Caption Funny

by Smitty


Barack: "And so then Angela Merkel socked me in the jaw like this. I said 'I don't strike women.' She said 'Neither do I, but in your case I made an exception.' Can you take her down for me?"
Hillary: "That East-German Stasi ronin badass? Your best bet is a Tomahawk strike from the Baltic Sea. That woman makes The Bride look like Michael Moore."

Update: Apologies to PDB Watch for neglecting the linky-love when originally posting.

Remember Hillary Clinton's 1969 Wellesley College thesis on Saul Alinsky?

Wow! Matthew Vadum caught this -- which was actually first reported last weeked while I was covering the 9/12 March On D.C. -- and he has the whole thing in PDF. Brief excerpts:

Democracy is still a radical idea in a world where we often confuse images with realities, words with actions. . . .
In spite of his being featured in the Sunday New York Times, and living a comfortable, expenses-paid life, he considers himself a revolutionary. In a very important way he is. If the ideals Alinsky espouses were actualized, the result would be social revolution. Ironically, this is not a disjunctive projection if considered in the tradition of Western democratic theory. In the first chapter it was pointed out that Alinsky is regarded by many as the proponent of a dangerous socio/political philosophy. As such, he has been feared -- just as Eugene Debs or Walt Whitman or Martin Luther King has been feared, because each embraced the most radical of political faiths -- democracy.

And democracy is a good thing! Maybe if I could have afforded to go to law school like Hillary and Bill Clinton did, I wouldn't have such an "infantile mind," like Professor Walter Williams and Professor Thomas DiLorenzo.

Go to law school kids, or else!

UPDATE: On reading through this loopy thesis, am I the only one who gets the feeling that if Bill didn't inhale, Hillary certainly did? Not that heavy drug use in college permanently impairs the ability to compose cogent prose, but . . .

UPDATE II: Wow! Talk about your weird coincidences, but as soon as I finished adding that first update, I went to comment moderation and found an anonymous comment on a previous post:

Anonymous said...
Doug Mataconis of "Below the Beltway" is a walking, talking mini-me to Charles Johnson. Nevertheless, his blog is listed under "Our Favorite Blogs" on your website. Have you ever bothered to read the crap he posts on his blogsite? He's no conservative, he's anti-homeschooling and violently anti-creationism, anti-Palin, in short, he's almost the antithesis of what this blog site stands for. "Below the Beltway" sucks. You heard it here first.
Sun Sep 20, 10:09:00 AM

So it appears that, even while I was busy traffic-baiting Professor Glenn Reynolds, this anonymous commenter was reading my post about gutless God-hater Charles Johnson and flaming Doug Mataconis. But whereas Charles Johnson is clearly evil, perhaps Mr. Mataconis is merely wrong. As I said last night, there is a difference between wrong and evil:

To fart in a crowded elevator is wrong, but does not necessarily make the perpetrator evil.

Generally speaking, it has been my experience that courtesy and a healthy sense of humor can prevent unnecessary arguments. So let us consider the biography of Doug Mataconis:

All I know is that the evidence is clear that Western Civilization is in a fight for its own survival right now.

On this, we are very much in agreement, and only a fool would desire to insult a man who wishes to fight for the survival of Western Civilization. Let us therefore read further:

Being from New Jersey . . . I am a huge science fiction fan . . .

Which is to say, his mama wouldn't let him play football.

In addition to writing, I enjoy listening to music, specifically jazz. . . . I’m a big Frank Sinatra fan . . .

As am I, having performed Sinatra's tunes many times in karaoke and even, occasionally, leading the audience in a Rockettes-style kick-line dance. NTTAWWT.

In college, I was a subscriber to National Review . . .

In college, I subscribed to Creem magazine. ("Boy Howdy!")

I’m a 37 year old attorney . . . practicing law . . .

(King Henry VI, Part II, Act 4, Scene ii, Dick the Butcher; cf., Luke 11:46.)

When I’m not enjoying time with my wife and dog . . .

Well, just because she's from Ohio, that's no reason to insult your own wife, sir. Of course, I married the only good-looking woman from Ohio, so if you insist that your wife is a dog, well, I have no desire to argue with you. Courtesy and humor . . .

At any rate, you see what can happen. If a blogger starts paying too much attention to his commenters, he might lose his sense of humor. So despite the insulting tone of this anonymous commenter, let me emphasize that I have never meant any insult to you, Mr. Mataconis, but as to what you said about Mrs. Mataconis, that's between you and her.

