Coming from The Nation, John Nichols' article on the Georgia-Russian conflict and what it means for Obama's VP is striking:

The events on the Black Sea coast should put an end to the Obama camp's "electoral-map" approach to the task.

Perhaps during the silly season of mid-summer, it was reasonable to talk about selecting a running mate like Virginia Governor Tim Kaine, who might help tip the balance in a teetering red state, or Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, who might at least create the fantasy of tipping the balance in an even redder state. It might even have been possible -- if not quite realistic -- to suggest that an Indiana Senator Evan Bayh could make an Obama-led ticket more attractive to skeptical voters in the Great Lakes states.

But the prospect that the next president might, on January 20, 2009, be confronted with the immediate challenge of a resurgent Russia, and all of the geopolitical consequences of such a development, should put an end to the discussion of putting a Kaine or a Sebelius, or even a Bayh, on the ticket.

Obama has spent three and a half years in the Senate.

He only recently completed his first major tour of global hotspots and, while that trek went well, he did npot even alight in Russia, China or India -- let alone Georgia or the next trouble zone.

The Democrat who would be president is going to have to pick a running-mate who can, as they say, "hit the ground running."

Nichols suggests that Obama take Hillary Clinton "a little more seriously," but focuses on Joe Biden, who has been out front on the Georgia conflict since it began.

It's a strong argument and not very flattering to the Obama campaign. One could also argue that Georgia conflict, now dying down, won't register much come November. But Nichols sees a glaring weakness in the Obama campaign: Namely, that its foreign-policy deficit is real and could decide the election if the world doesn't stay quiet. Instead of picking someone for what they could do geographically, Obama should fill this deficit.