Sorry if this topic has already been diaried, but a quick search revealed that it hadn't. It occurred to me that looking at two of the big stories over the past week (at least according to the media) - that Clinton noted that she and Republican John McCain had passed the Commander-In-Chief threshold (whatever that is exactly) and Obama hadn't, and that both Hillary and Bill have been pushing the idea that Obama should be Hillary's VP - that the 2 statements are incompatible. One interpretation is that Hillary will say anything to win. I know, tough to believe. The second, is that she obviously does believe Obama passes the CiC threshold.
More below the flip.
It goes like this. Let's assume that Hillary really does not belive that Obama is CiC material. Perhaps she and her team could explain then why they would so aggressively float the idea of him being a heartbeat away from the presidency as her VP? Wouldn't the person chosen as VP have to also meet the CiC threshold? So, if Hillary really doesn't believe that Obama is CiC material, then by floating his name as VP she is merely playing slick (or sleazy, take your pick) politics, or she is showing really bad judgment - take your pick.
But, on the other hand, if Hillary really does believe that Obama passes the CiC threshold, then selecting him as VP would not be poor judgment. However, she clearly would be lying and playing politics by publicly suggesting that he doesn't pass such a test (and making it worse by stating that McCain clearly has).
So, to summarize, if Hillary really doesn't think Obama measures up as a CiC, she is either playing politics or using really bad judgment in floating the idea of him being VP. If she does believe he is CiC material, then she has been lying about this for the last several weeks.
So, anyway you slice it, Hillary is either playing politics and using really bad judgement, or she has been lying to the American people about her feeling regarding Obama's qualifications to be commander in chief.