James Clyburn's latest attempt to inject race into the Democratic nomination process was truly strange. The subtext of his comments were unmistakable -- that there is somehow a racial component to Hillary Clinton's mere presence on the campaign trail.

Clyburn told the newspaper that many African-Americans believed the Clintons were trying to damage Obama to the point where he could not be elected. He also made similar comments in an interview with Reuters Thursday.

"There are African Americans who have reached the decision that the Clintons know that she can't win this," he told Reuters. "But they're hell-bound to make it impossible for Obama to win."

I hope Nova M Radio is happy with their new talk show host, the Left's own Rush Limbaugh. Randi Rhodes is a disgrace and an embarrassment to Democrats, and I can't imagine why any organization (political campaign or business) would want to be associated with her hate-filled rhetoric.

In the first five minutes of her show today, Randi let this one go:

"The Clinton campaign describes Hillary's voters as older, white, and undereducated. Or as we called them in my neighborhood: white trash."

"Family Values" is one of those political phrases that can't ever really be divorced from its earlier context and meaning. I'm sure that any one who lived through the 90's can't hear the phrase without remembering it as a Republican battle-cry used against the Clintons and the Democratic Party. It was a rhetorical weapon that signified opposition to liberal values such as gender equality and abortion rights. And it was used to attack the Clintons during the Ken Starr investigation and impeachment.

So why would Michelle Obama refer to "family values" tonight on Colbert?

The photo of Bill Clinton shaking hands with Reverend Jeremiah Wright first appeared today on the the blog of an anonymous member of Trinity United Church of Christ. The blog was launched yesterday and the photo was posted this afternoon, several hours prior to its appearance in mainstream media reports. However, the New York Times article about the photo doesn't credit The Truth About Trinity United Church of Christ blog. According to the Times, the photo was "provided today by the Obama campaign."

I've got some questions:

Who had the photo first? The Obama campaign or the Trinity blogger? And if the Obama campaign discovered the photo on the Trinity blog, why would they have inserted themselves into the story by leaking it directly to the NYT when it had already begun spreading across the web?

I've been listening to Randi Rhodes on Air America for a long time.  Her show is entertaining and Randi has usually had a solid command of the facts -- she likes to brag about how well-informed she is, and until recently that was reflected in her rhetoric. Which is why I have no choice now but to conclude that over the last several weeks she has been intentionally misleading her listeners with a barrage of lies and absurd speculation.

Randi finally admitted last Friday that she's supporting Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination, something that had become obvious recently to even casual listeners, despite her frequent claims of neutrality. That's fine. It's her show and her perogative to support a candidate. But it's not okay for her to lie and mislead her listeners in order to bring down a Democratic candidate. Randi Rhodes is damaging her own reputation and damaging Air America.

Over the past several weeks, reports have surfaced that the Republican National Committee is commissioning "top-secret polling and focus groups" to develop "new code words" that will allow them to attack Obama and Clinton without being accused or racism or sexism.

Last night on Larry King Live, Kellyanne Conway, a top Republican pollster who is likely at the center of this effort, apparently decided to roll out some those new code words, stating that Clinton and Obama are arguing about

...whether she should let him sit on the back of the bus of her presidential ticket, or he argues whether or not she lied us into war in 2002.

For the same reason Hillary Clinton hasn't. Neither candidate is going to abandon a viable path to the nomination that takes advantage of agreed-upon rules built into the process.

Despite demands by Obama supporters that Super Delegates commit to backing the candidate who represents the "will of the voters" or has "popular support from Democratic primary voters and caucus goers," Senator Obama has a more nuanced position. And I don't blame him.

Mitt Romney says the war is over...and we won!

Oh yeah, I remember now: George Bush. Aircraft carrier. Mission Accomplished. Apparently, the Great White Varmint Hunter is still eager to hitch his tugboat to Commander Codpiece.

Lashing out at Harry Reid for stating that the war is lost, Romney explained that understanding victory and defeat in Iraq is all about language and definitions. Sounds like somebody's been brainwashed by Karl Rove. Like father like son, I guess.

You see, we won the war, so Harry Reid is undermining the troops by suggesting otherwise. But it's okay for Mitt to say that the "jury is out" on the occupation rebuilding of Iraq.

Funny, though, why would Mitt bristle when asked if he's encouraged his five sons to enlist in the Global Battle Against Islamic Jihad?

Below the fold: Tbogg calls out Romney for wanting other people's kids to serve as sitting ducks in Iraq.