Hillary Clinton? Democrat.

Andrew Sullivan airs the larger disturbing question mark.

Is Hillary offering us a two-fer - with Bill?  Let's expand that.  Is Bill running for co-president? We need to know.

One of the disturbing aspects of having two dynastic presidential families - a sign that a republic truly is turning into a corrupt empire - is that a former president can intervene, with all his partisan power, on behalf of a candidate to whom he is related during a critical primary campaign. This week Bill Clinton showed his usual class by accusing Obama and Edwards of "swift-boating" his wife because they dares to challenge a front-runner in a debate.Clinton's comment was a classic hardball political maneuver to repair some of the damage done to his wife's candidacy by the last debate. Here's the money quote:

    "We listened to people make snide comments about whether Vice President Gore was too stiff and when they made dishonest claims about the things that he said that he'd done in his life. When that scandalous Swift boat ad was run against Senator Kerry... Why am I saying this? Because I had the feeling that at the end of that last debate we were about to get into cutesy land again."

[.]

But this little flurry of dynastic opportunism has one advantage in this campaign. It raises the important question of whether the Clinton-Clinton relationship/arrangement/partnership/marriage needs to be put more squarely on the table before it's too late. Clinton H, it seems to me, needs to be asked publicly if her candidacy is, as her husband described his in 1992, "two-for-one." Will her husband be given an official position in the administration? Will he be co-president again? Is he running with her? What role would he play in office again? These are completely legitimate questions about the content of a third and possibly fourth term for the Clintons.

[.]

Democrats, it seems to me, also have a right to know whether the Clinton team expects another out-break of the kind of scandals that rocked and roiled the country the last time this couple occupied the White House together. Are we headed back to marital psychodrama as public spectacle? Or are things different now? Even if you believe, as I do, that the private arrangements of public couples are nobody's business, the way in which the Clintons merge personal relationships with the exercize of public power makes a clear distinction between public and private life  much harder to maintain. And it is simply a regrettable fact that in the current media climate, the 1990s could return with a vengeance - and sideswipe the country in a much more perilous time.

If Bill is running, then the other candidates have a right to know.

Well, "You can't vote for war and disown the results"