All due respect, but I do know what I'm talking about.

Kos made the allegation that it was an overt action made as a racist act.  There's never been any proof of that, except in tin foil territory, and the explanation for the 'look' of the ad completely explained it.  His credibility was shot to hell with some of us because he jumped on the bandwagon to label the Clintons as racists.  

linked to:

In our experience posting videos to our Just the Facts feature, conversion to Flash format drives up contrast and reduces the mid-range color values that are frequently found in flesh tones and facial detail. We've noticed that Obama, and other candidates, appear drained of a bit of their color in some of our videos after they've been processed for posting.

Still, the Clinton ad makers may have darkened the Obama images intentionally, to some degree. When it comes to video editing, the possibilities are overwhelming. But that doesn't necessarily mean their motives were racist. We note that the entire ad is cast in dark tones and even Hillary Clinton herself appears in shadows, as though she were working late into the night.

The conclusion is that the entire image was darkened included his suit and tie, not just his skintone.  Therefore, they doubt it was intentional.  Not debunked as to facts but somewhat debunked as to motive.

Oh I agree!

My point is only that unless you know that, all you're going to see is that they made him darker, and that's going to set off a lot of alarm bells.  You can't expect the average person to have experience in photography or film.  The whole thing was hardly the credibility blowing bit of character assassination that empsrater is making it out to be.

And all the why's and wherefores were worked out on Daily Kos itself, and at the end the Kos community debunked it.  That's how it's supposed to work.

Actually, that would be an inference, not a fact.  

You may wish to assume that the people responsible for the ad did not intentionally make him look darker.  However, even a reasonable explanation as to how it could have unintentionally happen doesn't prove it was, in fact, unintentional.

Yeah. What's got people pissed at Kos is that the Kossacks continued to paint this as a "the Clintons are racists!" issue even when their own bloggers explained what was really going on.

I mean, I suppose as a rallying cry "the Clintons use ordinary political ad tactics!" isn't nearly as energizing. But it does happen to be true, unlike the other one.

I'm extremely skeptical it was an innocent alteration.  You would think even midling media people pay attention to the color and contrast in their ads.  As factcheck itself points out, however, there is a plausible, non-race, based reason to darken the picture.

Larry was a great blogger, and provided some really good, factual work during the time that a lot of those opposed to Hillary (note, not those in support of Obama, just those opposed to Hillary , aka the Hillary haters) worked tirelessly on sites like the orange place to slime and denigrate the Wilsons simply because they were in support of Hillary.

Those folks didn't deserve the time of day, but lots of folks were worked up against the Wilsons, and climbed on the bandwagon to dismiss anything they had to contribute.

That was wrong.

I've never been to NoQuarter, don't plan on going there.  I'd sooner go back to dKos, but that will happen when McCain finds the fountain of youth.

Taking concern trolling to a whole new level.

So you agree it's strange kos does not link to a source. You agree it's strange this is not on the official Obama rumor site.

Wow... This walks the line of Snark and Crazy... Nicely done.