Hillary Clinton is beginning to seem less objectionable than Barack Obama. This is not just an argument from policy or who would be better in office, but on another meta-level who would be preferable to oppose John McCain. Who we should most like to face in November.

For a time, Hillary seemed preferable simply because of the likelihood she would lose to McCain – this on the assumption that McCain despite all his faults would offer a better chance to get better Supreme Court appointments and better 2nd Amendment fealty, so we should want the weaker Democratic candidate in the general election contest. In the back of mind in this scenario – for me – was the idea that Obama seemed to have captured America’s imagination and therefore would be more likely to win.

As the weeks and news coverage have dragged on, there has been more time to reflect on the possibility that either of the Democrats could actually end up in the Oval Office. To the extent that “hoping” for McCain over either Democrat is akin to hoping for drought over floods, the possibility of Clinton or Obama winning is becoming less unthinkable.

Obama’s negatives are absolutely terrible. This Rev. Wright has been presented as a key influence, and there is no reason to believe that is not the case, all recent sidestepping aside. Wright appears to be a “Christian” pastor in name only. He is “religious” no doubt, but in a dark mode of religion that differs little from any number of prevailing sick, modern, anti-American ideologies. Obama has spent two decades listening to Wright preach almost every week. Then, we have his wife, Michelle Obama, saying she was never in her life proud of this country prior to roughly this past February. There is his “solution” to the Iran problem as dialogue with the mullahs. Finally is Obama committing the gaffe – which in this case reflects perfectly Michael Kinsley’s excellent maxim that “gaffe” = “truth” – by stating that people who adhere to religion and hold other conservative beliefs are just plain backwards.

Barack Obama gives every indication of being the next Jimmy Carter. Honestly, there seems to be no end to what wacky, incompetent stuff Obama might say or do.

This leaves Hillary Clinton, who personifies “the devil we know.” After seeing her speak recently, holding forth on the centrality of religion in American life and the sacrosanct nature of the 2nd Amendment, one must be reminded of the famous triangulations of her husband beginning 15 years ago.

Don’t get me wrong: I would expect awful Supreme Court nominations from Hillary Clinton, and likely a new “Clinton gun ban,” but I honestly think she is more likely to be someone we can work with for sensible policies. Bill Clinton, for all his downsides, was a hell of a better president than Carter. (Mr. Clinton needed a Republican Congress to be so, and that is fine. That could be the 2010 project).

Obama seems like an utter and complete liar. He has said the right things about bridging ideological divides, but his voting record is anything but, and his pedigree as noted above is radical anti-Americanism, through and through.

Consequently, much as it pains me to say it, Hillary Clinton appears to be the better choice for Democrat candidate for president. Better to have the devil we know than the next Jimmy Carter.