SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home End of the Affair

POLITICS JULY 24, 2008

End of the Affair

BY AUTHOR INFO NEEDED

Around midnight on July 16, New York Times chief political correspondent Adam Nagourney received a terse e-mail from Barack Obama’s press office. The campaign was irked by the Times’ latest poll and Nagourney and Megan Thee’s accompanying front-page piece titled “Poll Finds Obama Isn’t Closing Divide on Race,” which was running in the morning’s paper. Nagourney answered the query, the substance of which he says was minor, and went to bed, thinking the matter resolved.



But, the next morning, Nagourney awoke to an e-mail from Talking Points Memo writer Greg Sargent asking him to comment on an eight-point rebuttal trashing his piece that the Obama campaign had released to reporters and bloggers like The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder and Politico’s Ben Smith. Nagourney had not heard the complaints from the Obama camp and had no idea they were so steamed. “I’m looking at this thing, and I’m like, ‘What the hell is this?’ ” Nagourney recently recalled. “I really flipped out.”



Later that afternoon, Nagourney got permission from Times editors to e-mail Sargent a response to the Obama memo. But the episode still grates. “I’ve never had an experience like this, with this campaign or others,” Nagourney tells me. “I thought they crossed the line. If you have a problem with a story I write, call me first. I’m a big boy. I can handle it. But they never called. They attacked me like I’m a political opponent.”



So much for “Obama Love.” That’s the title of John McCain’s new web ad, which strings together clips of cable news pundits gushing over Obama like besotted teens. This romance has been a prominent story line of Obama’s entire campaign, and clearly elements of it are true: “I felt this thrill going up my leg,” Chris Matthews crows in one clip flagged in the ad. But scratch the surface, and you’ll find a lot of mixed feelings behind the Obama “love.” Reporters are grumbling more and more that the campaign is acting like the Prom Queen. They gripe that it is “arrogant” and “control[ling],” and the campaign’s own belief that Obama is poised to make history isn’t endearing, either. The press certainly helped Obama get so far so fast; the question is, how far can he get if his campaign alienates them?


 



Last year, when Hillary Clinton campaigned as a front-runner, Obama provided access to the press corps and won over the media. One night, during a campaign stop in Iowa, he met reporters for off-the-record drinks. He cooperated for magazine profiles and appeared on the cover of GQ. And Clinton’s relationship with the press wasn’t half as easy. “The difference is the Clinton people were hostile for no reason,” a reporter who has covered both Democrats tells me.



But, as Obama ascended from underdog to front-runner to presumptive nominee, the flame seems to have dwindled. Reporters who cover Obama these days grouse that Obama’s flacks shroud the campaign in secrecy and provide little to no access. “They’re more disciplined than the Bush people,” a reporter on the Obama trail gripes. “There was this idea of being transparent, but they’re not. They’re total tightwads with information.”



In June, there was something of a revolt after Obama ditched the press corps on his campaign plane for a secret meeting with Clinton at Senator Dianne Feinstein’s house in Washington, leaving the reporters trapped on the flight to Chicago. The D.C. bureau chiefs of half a dozen news organizations, including the late Tim Russert, sent an angry letter to Obama aides Robert Gibbs and David Plouffe and threatened not to reimburse the campaign for the cost of the flight. “The decision to mislead reporters is a troubling one,” they wrote. “We hope this does not presage a relationship with the Obama campaign that is not based on a mutual respect for the truth.” After the incident, the press corps decided that one pool reporter would keep Obama in sight at all times. “It’s a body watch,” one reporter jokes.



Meanwhile, there have been widespread complaints over the shortage of spots to accompany Obama on his tour of the Middle East and Europe. A few days before the tour departed, Time magazine was told it couldn’t send a photographer along, and, on July 22, NBC foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell complained on-air that the only images the press had received of Obama meeting with the troops was released by the U.S. military. (To be fair, congressional delegations to Iraq are kept secret for security purposes). And there’s been widespread grumbling that the campaign revoked New Yorker writer Ryan Lizza’s spot on the trip as retribution for the magazine’s recent satirical cover. These may or may not be legitimate complaints--the evidence is mixed--but the press is hardly inclined to give the campaign the benefit of the doubt.



Obama’s press liaison, Robert Gibbs, has built a particularly large reservoir of ill will. David Mendell, who covered Obama’s Senate campaign for the Chicago Tribune and authored the 2007 Obama book From Promise to Power, wrote about Gibbs as “the anti-Obama” and described him as “Obama’s hired gun, skillfully trained to shoot at reporters whose coverage was deemed unfair. Mendell tells me, “if [Gibbs] feels you’re necessary to achieve a campaign goal, he will give you access and allow you in. But, if he feels you’re not going to be of help, he can just ignore you.” Mendell has his own specific gripe: Apparently, the Obama team was less than pleased with his biography, on which they cooperated, and Gibbs has since refused to help with the second edition.



