Paul Krugman believes when it comes to Republican smears and scurrilous attacks, it will make no difference whether Barack or Hillary (or Edwards?) is sitting in the White House.

[T]hose who don’t want to nominate Hillary Clinton because they don’t want to return to the nastiness of the 1990s — a sizable group, at least in the punditocracy — are deluding themselves. Any Democrat who makes it to the White House can expect the same treatment: an unending procession of wild charges and fake scandals, dutifully given credence by major media organizations that somehow can’t bring themselves to declare the accusations unequivocally false (at least not on Page 1).

The point is that while there are valid reasons one might support Mr. Obama over Mrs. Clinton, the desire to avoid unpleasantness isn’t one of them.

Without question, I agree with Krugman. Bush has had a breezy walk in the park during his two terms compared to the Republican onslaught against Clinton beginning on his first day in office. And we won't even compare the many crimes, illegalities, and wrongs committed by Bush/Cheney vs. that oh-so-heinous Monica problem.

That said there is this question: will the fact that Obama is African American (1/2 anyway) serve to at least partially deter the inevitable outlandish attacks from the far right and coo-coo faction of the GOP? Will that cause them to hesitate? Discuss.