Could it be?

Since I have a little but more time to sit around in front of a computer these days, I'm able to poke around looking for interesting things and post up links to make this blog more like it was in its Xanga incarnation. Now, I know it's against the rules to link to what is essentially another link, but still....

Andrew Sullivan has an interesting post up with a long quote from a speech by Hillary Rodham-Clinton having to do with the Geneva Convention issue. At this juncture, I'm not going to get into the whole appalling mess over torture that we've gotten ourselves into, but I would like to say someting about Hillary. Anybody who's talked to me about this over the past few years knows that I absolutely oppose her nomination for president by the Democrats because I think she is entirely unelectable. She is polarizing, hated by the right, and the Strange dynastic turn that the office of the President has undergone recently would not be helped by electing Bill's kind-of-wife.

However, Andrew makes a good point about her sounding like a president, and while that's essentially meaningless, it occurs to me to wonder if Hillary's polarizing nature might actually help. I'm not talking about partisanism here, because I think we can all agree that partisanism is one of the things that's wrong with our national discourse these days. Instead, I'm talking about the Democrats finally finding somebody who can present a real Opposition to the party in power. It's not enough to be against Bush; that didn't work in 2004, and I don't think it's going to work in 2006. What could work in 2008, though, is running on an actual platform of opposition to the neo-Con PFNAC policies that will surely guide whoever is chosen to replace The Prince.