Define 'lewd and deviant'

Kind of hard not to smile at this Project on Government Oversight report complaining about misconduct by civilian guards at ths U.S. embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan:

The report highlighted occasions when guards brought women believed to be prostitutes into Camp Sullivan and videotaped themselves drinking and partially undressed. It also outlined communications problems among the guards, many of whom don't speak English and have trouble understanding orders from their U.S. supervisors.
"The lewd and deviant behavior of approximately 30 supervisors and guards has resulted in complete distrust of leadership and a breakdown of the chain of command, compromising security," POGO said in a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton . . .

Yeah, because we know that Hillary Clinton would never tolerate "lewd and deviant behavior." If the guards lose their State Department jobs, maybe they can get jobs in Hyannis Port.

Hey, did any of those guards drive an Oldsmobile off a bridge?

Old School Ties UPDATE: Lobbyist?

Yesterday, the question was asked, "Who Is Eleanor Acheson?" The answer is that she's the Amtrak vice president and legal counsel whose name is relevant to last week's unexpected retirement of Amtrak inspector general Fred Wiederhold.

Acheson ("Eldie," to her friends) was also Hillary Rodham Clinton's college roommate and . . .

By sheerest coincidence, yesterday the State Department held its annual commemoration of "Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month," at which the remarks were given by the department's chief of staff, Cheryl Mills:

First, on behalf of Secretary Clinton, I am honored to be here today and to celebrate LGBT Pride Month . . .
It is my great pleasure now to introduce a woman who has spent years serving the American people at Amtrak, at the Justice Department, at the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. She is a dear friend of Secretary Clinton, and she has been a wonderful public servant model and friend to me, Eldie Acheson.

NTTAWWT.

UPDATE: Ah, but there might be something wrong with this: Dan Riehl has discovered that, as recently as December 2008, Acheson was listed on a lobbyist disclosure form.

So, dear old Joe Biden gets $1.3 billion in "stimulus" money for Acheson's Amtrak, and they don't need no stinkin' IG sniffing around.

But wait a minute, there's more. As Michelle Malkin points out, Biden's all abou Amtrak. Suppose that Biden's fingerprints were discovered on some shenanigans at Amtrak, so that there was a real scandal? If dear old Joe had to resign . . .

Vice President Hillary? OK, that's far-fetched. But did anybody else notice that Hillary's now got Sidney Blumenthal working for her over at State Department?

Obama's popularity is starting to fade, Obama backstabs the gays, now all sorts of scandal talk is starting to swirl and is it really a conspiracy theory to ask, Cui bono?

C'mon, folks. Andrew Sullivan blogs kookier stuff than that every day. Question the timing!

Dear Associated Press: Let's talk about political celebrities and their ghost writers

Y'know, it was nice of you guys to assign Hilel Italie to write that story suggesting Sarah Palin doesn't have the brains to write her own book.

Shall we discuss the editorial process behind, say, Bill Clinton's My Life or Hillary Clinton's Living History? Between them, the Clintons employed enough ghosts to staff the day shift at Disney World's "Haunted Mansion" ride.

Having been a Washington, D.C., journalist since 1997, I can assure you that we "talk shop" often enough so that every writer inside the Beltway knows who's ghosting whom. No need to name names, but suffice it to say that once somebody has served in the Cabinet or been elected Senator, any book published under his name can be assumed to be, at best, a team effort in which the named author was the quarterback. (Or sometimes, as one hears in regard to the Clintons, the meddlesome team owner who insists on second-guessing the editorial quarterback.)

However, since the Associated Press has taken this sudden and keen interest in the subject of potential future presidents and their ghostwriters, perhaps you could be bothered to run down a disturbing theory that has troubled me for several months.

After I founded Authors Against Obama, a reader called to my attention Jack Cashill's theory that Dreams of My Father was ghost-written. Cashill offered abundant circumstantial evidence to support his theory, and perhaps the mighty AP could assign Hilel Italie to investigate this.

Or, as seems likely, perhaps not.

(Cross-posted at Hot Air Green Room.)

