Hillary can't win the election for Obama--he must do that himself. I *loved* Hillary's speech last night because she was credible, eloquent and loyal. No runner up has ever given a better speech. By not retracting her words, she remained credible and gave Obama an even bigger boost with Hillary supporters.

If he wants her to win this election for him, he should have nominated her as VP. He had every chance to do so. But, not for the first time, the Democrats will be their own undoing. In this case, the responsibility lies with Obama--not Hillary.

Janet, I think you're half right.

Clinton gave a good speech, and it would have been disingenuous for her to have pretended that the primary fight didn't happen. She gave Obama the respect of a strong, credible, defeated opponent, which is the best thing he could have asked for.

As for the VP stuff, I believe that Clinton took herself out of consideration with how hard she fought the last stages of her presidential campaign. But the way she handled herself last night won my vote for her -- in 2016.

The fact that Obama went for Biden as VP further shows his good sense. He chose a man who would help him govern if he won.

It would have been better in terms of short-run electability, perhaps, for him to choose Hillary - though if you want to ignite the passions of a very desultory Republican Party, just go for it. He could have gone with Warner or another female candidate to make a splash in terms of his Veep pick, but he went for the solid player in foreign policy, a person who Obama will learn from while in the White House.

And the reality is that you simply can't get Hillary without getting Billy Boy wandering around getting into trouble. He would be getting in the president's way in every matter. And how could Obama possibly choose the Clintons after they slimed him for so long?

"The fact that Obama went for Biden as VP further shows his good sense. He chose a man who would help him govern if he won...."

Um, try again.

It is not within the province of the Vice-President, or the office of the Vice-President, to 'help him (the President) govern'. That is not listed as a part of the Veep's duties in any official document.

He serves as President of the U.S. Senate. He may be sent as an emissary. He often serves, de facto, as the president's spy. But that's about it.

While he may offer advice, it is not incumbent upon him to do so. There is no requirement for it.

So when you say that Biden was picked for this reason, well....I absolutely agree with you, but that still doesn't excuse or validate the intention. What the selection of Biden does do, however, is underscore the puniness of Obama the politician.

I have said it before in the Fray, that Barack Obama is nothing more than the left-wing version of George W. Bush. Bush chose Cheney to bail his ass out when the time arose; now Homeboy has chosen his Cheney, a man who is a known prevaricator.

It's a presidency, not a co-presidency; neither is it a committee. It's the executive branch of the Federal government. It's meant for a sole occupant only. This is what is wrong with the entire Obama candidacy at its core; Obama himself knows he's in over his head, so he seeks greater minds than his to not just advise him but to assist him. So those who vote for Obama in actuality will be voting for a political hydra.

It would have helped Homeboy if at some point in his non-career career he had been in charge of something, to have been the decision maker, to have called the shots as the head of some type of business or charitable entity; in other words, an executive. But he's never sat in a board room; he's stood at the front of a classroom. Furthermore, it appears that all through his dainty, prim-as-a-tea-cosy professional life, he has had to depend on others around him to carry his water and do his legwork in order to get anything accomplished, rather than seizing the reins and orchestrating some kind of achievement by himself. When the ordinary person does this in real life, we label it as co-dependency; when Obama does it, it's called strategy.

Um, try dropping the pendantry.

You lecture me about the technical use of the Vice Presidency, inform me that it's not a co-presidency or a committee. Thanks professor.

You've got the technicals down, but your analysis has no art. The idea is that a Vice President can and often has been a very important confidant of the President. If you're going to tell me it's unimportant who the President has next to him for four years, if you tell me who a presidential candidate choose for his running mater, it tells me you've read a lot of school books but not a lot of papers.

You blather on:

"It would have helped Homeboy if at some point in his non-career career he had been in charge of something, to have been the decision maker, to have called the shots as the head of some type of business or charitable entity; in other words, an executive."

Indeed, it would. But who among the three big candidates this year has such experience? Hillary? Hah. McCain? He's got the least leadership or executive experience among them. Romney sure did, but you take issue with Biden's prevarication?! He was changing positions so fast the papers couldn't keep up with him. Hillary lies like she breathes.

Oh I could imagine a Perfect Candidate and God knows it would be none of them or Obama. So I support the one among them who I think is the right person for the right time for this election.

I do give Obama credit for running an outstanding national campaign - no small enterprise - as its leader, and doing a hell of a job. He's run circles around the other professionals, who've had to be bailed out financially after mulitple missteps, turmoils and inner dramas.

Oh, another thing professor: you might want to tone down the "Homeboy" thing. It may expose your you true problems with Obama.

"Um, try dropping the pendantry...."

You must mean pedantry. I do not wear a pendant. Perhaps you do. I'm sure it's becoming.

"....The idea is that a Vice President can and often has been a very important confidant of the President...."

Can, yes; often? Well we've seen it with Dubya and Cheney, but not so much with Clinton and Gore, who are estranged now, and became distanced during Bill's presidency. Poppy Bush and Quaylude? Don't make me laugh. Reagan and Poppy? Not hardly. Carter and Mondale? Maybe they had breakfast once in a while. The Troll of San Clemente and Spiggy? Only when Spiggy was needed as an attack dog.

I'm sure you get my drift. The possibility exists, but the probability works against your position. It's the exception, not the rule. And it makes practical sense to keep some distance between the two.

As for leadership and executive experience: you introduce Hillary and McCain, but the subject is Homeboy. Hillary worked as an advocate for the Children's Defense Fund, and I doubt that she sat in her office in the White House as First Lady just buffing her nails. I won't defend McCain, but 25 years in Congress doesn't count for nothing. and it's 24 1/2 years more time he clocked than Homeboy's mere 143 days of U.S. Senate service, hotshot. Try and sell that as Capitol experience and networking.

I also won't defend the Cigar Store Indian, but in point of fact he was governor of Massachusetts, and he is a successful businessman. I doubt all of that just fell into his lap. So he certainly trumps Homeboy. And yes, he shifted course as the wind dictated, but in Biden's case (and I refer to the plagiarism charge in 1988), he not only lifted someone else's words, he also escalated the problem by falsifying his own experience to accommodate the plagiarism.

One changes his mind as often as some men change their shirts; the other attempted to reinvent his life experience.

"....I do give Obama credit for running an outstanding national campaign - no small enterprise - as its leader, and doing a hell of a job...."

It may be because Homeboy didn't run it; David Axelrod ran it. Because, in truth, what the hell would Homeboy know about running a presidential campaign? Oh sure, he was in the loop, but you said running it. Check again, dude.

"....Oh, another thing professor: you might want to tone down the "Homeboy" thing...."

Now why would I want to do that? He's a part of the Chicago Democratic political machine--in other words, his gang. He's a product of a larger entity that protects him and implements him. He's a homeboy, all right. Get used to it.

EarlyBird:

The fact that Obama went for Biden as VP further shows his good sense. He chose a man who would help him govern if he won.

I dunno about that.

Have you ever seen Biden on C-SPAN? He's a gaffe machine who talks more about himself than Bill Clinton does and that's saying a lot.

Unlike Bill, though, he's not as interesting and doesn't know when to shut up.