One reporter sniffs that Gibbs, a native Alabaman and veteran of John Kerry’s 2004 campaign, is the “communications director who doesn’t communicate.” “If you’re getting an interview, and they say ten minutes, it’s ten minutes,” adds Time’s Karen Tumulty, who scored an interview with Obama in June. “Robert Gibbs will cut it off.”


 



Much of this is certainly the run-of-the-mill complaining of campaign reporters who can’t get enough access. Still, the campaign hasn’t helped itself, approaching reporters with a sense of entitlement. “They’re an arrogant operation. Young and arrogant,” one reporter covering the campaign says. “They don’t believe in transparency with their own campaign,” another says.



Reporters who have covered Obama’s biography or his problems with certain voter blocs have been challenged the most aggressively. “They’re terrified of people poking around Obama’s life,” one reporter says. “The whole Obama narrative is built around this narrative that Obama and David Axelrod built, and, like all stories, it’s not entirely true. So they have to be protective of the crown jewels.” Another reporter notes that, during the last year, Obama’s old friends and Harvard classmates were requested not to talk to the press without permission.



As tensions escalate, the risk to Obama, of course, is that reporters will be emboldened to challenge his campaign ever more aggressively. At the same time, McCain has demonstrated a longstanding ability to deftly manage the press. After all, it wasn’t long ago that McCain, short on cash and trailing in the Republican primaries, re-launched his campaign in New Hampshire by courting the press, “my base,” as he once proudly put it. In June, the McCain camp unveiled its redesigned campaign plane, a Boeing 737 that recreates the Straight Talk Express bus, so reporters can assemble with McCain and shoot the breeze.



Now, Obama may be handing McCain a shot at winning back his “base.” Of course, making ads that paint the media as Obama’s stooges may not be the best way to accomplish that. But the press wants to put its love somewhere, and, right now, that love is up for grabs.


Gabriel Sherman is a special correspondent for The New Republic.


Flip-flopper? Typical pol? Watch a slideshow of TNR’s Obama artwork and McCain artwork over the years.


Subscribe to The New Republic for only $29.97 a year--75% off cover price!

By Gabriel Sherman

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 385 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

385 comments

Good take on what is developing re. Obama & the image created by Axlerod. I would like to know a little more about Obama by those who REALLY know him. How can they tell classmates from Harvard not to speak to the press without permission. Does not sound plausible. I would like to see one take no prisoners not worried about future access real jounalist do a honest no hype expose on Obama. Not sure there is one out there. One word that surrounds the candidate and his handlers is arrogance. Well you know....those of us who have been around a while do not worry too much about arrogance because we know it will implode on itself. Only those who have no inner resources are taken in by arrogance disguised as substance. Keep cutting off access and they will go after him.

- John

July 24, 2008 at 6:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The press really comes off as a group of whiners (to paraphrase a recent gem). It seems they have to be constantly coddled and paid obeisance by candidates or they threaten the ultimate - negative stories. If I was in Obama's or his aides' shoes I'd be careful too. Every little word, gesture, turn of phrase is pounced on and pulled apart - usually looking for some negative light to cast. Bunch of crybabies...

- penndem

July 24, 2008 at 6:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

How 'bout the media reports news, and doesn't try to get laid by the candidates?

- The Frustrated Teacher

July 24, 2008 at 6:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If the press took greater care to keep their mission statement "Report The News" as opposed to "Create A Narrative," they wouldn't be kept at arm's length by candidates who have nothing to gain and a good deal to lose by granting them access to anything but endless repetitions of the narrative that the candidate wants created. Candidates who are trying to make up ground have no choice but to play with the dynamite that is unstructured press availability. Candidates who are far ahead in the polls quite properly choose to keep the "meddling kids" in the press away from their nuts and bolts. This often triggers a round of skeptical (read: spiteful) coverage which, combined with sympathy born of gratitude for the granting of increased access to the opposing candidate and his/her team, often grants that opposing campaign a second, third, fourth wind and makes a race that has no business being close into a nail-biter. Maybe members of the press should just check their egos at the door when it comes to presidential campaigns. It's not the campaigns' job to help them do theirs. The 2000 election should be all the evidence they need that personality-driven coverage leads to sub-optimal electoral outcomes.

