a lot of time learning and writing about. We’re ironic, sarcastic and self-deprecating, a reflection of the pop culture and politics that played out while we grew up in the 1980s, 1990s and onward. We were weaned on Chevy Chase movies (“Spies Like Us,” of course, being the best), grunge and MTV’s “The Real World” (seasons 1 and 2 only, please) and trained by the Onion, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert to detect spin in the most banal comments. People my age shed privacy at the nearest high-speed Internet connection and, more often than not, display the very grown-up qualities of self-awareness and self-reflection.

So how does Chelsea fit in with the rest of us?

It’s complicated.

Sometimes I feel she’s aligned well with our generation, especially when I watch video clips of her speaking idealistically about her mom’s plans to promote gay rights, fix the student-loan industry or provide universal health care. And her stature on college campuses means that she draws crowds and helps bolster youth activism, which is important to our generation. (Although sometimes I wonder how many in the student crowds wish, in the middle of her discourses on her mom’s “green vehicular bond,” that they hadn’t skipped class after all.)

Crystal Strait, a 28-year-old undecided superdelegate in California, praises Chelsea for distilling wonky issues into digestible question-and-answer sessions that feel substantive but not boring. “As sad as it may be, sometimes when it comes to the youth community, we’re our own worst enemy,” Strait said. “We’re shocked to see a young, articulate woman. Everyone’s impressed with her.”

But I wonder. What do we really know about Chelsea? Not that much, given her famous secrecy about her personal life, which only fuels my curiosity — and my reporter’s skepticism. What does she do as an employee for Avenue Capital Group, a hedge fund run by a donor to Clinton-related causes? Don’t we need to know more about this national figure — other than that she wants her mom to be president — to take her views on policy seriously?

“She’s been pretty adamant about saying that she’s not going to talk about her personal life, only [saying] she has a dog and a boyfriend, but it would go a long way to get the youth vote and humanize her” if she’d share more of herself, said Jane Fleming Kleeb, 34, the executive director of Young Voter PAC, an organization that works with Democratic candidates to gin up the youth vote.

If you go on Facebook, you have to wait until “Chelsea” approves your “friend request” before you can visit her official page, where, once your request has been accepted, you see this in the “About Me” section: “Like so many young people around the country, I am working hard to make my mom my President!”

Like a lot of voters, I haven’t seen the Chelsea Express firsthand; since she doesn’t give media interviews, I have to get a sense of her bearing the way so many twentysomethings get our news: by watching YouTube clips, some shot by students, others by television networks.

At times, she seems too afraid or too calculating to answer controversial questions head-on. When she was asked recently about her father’s affair with Monica Lewinsky — and whether it had an effect on her mom’s credibility — she was blunt, according to news accounts: “I do not think that’s any of your business.”

Her tone was more that of a reprimanding scold than a camera-savvy surrogate wooing the college crowd. Wouldn’t it have been smarter politics to deflect the question with harmless sarcasm? “I really don’t feel like talking about Monica,” she might have said, “but thank you very much for the personal and intrusive question.” Or, if humor isn’t appropriate, what about: “I know that question may be on your minds, but I’m not ready to talk about such a personal issue, and I may never be.”

After that rough start, she has since addressed Lewinsky questions more thoughtfully, explaining that it’s a family matter and that her father’s behavior shouldn’t influence a vote on her mother.

Or there’s another intriguing clip, “Chelsea Clinton vs Daniel Lee,” in which a student asks whether she could say anything positive about President Bush. The question itself seemed deliberately irritating, but it could have been an opportunity for a witty, detailed smackdown of a president of whom, according to recent poll data, a large majority of 18-to-29-year-olds disapprove. Instead, Chelsea went bland. “Everyone has a right to his or her opinion in this country,” she helpfully explained to a crowd of students. “I urge you to vote for whomever you choose on February 5. But I am not in the business right now of talking about the president. I am going to talk about my mom.”

Chelsea declined to comment for this article through Philippe Reines, a senior adviser to the Clinton campaign, citing her long-standing policy not to talk on the record with the media. “This isn’t the time or place. This is the time to talk about her mother’s views,” Reines said.

Chelsea, he added, doesn’t consider herself an ambassador of her generation, though the campaign does believe she connects well with young people. Her appeal “is less specific to her peers than to people in their 60s and 40s — people who are parents and grandparents, and they find her remarkable. . . . They know how hard it is to raise children. When they see someone who conducts themselves so well, they identify with the senator and former president.”

Chelsea isn’t visiting homeowners’ associations, however. She’s primarily touring college campuses, where people, for the most part, aren’t yet thinking about getting married and raising children. To many, she comes off more like a simulacrum of a young person — or some grandparent’s idealized vision of a young person — parachuting into the college scene, where most voters prefer the other guy.

She seems to know it, too. In one speech in Indiana, she aimed her pitch directly at students, not their parents: “I couldn’t be more proud than to be out talking about why I support my mom, not only because she is my mom, but also as a young voter because I believe that she is the most progressive and most prepared candidate.”