UPDATE: Allahpundit loves me! And Chris Matthews still hates Sarah Palin:

Republicans roll over for Hillary

The vote was 16-1 in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, with Louisiana Sen. David Vitter as the only Republican with enough testicular fortitude to vote no. Jim Antle of the American Spectator:

It's a pretty sad statement that so many Republicans are rolling over for Hillary Clinton. And the fact that many conservatives consider Hillary preferable to other alternatives shows that our political debate is continuing to drift left over time.

Tell it to Vince Foster.

'I can’t stop thinking about this picture'

So says former Clinton press secretary Dee Dee Myers:

An incredibly talented young aide, to an impossibly idealistic new president, gets caught doing something indefensibly stupid and undeniably sexist. Everyone is uncomfortable. But should anyone be held accountable? Apparently not.
The incident I’m talking about, of course, is the photo of Jon Favreau, Barack Obama's 27-year-old wunderkind speechwriter, with his hand on a cardboard cutout of Hillary Clinton’s chest. . . .
I can't stop thinking about this picture, and I confess I find it really upsetting. And, no, it's not because I don't have a sense of humor.

The fact that Myers feels the need to insist that she's not humorless should clue you into the fact that what follows is . . . well, humorless:

What's bugging me is his intention. He isn't putting his hand on her "chest," as most of the articles and conversations about the picture have euphemistically referred to it. Rather, his hand -- cupped just so -- is clearly intended to signal that he's groping her breast. And why? Surely, not to signal he finds her attractive. Au contraire. It's an act of deliberate humiliation. Of disempowerment. Of denigration.
And it disgusts me.

Oh, puh-leeze. Look, to start with, no one named "Dee Dee" is allowed to take themselves so seriously. Second, groping a cardboard cutout's boob doesn't "signal" anything, except maybe that the person doing it is drunk. Third, I greatly admire Andrew Breitbart and enjoyed his Monday column about this, but he was trying to make a point about double standards: What would have happened if the offending staffer were a Republican?

The question was asked as a hypothetical, to make a point. I'm not sure that Breitbart was advocating that Jon Favreau actually suffer that fate. And certainly, I don't.

I cannot be accused of sympathy toward Obama, but I'm tired of seeing careers in Washington destroyed by one ginned-up "incident." Fifty or sixty years from now, when Favreau dies, his Washington Post obituary will include a paragraph about the cardboard-cutout groping incident, and I'm sure he can live with that. But to try to get him fired over that? No. And not just no, but hell, no.

As a conservative, I am grateful to Jonathan Favreau for (unintentionally) exposing the partisan double standards of media outrage about "sexism" -- the scare-quotes signifying that I don't think Favreau is any more "sexist" than anyone else. And if someone out there has a Facebook photo of a Hillary Clinton staffer acting disrespectfully toward a cardboard cutout of Obama, please publish it, so that we can discuss "racism" in the same context.

This all goes back, as Breitbart said in his column, to when "righteous feminists . . . tried to destroy Clarence Thomas - for nothing." The worst that was alleged against Thomas was that he had made a couple of off-color jokes at the office, which somehow became transmogrified by feminist witch-hunters into sexual harassment of the "hostile environment" variety. It was insane and unjust and I hope that Jonathan Favreau, at least, can now understand why it was insane and unjust.

As for you, Ms. Myers: Spare us your phony belated outrage. You were a joke as White House press secretary, and the only reason anyone pretends to take you seriously now is because your husband is an editor at Vanity Fair.

UPDATE: Linked at Hot Air. Thanks! Over at Q&O, McQ coughs up a lung laughing at the irony of a former staffer for Bill Clinton being offended by sexual harassment. I'm sure Kathleen Willey is laughing, too.

UPDATE II: James Joyner:

If Obama wants to fire this guy for being a dumbass and embarrassing himself and his boss, that’s fine by me. If he doesn’t, though, it’s not a signal that he’s indifferent to sexism but rather that he doesn’t think groping a cardboard cutout is a hanging offense.

Unless the cardboard cutout files a lawsuit, or unless Favreau is caught on an FBI wiretap declaring that a Senate seat is a "f---ing valuable thing," I'm pretty sure Favreau will keep his job, on the "No Drama Obama" principle. On the other hand, it's nice to note how the Obama administration is already delivering juicy scandals more than a month before he's even inaugurated. As I told a friend last night at my son Jefferson's birthday party: "This is gonna be a good four years for me."