- austinexpat

July 24, 2008 at 6:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Is the press finally experiencing attack mode politics that so many of us have been subject to for months? With Barrack Obama's Presidential seal in place, his transition team readying to go and his current global parade performing as US President (despite his words) the election is fast becoming a moot point. For those of us who thought we had the right to vote, we're seemingly delusional. For the press to finally ask tough questions and attempt hard reporting, how dare they. The Obama campaign has become a self proclaimed march on history, and now with the wind at their backs, we the people and press be damned. Is this Barrack Obama's first big change?

- Bekky

July 24, 2008 at 6:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

There is no journalistic ethics in any of the MSM and we all know it. I'm glad both campaigns are freezing you guys out. You all add nothing of substance to the debate and you ignore that which would. You are shills for your corporate bosses and your advertisers. You have no respect or admiration for the American people. And now we and our candidates hold all of you in equal distain. Learn how to do your jobs well and you can start earning our respect again. Stay the course you are on now and the Internet will bury you. I will line up to dance on the grave.

- artigiano

July 24, 2008 at 6:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Can you spell reverse discrimination Bunky? If this side show minstrel wins the election, white citizens are sunk and the urban transit infrastructures will come to a screeching halt.In case you haven't noticed our country has been infiltrated by hyphenated Americans who only care about themselves."Where my reparations at"? will be the mantra of the remaining decade. Thank goodness we still have the second amendment (for now anyway).

- Jay

July 24, 2008 at 7:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh please. Reporters are such hypocrites. They've spent the entire campaign on "gaffe-patrol", blowing up the inconsequential and (with a few exceptions) ignoring the pertinent and concerning issues facing our country, but still expect to get treated as sober, sane, rational reporters who write only the truth (with no opinion or hyperbole). After Ayers, Wright, OJ, bittergate, etc., can you really blame the Obama campaign?

- Steve Jones

July 24, 2008 at 7:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

i understand that you are a member of said press, and as such you're the authority on the subject of press access. But i think you've got it bad. it's not sheer volume of press coverage that guarantees that the press is tanking for someone, but rather, the "tilt" of the message. i hadn't heard any coverage of mccain's repeated foreign policy gaffes until they started complaining. maybe it's campaign malpractice from the obama folks, maybe it's just that folks in the media are afraid of covering the issue because it's thought to overlap significantly with his age. i have little willingness to pass judgment. but i'll stress that they didn't know how to react to the media not pulling for them for a week. i sure hope what you're saying it not true about his biography (not that i'm accusing you of slanderous reporting) because it would be disenchanting, and i sure hope that what you're saying about transparency isn't true, because then i'd have little reason to support him wholeheartedly, but at the very least i think you should acknowledge that the media is doing mccain a great favor by not covering him as scrupulously as obama (which forces them to be more aware of slipups, because, oh no, that would be inexperience while with mccain it's not really an issue until he throws you under the straight bus). One more thing. I haven't seen a lot of reporting on the collapse (or aggressive targeting, what have you) of the mccain message campaign, and its accusation that obama is treasonous for putting acceding to power instead of caring for his country. worse, i didn't hear any complaining about mccain canceling that presser yesterday when he decided not to confront all of these issues. but then, i guess i might not be getting the whole picture after all, because until mccain put out that video, i didn't know that the press was pulling for him, and that the press thinks that it's pulling for obama. if not, then an extra article might be warranted.

- lupercal

July 24, 2008 at 7:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I completely appreciate that any presidential candiate has to manage its relationship with the media and that in doing so it must stroke personal and professional egos. A crabby, whiny reporter whose mood was rendered because of a perceived lack of access or who feels he or she has been slighted personally probably doesn't give the candidate the benefit of the doubt. I think it is clear that such reactions are unprofessional, but that's human nature and Obama, like any other candidate, has to deal with it. What I don't get is why this article seems only to have been sourced (if sourced at all, and it barely is) from crabby whiny reporters who have an axe to grind. I also don't understand why generic claims are made from unnamed "reporters" without any specific factual instances to back them up. (e.g., ALL friends and classmates told not to talk to the press - any evidence here beyond the general allegation?) I also don't understand the factual basis for the alleged statement that Ryan L. of the New Yorker's credentials were "revoked" from the most recent trip. My understanding is that he was simply one of 160 of 200 applicants to simply not receive a position on the plane. The article hedges that this example, as well as the Andrea Mitchell complaint (which the article on its face admits is bogus), may not be legitimate. If so, why use it as the meat of the story? In other words, why, if the gist of the story is that Obama's not transparent enough, is this article so untransparent with its sources and facts?

