The Politico website this morning featured a story about a 1996 questionnaire filled out by Obama's campaign in a state senate race that reflected some un-nuanced liberal stances.
It certainly seemed like the product of opposition research by someone instead of a lucky find by a reporter on a fishing expedition at a library in Springfield, Ill., and the story was actually pretty candid, noting that the questionnaire was provided "with assistance from political sources opposed to Obama’s presidential campaign."
Who could that be?
This afternoon, the Clinton campaign raises questions about Obama's electability in a conference call. A Clinton supporter on the call references that Politico story that, coincidentally, just popped up about Obama's past liberal views. And the Clinton campaign pushes out a press release that says Obama is suddenly "on the defensive about his electability," partly because of that "revealing new report" on the questionnaire.
So would we be jumping to conclusions if we suspected that the "political sources" that were so helpful in bringing the questionnaire to light were affiliated with.....????
Add: On substance, Obama contests the thrust of the story here.