No one is "believing" the Drudge report. Per today's Washington Post (which was the source of the quote in my previous letter): "[Clinton campaign manager] Williams statement did not deny that Clinton's team sent [Drudge] the picture, although communications director Howard Wolfson said later in the day that he had 'no knowledge' of [campaign's involvement] in distributing [the photo]." "No knowledge" is NOT the equivalent of "no involvement" more like "I don't want to know." So it is not a matter of "believing" the Drudge report - the photo is available for all to see and not just on the Drudge site, Clinton has not denied that her campaign is responsible for publishing the photo and without such a denial we are all free to draw our own conclusions about the meaning of the photo's publication. The Drudge report has nothing to do with that.

Maybe I am dense but I do not understand Rose Hann's reasoning that leads her to conclude that the Obama campaign circulated the Somali dress photo. How does he benefit? Gives him the opportunity to smear Clinton as anti-Muslim? And this helps him...how? Seems to me that 1) there are many voters who would find Clinton's alleged anti-Muslim sentiments a plus (hey, just read many of the posters on this thread who believe or insinuate that Obama is a Muslim) and 2) "pictures say a thousand words" - most people will see the photo and will not dig any further into the meaning, origins, and purpose of circulating it - no, they'll take it at face value and if they're coming from an anti-Muslim P.O.V. all they will see is Obama in Muslim garb. So, Obama has more to lose and Clinton more to gain from the publishing of this photo.

If those of you who claim that the Clinton campaign has denied having any responsibility for the Obama photo please provide a citation for your source. A Monday War Room Post states that they have NOT issued a denial.

Especially, if she is willing to use such Rovian dirty tricks to stir up anti-Muslim sentiment to hurt Obama in the upcoming primaries. But her use of this dirty tactic has far greater significance than what will happenin next Tuesdays' primaries. Hillary is so desperate to win that she is willing to capitalize on the "Obama is a Muslim" rumours. This tactic may (hopefully it won't) work in her favor next week - but it does not bode well for her Presidency. She touts her "foreign policy experience" as one reason we should vote for her - well, obvously, that experience has taught her nothing. The next President absolutley must begin repairing relations with the rest of the world. Exactly how stirring up anti-Muslim emotions in the election campaign helps is beyond me.

If the photo in question were of Obama in the traditional dress of Laplanders, yes, it would undoubtedly be a silly, harmless photo. If we lived in a world at peace, yes, this would be a silly, harmless photo. If the intent had been to publish a silly but benign photo of Obama I am sure that there are many to be found. If you have been living in a shoebox for the past 10 or so years maybe you'll only see a silly picture. But if you have been paying attention to the world you can't miss the message here - Obama is wearing Muslim dress, Obama is a Muslim, Muslim are our enemies, Obama is our enemy. This is serious and the Clinton campaign should recognize it as such. At the very least, they should acknowledge and condemn the message intended by the circulation of the photo. They should issue a clear and unequivocal statement that none of the major decision makers in the campaign had anything to do with the photo. Reasonable people will understand that in a national campaign organization it is not realistic to expect 100% control over all staff/volunteers. Until that happens it is not unreasonable to be suspicious of Clinton. If you think this is just a tempest in a teapot than you've got your head in the sand.