- michael

July 24, 2008 at 7:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

i understand that you are a member of said press, and as such you're the authority on the subject of press access. But i think you've got it bad. it's not sheer volume of press coverage that guarantees that the press is tanking for someone, but rather, the "tilt" of the message. i hadn't heard any coverage of mccain's repeated foreign policy gaffes until they started complaining. maybe it's campaign malpractice from the obama folks, maybe it's just that folks in the media are afraid of covering the issue because it's thought to overlap significantly with his age. i have little willingness to pass judgment. but i'll stress that they didn't know how to react to the media not pulling for them for a week. i sure hope what you're saying it not true about his biography (not that i'm accusing you of slanderous reporting) because it would be disenchanting, and i sure hope that what you're saying about transparency isn't true, because then i'd have little reason to support him wholeheartedly, but at the very least i think you should acknowledge that the media is doing mccain a great favor by not covering him as scrupulously as obama (which forces them to be more aware of slipups, because, oh no, that would be inexperience while with mccain it's not really an issue until he throws you under the straight bus). One more thing. I haven't seen a lot of reporting on the collapse (or aggressive targeting, what have you) of the mccain message campaign, and its accusation that obama is treasonous for putting acceding to power instead of caring for his country. worse, i didn't hear any complaining about mccain canceling that presser yesterday when he decided not to confront all of these issues. but then, i guess i might not be getting the whole picture after all, because until mccain put out that video, i didn't know that the press was pulling for him, and that the press thinks that it's pulling for obama. if not, then an extra article might be warranted.

- lupercal

July 24, 2008 at 7:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Instead of just repeating and sticking up for that notorious hack Ad Nags, why not report that TIME's polling director, Jackson Dykman, agreed with the Obama campaign that the article was junk? So the story was that Ad Nags was not fairly treated but not about the substance of a bogus article? Here is what Dykman said about the article so there is no confusion.

I too was really struck by the NYT’s characterization of its own poll. I read the full poll first and then the story when they posted it last night. I’ve rarely seen a story so wildly off from the actual data on which it is based. Aside from point C in the Obama response (which is true and basically negates the story), the premise of the story is, well, utter nonsense. Are we really supposed to think that because a black man has become the Democratic nominee in recent weeks that he somehow should have cured (or markedly improved) race relations in this country? This is just a silly premise, yet the story thrust of the story seems to be shock and surprise that the mere fact of Obama’s candidacy hasn’t reversed—or obliterated—the slight increase in racial tensions in this country over the past 8 years. I can’t decide whether it’s the headline or the story that really creates the schism. The hed in the paper is: “Poll finds Obama candidacy isn’t closing country’s divisions on race.” Are you kidding me? The guy just wrapped up the nomination. Racial divisions in the U.S. have a wee bit of a 400-year head start on him. If Obama goes on to win the election, I really hope the Times does this poll again in four years. Whatever the result, THAT would be a story. I’m going to show my age here, but this reminds me a lot of some days I spent reporting in Chicago way back during the Harold Washington/Bernard Epton race for mayor. I did a bunch of man-on-the-street stuff in some white West Side neighborhoods. The most prevalent rumor at the time was that if Washington were elected, he would cut off electricity to white neighborhoods. People believed this. Thinking of that and reading this poll, I gotta think we have made progress. Two other points. In the poll data, 79% of white voters think an Obama administration would treat both whites and blacks the same. And 82% of white voters think a McCain administration would treat both races the same. Okay, fine. The real story in this question is this—90% of black voters think Obama would treat whites and blacks the same, but only 50% of black voters think McCain would treat both races the same. Yet Obama is the one who’s failing to close “the country’s divisions on race”? Finally, I looked it up again because I couldn’t believe it, but Point E in the Obama response is correct. Why on earth would the story say “there’s even racial dissension over Mr. Obama’s wife, Michelle: She was viewed favorably by 58% of black voters, compared with 24% of white voters.” The numbers for Cindy McCain: 20% favorable among white voters, 9% favorable among black voters (!!!) I've long made the argument that journalists care wildly more about candidates’ spouses than readers do, but someone needs to tell me why the racial dissension is “over Michelle Obama.”
Why not write an article about that?

- Brandon

July 24, 2008 at 7:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

So let me get this right. You have reporters giving anonymous quotes making scurrilous charges that Obama's story is "not true" and then have to nerve to complain about "transparency"? Tumulty at least shows that she is a pro and doesn't go anonymous, but if you get 10 minutes, why should you complain if the interview ends at 10 minutes? The most precious thing a candidate has is their time and it seems to me that the reporters need to respect that. Nagourney's complaint was ridiculous because his article was just a bunch of hackery. If I remember correctly, he said that Michelle Obama had a problem when she polled better than Cindy McCain. It's ridiculous. And why shouldn't a campaign cooperate more with reporters that are more favorable to them. Didn't the McCain campaign announce that they created a special place on the campaign plane for reporters that behave? This article is stupid and scurrilous, ill-informed and a big whine from some of the most priviledged and ill-behaved people on the earth, the national press corps. You folks act like babies all the time. There is a guy running for the dang presidency, whether they ask you if you need a pillow is irrelevant.

