Increasingly, the wise guys are predicting that Obama will choose Bayh or Biden as his running mate. Maybe, but neither one makes much sense to me. Obama's entire candidacy has been organized around his initial opposition to the Iraq war, and his condemnation of the "Washington thinking" and and "Washington judgment" that led us into it--which in the primaries, at least, was implicitly more an attack on supposedly weak-kneed Democrats than Republicans. For him to choose someone who, like Hillary Clinton, backed the war resolution and took a cautious line about withdrawal just seems to make a mockery of all that.

P.S. There is one prominent defense hawk out there who covers Obama on national security and opposed the war, but he doesn't seem to be on the list anymore, at least not in the media chatter....

Update: Good stuff in comments, including this from deldickson0:

I agree with the point with respect to Bayh, but not Biden.  In 2002, Biden was one of the key drafters (along with Sen. Hagel I believe) of the war resolution that would have given Pres. Bush far less leeway than the Gephardt-brokered deal did.  Not only that, but Sen. Biden, even at that time, expressed real ambivalence about his vote on the Gephardt-negotiated resolution, and was ahead of the curve right from the get-go in criticizing this administration's management of the war.  He also, as recently as 2004, has led the charge on the Democratic side in putting forth proposals that would help us get out of Iraq....Also, remember Obama himself in one of the early Democratic debates (it may have been the first debate), when given a chance to say that anyone who voted for that war resolution didn't have the judgment to be president, explicitly refused to go there, so I think it's a stretch to say that the campaign he ran makes it impossible for him to pick someone who voted for that resolution.

--Michael Crowley