Breitbart on double standards

The case of the cardboard-cutout Clinton:

If the photo had exposed a Republican offender, there'd already be a full-bore media scandal and cascading resignations. MSNBC would be rearranging its schedules for a wall-to-wall 24/7 bonanza. Rachel Maddow would finally have her big story. Barbara Boxer, Patricia Schroeder and other righteous feminists would walk up the Capitol steps, reprising the time they tried to destroy Clarence Thomas - for nothing.
Yet so far there is no groundswell of feminist rage in the District of Columbia. The unnamed co-conspirator thrusting the beer bottle into the mouth of the designated secretary of state isn't yet a household slur.
Instead, with the accused being a member of the protected Democratic class, we only have a quick peripheral debate. The mainstream media headlines soften the story's implications: "Obama speechwriter Favreau learns the perils of Facebook" (CNN).

The double standard is truly obnoxious, but I'm not really offended by the photo -- and I don't think Hillary was, either. I think she was actually flattered by the attention. As a matter of fact, that photo probably depicts Hillary's fantasy of a wild weekend: "Grab me! Grope me! Make me drink Heineken!"

Oh, wait . . . that's my fantasy weekend. Never mind.

UPDATE: Linked by VodkaPundit. Thanks.

UPDATE II: Moe Lane: "Besides, that cardboard cutout was totally asking for it." Cardboard cutout consent.

Her Unconstitutionality?

Many bloggers are intrigued by the possibility that Hillary Clinton is forbidden, under Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution, from taking the job as Secretary of State. Marc Ambinder sums it up:

Essentially, you cannot take a job if the salary was increased during your current congressional term. And the salary for cabinet officials has gone up in the past year.

Not that the Clintons have ever let the Constitution stand in their way before, but Ed Morrissey points out:

Still, the intent of the founders is clear, and not something to shrug off so lightly. They wanted to keep Congress from creating cushy sinecures for them to occupy when a friendly President took office. The attraction of power, cash, and cronyism would lead to corruption and a permanent political class that would cease answering to the electorate.

We are well past the point where constitutional restraints have any real meaning. On the one hand, the Supreme Court looks at the Constitution and sees things -- "penumbras and emanations" and the "sweet mystery of life" -- that aren't there. On the other hand, the limits of the enumerated powers are ignored and the 10th Amendment eviscerated by the very existence of the massive establishment in Washington. If the Constitution had any real power, the Department of Education would not exist.

The Constitution now means whatever the fashionable professors say it means. Perjury and obstruction of justice cannot be "high crimes and misdemeanors," the professors assured us during the Lewinsky scandal. I'm sure the Clinton Foundation can make a few research grants and buy off enough law professors to legitimize whatever it is that Hillary wants. The dictatorship of the professoriate!

Sid is back!

Wherever the Wicked Witch goes, can her flying monkeys be far behind?

Late last week, as stories swirled around Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's possible jump to the job of Secretary of State, another longtime Clinton aide's name began to crop up: former journalist and Clinton back-room consigliere, Sidney Blumenthal.
Should Clinton accept the Secretary of State job, Blumenthal, it is believed, will move to Foggy Bottom as a counsel to the secretary, a post that will not require Senate confirmation, but will require an extensive security and background check.
According to Obama transition team sources, Clinton aides presented them with a list of potential senior staff for the Secretary of State office, and Blumenthal's name -- without a title or role described -- was on it.

Hope! Change! Sidney Blumenthal! Don't you know there's got to be some Obama volunteers who walked precincts for him in New Hampshire who are now about to blow a gasket over Hillary getting a Cabinet post -- and bringing her evil minions with her?

The media's anointed One

John McCain aide Mark Salter complains bitterly about how totally in the tank the media is for Obama, and Tom Bevan recalls that Hillary Clinton's aides had the same complaint.

The longer the Democratic primary campaign lasted, the more the national press corps acted like they were on Obama's payroll. I'll never forget that day in Shepherdstown, W.Va., right after the North Carolina primary, when this fat, obnoxious CBS reporter more or less told Hillary to quit:

Does her vow to keep fighting, asked one network TV reporter, mean that Clinton will continue her campaign all the way until the vote on the convention floor in Denver?
"I'm staying in this race until there's a nominee, and I obviously am going to work as hard as I can to become that nominee," she answered. "So we will continue to contest these elections and move forward."
The reporter fired back with a follow-up question: "But what do you say to those Democrats who fear that you're putting the Democratic Party's chances at risk by...continuing to stay in?"

