...her campaign did leak that photo, notwithstanding their limp-wristed 'to the best of our knowledge' denials. Obama has said he believes Hillary that she didn't know about the leak, implausible as that is, not that he believes the Clinton campaigns non-denial denials. These are different things.

It bears pointing out that neither any member of the Clinton campaign nor the Senator herself have ever categorically stated that no person in the campaign leaked the photo to the Drudge Report (in fact, the campaign manager even went so far as to defend the tactic, 'photos in traditional garb are not devisive'). After all, as they say, 'it's a 700 some odd person organization so we can't say for sure', blah blah. So you'd have to question his intelligence if he didn't believe it was her campaign, which he clearly does believe. Not that she knew anything about it *wink* *wink*

Saying that "the campaign leaked the photo" is different than saying "Hillary Clinton leaked the photo." It's possible Obama is aware of new information related to how Drudge got the photo that the rest of us aren't privy to. Others have pointed out that it's an Associated Press photo that any media agency could have gotten ahold of, and some did. But the Drudge Report specifically based the story on the leak and comments of the Clinton staffers, which makes it far more "newsworthy" (whatever that word means for Drudge), so those points are fairly moot. The Clinton campaign, for its part, has not offered any follow-up information to the public regarding whether they've determined that their staff was involved in sending the photos out.

Also, Susan Wood wrote in a post in these comments that people have been "way to quick to assume that Drudge is telling the truth. Does he have a history of doing so? Does he have a history of cooperating with Democrats, especially those named Clinton?"

The answer to your last two questions is yes, and yes. Here is a New York Times article from Oct. 21, 2007 that details the connections established between Drudge and Clinton:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/22/us/politics/22drudge.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=drudge+clinton&st=nyt&oref=slogin

This article documents at least one story in which Drudge made a headline out of information directly funneled to him by the Clinton campaign. He did it on another memorable occasion in which Drudge reported that the Clinton campaign was sitting on something scandalous about Obama but had decided not to reveal it. At that point, Obama challenged Clinton to repudiate the claim, and instead of blasting Drudge for the false story, Clinton turned around and called Obama naive for falling for a right-wing attack. The revelation that Clinton was in contact with Drudge at the time, along with Clinton's lack of denial, made it seem to me that Clinton was playing a rather cheap game against Obama. I was not an Obama supporter at the time, but the tactic definitely made me more sympathetic to him and less to Clinton.

All of this said, I think it's a good time for Obama to retire this particular gripe. The public memory tends to be short, and it has already largely faded on the leaked-photo issue. By mentioning it he gives media an opening to revive the story. I also think that Obama needs to continue to play up his strengths, making positive statements about the direction he wants to take the U.S. in. Perhaps Obama is doing that, and only the Clinton-related parts of his speech are making headlines? I am glad Obama is fighting back, but he should make sure that he makes headlines in positive ways too.

You have a point... I often find myself poring through AP photos that are over two years old and wondering why they aren't front page news... It's all completely innocent...

I mean, if Obama staffers just happened to be reminiscing over old AP photos from the 1990's and just happened to pick out a picture of Hillary Clinton kissing Soha Arafat and just happened to e-mail it around and it just happened to became a story on Drudge's site, there wouldn't be anything suspcious with it.

I'm soooo tired of Obama supporters implying without a shred of proof that there was anything nefarious involved! Those Obama people are just like Republicans! It makes me sick!

What about the "Harry and Louise" redux ads that Obama ran in Iowa? That move, however much it went without comment, struck me as just as cynical - or, even more, given that their Gingrich gamesmanship was crucial to torpedoing expanded healthcare - and absolutely a case of aping the worst of Repug tactics.

Whatever, they're fighting hard, and that's fine - to me, this is just Obama's version of crying plagiarism, and just as unimportant.

What's this, Obamas version of the flip-flops the lunatic GOPers wore on their lapels during their convention. Will Obama be creating Kitchen sink buttons for his supporters?

Personally if Obama mentions "kitchen sink" one more time, I will pray to all the Gods that they they throw all kitchen sinks ever created since the dawn of mankind onto Obamas head.

Before I was uneasy with Obama, now I am completely clear that Obama is in fact a liar and a hypocrite. "Leaking photos of me" is a lie and actually if Obama was not a liar, hypocrite, and coward he would challenge any negative perception of the photo. Clue to Obama campaign - there is nothing wrong with that photo. The people who see something wrong in that photo are what's wrong. What a pathetic set of ethics coming from a campaign allegedly based on ethics.

And here's another clue, it is important to know we are electing the person who does have to answer the phone when there is a crisis. Clinton at least has the confidence to come out and say, "I will answer that phone and handle it!" and instead Obama deflects. For Christs sake, Obamas two serious opponents in Illinois self-destructed, any imbecile could have won that race. And that was it, his biggest crisis in political life?

Real change my ass. New lows in being a politician more like it.