We’re kicking off Giving Tuesday early this year! Your donation today will be matched up to $10K, doubling your impact! If you donate $50 today, the Reader will receive $100.

The Reader is now a community-funded nonprofit newsroom. Can we count on your support to help keep us publishing?

Living on the Indiana side of the state line, I used to get ribbed at the office in Chicago when Dan Quayle was making Bush I look good. Now I’m going to have start wearing a bag over my head again: Evan Bayh may run for president in 2008.

I knew he was a Vichy Democrat, one of those who now says he’d have voted against the war if he knew then what he knows now—as if everyone with neural activity didn’t know then that Bush II had already chosen war and was just shopping for a reason.

But he’s still at it, warning Democrats against pursuing “an ideological course,” whatever that means. And Kos reminds us that he’s stingy—”refused to send some of his big war chest to the DSCC [this fall] when we pushed the ‘Use it or lose it’ strategy, denying the national party money when locked in its fierce battle for control of the Senate.”

John Judis recently called attention to Bayh’s votes to allow credit-card companies to keep wooing college students into debt they can’t afford (New Republic, paid subscription required):  

“There is an obvious explanation for why Bayh would take the credit card companies’ side. In states like Indiana, Georgia, Arkansas, Nebraska, Florida, and Montana, where there is not a powerful labor movement or a plethora of pro-Democratic organizations, and in Delaware, where many of the credit companies are based, Democrats often look to the credit card companies for campaign contributions. And the companies and their executives often oblige.

“The bankruptcy bill was their payoff. It was not surprising, therefore, to see Delaware’s Joe Biden and Thomas Carper, Nebraska’s Ben Nelson, or Montana’s Max Baucus voting ‘yea.’ And Bayh was also a recipient of credit card money. He was tenth among all Senators in 2001-2002 for the receipt of money from finance/credit companies, the year of the vote, and he was tenth in the 2005-2006 session, when the bill finally passed both houses and was signed. So he was paying the companies back for their support.

Y’know, anything else would have been “ideological.”