First Clinton attacks Obama over fund raising ethics, and now the woman who is rumored to have had a "secret pact of ambition" with her husband is slamming her opponent for apparently denying some deep-seated aspiration to occupy the Oval Office.

As I wrote back in early March when the Philadelphia Inqurier carried an interview with Obama's brother in law in which he revealed that Obama mentioned the idea of running for president at their first meeting back in 1991:

Part of Obama's appeal is that he appears refreshingly unambitious relative to his competition. Unlike Hillary, who seems to have spent every minute of the last ten years calculating each move with respect to its impact on her presidential ambitions, and unlike John Edwards, who has been running for President non-stop for the last five years, Obama has cultivated an image of being "the right man at the right moment." He's gone out of his way to make self deprecating remarks about his hyper popularity, and when discussing his thoughts about running for President he said more than once that "This is an office you can't run for just on the basis of ambition."

That's absolutely true. Personally, I think Obama made the right choice in running this year, even if it is a bit audacious. Still, it's a bit shocking to learn via his brother-in-law that Obama's audacious move seems to have been on his mind and in the works for a lot longer than most people thought.

Despite this fact, the subject of ambition is one that neither Clinton or Edwards can touch - for obvious reasons. Campaigns are all about finding the proper openings against your opponents and exploiting them, but the Clinton camp - perhaps in a sign of their growing concern over their inability to make anything stick to Obama - seems surprisingly tone-deaf in its choice of attacks.