THE GIPPER REACHES THE FAUX MOUNTAINTOP. The Boston Globe's Alex Beam has a funny column today on the New Hampshire legislature's less-than-successful quest to rename Mount Clay after Ronald Reagan. But Beam leaves out the best part: Mount Reagan - er, Mount Clay - isn't actually a mountain.

At 5533 feet, Clay should rank as one of New Hampshire's highest peaks. But as you can see from this list, it doesn't make the grade as one of the state's 48 four-thousand-footers. That's because Clay is actually a spur - a bump - between Mounts Washington and Jefferson.

When I hiked the Northern Presidentials two years ago with my son and a friend of his, we didn't even bother with Clay, taking a side trail around the summit.

Beam notes that several other mountains in the Presidential Range aren't actually named for presidents. He cites Mounts Sam Adams and Mount Webster; there is also Mount Franklin. But Webster is a mere hill at 3910 feet, and Sam Adams and Franklin are, like Clay, spurs of nearby "real" mountains (Adams and Eisenhower, respectively).

Thus Reagan would be the only president honored with a faux mountain. For a president whose eight years in office were built far more on image than substance, it would be a fitting tribute.

FEEL THE LOVE! The e-mails started trickling in last night, ripping a just-posted piece I'd written on what John Kerry should do to revive his stalled campaign. As soon as I saw the subject line on the first message - "Memo to Johm [sic] Kerrrie [sic]" - I knew what had happened: someone had posted my article on Lucianne.com, the online home of Linda Tripp's literary adviser.

Sadly, the thread has already expired. But my "Johm Kerrrie" correspondent was kind enough to compile a "best of" list:

Do you know a lie from the truth?? Apparently not judging by your article.

Your untruth #1: weird inability to swat away the discredited swift-boat attack ads. Ya think the "weird inability" has anything to do with the fact that the SBVs have not actually been discredited?

Your untruth #2: Legitimate new source??? or a Kerry shill?? You have a new legitimate source why don't you mention it??

A very good description of you from a reader of your article: Just another piece of crap with a keyboard. Dunce, fool, idiot, moron comes to mind.

Baby boomers, the worst generation.

Keep those cards and letters coming.

BUSH, NOT AT WAR. Today's must-read is Eric Boehlert's Salon piece, which brings everything completely up to date on the National Guard story. The most fascinating detail is that George W. Bush may very well have had his honorable discharge revoked because of his chronic absenteeism, only to have it restored through political connections.

Josh Marshall says:

This isn't about what President Bush did 30+ years ago. Or at least it's not primarily about that. The issue here is that for a decade President Bush has been denying all of these things. He did so last January. He did so again as recently as last month. He's continued to cover this stuff up right from the Oval Office.

I'll take it one step further. I don't even particularly care that Bush is lying and covering up about what he did all those years ago. But given that he refused to denounce the swift-boat ads against Kerry, and that Poppy and Laura practically endorsed them, he deserves whatever he gets over this issue.