- Steven Wald

July 24, 2008 at 7:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Barack was justified, The treatment was skewed and slanted.

- Stephen C. Rose

July 24, 2008 at 8:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Excellent article....but this cracked me up "The difference is the Clinton people were hostile for no reason," a reporter who has covered both Democrats tells me." No reason? How about 16 years of reasons?

- Anne

July 24, 2008 at 8:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Awww! Did the press have their feelings hurt :(

- Max

July 24, 2008 at 8:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I love the Washington press corps. Nagourney wants extra-special treatment before the Obama campaign is allowed to criticize his truly awful, awful article. Karen Tumulty is upset that when the campaign says an interview is scheduled for 10 minutes, they actually mean 10 minutes. And *Obama* is the one who's "arrogant" and has a sense of entitlement? Grow up, whiners.

- don anon

July 24, 2008 at 8:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Not clear from context, but did Nagourney float his piece by the campaign? And if not, well, suck it. Turnabout's fairplay--and if he's as "big a boy" as he claims, and his work was solid, who cares. The fact that this race is even close suggests a bias against Obama--McCain's so out of touch with the times you should be cross-checking him into oblivion. And yet . . . we get whining from supposed professionals.

- RuperttheBear

July 24, 2008 at 9:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Looking into the past of Barack Obama , one is bound to discover the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Obama was just 33 years old and fresh out of Harvard when former Weatherman and unrepentant terrorist William Ayers picked him to lead this 110 million dollar charity. There's even a Wiki page devoted to this. Yet no one in the mainstream media has bothered to report on any of this. Strange no?

- B. Weisman

July 24, 2008 at 9:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The media acts as if they are a constant, remaining unchanged while candidates shift. Get real. The media loves underdogs and loves to tear down top dogs. As the front runner, Clinton was wary of the press because she knew they were looking for "gotchas" to tear her down. Like all long shots, Obama at the time had no choice but to cozy up with the media to get exposure. Now that he's in front, the media are looking to get him in turn. Naturally, he's more guarded as a result. It would be no different with anyone else.

- billp

July 24, 2008 at 9:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm not an Obamamaniac, but this piece is just a bunch of whining -- especially from Nagourney, who is just a Conventional Wisdom hack from inside the Beltway.

- Stephen

July 24, 2008 at 9:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

quit being such crybabies

- wc

July 24, 2008 at 10:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yeah, how dare they rebut my article that argued White voters don't like Obama when I published it knowing full well that Obama's favorability rating among whites was virtually the same as McCains (31% O, 34% M) but decided to ignore it in favor of my contrived storyline?

- A. Nagourney

July 24, 2008 at 10:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well, there is still time before August 25 to make amends and begin fair coverage -- which might result in a better presidency: Hillary's.

- fsteele

July 24, 2008 at 10:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It is difficult to evaluate Nagourney's beef without the accompanying story and Obama's rebuttal. Having said that, we can glean a few telling details which put Nagourney's complaint in (I think) its proper context. 1. The article had already gone to print. Why go to the reporter at that point? 2. Note: "Later that afternoon, Nagourney got permission from Times editors to e-mail Sargent a response to the Obama memo." As opposed to: "Later that day, Nagourney got permission from Times editors to publish Obama's rebuttal and his response in the next day's paper." No editing was possible, and no correction/retraction/response was forthcoming. Obama had nothing to gain by engaging Nagourney at that point, so he moved straight to what sounds like run-of-the-mill pushback on a critical article. Nagourney's overreacting.

- Stan

July 24, 2008 at 10:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Call me first?" Did he call them first? He should not be complaining unless he practices what he preaches.

-

July 24, 2008 at 11:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

BTW, how can Lizza's spot on the plane be revoked when it was never granted in the first place? 200 people applied for 40 spots. Please someone tell me which reporter on that trip did not deserve to be there and Lizza should have had their place in return.

- Steven Glass

July 24, 2008 at 11:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

There is an untruth in this article. This sentence is misleading.

After the incident, the press corps decided that one pool reporter would keep Obama in sight at all times. "It's a body watch," one reporter jokes.
In fact, the Washington Bureau chiefs demanded in their letter, in rather mocking language, that the Obama campaign should take a pool reporter inside the "security bubble". And what did the press do with that access? They wrote pool reports with snarky comments about Obama going out to dinner with his wife and about Obama watching his daughters soccer game (counting the number of times he yawned). Don't act like the press is totally innocent here. How about some perspective? How about noting that the access you guys get with the pool reporter inside the "security bubble" is greater than the access that you get with McCain? What does McCain do on his weekends off anyways? And why has the Washington Bureau Chiefs not written the McCain campaign requesting similar access? The complaints about the foreign trips are equally ridiculous because there was limited space. And I saw Andrea Mitchell's complaints and she failed to note that there was a pool reporter with them sending pool reports out. And I have to wonder what she was expecting, for Obama to fly his campaign plane full of journalists to Afghanistan? Are you kidding me? This article is one big whine. Maybe you all should join John McCain in the cheese aisle.

