Well, it could be Hillary, couldn't it?

By Michael J.W. Stickings

I have asserted on numerous occasions here that Hillary will not be Obama's running mate. And yet...

It's not like any of the other apparent contenders are obvious choices (or would be perfect picks). One can make compelling, if not convincing, cases for the likes of Biden, Dodd, and Nunn, for example, but one can also make compelling cases against pretty much all of them. Even, I suppose, against Gore and Edwards -- the former was my preference for the top spot all along, the former was my preference among the top three through the first few primaries and caucuses, and I wouldn't mind either one on Obama's ticket (and Edwards has said that he would "seriously consider" it).

(I don't include Hagel here. Although there's much speculation surrounding his upcoming trip to Iraq with Obama (and Reed), it must be remembered that, however impressive a voice he has been against the Iraq War, he is, on most other issues, a hardcore conservative Republican.)

Of course, one can make a compelling and perhaps convincing case against Hillary, much of it having to do with the bitterness that seemed to come between her and Obama during their race for the nomination, not to mention the fact that she could overshadow him (not in terms of substance, but in terms of celebrity).

As the L.A. Times is reporting, however, Obama has apparently told a Democratic donor and Hillary supporter, Jill Iscol, that Hillary is on his list of possible running mates.

The main obstacle? Her husband, of course, Big Dog Bill, who is, well, a "complication." (To put it mildly.)

Hillary wouldn't be my first pick, but I've warmed to her again since the primaries ended, and I think the case for her has gotten more compelling, not less, with time.

The problem is, Bill may just prove to be an insurmountable obstacle -- or at least one with which Obama would rather not have to contend.