Honestly, who were "those Democrats" whose fears that jerk from CBS was expressing? Him and his liberal buddies on the press bus, that's who.

Americans should remember this well. If the Obama presidency goes bad wrong -- and does anyone seriously expect it to go well? -- it was the media who elected him. Those biased bastards like that guy from CBS will bear a huge responsibility for the result.

How not to solve the problem

Hillary Rodham Clinton:

We should also put in place a temporary moratorium on foreclosures and freeze rate hikes in adjustable-rate mortgages. We've got to stem the tide of failing mortgages and give the markets time to recover. . . .
If we do not take action to address the crisis facing borrowers, we'll never solve the crisis facing lenders.

Moron. Let's go through this, shall we?

Q. "Failing mortgages" are caused by . . . what?

A. People not making their payments.

So Hillary's answer is to let people stay in "their" houses, even though they're not making the payments? What she is actually saying is that the federal government should give people houses.

By Hillary's reckoning, people who swindled banks by signing mortgages they couldn't pay are victims. The moral calculus of liberalism therefore justifies fraud.

'Hillary is not on the ticket'

Patrick Healy: "You know what I keep hearing privately from advisers to Hillary? They say, 'Why is it our job to blunt Palin's impact? Hillary is not on the ticket. Obama didn't choose her.' I don't think it's so much about resentment, it's an honest assessment that Hillary can only do so much in this regard."

"Hillary is not on the ticket." They're going to keep saying that and saying that, and after John McCain gets elected on Nov. 4, you're never going to hear the end of them saying it: "Hillary was not on the ticket." Then we'll spend the next four years waiting for Hillary to run again, and any Democrat who even thinks about challenging her will be demonized.

And forget about Obama after Nov. 4. The Democrats shoot their wounded. For better or worse, Republicans operate by the "it's his turn" principle, whereas Democrats are always about the "fresh new face." As Howard Dean showed, you've got exactly one chance to be the "fresh new face" with the Democrats, and once you blow that, you're through.

So McCain wins this year, the economic collapse grows increasingly worse, the entitlement crisis gets punted a few yards downfield, and the stage is all set for Hillary's big comeback in 2012. She'll be really inevitable next time around.

Hillary: 'Thanks . . . send money'

E-mail from Hillary Clinton:

Dear Robert,
Standing on that stage tonight in front of 20,000 Democrats unified behind Senator Obama, I saw a bright future for America. I saw millions of people across the country working as one to elect the next Democratic President. I saw a new President and a new Congress giving a voice to the voiceless. I saw America, the land of endless potential, regaining its role as a leader in the world.
I couldn't be prouder of our party, of our nominee, and of all the work you and I have done together over the course of this campaign on behalf of the American people.
I knew that as I stood in front of that podium, I wasn't alone. I had you, and everyone who has supported me, standing right up there with me. And that means the world to me.
Thank you again for everything you've done. Now let's get to work helping elect Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and all of our great Democratic candidates!
Sincerely,

And then a link to contribute to retire her campaign debt. Heh.

Live blogging Hillary

At Chez VodkaPundit, where Stephen wagers that Hillary will repeat her Emily's List performance by failing to mention Barack Obama during her speech. I'm doubtful she'd diss the Messiah at the Pepsi Center.

UPDATE: Introduced by the Good Clinton, Chelsea.

Orange suit -- a bold choice.

Vodka says she looks like "a traffic cone."

"A proud supporter of Barack Obama" -- I should have taken Stephen's bet.

"You ... you ... you" -- it's all about affirming the listener's sense that they are important.

Her peroration included the phrase "faith in God" -- she is a Republican!

All in all, a good speech, and a reminder to Democrats they could have had a V-8. I think they may yet regret not nominating her.

UPDATE II: Stephen's full-blown liveblog is at PJM. Stephen says:

McCain mentions: One. Bush mentions: Many. The Dems are STILL running against Bush. Do they think he’s going to be around another four years if they don’t?

This is very much like what the Democrats did in 1988, when Dukakis essentially ran against Reagan -- and got his butt kicked. The problem for Republicans is that the economy now is more like 1992. But still, Bush in 2000 did not campaign against Clinton.

D-1: 'We will not be silenced!'

