IT'S SPREADING. Gawker.com has picked up on Mallard Fillmore. I still haven't seen a letter about this to the Globe, though, even though the worthless strip has frequently been the object of reader anger in the past. I think this Monday is Globe ombudsman Christine Chinlund's week to write. Don't let us down, Chris!
More seriously: I've gotten a few e-mails telling me that Mallard Fillmore is objectionable to liberals in precisely the same way that Doonesbury is to conservatives. (One similarity: neither is funny.) But the whole point is that you can't make the case anymore - not after this.
BOUGHT AND PAID FOR. I was running around earlier today and didn't have a chance to weigh in on the revelation that the meter was running every time conservative commentator Armstrong Williams said something nice about the No Child Left Behind law.
A little while ago I saw him on CNN Headline News saying that he can understand why people would think he was on the take if they don't know all the facts. Of course! It's like assuming Alberto Gonzales supported torture just because he wrote memos supporting torture. We shouldn't be too quick to jump to conclusions.
And as one of Josh Marshall's readers suggests about Williams, there are more facts to be known. Like: who else?