Lt. Gov. Elizabeth Roberts was on the phone from Denver and talking about how impressed she was with Hillary Clinton’s speech endorsing Barack Obama.

Roberts, who supported Clinton for the nomination but long ago came around to Obama, said she wasn’t sky high. “It’s more a bittersweet moment than sky high,” she said. “I found myself moved and I found myself excited that we are going to be able to leave here this week …with the energy and drive needed to win.”

Roberts watched from her perch in the Rhode Island delegation, somewhere back there near Oregon and American Samoa.

I watched on television.

I thought Clinton, spirited, eyes afire, even occasionally funny, did a terrific job under the circumstances. It had to be tough swallowing her conviction she should be the nominee.

I found it eerie that the camera panned so often to her beaming husband, Bill, obviously so proud of her, but someone who was, unquestionably, a distraction to the campaign she waged.

Obama had every right to be ecstatic about the speech, though John McCain’s camp also is justified in citing a hole in it. In framing her call for Democratic unity, Clinton linked her causes with Obama’s; she did not specifically build up his qualifications.

Republicans will continue to pound away on this front and cite her primary-campaign criticisms of Obama as a lightweight. Perhaps you’ve seen the GOP ad that plays off her 3 a.m. commercial suggesting a crisis and that shows her saying, “I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience that he will bring to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002.”

It’s a great ad — and you can bet the Democrats will air similar spots if McCain taps Mitt Romney for vice president.

Clinton emphasized her passion for issues like health care, illuminated through personal stories. In what Roberts called a “very poignant” touch, the New York senator cited heart-rending encounters she had had during her campaign, and told her backers:

“I want you to ask yourselves: Were you in this campaign just for me? Or were you in it for that young Marine and others like him? Were you in it for that mom struggling with cancer while raising her kids? Were you in it for that boy and his mom surviving on the minimum wage? Were you in it for all the people in this country who feel invisible?”

She offered a sharp indictment of McCain and President Bush, on fronts ranging from the economy to the war to women’s rights, and built to this zinger:

“With an agenda like that, it makes sense that George Bush and John McCain will be together next week in the Twin Cities. Because these days they’re awfully hard to tell apart.”

This is a huge challenge McCain will have to deal with at the Republican convention.

As for the Democrats and any lingering resentment among Clinton fans, Roberts said Clinton played her part Tuesday; now Obama needs to do likewise. “There are two parts to this unification of the party,” Roberts said.

I was struck by a CNN interview with a Texas woman who was left sobbing by Clinton’s speech; it was so presidential, she said, and, though she can’t bring herself to vote for McCain, she might not vote at all. Obama, whom she saw as less experienced than Clinton, now must win her over, she said.

Obama gets his chance to reach out, to delegates and all of America, with his speech tomorrow night.

M. Charles Bakst is The Journal’s political columnist.

mbakst@projo.com