The Clinton camp is saying the senator will not release her tax returns until after she wins the nomination.

Why the delay? What is in those tax returns that she doesn't want Democratic voters seeing? Perhaps she thinks Dem voters might be a bit more concerned about her financial dealings than voters in the general election.

Here's how Obama's people are responding:

"Why should Democratic voters have to wait until after the primary campaign is over to find out important information about Senator Clinton's finances that Senator Obama has already disclosed?" asked Obama spokesman Bill Burton. "For someone who claims to be fully vetted, hiding a campaign loan from voters until after Super Tuesday and refusing to release your tax returns until after the primary doesn't seem like the best way to prove that there are no surprises for the Republicans to find once they start digging."

Clinton keep bringing up the line about how she is "fully vetted," but obviously there is something she is hiding. What hasn't been vetted is all the business dealings Bill has been involved in since leaving office. Sorry Hillary, you made "vetting" a campaign issue, so now you better put up or shut up.

ABC News blog is saying that senior Clinton staffers are voluntarily working without pay this month to keep her campaign afloat. And this is after she loaned her campaign $5 million.

Meanwhile, Obama is raising big money for his run for the nomination.

I think this shows how desperate the Clinton campaign is right now. It's not news when some rich candidate like Mitt Romney loans his campaign money, but the Clintons do not have that kind of cash lying around. $5 million is a big chunk of change for them to put out. And if staffers are having to forgo paychecks, that shows that what was once perceived as the best campaign machine of this cycle is running out of gas.

This comes at a bad time for Hillary. She is skipping the caucuses this weekend (Nebraska, Louisiana, Washington and Maine), which shows she doesn't think she will do well in them. And the Potomac Primary next Tuesday -- with Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia -- are heavy on black voters and look like an Obama sweep. That's an awful lot of momentum at a time when the stories coming out of the Clinton campaign are about money troubles.

What is the Clinton campaign paying Paul Krugman?

Seriously, Krugman is wound up so tight on this issue that he's basically forgetting everything else. How many times will we have to read him pick apart Obama's health care plan?

Hey, maybe he should take a look back in history to Franklin Roosevelt, who campaigned on the issue of balancing the budget. According to Krugman's logic, we should have all voted for Al Smith.

You can't tell how a candidate will do as president by looking at issues and policy promises. Issues change, policies are revamped and rewritten in Congress. What counts is character.

In that regard, when it was politically beneficial to champion war in Iraq, and possible war with Iran, Hillary jumped on the Bush bandwagon, while Obama did what he believed was right. Obama marched in immigration protests, not calculating what would be good for him politically, while Hillary stayed away.

My problem with Hillary is that she wants to be president for herself. She, like Bill, will make whatever deal with the devil to satisfy their ambition. That doesn't seem to be the case with Obama.

Professor Krugman wants to boil this all down to a policy debate, forgetting that you have to become president and persuade Congress before you can set policy.

CNN poll now has Obama in the lead by three points. He has the momentum and is gaining ground. But since there are a lot of voters in these states who cast their ballots already before the Obama surge, could that sway the vote to Clinton?

Out come the claws:

Hillary Rodham Clinton opened a five-day campaign to target what her aides call Barack Obama’s inexperience, delivering sharper attacks against the Iowa winner that are likely to become more personal and negative, according to Democrats familiar with the evolving strategy.

I think this may backfire on Hillary. All Obama has to do is to brush off these attacks as part of the same old politics he is trying to change. Also, Romney went negative in Iowa, and it seemed the more he did, the worse he did.

But Hillary doesn't have much choice here. If she doesn't attack, Obama wins. It will be interesting to watch just how much Hillary cares about her personal future over that of the Democrats.

Frank Rich lays out why the "Clinton is inevitable" narrative is wrong. He makes a great case for why Barack Obama may not only beat her, but gives the GOP a much bigger fight:

The unspoken truth is that the Clinton machine is not being battle-tested at all by the Democratic primary process. When Mrs. Clinton accused John Edwards of “throwing mud” and “personally” attacking her in a sharp policy exchange in one debate, the press didn’t challenge the absurd hyperbole of her claim. In reality, neither Mr. Edwards nor any other Democratic competitor will ever hit her with the real, personal mud being stockpiled by the right. But if she’s getting a bye now, she will not from the Republican standard-bearer, whoever he may be. Clinton-bashing is the last shared article of faith (and last area of indisputable G.O.P. competence) that could yet unite the fractured and dispirited conservative electorate.

Looks like Hillary Clinton has picked up some bad habits from the current president. This planted questions scandal feeds into the right-wing hysteria about the Clintons.

Hillary has the best campaign organization, and knows that the nomination is hers as long as she doesn't make a mistake. But just like a football team playing prevent defense, sometimes it prevents you from winning. They are so focused on not making mistakes that they make big mistakes like this.