Experience?

Hillary touts hers: A term and a half in the U.S. Senate; then smudges a year of screwing up both health-care and the White House travel office—plus a couple of decades playing First Enabler to Bill’s chronic case of satyriasis.

Now—you want to talk serious experience?

How about: twice elected governor of New Mexico, 14 years in the U.S. House, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, U.S. Secretary of Energy, international nuclear negotiator with North Korea, liberator of Saddam Hussein’s and other hostages and key negotiator in Sudan obtaining the recent release of Pulitzer Prize winning reporter Paul Salopek. Nominated several times for Nobel peace prize—and he’s barely 60.

Good grief! If experience is what we’re looking for Bill Richardson should win by a landslide. Wouldn’t even have to hold an election.

You say you want change?

How about the first Hispanic president? (OK—so he’s hemi-Hispanic, the way Obama is demi-black, except Richardson’s madre was the minority.)

You want policy? How about a guy who says he’ll have all—repeat all—the troops out of Iraq in a year. The No Troops Left Behind president. Wants genuine universal health care through expanded Medicare and Medicaid.

To boot, he does well in almost all the debates, throwing out solid, succinct thoughts often with a good touch of humor.

So why is Bill Richardson running fourth in all the national polls, barely breaking double digits?

That’s the mystery of the man with the best potential presidential resume since Bush the First. The only Democrat with executive experience.

Yes, Richardson is reputed to have Clintonian zipper issues—but who knows that outside of the Washington press corps? (They’re not telling it yet.) The public has no more knowledge of his possible flaws than it does his outstanding history. There is something deeper—or perhaps shallower—here.

There is that elusive quality called charisma, of which he ain’t got. Somehow, he just doesn’t look presidential. Missing the exposure and romance of Clinton or Obama—to say nothing of their money—missing the looks and charm of Edwards, there does not seem to be enough oxygen in the room for this capable, eminently qualified guy and it is a shame.

Another shame: though he is often thought to be an ideal vice presidential choice, that too is unlikely. With either a woman or an African American atop the ticket, giving a Latino the second spot likely would seem too much change. For the same reason, apart from the fact that Clinton and Obama detest each other, neither would pick the other for a running mate.

Clinton thus would go for someone such as General Wes Clark, Iowa’s Tom Vilsack or Indiana’s Evan Bayh to enhance a stable, centrist, middle-American perspective and maybe pick up their home states. Not bad choices for Obama, either, among others.

Then of course there is that zipper issue—true or false, it stopped him from being Al Gore’s running mate in 2000.

Thus, the guy who points out that he has clearly the best experience and offers the hope of great change along with loads of progressive policy, is unlikely to get even a taste of the national ticket.

And that’s a damned shame.

______________________________________

Don Rose is a regular columnist for The Chicago Daily Observer and a strategist in Illinois progressive politics who has been widely sought out by both parties as well as the independent movement.