Jim Hoagland got paid to write this:

If the Democrats nominate the deeply polarizing Clinton, other GOP strategists would prefer to try to make her and her gender the campaign’s central issue rather than defend Bush’s terrible record or run on the strident positions and deep divisions that this year belong to leading Republican candidates.

Now why didn’t I think of that?

*

In all seriousness, if this kind of thing pisses you off and frightens you, and it should, then you should be rooting for Hillary Clinton to win in 2008. Not because I trust her with the sorts of unchecked power the right wing has demanded authorities have during Bush’s tenure, but because I know the surest way to wake up NRO and the Red State and the other alleged “conservatives” to the dangers of this sorts of behavior is to give the power to Hillary.

Exactly, but what of that “liberal, democratic” relative who sat at your Thanksgiving table who rails against Bush but adores Clinton?

*

Have some reads:

• Fox morning host defines “good Indians.”
• Dennis Perrin urges you to smash your hand w/a rock.
• Elric 7 flies here tomorrow.
• Racist nation, adding, my left foot’s littlest toe for a “respected” scientist to publish papers “proving” chinks and gooks smarter than round eyes.
• Dickens the racist.
• Comply or ZZZZZT!
• I vaguely remember when Michael Kinsley didn’t suffer from villageritis.
• Where Audrey and I went to make out. True.
• Royalties and loyalties are not mutually exclusive.
• Good riddance John Howard.
• Yugoslavia, reconsidered (plus important links).
• The metrics: the Right’s rich hate the poor and believe the poor deserve nothing while the Left’s rich hate the poor but provide them aid in exchange for the poor’s votes, which to the Right is both bribery and hypocrisy.
• America’s Prolapsed Anus of Malevolence.
• The above isn’t about Imus, but this is, and is right.
• But Greaseman? No pity.
• More Kaufman.
• Evil’s henchman.
• What was missing at Thanksgiving.