UPDATED & BUMPED: Security is ultra-heavy:

To the uninformed visitor, it has become difficult to tell whether Denver is preparing for a Democratic National Convention or the institution of martial law. Helicopters filled with armed commandos swooped over downtown in a training exercise earlier this summer. A warehouse was converted into a temporary jail with chain-link fences and signs threatening the use of electric stun devices. Travel agents sold getaway packages to locals, with one company imploring residents to "escape town while you still can."

Dang. Someone must have warned them I was coming.

UPDATE: Last word before packing up for Dulles, and VodkaPundit tells ABC News and the protesters, "Welcome to Denver, Now Go Away."

PREVIOUSLY: I'll be boarding a plane for Denver pretty soon, and must make final preparations, but check out (via No Quarter) this new documentary:

We believe that the The Democratic National Committee (DNC) made a grave error by depriving American voters of their choice of Hillary Clinton as Democratic nominee. Senator Clinton, by all accounts, except caucuses, won the Primary Election and, therefore, should be the 2008 Democratic Nominee. That didn't happen, due largely to illegitimate and illegal acts. . . .
This documentary is about the disenfranchising of American citizens by the Democratic Party and the Obama Campaign. . . . We want to be heard and let the country know how our party has sanctioned the actions of what we feel are Obama campaign "Chicago Machine" dirty politics.

Here's a preview clip:

"It was unbelieveable that this could be happening . . ."

Hmmm. Corruption? In the Democratic Party? Somebody ought to write a book about that.

UPDATE: So far, the protest scene in Denver is incredibly lame. Michelle Malkin reports from the scene Saturday at Planned Parenthood:

The pro-abortion presence was measly. I counted about seven or eight demonstrators who tried to compensate for their low numbers with their loud mouths.

Liberals were too busy getting ready for the Salon party.

Feel the burn, PUMAs!

New ad from Team Maverick:

Ed Morrissey:

Instead of just focusing on the injustice Hillary received, the ad makes it about Obama and his inability to deal with her criticisms. This calls into question Obama’s leadership and his ability to separate the personal from the job — as well as refloat all of the specific issues Hillary mentions in these clips.

Who predicted this?

Especially for those swing voters who voted for Hillary in the Democratic primaries, it may come as a brutal shock to learn that the former First Lady won’t be on the ticket in November. The shock will be amplified when those voters learn that Obama’s choice was the result of an ABC (”Anybody But Clinton”) process that excluded Hillary from serious consideration months earlier.

And now Crazy Cousin John's rubbing salt in those fresh wounds, just in time for Denver.

And they call ME sexist?

Pro-Obama columnist:

This convention is Obama's moment -- his hour to welcome America into his home, the Democratic Party -- and he deserves to set the table any way he wishes.
Hillary's job is to bring a casserole dish and to serve it with a smile.

Jonathan Last:

Should she be barefoot, too?

Isn't it incredible what you can get away with if you're "progressive"? I'm sometimes tempted to start pretending to be progressive, just so I can get away with saying crap like that.

Clinton delegates want Hillary as VP

As I pointed out at Pajamas Media, the common-sense logic of the Obama-Clinton "dream ticket" is such that many Hillary supporters still believe her to be the obvious choice as running mate. Most Oklahoma Democratic convention delegates agree:

Of the 14 Clinton delegates who responded to an Oklahoman survey last week, 11 named Clinton as their first choice for running mate. Obama is expected to announce his choice this week.
Mildred Banks, a delegate from Tulsa, said, "As a delegate pledged to Hillary Clinton, and as chair of Tulsa Area Hillraisers for Hillary Clinton, my pick for VP is Hillary Clinton. She brings 18 million voters -- more than any candidate in history."

Don't bother arguing with me. Take it up with Mildred.

UPDATE: Similar news from New Mexico:

Hillary supporters in the audience included Paulette Atencio, 61, of Chama, who worked for Clinton in the primary. Clinton narrowly won New Mexico's Democratic caucus in February, getting 14 delegates, compared to 12 for Obama.
"Way deep in our hearts we are very disappointed," Atencio said.
If Obama doesn't select Clinton as his running mate, she said she would support McCain in the general election Nov. 4.

Does Obama think these ladies are kidding?

