At this point, the party is so divided that Obama needs to sink or swim on his own.  

Gen. Clark is a Rhodes scholar, uncommonly articulate, a quick & sharp thinker, adept at handling the media, a skilled debater & a truly "commanding" presence.  For him to be in the same venue as Sen. Obama would serve only to highlight the much better skills, personality, character & experience of the general--perhaps much to the detriment of the senator.

I think Clark would be a first-rate VP choice (though I'd rather see him as Def. Sec, truth be told).  Clark is an incredibly smart and perceptive and just plain human kind of guy, but I think it's pretty clear he isn't even adequate as a presidential candidate.

Whatever it takes to get him as high in the government as possible I'm in favor of just in principle.

Politically, he has no negatives I'm aware of and his mediocre campaigning skills I don't think would be much of a deficit in this circumstance, nor would his inability to bring a swing state with him.

Who the next VP is will be Hillary's decision. :)

But, if you really want to know about Clark on the unlikely Obama ticket. No. He needs to stay away from all Clinton supporters because it looks like he's scratching his cheek again.

But I still don't believe the combination of Obama and Clark would be strong enough to defeat McCain. The Republicans will attack Obama on his record, his past associations, and his readiness for the job -- the VP, however good, cannot do much to blunt those attacks. Also, we can expect McCain to add a strong VP candidate to his ticket, to counter the selection of Clark. (What if he picked Condi, for example?)

If the goal is to try to repair some of the rift between the Obama campaign and Clinton supporters, this is way too subtle an approach. Nobody will notice.

In addition, should he pick someone with a better resume it's only going to excentuate Obama's shortcomings and make the comparison to Bush/Cheney too obvious.

If Obama is the nominee, then Obama is applying for the job of President, not his VP choice.

Obama is unqualified to be President. He does not have the resume or policies or maturity for the job. I would vote McCain before I vote for him. I do not fear a McCain Presidency.

As to calling myself a democrat, that will not happen again if Obama is the nominee. This election has taught me that the Democratic party leadership and I have no principles or values in common.

I learned a long time ago that you teach people how to treat you by what you accept from them. I will not sanction or accept what has been done in the name of winning this primary.

I will not support balless, spineless politicians who allowed Bush and his cabal to do their worst, but now have found their backbone against their own.

What happened to the much vaunted 100 days after the 06 election? What happened to the new sheriff in town? What have they achieved?

They're in fact still the do-nothing-congress.

He states: [T]he Clinton people need an incentive to work aggressively for the ticket, and Clark is that incentive.   Why does Obama need this? His specialty is GOTV.  

Obama supporters hit Clinton for her vote on AUMF but contradict themselves in picking the guy that has her views? Clinton loyalist on national security issues that progressives have.  How does Obama pick someone who backs Clinton on FP and Iraq?  So now Clinton's decisions are ok?

The progressive blogosphere's incoherence about Clark is just as pathetic as it's incoherence about Clinton herself.  On different terms he was clearly entertaining military action in Iraq.  And yes, he came out against the war as conceived by Bush and his cronies.

So.   Now why would such an anti-war advocate endorse Clinton in the first place??????!!!!!!!

Huh???

Probably because every single pathetic minutia one hears on the internet about war support and anti-war activism is utter bullcrap.  That's why.

Hey.  Whatever.

Second, it would be hard to argue Clinton was not supporting Obama or was trying to divide the party if Clark were on the ticket since Clark would not accept without Clinton's blessing.  So it helps kill the Clinton is sabotaging Obama or Obama's loss is Clinton's fault.

Third, it keeps Clinton's position with respect to the nomination in place.  If Obama melts down over the summer and the SDs are looking around for another choice - Clinton does not have to worry about Clark trying to wreak havoc (and neither does the party) and the party wouldn't have to worry about what to do with Obama's VP selection since Clinton/Clark works just fine (better from my standpoint).

So all in all, I'd say a good choice for Obama, since Clark is a terrific man, a good choice for Clinton, and a good choice for the party.  

As I understand it, there is not yet a nominee.  Seems premature to start the transition away from this being an essentially Pro Hillary until our dying breath site.

I would prefer to consider Clark as VP for Hillary
when the  SD's awaken from their insanity or when Obama self destructs.

I know it's not a welcome highlight of Obama's sputtering campaign, but it's the reality.

Hillary's big wins continue to boost her viability.

No question that only SHE can make the ticket come alive. She's been the one bringing the energy into the race since spring, not him.  

Pundits keep talking about her baggage and I have to laugh, he's the newbie and he's got the worst baggage of all the candidates.

Between the media snow job and Axelrod astroturfing, we've been handed a face and a name with very little substance.

And I like him.

All good things.

I suspect he will choose someone for short-term political gain, e.g., Bill Richardson who would help with the western states or Jim Webb who would help with Virginia.

From HRC supporters' perspective, either would be a poor choice. The nature of Richardson's defection and Webb's (non)handling of the Tailhook scandal would only further alienate Clinton supporters. The  problem is that BHO supporters don't think they need HRC supporters. They think they can win with their new post-Clinton Democratic Party.

Also: Obama never inserted Race or Gender into this campaign, and if you think he did, I would like a specific example, otherwise please stop spreading this untruth.

O/Clark would also be sending an olive branch to the Hillary wing.

Could be other far worse picks -- Gov Judas, Sam None, Hégel.

Still, Clark is hardly more than a political rookie and didn't exactly impress in his brief 04 run, stumbling badly coming out of the blocks.  He's smart and brings nat'l security gravitas, but isn't deeply steeped in many domestic issues.

He also doesn't strike me, nice guy that he is with the smooth even-keeled demeanor, as the sort of aggressive attack dog we'll need in the Veep slot.

Clark didn't get a ton of votes in 2004.  Can he connect?  Is he only going to play into McCain's desire to make this election about national security?  

Nothing would work until Obama really sacrifices for the sake of party unity.  Sacrifice means demonstrably taking an action that we know he would not otherwise want to do.  Asking Clarke to be VP, in and of itself, is not such a sacrifice.