Has the Washington Post exposed a smear, or simply repeated one?

It's a little hard to tell whether this piece was intended as a hit. Read it for yourself: "Foes Use Obama's Muslim Ties to Fuel Rumors About Him."

What Muslim ties?

An early rumor about Obama's faith came from Insight, a conservative online magazine. The Insight article said Obama had "spent at least four years in a so-called madrassa, or Muslim seminary, in Indonesia." It attributed this detail to background information the Clinton campaign had been collecting.

After Obama denied the rumor, Jeffrey Kuhner, Insight's editor, said Obama's "concealment and deception was to be the issue, not so much his Muslim heritage," and he suggested that the source of the madrassa rumor was the Clinton campaign. The Clinton campaign denied the charge.

What "concealment and deception"? What "Muslim heritage"?

Alas, the WP never clarifies that the school was not a madrassa -- just an ordinary school in Indonesia that he attended between ages six and ten. Obama claims to be a Christian and no-one has ever presented any evidence that he is lying.

Here's the part the WP left out:

"It's not (an) Islamic school. It's general," Winadijanto [an Obama classmate] said. "There is a lot of Christians, Buddhists, also Confucian. ... So that's a mixed school."

Was Muslim extremism common in Indonesia in 1969-71? The country was run by Suharto, who was a Washington tool.

As for those spreading the smear: I doubt that they are Christians, judging from the contempt they've shown for the commandment against false witness.