UPDATE II: The Hillary-or-else message is also being heard from Texas:

Ramona "Monchi" De La Paz Torres wants to see that U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton gets the respect she deserves at the Democratic National Convention in Denver.
"I'm going to stick to Hillary to the end," said De La Paz Torres, who lives in Central El Paso.
She's one of 10 El Paso Democrats who will be delegates at the convention Aug. 25-28. . . .
De La Paz Torres said she's not sure she can vote for Obama. . . .
"He's not experienced enough for him to handle the presidential decisions right now," she said. "I feel that he should have waited."
Blanche Darley, a fellow Clinton delegate from Central El Paso, said she doesn't like Obama, doesn't trust him and doesn't think he has paid attention to the needs of Mexican-Americans.
"I don't believe in him," she said.

UPDATE III: Big Tent Democrat says of Clinton as VP, "I've never seen a bigger no-brainer in my life," and links Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight, who says:

I think Obama might get an immediate 10-15 point bounce if he named her. . . . It's a crazy scenario, but the whole Obama veepstakes has been crazy enough that I wouldn't rule it out.

(Cross-posted at AmSpecBlog.)

Hillary: Not good enough for No. 2?

My column at Pajamas Media:

Informed political observers have realized since June that Hillary Rodham Clinton won't be Barack Obama’s running mate. As Obama prepares to announce his vice-presidential choice, however, it will be worthwhile to watch the reaction of the ill-informed and unobservant — which is to say, the independent "swing" voters who will ultimately decide the election.
Especially for those swing voters who voted for Hillary in the Democratic primaries, it may come as a brutal shock to learn that the former First Lady won't be on the ticket in November. The shock will be amplified when those voters learn that Obama's choice was the result of an ABC ("Anybody But Clinton") process that excluded Hillary from serious consideration months earlier.

Read the whole thing.

UPDATE: Thomas Lifson at American Thinker:

It is still theoretically possible that Obama will shock everyone by offering Hillary the second spot, and perhaps equally possible Hillary will launch a coup, if enough super delegates abstain in the first roll call vote, in order to throw the voting open on subsequent ballots.

Meanwhile, Patrick Ruffini suggests that talk of Bayh and Biden, et al., could be a "massive head fake":

If you're Obama, why not choose a VP who strengthens you all over and consolidates a source of weak support? Who has been thoroughly vetted? Whose selection would be a surprise and galvanize support for the ticket?
If Bill Clinton can be sent to Tahiti for the next 80 days, it just might work.

California Yankee agrees:

Ruffini's prediction makes perfect sense to me. Nothing else will solve The Obama's Democrat deserter problem.

OK, since we're just talking gut hunch here:

• The real problem with Hillary at VP is that she has played Team Obama like xylophone. She thinks he'll lose without her, but can't make it look like she's unhelpful. So while publicly she says she is willing to be the running mate, privately she insisted on impossible terms -- setting Obama up to make it look like he rejected her, rather than the other way around. She's thinking ahead to 2012.
• It's definitely Bayh. His name was floated long enough to test reaction, which was overwhelmingly positive, and only then did we start hearing talk about Biden, et al. That's just chaff to throw people off and keep up the sense of mystery. It's Bayh all the way.
• Biden makes zero sense. He's got no constituency, he's from an electorally insignificant state, and if Team Obama wants "gravitas," they'll definitely go with New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson.

Bayh is the obvious do-no-harm choice, a young and telegenic Midwestern governor from a red state. Ruffini says Bayh was "vetoed by the netroots," but what better way for Obama to give the Kos crowd some Sister Souljah tough love and demonstrate he's not a tool of the Left?

Bayh all the way. Ignore all chatter to the contrary.

UPDATE II: The Ruffini theory prompts Allah to one of his longest posts evah:

Picking her would indicate that Obama thinks he has a bigger problem with Democrats than with independents and needs to purchase "unity" even at the expense of alienating centrists and handing McCain a gift-wrapped GOTV angle. . . . Is the sore-loser PUMA contingent really so huge within the party that he genuinely fears it's going to cost him the election?

Answer: It's not PUMAs, it's mainly older independent women who are at stake here. They voted for Hillary in the primaries, but haven't paid much attention to the "inside baseball" chatter since Obama clinched in June and did those "unity" photo-ops with Clinton. In their cluelessness, they figured an Obama-Clinton ticket was the common-sense solution, and when Obama picks someone else -- it's Bayh, I tell ya -- they're going to feel that this is a high-handed insult to the former First Lady. It's all about the arrogance meme, see?