In her 10th year as editor of The Nation, Katrina vanden Heuvel is the only woman in the country running a major weekly. She has just published a Dictionary of Republicanisms, a short work offering brash definitions of political terms by The Nation’s readers.

Betsy Rothstein asked vanden Heuvel what is on her mind these days, aside from God (“the Republican in chief”), common sense (“modifier used for extreme, right-wing justices Bush wants to appoint to the courts”) and the axis of evil (“Cheney, Rove and Rumsfeld”).

Q: Can a woman become president?
A: What EMILY’s List has done over the years is important. Geena Davis in “Commander in Chief” is great.

I see many women in our political system who I disagree with. I would love to support a woman president who has strong values and policies who would make this a fair equal and just country.

Who can do that? I see many women, and I won’t name names, who seem primed to do the opposite. I mean, would I want Lynne Cheney as president?

Q: What do you think of Hillary Clinton for president?
A: She’s doing a lot of triangulating, Hillary style, right now. She’s a decent smart woman, but … our publication will not support any candidate who doesn’t make a speedy end of the war a major issue.

She has a chance, no question, of winning the Democratic nomination because of the strength of the Clintons within the Democratic Party. She is an astute politician.

Is she a leader? Time will tell. She’s a very shrewd woman and political figure. She’s repositioning. She’s playing catch-up in the Murtha quake. … This is positive, but … she’s following.

Q: You’ve said Bush is bad for the nation but good for The Nation. Any mixed feelings about this?
A: Victor Nevasky has said that for many years. I say that with a lament because I want to edit a magazine that is good for the nation and good for The Nation. The publication in opposition conventionally and traditionally does well. We’re not the Democratic opposition by any means. On some weeks we are as critical of the Democratic leadership as any party.

Q: Why did you write this Dictionary of Republicanisms?
A: I hope it’s satire at its top form. Skewering with this kind of satire means that lies melt away more easily. Laughter is the best way to get people to think about deception. The right has engaged in a well-funded and self-conscious program of Orwellian doublespeak, using the language to suit their ends.

Q: What is your favorite Republicanism?
A: One of my favorites because [Gov.] Arnold Schwarzenegger is under fire is “girly men — males who do not grope women inappropriately.” Another favorite is “Cheney — the greater of two evils.” But I love “neocon — nerds with Napoleonic complexes.”

Q: What do you think the White House reaction will be?
A: If there is any sense of humor in the bunker… there will be some laughs.

Q: Who are your favorite and least favorite TV talk-show hosts?
A: Chris Matthews is one of my favorites. He has really done a service by grilling the neocons and holding their feet to the fire.

The most abusive person in the political talk-show circuit is Sean Hannity. Not only does he not let one make one’s point, but he does so with vitriol and he misrepresents and distorts.

To go on Charlie Rose is completely different. There should be more spaces like that.
Rush Limbaugh … was appalling. [This is] a man who has done too much Oxycontin. It was heartbreaking. I found it to be the lowest of the low. I felt like I was punched in the stomach.

I do find going on ABC “This Week” of value. George Will was respectful. At least you’re dealing with intellect. George Stephanopoulos was polite and fair.