I'm with Kaus - if Obama wins it stregthens his candidacy, if Hillary wins then it shows pulling out early was premature (I say that because I believe Michigan and Florida should re-vote, and as long as there is a plausible way she can win the total overall votes cast she has a legitimate argument for the nomination).  

Drudge is obsessed with getting hits (naturally).

He has found a magical formula for getting maximum blog traffic, and it's Hillary bashing. He can draw in Republicans AND Obama Democrats - including young professionals or college students (the folks who aren't conditioned to hate Drudge because they weren't politically conscious in the 90s). That's a great demographic for selling ads!

I hated Drudge until a few months ago. Now I go there to feed my anti-Hillary addictions.

In Shanghai a few years ago for a summit, Bush and all the other leaders wore traditional Chinese garb. Just post a picture of that up. If I recall the picture was on many magazines, but absolutely no one anywhere drew any inferences from the garb.

This pretty much shows that too many of Hillary's people basically think running for President is the same as running for 8th grade class President. Silly season is right (and sad)

there's also the fact that every time drudge, novak, etc., tries a bank-shot smear, the Obama campaign uses it to bash Hillary--I think Plouffe and Axelrod like having the right hide their smears behind Hillary so that they can use it to attack her and make the story about her campaign tactics instead of the story itself.  Even if the story itself is ridiculously dumb, like it is here, if it was not attributed to Hillary the right-wing echo chamber would be more likely to magnify it, like the ridiculous Obama and the national anthem story which has crossed over, thanks to the AP.

This is the sort of thing that shows the unending ineptitude of the Hillary campaign, shmansy rooms at the Bellgio look postively brilliant compared to this.

If she thinks Obama voters will somehow bite the bullet and vote for her after being called choir-addled idiots and seeing pictures like this (this is just the filth in the last two days), she's insane. Right now, she is personally building the entire "Obama Voters For John McCain" movement that would no doubt errupt if she managed to steal this thing or win ugly this way.

As far as her doing the Republicans dirty work - remember Hillary's infamous vindictiveness - she could be doing this out of spite alone.  Of course it might help with the blockhead patrol in Ohio as well.

That's our Hillary, always appealing to the best in people.

Jason, this is written as if Hillary was just  a conduit for this message who lacked her own agency. This did not originate with the GOP. Sure, the GOP wants to attack both of them, but she gave them the opportunity. This was her first move, and she must have foreseen the consequences. It is Hillary who is initially making the ethnic smear, and the more she does it, the more it becomes an acceptable tactic.

The GOP may be hiding behind her, but she handed them the ammunition.

This really is morally repulsive on her part.

Apparently the Obama campaign has responded.

His campaign manager: “On the very day that Senator Clinton is giving a speech about restoring respect for America in the world, her campaign has engaged in the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we’ve seen from either party in this election. This is part of a disturbing pattern that led her county chairs to resign in Iowa, her campaign chairman to resign in New Hampshire, and it’s exactly the kind of divisive politics that turns away Americans of all parties and diminishes respect for America in the world,"

Hillary's right. This photo of her:

www.judiciaryreport.com/.../hillary-clinton-witch.jpg

Will be on the cover of magazines if Hillary wins the nomination.

That's aside from the many photos of Hillary in native costume from her goodwill trips to Asia and Africa that I remember from the 1990s.

What utter silliness. Does Hillary's staff really have time for this sort of trivial nonsense?

virginiacentrist, whether you go to Drudge or not, you're getting Drudge in your regular news.  Because the lazy, conventional, unimaginative MSM goes to Drudge all day long to get story ideas.  Or get the story period.

Just as they did in the 90s.  Drudge has been legitimate ever since the Monica story Drudge broke turned out to be true.

"Wouldn't we be seeing this on the cover of every magazine if it were HRC?"

If it were the former First Lady, then yeah. And it would be accompanied by a sappy, glowing, self-important article about reaching out to help the plight of Africa. And the pundits would talk about her commitment to human rights, and she could talk about her faith, and half of the evangelical block would eat that shit up and vote blue for her. But she didn't. She will die before losing the pantsuit.

In any case, *he* should stick to being a cowboy.

You peope are all accepting that this was Hillary's doing on the word of MATT DRUDGE?  Hatred makes you gullible.  

Newdex - no actually, on this one your bias makes you blind.

