1. It’s Wednesday, March 11, 2015. Sorry this is late.

2. If 47 Republican senators had any guts at all, here is the letter they would send to the leaders of Iran:            

Dear Ayatollah Khameini:                                                                                                         

We, the undersigned members of the United States Senate, don’t want to negotiate a deal that keeps you from getting nuclear weapons.

Instead, we’d rather send our military to war against your country than make an agreement with your ilk.

We don’t know what the black guy in the White House is thinking, but he doesn’t speak for us. We’re ready to rumble. Whatcha got?

Regards, Tom Cotton and 46 other morons who are ready to be the first ones, along with our sons and daughters, and grandsons and granddaughters, to fight this holy crusade against you heathens.

Not one of these people who rail against a possible deal with Iran, including Benajmin Netanyahu, has the nerve to say out loud: Let’s use U.S. troops to stop them. It’s easy. Just march into Tehran. Or bomb it — John McCain can sing his little ditty again.

They’re afraid to do that because there’s no support whatsoever for an American military strike on Iran. The American people don’t want war with Iran, and especially if it’s believed there could be a better solution.

A better solution is what President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry are seeking in their negotiations. It’s not going to be perfect. But it’s the best way to prevent a crisis in the region, and to keep Israel safe.

Which leads to the second way these Republicans display their gutlessness. It’s easier to try to block a deal before it’s made than to vote against one. If they did reject it, they would then face voters who would rather not see their sons and daughters die in a Persian desert.

For Americans, the Iranians are not lovable. But going to war isn’t what we do for sport or on impulse. The brazen nature of the Republican letter is a disgrace.

3.    I know I’m going to vote for Hillary Clinton on Nov. 8, 2016. But days such as yesterday don’t help her cause.

And the reason is nailed by Frank Bruni in The New York Times: You just get the sense she’s annoyed by this controversy that she herself created. 

She seemed dismissive of the questions about why she used her personal e-mail account for official State Department business. And the idea that just saying she wanted to carry only one device doesn’t impress someone who used to carry four and didn’t have the entourage that follows the Secretary of State.

If Ms. Clinton wants to put this thing behind her, she would take the advice of my former colleague, Lisa DesJardins of the PBS Newshour, and go full Arnold Vinnick. For those who aren’t “The West Wing” fans, Vinick — played by Alan Alda — was the senator from California who, in one episode, answers every single question a reporter asks him in a news conference. He doesn’t dismiss anything. 

That’s what Chris Christie did, somewhat, when the George Washington Bridge scandal erupted. It put that controversy aside for at least a while.

Mrs. Clinton has been a key American political figure for almost a quarter century. She should know that no one — especially the Republicans — are giving her a free ride to 1600 Pennsylvania. If she wants — if she really wants it — she needs to tackle these things head on, and with gusto.