Bye bye to VP Bayh

August 25, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana has missed its chance to send another Hoosier to the White House.

With Saturday’s announcement that the Democratic Party’s presumptive candidate for president Sen. Barack Obama chose Delaware Sen. Joe Biden as his vice presidential candidate, the supporters of Sen. Evan Bayh let out a collective sigh and grumble at this missed opportunity.

I admit it – I got excited at the thought of having someone from Indiana as vice president. Indiana is very good at producing vice presidents, having sent five people with Indiana connections to the White House. Bayh would have been the fifth attorney from Indiana to be V.P.

For weeks, vice presidential nominees have been debated ad nauseam in the press. When I woke up Saturday morning to see Biden was selected, I was disappointed, probably like many Hoosiers who wanted to feel like they had a bit of a connection to the presidency.

Bayh would have been a logical choice for Obama in some respects – both are relatively young guys in the world of politics and Bayh could have reinforced Obama’s message of “change” and gone against the typical ticket of older, white men.

But outside of Indiana, what do people know about Bayh? He did receive a lot of coverage for supporting Sen. Hillary Clinton’s campaign, he has been mentioned in the past as a possible V.P. candidate, and he formed an exploratory committee for running as president this election cycle. But outsiders don’t know him like Indiana residents do.

Bayh is young and has great potential to become a vice president or presidential nominee in the future. He gives Indiana some hope that we may yet send our sixth Hoosier to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

  2. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  3. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  4. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  5. Different rules for different folks....

ADVERTISEMENT