Veepstakes

[One of the most important decisions a freshly minted presidential presumptive nominee [did I touch all the bases :-)] makes is who the vice presidential choice is going to be. It is often referred to as the “first” such decision of a candidate to which voters pay attention.

And if voters don't, the press will.

Such was the case for Barack Obama this week when it turned out that controversy erupted not over his vice presidential choice, but for his choice of who would look into the various possibilities. These people, usually called “vetters,” because they “vet” the potential nominee, looking for scandals, controversies, hidden issues or problems that will no doubt emerge during the long campaign. Most times, the candidate assembles a team of two or three people who perform this chore. Sometimes they do a good job, sometimes not. And sometimes, it's impossible to do the job because somewhere, there is always going to be some stone that is left unturned.

The vetters are usually party elders or people close to the candidate who have the nominee's trust. In Barack Obama's instance, he chose a panel of three people—Caroline Kennedy, former Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder, and Jim Johnson, the former CEO of mortgage lender Fannie Mae.

Jim Johnson, during his tenure at Fannie Mae, a government chartered company that lends money to mortgage institutions, apparently received loans on very good terms from a company called Countrywide Financial Corporation. Not usually a big thing but...

During the campaign, Senator Obama bitterly assailed Countrywide by name saying, “this is a company that is as responsible as any firm in the country for the housing crisis we're facing today.” And he also criticized an aide of Senator Hillary Clinton, whom he defeated for the nomination, strategist Mark Penn, for leading a company that did work for Countrywide.

Well, now the shoe is on the other foot, so to speak, and it's Barack Obama's chief vice presidential vetter who has ties to Countrywide. So what did Senator Obama have to say?

He defended his choice, calling critical reports of his vetter, “a game,” and that the committee were “folks who didn't work for him.”

Well if not for him, who?

Senator Obama hopes this will all go away and the press may move on to other things but for now, it's a mini-headache for the candidate that could get worse if it is not addressed more carefully. The "game" could backfire just as he begins to "introduce" himself to the electorate at large

If it was bad for Mark Penn to do work for Countrywide, why is not bad for his aide to have gotten what has been described as preferential loans from the same company?

Certainly, the press may want to know.

I'll have some thoughts on the Republicans' vice presidential vetting tomorrow.