- Taleigh

July 24, 2008 at 11:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Perhaps it's time to hear the real story of Barack H Obama...perhaps it's time for a few reporters to do a little investigative work(like they use to do), and not worry about getting on the candidates buddy list...like BEFORE the election! Why would anyone want to settle for the 'narrative' written by the campaign manager and Barack himself? This isn't American Idol...this is serious!

-

July 24, 2008 at 11:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Instead of trying to find a place to "put their love", perhaps reporters could just do their job: being OBJECTIVE, being the eyes and ears of the public. Oh, no, they get all mushy over someone who is manufactured, a brilliant marketing campaign run by the Daly advertising guru, David Axelrod. many in the blogosphere have been screaming for months that the press was not vetting Obama, at all, never mind enough. They were so enamoured they forgot that equality means that you get looked at just like the white guy or gal, not given a pass because it may offend. That in itself is racist.

- KarenAnn- Massachusetts

July 24, 2008 at 11:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

sounds like a lot of whining that Obama's not making the press's happiness his number one priority. Also sounds like the media can dish out the criticism but they're too weak to be able to take it, ie Nagourney attacked Obama in print and Obama responded to the attack in print, nothing wrong with that, is the media too high and mighty and to delicate and sensitive that the people they attack in print shouldn't be able to respond in print to the attacks? "The difference is the Clinton people were hostile for no reason" Really? I don't even like hillary, the queen of narcissism , and even I'd say she has many reasons to be hostile to the media, look at how they treated her over the years esp in the clinton years, she brought some of it on herself but not all of it. Being asked for a 10 minute interview with a presidential candidate that EVERYONE want's access to and being given exactly what you asked for and whining about it like some spoiled little kid? God. What a self absorbed, narcissist. Tell me how often journalists (fox network is a propaganda outlet, not journalism) got access to George Bush in the last year.

- Pete

July 25, 2008 at 12:01am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well, well, well. The Press is finally waking up and no one has a comment? Here's mine: How can you tell what kind of governing style a candidate will use in office once elected? The way a candidate campaigns gives you clues as to how they will govern. In business, human resource professionals use a 90 day wait period before making people “permanent” employees because they know that people cannot keep up a mask beyond that point. Campaign behavior versus campaign talk will give you a preview of that candidate as President. Look at what they are doing not at what they are saying. Obama’s campaign style (and press strategy) belies his “hope and change” rhetoric where he promises a “new kind of politics” but in fact is using old-style strong arm political tactics to win. We know these people. We see them every day in our work lives trying to get ahead without really doing the work necessary. They take the credit for other people’s work – just like Obama has done his whole political career starting with the Illinois Senate. In Iraq Obama took no questions from professional press. This is the same type of tactic that GWB has used in office. It impedes the free flow of information and critique by the press. Obama’s and GWB campaign communication strategy are very similar. GWB limited the number of debates because he was a poor debater. Obama performs poorly without a script. He said he was all ears about town halls with McCain but when given the chance, he backed out. The Press is finally seeing what Hillary’s supporters have seen all along. He will do anything to win. This should not be an acceptable way to win office. The New Politic that is emerging demands a two way flow of communication – not a top down “I’m the boss” type of communication that we see from both GWB and Obama. Hope and change? Not!

- JUST THE FACTS M'AM

July 25, 2008 at 12:06am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't count a single legitimate gripe in this entire article. All I see is whining by reporters about a campaign not willing to indulge their senses of entitlement. And seriously, who cares what Adam Nagourney has to say? The man is an embarassment to the Times.

- ejbenjamin

July 25, 2008 at 1:02am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The article implies that the press chooses who they will elect as president based not on reporting the news as it is but on how well they feel a campaign treats them. In my opinion, thata is the pot calling the kettle black when it comes to arrogance. Obama has been keeping an incredible schedule during which he has to be constantly "on". Any human being has to have some time to rest and restore themselves. John McCain does not write his own speeches and most of his appearances are off the cuff, and less substantive. It isn't surprising that he has more time to just sit around shooting the breeze. That doesn't necessarily mean that he would be a better president. Are the press aware that they're Americans too?

