This?

"Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign has prepared a detailed memo listing various instances in which it perceived Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign to have deliberately played the race card in the Democratic primary.

The memo, which was obtained by the Huffington Post and has been made public elsewhere, is believed to have been given to an activist and contains mostly excerpts from different media reports. It lists the contact info and name of Obama's South Carolina press secretary, Amaya Smith, and is broken down into five incidents in which either Clinton, her husband Bill, or campaign surrogates made comments that could be interpreted as racially insensitive.

The document provides an indication that, in private, the Obama campaign is seeking to capitalize on the view - and push the narrative - that the Clintons are using race-related issues for political leverage. In public, the Obama campaign has denied that they are trying to propagate such a perception, noting that the document never was sent to the press...."

For the full report, written by Ben Stein on January 12 of this year:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/12/obama-camps-memo-on-clin_n_81205.html

Okay, this appeared the day after the HuffPo report:

COLUMBIA, S.C., Jan. 13 -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton defended her recent remarks on civil rights Sunday, as Sen. Barack Obama weighed in on the controversy for the first time, describing Clinton's earlier comments about the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. as "unfortunate" and "ill-advised."

Obama had previously tried to sidestep direct engagement in the debate over race. But the recent controversy has touched a nerve with many African Americans, including some sympathetic to the Clintons, and Obama chose to address it Sunday.

The primary source of the debate is a comment Monday from the New York Democrat: "Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act," she said, adding that "it took a president to get it done." Critics read that as playing down King's importance in the civil rights movement. Clinton said Sunday that the Obama campaign was "deliberately distorting this."

Asked whether he had taken offense to Clinton's remarks, the Illinois Democrat said he had not been the one to raise the subject.

"Senator Clinton made an unfortunate remark, an ill-advised remark, about King and Lyndon Johnson. I didn't make the statement," Obama said in a conference call with reporters. "I haven't remarked on it. And she, I think, offended some folks who felt that somehow diminished King's role in bringing about the Civil Rights Act. She is free to explain that. But the notion that somehow this is our doing is ludicrous."

....Clinton defended her remark about King, made the day before the New Hampshire primary, in a sometimes contentious appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday morning. She said she was responding to a speech Obama made comparing himself to both John F. Kennedy and to King, and she elaborated on her view of King's role as a change agent.

"Dr. King had been on the front lines. He had been leading a movement," Clinton said. "But Dr. King understood, which is why he made it very clear, that there has to be a coming to terms of our country politically in order to make the changes that would last for generations beyond the iconic, extraordinary speeches that he gave. That's why he campaigned for Lyndon Johnson in 1964. That's why he was there when those great pieces of legislation were passed. Does he deserve the lion's share of the credit for moving our country and moving our political process? Yes, he does. But he also had partners who were in the political system...."

Here, Obama makes no attempt to disabuse anyone of the notion that Clinton's remarks were offensive, nor does he admit that his campaign may well have fanned the whole controversy. All he offers is: I didn't start this.

The question that no one asks is: what, exactly, did Hillary Clinton stand to gain by offering remarks which could have been interpreted as being offensive to black American voters? The answer, of course, is: absolutely nothing.

"I don't believe the Clintons are racists. However I and I bet a whole lotta people do believe that the Clintons were willing to be dismissive and disrespectful to black people if they thought it would help win primaries."

How in the hell would this have helped Hillary Clinton win black votes in the primaries? Do you really believe the Clintons, long known for progressive views on race, hatched a plan to conquer Obama by writing off 13 percent of the American population? Not even Dan Quayle could be that stupid.

You are hereby forbidden to use the surname Clinton and the adjective Rovian in the same sentence. This is simply a means of pushing a really shabby argument. Not only shabby, but entirely unconvincing. Are we to believe that the Clintons are racial poseurs who chose the occasion of the 2008 primaries to finally show their true colors, in the process negating their entire histories in the public life? Are we to further believe that the Clintons coincidentally became politically tone deaf in service of their newborwn wedge issue? Sorry, this is patently absurd. Not only that, but very depressing.

And you are forbidden to use the phrase "steal the nomination" in conjunction with any permutation of "Hillary" and "Clinton". This business is about her "stealing" anything is so much utter nonsense.

Your argument here is more than a bit confused, as Hillary Clinton did not write off the black vote, the black vote largely wrote her off, with a mighty shove from the Obama campaign and the MSM's venal meddling. At this point, would you have her concentrate the greater part of her efforts and resources on trying to obtain votes she sadly cannot get? Is facing the futility of doing so now to be interpreted as calculation and cynicism? Is there anything Hillary Clinton does which is not interpreted by the Obama camp as cynical and calculating?