But if Chelsea is her mom’s pitchwoman for the youth vote, she still has some Facebook friending to do. So far, Sen. Barack Obama has dominated the younger demographic, prevailing by double digits in 24 of the 31 states where exit polling included a large enough sample of 18-29 year olds.

Chelsea’s trying, though. She has logged more than 120 flights to visit more than 100 college campuses. Plus, she hosted a gay pub crawl in Philadelphia and a Superbowl party in Fayetteville, Ark., while sporting an Eli Manning jersey. (Yes, her handler keeps these statistics at the ready.)

But is she out of step?

“This younger generation [is reacting] against spin in every aspect of life” said Peter Levine, 41, the director of CIRCLE, a nonprofit group at the University of Maryland that researches young people’s civic and political engagement. “They have irony about the powerful, but not idealism. There’s no urge to tune out. Rather, you get earnest efforts to do something authentic .”

The quest for authenticity frames several of the anxieties surrounding today’s young people, and even though she could be more open, Chelsea may embody our generation’s professional ideals: she is a well-paid do-gooder. Many in our generation were bred on the optimism of the 1990s economic boom; we cultivated a certain sense of entitlement after seeing so many college graduates strike it rich with quirky, massively influential ideas in Silicon Valley. But the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks made many of us pivot to think about the world and public service, and the Iraq war only hardened many young people’s cynicism about newsmakers and reporters.

Maybe Chelsea reached this workplace ideal of neatly combining altruism with affluence at her first job at McKinsey, an elite consulting firm, where she specialized in health care, or possibly now, at her hedge fund.

So if, perched in a challenging yet comfortable job, she is trying to give back, maybe her campaigning fulfills that yen? Either that, or, um, her work as a board member of New York’s School of American Ballet?

We can’t know, of course, because she won’t discuss her work publicly. The only time I even came close to talking with Chelsea was when she was a high school senior touring Princeton, where I was a freshman and a reporter for the Daily Princetonian. Word leaked to the newsroom that she was down the street at the bookstore, and a few of us scampered over to see if we could wrangle a comment on her college leanings.

I peeked over a bookshelf and caught a quick glimpse. But then I left. It felt weird. This was the first daughter, whose parents fiercely kept her away from the media. Who was I to try and intrude?

But now Chelsea is no longer a teenager on the prospective frosh tour. She’s touring colleges as a 28-year-old saleswoman. Yet she’s clinging to her privacy as she did a decade earlier, which, to her contemporaries, could make it all the more difficult to buy what she’s selling. Maybe it’s time to finally meet the press and — not to micromanage my new Facebook friend too much, but — act our age.

CNN describes the list as:

Time magazine’s fifth annual list of the world’s 100 most influential people includes leaders, thinkers, heroes, artists, scientists and more. Drawing nominees from 23 countries…

Read the full list here.

Barack Obama, as I previously stated, was ranked number three. Written by Deval Patrick, the governor of Massachusetts, Time reports:

The first time I met Barack we had coffee together at a shop in downtown Chicago. He was in a small law firm, and I was at the Justice Department’s civil rights division in the Clinton Administration. Like many who meet him, I hoped he would one day run for public office. You just want people of his caliber to lead.

When at last he decided to run for the Illinois Senate, he called to ask for my help, and I was eager to give it. “I’ll contribute at the max,” I pledged. “Deval,” he said, “in Illinois there is no max.” I said, “Brother, I’m sorry, there has to be a max!”

Barack, 46, has already changed American politics. We often hear about the size of the crowds he attracts, as a measure of the excitement about his candidacy. It’s the variety of the crowd that is the real phenomenon: little kids who sit on the floor in front of the podium, and the 101-year-old gentleman who stood up from his wheelchair in Iowa and said, “I’m with him too.” Farmers in overalls next to people in business suits. Every race, religion and creed. Every political party and no party at all.

You can feel their excitement about being in Barack’s presence—and about being in the presence of one another. They glimpse for a minute what it might be like to find common cause across differences. That’s how Barack has changed politics.

Another interesting bit, is that Oprah was also named in the top 100 list and her entry was written by Michelle Obama. She writes:

Oprah is a wonderful friend and an incredible force. Her friendship and support have meant so much to Barack and me.

As Barack often says about his own life, Oprah’s story is one that truly could happen only in America. After the struggles she endured as a young girl, she became a popular talk-show host with a national following. But she didn’t stop there. Using her platform to serve as a global role model, she challenges us to make the world as it is the world as it should be. And she is always the first to show us how it can be done.

In the past few months, I’ve had the privilege of watching Oprah inspire thousands of Americans to participate in our democracy. She has also reached out to thousands more who might not have known there was a seat for them at the table at all—people who desperately need a voice.

Over the past 20 years, Oprah, 54, has developed and nurtured a relationship with her viewers and readers built on the recognition that there is more that unites us than divides us—that our shared experiences in work, life and love, in family and community, in our hopes and dreams, know no barriers; that regardless of race, gender, socioeconomic status or hometown, we are our brothers’ keepers, our sisters’ keepers.

For this impact on all of us, I am honored to honor Oprah, the only person to make this list every year since it began.

Interestingly, John McCain’s entry was written by Joe Lieberman. Is anyone smelling vice president?