The embarrassment that is the Democratic race for the presidency is just getting worse.

This morning on NBC’s Meet the Press, Senior Clinton Advisor Harold Ickes, who is also a member of the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee was questioned by Tim Russert about Hillary Clinton’s change of heart over counting Michigan’s primary results.

First, Russert read Clinton’s comments from October 11, 2007, aired on New Hampshire Public Radio’s The Exchange:

“You know, it’s clear, this election they’re having [in Michigan] is not going to count for anything.”

Russert then said, “That’s what she said back then, and now, suddenly, when you need the delegates in order to catch up to Obama, everything should be counted.”

Ickes then made this outrageous statement:

“Well, you know, I guess the simple response to that, Tim, is one, circumstances do change, but Senator Obama took his name off the ballot, but he was eager to get all 55 uncommitted yesterday. Took ‘em. Willingly. Argued for them, took ‘em, and, in fact, reached over and grabbed another four from Hillary. So here’s a man who took his name off the ballot, and said, ‘Give me the delegates, and give me four others from my opponent.’”

I think the Clinton campaign is loosing its collective mind.

Circumstances do change? Sure do, Mr. Ickes. We call that “flip-flopping.”

Barack Obama took his name off the ballot? Yes he did. And Hillary kept hers on, she said, only to avoid offending the voters. But she said it wouldn’t count. If Obama’s effort to remove his name should be, in Hillary’s view, acceptance that he was going to get zero delegates out of Michigan, her statement on NPR should be regarded as her acceptance of the same condition. By that logic, neither candidate is entitled to a single delegate out of Michigan.

As such, she ought to feel damn lucky to lose only four.

Hillary, clearly, wants to receive her share, and keep Obama from receiving any. How, Hillary, is that a case of making sure every vote is heard?

Russert then questioned Ickes on a new campaign ad that begins with this statement:

“Seventeen million Americans have voted for Hillary Clinton, more than for any other primary candidate in history.”

Ickes justified the number by claiming that it was based on AP projections and included Michigan, where Barack Obama’s name wasn’t included on the ballot to begin with. Not counting Michigan, Obama has more popular votes. Guess that’s why Clinton’s camp is so unapologetic about counting it, although I seriously wonder how they can feel like they’re being either completely honest or fair about it.

I don’t know about you, but I sure wouldn’t buy a car from any of those people.