There’s a new controversy surrounding Democratic nominee Barack Obama, and this one is actually quite significant. It tells us a lot about the friends he chooses and it shows us just how hypocritical he is. In short; he’s repeating the famous ‘it depends on the definition of is’-game.

This is what the controversy is all about:

ABC News’ Sunlen Miller today asked Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, how he could “rail against Countrywide Financial Corp as an example of insiders and today’s economy while your VP search is headed by someone who got questionable loans from Countrywide?” (This is an issue we wrote about earlier today.)

“And in addition,” Miller continued, “another person on that same VP search team – Eric Holder — has also been involved in the Marc Rich scandal.”

Why yes, one would certainly think so. Wouldn’t one? But not Barack Obama. After all, he has a lot of friends with, lets say, ethical problems.

So how does Obama defend his position? Easy, fight over the meaning of the words ‘work for’ (video below):

“Well, look,” Obama said, “the, the, I mean - first of all I am not vetting my VP search committee for their mortgages, so you’re gong to have to direct — ”

“But shouldn’t you?” asked Miller.

“Well, no,” Obama said. “It becomes sort of a, um, I mean, this is a game that can be played - everybody, you know, who is tangentially related to our campaign, I think, is going to have a whole host of relationships — I would have to hire the vetter to vet the vetters. I mean, at some point, you know, we just asked people to do their assignments.

“Jim Johnson has a very discrete task,” Obama continued, “as does Eric Holder, and that is simply to gather up information about potential vice presidential candidates. They are performing that job well, it’s a volunteer, unpaid position. And they are giving me information and I will then exercise judgment in terms of who I want to select as a vice presidential candidate.

“So this – you know, these aren’t folks who are working for me,” Obama said. “They’re not people you know who I have assigned to a job in a future administration and, you know, ultimately my assumption is that, you know, this is a discreet task that they’re going to performing for me over the next two months.”

Pardon me?”These aren’t folks who are working for me”? How in the world can you say this in all seriousness? You don’t pay them, that’s true, but they’re sure as heck doing some important work for you. They are vetting possible VP candidates.

The McCain campaign quickly responded to Obama’s blatant hypocrisy:

Sen. John McCain presidential campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds just pounced on this, saying “It’s preposterous for Senator Obama to claim that the leader of his VP selection committee isn’t working for him. Barack Obama has castigated Countrywide Financial, but now that Jim Johnson has been exposed for taking sweetheart deals from Countrywide’s CEO - Obama is in a state of denial. It’s that brand of weak leadership and hypocrisy that shows why Barack Obama has no record of taking courageous stands or making change in Washington.”

Ah, the new kind of politics: politics as usual, but then more hypocritical and more eloquent.

Ed Morrissey:

 And ultimately, my assumption is that this is a discrete task that they are going to be performing for me over the next two months.

Ultimately, our assumption is that you will hire people for “discrete tasks” in your administration in the same way you hire them for your campaign. Ultimately, we assume that when you complain about others with connections to subprime lenders and corruption that you will avoid those connections yourself. Otherwise, we assume you are a hypocrite who spouts off about “hope and change” as a way to distract people from the fact that you have no experience for the job you seek.

 Ben Smith:

The fact that his staff made similar tactical attacks on Clinton, on very similar issues (actually, nobody on in Clinton’s orbit was ever accused of getting a special deal from Countrywide) makes it harder for Obama to take cover on the high road here.

UPDATE: For instance, David Plouffe in March critized Clinton for taking contributions from Countrywide lobbyists.

‘If we’re really going to crack down on the practices that caused the credit and housing crises, we’re going to need a leader who doesn’t owe these industries any favors,” he said.

Michelle Malkin:

 The video– “uh, um, I mean”–speaks for itself, but go here for all the background

Here’s the video. It’s always remarkable to see just how uneloquent he is when confronted with an unexpected question.