I'm with Althouse on Hillary's "as far as I know" answer on the Obama/Muslim canard. It seems like mere reflexive politico-legal ass-covering on her part, not innuendo-spreading. If you're Hillary, you have to have learned not to make sweeping declarations of fact about things you can't really know—e.g., "Obama is not a Muslim"—without adding a caveat. Her sin, if any, was not realizing that this instance was an exception to the normal rule —an occasion where she'd be expected to make a sweeping declaration of fact about something she couldn't really know.She might also be remembering the 1990's, where she held press conferences affirming that her husband wasn't cheating on her. But here's my point—why on earth is it Hillary who's being asked tough questions about Obama's Muslim past? Shouldn't they be asking these tough questions of Obama, who knows the answer?
Furthermore, the press could be asking Obama to "distance himself" from Islam, to condemn the Prophet, or ask him to condemn the worldwide Muslim crime wave. That's just what the SPLC does when it asks Southern politicians to "distance themselves" from what they call hate groups, or what Salon Magazine did, when they asked Tom Tancredo to condemn us. (He declined.)