Over the course of this campaign season, I have given much thought to the possibility of a "dream team". That was in the beginning of the campaign. Since that time, I must admit, I am no longer of the opinion that an Obama-Clinton ticket would be the best choice to represent the Democratic Party.
Admittedly, the idea of the first black man teaming up with the first woman was quite intriguing. The operative word is "team".
Over the course of this very long and steamy campaign Senator Clinton launched a series of attacks against Senator Obama that I would have to say were crude and unfair. On the one hand she stated that Senator Obama did not have the capability to run this country but, on the other hand she said Senator Obama would be a better choice that Senator McCain.
I also have begun to question her credibility in regard to the matter of seating the Florida and Michigan delegations. It might be interesting to note that all of the candidates agreed to the rules set forth by the DNC stripping the states of their delegates if they changed the dates of their primaries.
It seems Senator Clinton wasn’t nearly as concerned with the voices of all of those citizens being silenced at that time. It was only after it appeared that she won those two states that her stance changed. Would she be so adamantly in favor of those delegates being seated if Senator Obama had won those states? Surely not!
You cannot change the rules to benefit yourself. The rules are what they are – a standard of conduct that is unchangeable except any changes that would benefit all of those who are controlled by them. It’s like a walls and a ceiling that cannot be circumvented.
As a former candidate for public office, I have often stated that I am not a perfect man. However, I am accountable. Senator Clinton has not proven to be accountable to the people; instead it appears that she is willing to do whatever she has to, even at the detriment of the party, to win. Where is the accountability?
Further, although Senator Clinton would probably be a better representative of the other half of the voters, i.e., those that Senator Obama did not win, I cannot see Senator Clinton relegating herself to duties, which would likely remove her from the spotlight.
Although the Vice Presidency is the second most powerful office in the nation, typically the Vice President operates under and at the pleasure of the President of the United States. I would foresee battles aplenty in the halls of the White House under an Obama-Clinton administration. Those problems are indicative of at least four years of political turmoil in the Executive Branch; not team work.
So, you ask, whom should the likely Democratic nominee pick for the second half of his ticket? "A few names come to mind, one of which would likely raise eye-brows. Sadly it could now never happen. I was considering the possibility of an Obama-Kennedy ticket. It is now a moot point with the announcement of the long-time party leader’s serious illness.
Both Senator Obama and Senator McCain should pick someone who brings balance to their tickets. For Senator McCain wisdom would suggest that he pick someone that represents change that the American people have indicated they so desperately want. Some of the names that come to mind are Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, or even former Secretary of State Colin Powell.
For Senator Obama the person best suited to fill that role would be House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The key in this choice would be her connection to and working relation with Congress.
I am also of the impression that a powerful message would be sent by either candidate if they picked someone from the other party for the second half of their tickets.
Neither candidate can expect to forward a message of change if their ticket reflects "politics as usual". Each ticket should be a glaring representation of real change. We the people know the difference!
If you walk like a duck and talk like a duck, you can never claim to be a goose!