- karela

July 25, 2008 at 2:16am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

...and the Obama campaign will read this article and figure out a way to placate the media (ass-kissing? fake facts? cash? government positions?) and all will be well again. May I point out that HRC did not kiss the press's butts, doesn't even like the press, and was punished for that...she never played games with them to lure them in or keep them in their place, and look what that got her. The person with integrity who doesn't play the game gets punished, as usual.

- susan k. (NYC)

July 25, 2008 at 3:44am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Strange. When every bit of news was covering Wright, Pfleger etc from dawn til dusk, there I was thinking "the media sure loves Obama". And when directional changes by Obama get mass press and ones by McCain get buried, I'm still thinking "the media sure loves Obama". Or when any mistake by Obama gets pounced on and ones by McCain get ignored, guess what I'm thinking....

- Pete

July 25, 2008 at 6:05am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh boo hoo, that article was so dishonest with the data (most of which they did not show - because it would have easily contradicted the entire premise of the article) that I commend any campaign for standing up to such total bull. I cannot imagine the NYT thinking they'd get away with it. I'm a Democrat, but if such obviously trash stats and bad reporting were foisted on John McCain, I'd say the same thing and cheer him on - go get 'em Johnnie Mac.

- WandreyCer

July 25, 2008 at 6:37am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It would be refreshing to see the mainstream press stop acting like a wholly owned subsidiary of the Obama campaign and instead start to examine his past, his character and his ideology. To date all we have seen is a fawning, swooning, adolescent girl like media gushing over the annointed one. I hope this article is a step in the right direction.

- Joanne600

July 25, 2008 at 6:45am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Man, call the waahhhhmbulance. The press sure does like to talk about itself and its own grievances. Thing is, no one else gives a shit.

- Lu

July 25, 2008 at 6:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I can't say this enough, Hussein is a sinister, evil person.

- Kansasgirl

July 25, 2008 at 6:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This story is inside the beltway/inside baseball drivel. Concentric narcissism that only the press would find interesting. Yet, you still exhibit the cluelessness of the media when you say "This romance has been a prominent story line of Obama's entire campaign, and clearly elements of it are true." What "elements" of the media love affair aren't true!? The media's disgraceful behavior has tarnished the entire journalistic enterprise. You all look like fools. The gleeful favoritism of the MSM is repulsive. It makes us all long for the days of covert favoritism of the Rather and Mapes variety. Journalists, heal thyselves!

- EMD

July 25, 2008 at 7:51am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yup, the poor guy is really getting beaten up out there. I hope he can manage.

- Selish70

July 25, 2008 at 8:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Expecting Obama to call a reporter before criticizing the reporter sounds extreme.

- Dennis Boston

July 25, 2008 at 8:17am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When you are all "Pomp and circumstance' with no substance, this is exactly how you would act. Even liberal reporters want SOMETHING substantive for their readers. I would rather read about McCains hangnail, than see Obama stickers on the Wall in Jerusalem.

- William Johnson

July 25, 2008 at 8:17am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Better they find out Obama is a fake and a phony, and end the mass media love affair now then after the - dread the thought - election should he be president. Obama is sounding more & more like George Bush with all his war rhetoric and fight terrorism speeches. Even his speech in Berlin, why he's campaigning all over the world is a mystery - he should be focused on America - his speech in Berlin stated nothing new. Nothing George Bush hasn't said before in more believable vernacular. When the press who worships his every word can't trust the guy, and he lies to them - not on policy or his actions which he lies to them about all the time and they swallow it readily - who won't he lie to? Funny that the NYT let reporters respond to Obama but not John McCain...NYT should be out of business and hopefully will be soon. Their quality writers will find new work easily.

- Lizette

July 25, 2008 at 8:21am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What ever happened to reporters just reporting the news? Now they have to be treated just so or they will withhold good coverage or amplify bad coverage? While worrying about the candidates egos they have ignored their own inflated egos.

- David in Texas

July 25, 2008 at 8:27am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

As unhappy as I am at the prospect of Obama as our Party's nominee, I'm furious at the media for trying to stuff this guy down our throats. It's been clear for some time now that information about Obama's background and early life have been carefully managed. Thanks for providing confirmation about this.

- s. valenti

July 25, 2008 at 8:29am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Interesting that the press is starting to see the rabid response to anything not pro ossama, oops I meant obamma. What cuaght my attention was his long term attendance of the questionable church and the So called Rev. Wright and how the media along with the organized bloggers stomped out the story. Then you start to notice one candidates gaffes are forefronted and the others swept under the rug. worse choice of candidates I can remember.

