Of all the Veep speculation here on DU, I've seen very little mention of Sebelius, and she is usually written off because: a)her selection would offend feminists and Hillary supporters (because ONLY Hillary is qualified to be VP); b) she would have negligible draw; or c) nobody knows her.
To answer those concerns:
A) Hillary, although she ran a historic campaign, is not entitled to the VP, nor does Obama owe her anything. Obama ran a dignified campaign against her, and refrained to the best of his ability from attacking her character. It seems, to me, to be completely antithetical to equal rights to support only 1 woman for the highest office. Kathleen Sebelius has been a fantastic governor for Kansas, and she has stood up repeatedly to the area's near-violent pro-life faction (especially concerning the Dr. Tiller matters). She has proven to be a progressive in the mold of early Kansans with her opposition to new coal plants, demands that the state balance its budget, and her dedication to providing more funds to the state's public universities (Just 4 years ago, the total deferred maintenance bill-- a lovely leftover of the Graves admin-- for the colleges here was over $600 million. Now, it is under $200 million, and the universities are actually able to prevent further degradation of buildings).
B) No VP will ever have the same aura as Obama, mainly because he is a once in a generation politician. So, what's the point in trying to overshadow Obama? Sebelius can and has gone to bat for progressive causes, and she has tremendous street cred in the Midwest, not mention that she is highly liked by her fellow governors (and she was even the president of the national governor's association). In her SOTU rebuttal, it may not have played well in the traditional blue states, but it played very very well here in Kansas (and I think probably similarly in other red states). She came off as smart, logical, and tenacious, all without appearing vindictive or angry. We need a VP that is willing to go against public opinion (her vetoes of new coal plants, as well as her thrice vetoing of a Voter ID act). She is clearly effective in this respect.
C) It's true that she is relatively unknown outside Kansas and the midwest, but I can guarantee that any skeletons would have come out already, especially since the state GOP has dramatically more funds every election cycle. She would have 3 months for the public to get to know her, which is more than enough time. She can hold her own in debates, she is articulate, she is very intelligent, she is attractive, and she is likeable.
Having a VP from a state that elected one of the first women to the US Senate (Nancy Landon Kassebaum) would be a fantastic and symbolic choice.
--------
all that being said, I don't know if she would take the job, especially since Brownback is not running for reelection in 2010. However, Sebelius on the ticket could move a Kansas Senate seat to the Democrats (Slattery is running a tough race against Roberts).
