NY Times moves the goalposts for Hillary

In an article posted Sunday to the front page of its website, The New York Times uses this article about calls for Senator Clinton to leave the race as an opportunity to move the goalposts once again for Hillary:

Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont hold primary contests [on Tuesday], and the Clinton campaign, trailing in the delegates needed for nomination and having lost the last 11 straight contests, has acknowledged that the New York senator needs to win at least Ohio or Texas [emphasis mine]. Both candidates were campaigning Sunday in Ohio.

She only needs to win Ohio or Texas? Funny, that's not what the Times' own Caucus blog reported former President Bill Clinton as saying just a couple of weeks ago on February 21st:

Bill Clinton: Texas and Ohio or Bust

While Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign has been signaling how critical the Texas and Ohio primaries are, Bill Clinton took that a step further, suggesting during a campaign stop in Texas that the two states are must wins.

"You probably like it that it has come down to Texas," he said while campaigning for Mrs. Clinton on Wednesday in Beaumont, Tex. "If she wins Texas and Ohio, I think she will be the nominee. If you don’t deliver for her then I don’t think she can be. It’s all on you."

But far be it from me to suggest that the Times' reporters read their own blogs.

The Times then goes on to quote Senator Dianne Feinstein and, yep, Karl Rove, chastising the Obama campaign for premature calls for Clinton to withdraw. The article also ends with a completely unsourced claim from "some political analysts" that Clinton is re-gaining momentum:

And some political analysts said that Mrs. Clinton — who has clearly sharpened her attacks on Obama, even as he has been outspending her — appeared to have made some headway in recent days in raising doubts about his experience and readiness to be commander in chief.

On one brighter note for the Obama campaign, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson (a former Clinton cabinet member) is sounding more and more like an Obama surrogate:

Mr. Richardson, saying that it was vital to Democrats’ hopes in the general election in November to mount a positive, unifying campaign, said on the CBS News program "Face the Nation" that "whoever has the most delegates after Tuesday, a clear lead, should be, in my judgment, the nominee."

For that to be Mrs. Clinton, she would have to significantly exceed the results predicted by polls, which now show Texas a virtual toss-up, while Ohio voters narrowly favor her. In the smaller states, Mrs. Clinton holds a lead in Rhode Island while Mr. Obama has the edge in Vermont.