Faint Praise

Yesterday, the New York Times endorsed Senator Hillary Clinton in the Democratic Primary. Today they are doing their darnedest to tear her candidacy apart! In addition to the editorial that I talked about here, they have an Op-Ed piece on why a "co-presidency" is a bad thing!

SENATOR Hillary Clinton has based her campaign on experience — 35 years of it by her count. That must include her eight years in the White House.
Some may debate whether those years count as executive experience. But there can be no doubt that her husband had the presidential experience, fully. He has shown during his wife’s campaign that he is a person of initiative and energy. Does anyone expect him not to use his experience in an energetic way if he re-enters the White House as the first spouse?
Mrs. Clinton claims that her time in that role was an active one. He can hardly be expected to show less involvement when he returns to the scene of his time in power as the resident expert. He is not the kind to be a potted plant in the White House.
Which raises an important matter. Do we really want a plural presidency?

Now there is a certain historical lesson to be learned here and Professor Emeritus Willis goes into the Founding Fathers reason for a singular Executive in great detail...detail that the Junior Logician has been reminding me of as he studies the founding of the Union in his History class. These are lessons that we all need to remember going into each and every election.