There is no controversy that this was sent to reporters from the Clinton campaign - they haven't even bothered to deny it.  The shtick was supposedly more simpering victimology: somehow she was yet again the victim because the press hadn't dug this up and plastered in on the front age of the NYT - with negative connotations presumably.

Uh yeah.

I guess there are a few people out there who buy it.

right, just like hillary gave novak all that dirt on Obama in November--this is like the 10th time that Drudge, et al have accused the Clinton campaign of leaking something about Obama to them, and after each time, the Obama campaign uses it to bash Hillary.  And everytime, Hillary-haters on the left fill up blog posts bashing Hillary--the only times you'll ever use Drudge as an authoritative source is when it makes Hillary look bad.  

Even if true, Drudge ascribes it to a "staffer"--even if it came from someone who works on the Clinton campaign, it doesn't make it an organized smear, it makes it the e-mail of a bitter Clinton staffer.  There really is no low you Hillary-haters will ascribe to her campaign, no matter how ridiculous or tangential the evidence may be.

Wandreycer, you might be right, but my bias is toward not believing Drudge or most of the press rather than towards believing in Hillary.  

"There is no controversy that this was sent to reporters from the Clinton campaign"

There isn't?  Drudge just says "staffers circulated a photo over the weekend."  To who?  What reporters recieved the photo?  Was there anything else accompanying it?  How come Drudge is the only source on this if it was "circulated" to reporters?

As for "not bothering to deny it," what I've heard is that they can't confirm, as of yet, whether or not one or more of thier staffers were connected with the "circulation" (whaever that actually means), but that it certainly wasn't an effort by the campaign.  

Of course, if you know that Hillary is pure, malicious - and apparently retarded - evil, then her statements about the matter mean whatever you want them to mean.   I mean you in the general sense, not you particularly, wandreycer.

Newdex, then Hillary should make it public that she never advocated the picture be sent, she has no knowledge of it, decries and condemns it, and will fire any staffer who did such a thing, if one did. And if Matt Drudge comes up with the name, and it is her staffer, fire that staffer. Admit it, it would be much better politically than a nondenial denial.

OK Newdex - I do get your point and i can see how you'd be mistrustful of the press, but the email was sent to him, not asked for.  

I cannot believe the jutitsu I;m seeing with this thing from Team Hillary. It's Orwellian.

Wandrey, yer giving Team Hillary too much credit.  It ain't Orwellian, it's amateur time.  Just so transparent and obviously it was going to backfire.

Blackton:

"Newdex, then Hillary should make it public that she never advocated the picture be sent, she has no knowledge of it, decries and condemns it, and will fire any staffer who did such a thing, if one did."

That's exactly what Hillary's campaign has said, Blackton.  Of course that part isn't nearly as interesting as the part where they take a swipe at Obama.  Taking a swipe at Obama over this is not smart, I'll agree with you on that, but hardly unfair.  Do you suppose the Obama campaign really thought for a second, or  even cared one way or the other, that this was a purposeful campaign strategy?  I don't think so, but they knew to respond to it as if it were (without knowing).   They could take the opportunity to slam Drudge and the press for thier Drudgy ways - you know, like, try to change the tone of politics, or they could play it up to thier advantage.  

Wandreycer: "the email was sent to him, not asked for."  Maybe.  By who?  And why would any Clinton staffer, high-up or low-level, think for a second that sending an email like that to Drudge would serve some beneficial purpose.  It doesn't add up, to me.  

There's an even better reason for Hillary to get out of the race: she is less--perhaps much less--electable in a race against John McCain.

Example: the LA Times story ( www.latimes.com/.../la-na-gopobama25feb25,0,4658669.story ) this week on Republicans for Obama. In it, one of his GOP campaign workers said that, as strongly as he feels that a change of political direction is needed, he'd nevertheless vote for McCain over Clinton if she were to become the nominee.

What struck me about the remark was the frequency with which I've heard it myself: nearly all the Republicans and independents I know are disgusted with Bush and set to vote for a Democrat--but not if that Democrat is Hillary. (A vehement "I CAN'T STAND HER" usually follows this declaration.)

Now, this probably only proves how effectively conservatives have demonized the woman over the past decade and a half. Still, when people are punching their ballot cards in November, the whys will not be important.

This country CAN NOT survive another 4-8 years of conservatives' self-serving ideological nonsense. A Democratic victory in November is essential, and having Hillary as our candidate may well put that outcome critically at risk . Vote Obama.