Hillary Clinton's greatest victory thus far is her ability to cause otherwise smart and honest people to doubt the legitmacy of Barack Obama's primary success.  Yet, the success is transparent.  Obama currently has an insurmountable lead in pledged delegates, an insurmountable lead in the popular vote, even allowing for Florida, and the clear momentum in superdelegates.  By insurmountable, I mean even under scenarios that no poll is even close to projecting.  Most importantly, his electability problems are nothing compared to those that Sen. Clinton would face as a result of the party meltdown that would occur if the remaining superdelegates were somehow to override these achievements.  He has played by the rules and won.

But every day, pundits, politicians, and plain old folk seem not only to cast doubt on the legitmacy of his victories, but they want him to do so as well.  Every time Obama is asked to debate Clinton, he is being asked to question the status of his victories.  To debate Clinton is to imply that somehow it is possible to envision a scenario where her winning the nomination is legitimate.  But no such scenario exists.  Thus, Obama should not be forced to pretend that one does exist by agreeing to a debate.  Every time Obama is asked to defend his electability he is being asked to apply a general election consideration to a primary process that he has already won.

One can challenge Obama's electability, as one can Sen. McCain's, until the day after the general election, but one cannot ask Obama himself to cast doubt willingly on what he has achieved within this primary.  One can allow Sen. Clinton to campaign in every remaining state, but one cannot ask Obama to accept that she has a legitimate chance at winning.

Those who continue to support the idea of debates with Clinton, or even a Clinton vicotry, should remember that a prerequisite for the office of the President of the United States is an ability to stand up for one's own dignity.