Captain's Quarters -

The surprise endorsement of Hillary Clinton last week by two prominent African-American politicians in South Caroline raised eyebrows for one's statement that a black nominee would doom the Democratic ticket across the nation. Robert Ford's odd diatribe might have been the lighter part of the story. Earlier today, the AP challenged Hillary to explain a $10,000-per-month consulting contract with Darrell Jackson, the other state legislator who eschewed Barack Obama to endorse Hillary:

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton on Monday denied that her campaign traded money for an endorsement from one of South Carolina's most influential black politicians.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Clinton responded to questions about the consulting contract her campaign negotiated with state Sen. Darrell Jackson, who last week endorsed her candidacy rather than of top rivals John Edwards or Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.

"Senator Jackson was someone who was involved in my husband's campaigns. He was someone we turned to for political advice and counsel and I'm proud to have him on my team," Clinton told the AP.

Soon after the endorsement, Jackson acknowledged that his media consulting firm had negotiated a $10,000 per month contract with Clinton's campaign. Jackson has said he turned down more lucrative contracts from other candidates.

This comes courtesy of the political party that ran on a platform of reform and "draining the swamp". Now it appears that the Democratic frontrunner has positioned herself as chief alligator. The green certainly has flown around the campaign trail, if this is any indication.

Two people have to answer for this arrangement. First, Darrell Jackson has to explain to his constituents why he literally sold out to the Clintons, rather than stick with John Edwards or considered Barack Obama. Considering the shocking statement of his partner in the endorsement -- Ford had also said that he would not "kill himself" by endorsing Obama -- the consultancy gives a ready explanation why Jackson so blithely followed suit.

More importantly, Hillary has to explain this better than the fact that Jackson had been involved in Bill's presidential campaign in 1992 or 1996. It doesn't take a $10,000 per month consultancy to advise Hillary on political matters in South Carolina or to conduct outreach. It looks and smells like a payoff, and given the history of the Clintons in politics, it smells particularly bad.

The immediate question should be this: how many other paid consultants are higher-profile politicians who have endorsed Hillary? How many other politicans has Hillary bought in this stage of the primaries? And perhaps the Democratic Party can explain to us once again how they represent clean government and political reform -- because from the grandstands, it looks like Democrats have put themselves up for the highest bidder, and that they're willing to bid rather high themselves.