I've been listening to the talking heads for a while now, and contemplating on my own. Sure, there are lots of high-profile candidates like Florida Governor Charlie Crist that "make sense" for all the safe, normal reasons. These five candidates may not be the best choices for John McCain, nor for the Republican party, but any one of them will certainly keep the talking heads busy for weeks:

• Michael Bloomberg -- As mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg has something neither of the present candidates has - he's actually run something bigger than a Senate office. In fact, with McCain's self-confessed deficiency with economic issues, Mayor Bloomberg's corporate experience at Salomon Brothers and Bloomberg LP makes him an ideal point-man to take on the stalling U.S. economy.
  
  He should be a favorite on Wall Street and, while he won't help put any states in play, he could certainly make parts of the New York/New Jersey/Connecticut area more difficult for the Obama campaign. Plus, this will help reinforce the idea that McCain is more of an independent than a diehard conservative. (This all goes out the window, of course, if Obama picks Bloomberg first...)
  
  
• Condoleezza Rice --  Obama has already begun painting McCain as a rehash of the Bush administration, so why not work against that idea? Dr. Rice, as former National Security Advisor and current Secretary of State under Bush, has the national security chops to stand up to anybody the Democrats throw at her. She's also got the double-whammy of being a woman and a minority, so the reverse race card won't be nearly as effective. (Not that I expect such shenanigans from the Obama campaign, but there are always third-party political action committees like MoveOn.org that are capable of anything...) Finally, Condoleezza brings a fresh and younger perspective to balance out the older-not-quite-so-fresh McCain, one that could resonate much more effectively with younger voters.
  
  Of course, there's that Bush/Iraq connection...
  
  
• Joe Lieberman -- Senator Lieberman is a good friend of John McCain, and as presidential teams go there is alot to be said for the President and Vice President getting along well. Senator Lieberman, like McCain, is also viewed as a maverick, having run for his Senate seat as an Independent after the Democrats sold him out last fall.
  
  Lieberman also has foreign policy chops, and has good relationships with many world leaders. He could also help put Connecticut in play, and while it isn't a swing state every electoral vote counts. (He also can help deliver the Jewish vote.)
  
  A Lieberman choice would demonstrate that McCain is ready to work across party line. On the downside, how many diehard Republicans will stand for a Democratic-leaning independent in the #2 slot?
  
  
• Rudy Giuliani -- Everything I said about Michael Bloomberg goes double for Rudy Giuliani. He has the experience of running both a city and a corporation, and in addition has his years in the Attorney General's office to fatten up his tough-on-crime chops. (He even had mobsters contemplating a "hit" on him -- how many VP candidates can say that?)
  
  With all that, he also has his center-stage status during the worst terrorist incident ever on US soil, where he demonstrated the balls to drag his city back from the brink. That was pure leadership, more so than anything I've seen from any of the others Democrat or Republican. It remains to be seen if that was his finest hour, or merely a foreshadowing of things to come.
  
  His big downside comes from his more liberal stance on several social issues like gay marriage and abortion, which could make the party faithful freak out.
  
  
• Ron Paul -- The one thing that McCain needs desperately is campaign funds, and Ron Paul's followers have shown they can deliver that in spades. Congressman Paul has captured something on the internet, with followers willing to work tirelessly to spread his message. As part of the Republican ticket, he can bring those followers into the campaign again, countering the similar demographic fueling Obama's successes.
  
  Like Obama, Congressman Paul also has been anti-war from the start. He also could appeal to the conservative base in the party, although his conservativeness borders on Libertarian.

As I said, any of these would be controversial enough to keep the talking heads in business for many days. Not sure which would be open to the idea, or even if McCain would consider them. It's fun to speculate though, isn't it?

(Check out my choices for the five most controversial Democratic Vice Presidential candidates.)

P.S. Don't miss my bonus controversial Republican vice presidential candidate. 

A couple of weeks ago I posted about the five most controversial Republican VP candidates, and had some fun coming up with those choices. Due to popular demand, today I'm turning my attention to the Democratic field now that Obama has sewn up the nomination.

(I didn't bother to include Hillary here; while it would be surprising, so many have tossed her name around that it just wouldn't be controversial at all.)

• Joe Lieberman -- I covered him in the other post, but he brings something to this candidacy too. His solid foreign policy experience would shore up an area sorely lacking in this ticket. Also, just a few short months ago the Democratic party turned on him and he still managed to pull out a win; putting him on the ticket would demonstrate Obama's independence from the "business as usual" dealings in the Democratic party.

• Jesse Ventura -- One way for Obama to solidify his "change" claims is to nominate an independent candidate. Former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura certainly fills that bill. No stranger to the public eye, Ventura's mixture of social liberalism and economic conservatism would appeal to a broader audience apprehensive with the perceived extreme choices of Obama and McCain. Also, as a former Navy seal, he brings a military perspective that Obama lacks.
  
  On the downside, his outspokenness can quickly put him in hot water, such as his repeated criticism of the two-party system and his suspicions about the tower collapses on 9/11.

• Al Gore -- OK, I can't for the life of me think of a reason why Gore would do this. However, he would bring some key elements currently missing from the Obama candidacy including foreign policy experience and a more extensive experience in the inner workings of Capital Hill. Plus, with his Oscar and Nobel in hand he has morphed into some sort of cult hero.
  
  The downside is clear, though -- what kind of "change" is it to bring back the Clinton VP? 

• Oprah Winfrey -- Many pundits points to Oprah's May 2007 endorsement of Obama's candidacy as a watershed event. The fact that she has such a widespread and influential following (witness the impact of an Oprah book endorsement) and the fact that she'd never endorsed anyone before made it a newsworthy event. Was it enough to get him the nomination? Probably not, but certainly it was enough to get him in position to do so.
  
  Oprah has no real national political experience, but could nonetheless be a tremendous asset to the Obama campaign. He has real need to reach out to women voters, after the way he trounced Hillary, and this would help those efforts. Plus, having two minorities on the ticket would be a historic event. (It worked for Chris Rock and Bernie Mac in "Head of State" after all...)
  
  On the negative side, Oprah's political experience makes Obama look like an elder statesman. Plus, with equal time laws the networks would probably have to give McCain his own talk show.

• Howard Dean --  Dean had a successful campaign going in 2004 until his impromptu yell came back to doom his chances. Still, his maverick approach to campaigning earned him the top spot in the DNCC. As a former physician, he could take point on Obama's universal health care issue like nobody else could. As a former governor of Vermont, he brings much-needed executive experience lacking in both presumptive presidential nominees. He also extends the idea of the "change" candidacy, being known as a maverick in his own day.
  
  Dean's downsides are numerous. His "change" credentials can easily be challenged - after all, he is the current DNCC chairman. Plus his decidedly liberal leanings that won him terms in Vermont could galvanize the conservative opposition in ways that John McCain is having trouble doing on his own.

So who do you think will be the eventual VP pick? 

"George Carlin died yesterday from heart failure." 

I won't pretend he was the greatest American since Tim Russert, but George was a giant in his field. He had the unerring ability to make you laugh with 80% of his act while royally offending you with 20%, yet he'd keep you coming back for more. Whether it was religion, free speech, advertising, or flatulence, George always had something insightful (and inciteful) to say.

As a fellow New Yorker, I'll miss him.