Chris Hayes isn't exactly the most trustworthy source, and all he does is link to snopes: snopes.com/politics/obama/familyphoto.asp

And, that's not really a "smear" so much as tasteless humor. Hint: the name "Washateria" is a clue.

Yes, what exactly is the provenance of this repulsive attack on Obama? What? Do you mean to tell me that a fine publication such as this would link to such a scandalous image without having investigated its provenance? Who could have produced it? There seem to be 4 possibilities:

1. A bona fide racist, probably with GOP sympathies to some degree or other. Probably not the McCain campaign itself due to the danger of exposure and backlash. Yet, the white racist is the favorite and undisputed explanation of the leftwing punditocracy.

2. A mere prankster. Poor taste indeed, along with a desire to poke the hornets' nests (as if the 2 Democratic campaigns weren't already doing enough of that).

3. Someone connected, however, tenuously, with the Clintons (even an ordinary supporter). Not likely from the campaign itself due to the inevitable backlash and the possibility of exposure.

4. Someone connected, however tenuously, with Obama. Again, not from the campaign itself due to the inevitable backlash and the possibility of exposure. Prima facie, the possibility of an Obama supporter is the most likely, if only because his campaign stands to benefit the most from such a photo. Perhaps it could be thought of as a “false flag” operation by leftwingers driven by fear that there Obamassiah may be falling out of favor due to revelations about the radical kook with whom he is so closely associated.

Get to it, brilliant members of the Fourth Estate—find a belated answer to what should have been your first question.

Bayh is just pushing a variant of the claim by the Clinton campaign that Hillary has the advantage because she can win the big states, such as Pennsylvania and Ohio and Obama can’t.

Win these states? These are primaries, against Obama not McCain, where also she often has the advantage of support from officials such as Pennsylvania’s governor and Philidelphia’s mayor.

It is nonsense to contend that Obama would not do well in these states. Does Clinton believe that those who voted for her in the primaries will suddenly become Republicans?

homer www.blogspot.com

As one of Hagel's constituents, I have to say I couldn't care less whether he backs McCain. Hagel has shown nothing so clearly as his own ability to speak out of both sides of his mouth (being Dubya's most prominent Republican critic while also being his most consistent supporter in his actual Senatorial voting record, for example). So who he backs or doesn't back is pretty meaningless. He claims not to support McCain because the latter supports the Bush strategy in Iraq. But at the same time, Hagel supports former ag secretary Mike Johanns to replace him in the Senate, and Johanns is just as fervent a supporter of that same policy.