- marine2002

July 25, 2008 at 8:30am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

WHEN THE TIME IS RIGHT, GIBBS WILL BE THE NEXT PERSON THROWN UNDER THE OBAMA BUS

- OSIRTG

July 25, 2008 at 8:33am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

". . . the press wants to put its love somewhere, and, right now, that love is up for grabs." The press has only one obligation: to provide readers with accurate, fair and balanced reportage. Love is not part of that equation. I might add that presidential campaigns have no obligation to kiss the hands that type the stories. The Nagourney "analysis" of the NYT poll was atrocious, and his editors should have taken him behind the woodshed for it.

- Bill Marjenhoff

July 25, 2008 at 8:33am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

How about "giving their love" to ethical journalism, which wouldn't cover up McCain's many, many gaffes and forgetfulness or wouldn't spread salacious rumors about Obama? The press lost the American public's faith completely after the cheerleading that led up to the disastrous Iraq war. The Bush boosterism, because "we are at war" got old very fast. The arrogant presumptuousness (isn't that the new talking point phrase you all must use for Obama? Digby has a list of over a dozen different news outlets using the exact same phrase yesterday) that the press will decide the election based upon which candidate makes them the best barbecue, flatters their egos the best, or refrains from questioning their errors is disgusting and exemplary of what it wrong with journalism in this country.

- Zigzag

July 25, 2008 at 8:33am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Perhaps the days when NYT reporters would gladly plant WMD stories, and any other items that might be helpful, for their friends in the White House have come to an end. And where's that story about the Bush Administration closing the racial divide? Oh, sorry, that's Obama's job, to overcome decades of racial antagonism fostered by Republican Southern Strategists. Not that the anti-MLK legal holiday voting duo of Cheney and McCain would know anything about that.

- Tom C.

July 25, 2008 at 8:34am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The NYT correspondent is lucky Obama's people didn't nail him to a tree along side the road for all to see. Obama is coming into power, and the world should prepare for his reign.

- Meerkatden

July 25, 2008 at 8:34am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't know why the press is complaining? They treat him like the second coming, and then they're mad when he acts like he is! Obama has had too many screw-ups, when he has not been on a tele-prompter, so they are just trying to protect the image of the "American Idol", before they realize, that he needs to be voted OFF the show!

- EmmaLee

July 25, 2008 at 8:34am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I suggest the press stop whining, and do it's job. After the Press' historic failures covering this campaign, allowing all political discussions to be made through sound bytes and talking points - it has gone on far enough. The coverage has been biased against him from the start - a few people like the guy is that so bad? None of them apologize, and qualify all his statements like the farce reporters covering the McCain campaign. Get real. You're not even going to have a job for long.

- Troy - MN

July 25, 2008 at 8:35am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Let me get this straight. Nagourney writes a shoddy front page article, widely criticized for its inaccuracy, the Obama campaign publishes a rebuttal, and Nagourney flips out BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T CALL HIM FIRST? I didn't know you needed permission to criticize the press. Talk about a sense of entitlement! (Full disclosure: permission was not sought of Mr. Nagourney, the New York Times, or the New Republic before posting this comment).

- PhilP

July 25, 2008 at 8:35am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When will the press wake up. If you think they are bad now, wait until they get in power. They will shut down all opposition. Give away our nukes? Who would fear us? Tax people beyond their ability to pay? Come on folks, it's time to wake up from your hypnotic sleep. Remove the American flag and put up your "O" sign. Remake the Presidential seal in your image. Speak about changing the world. Doing what? When are you all going to ask him about the changes he has in mind? Fairness Doctrine. You thought they were after talk radio. Folks, anyone who does not agree with him or points out anything, they will come after you with the IRS and any other force they have. Two more liberal Supreme Court Judges - good bye to free speech. Especially if it attacks the "O". The liberal media better wake up. Behind all those smiles and promises is a tyrant waiting in the wings.

- Tl Watchman

July 25, 2008 at 8:36am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This is nothing new, but all the lovesick followers have on rose colored glasses. Obama could kill a puppy and his followers would ignore it. And for the record, I wish people would start being honest about Obama's intelligence. Delivering nice speeches through a raspy, smoke induce windpipe is not intelligence. Arrogance is not a sign of intelligence, either ~ it's a sign of weakness. Going to the gym a lot is also not intelligence. And last but not least, taking your kids out for a bike ride/photo op in a thunderstorm is definitely not intelligence. Maybe if his own father was around he would have known not to do that one. Guy can't even make good decisions in his own household, yet he wants to run the country/world. Don't be so cavalier with your votes folks.

- steve in k.c.

July 25, 2008 at 8:37am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's ok, I hear Nagourney is a major league asshole, anyway.

- Richard

July 25, 2008 at 8:40am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Thin skinned and controlling. No criticism or satire of Obama will be tolerated. If you aren't a true beleiver, you will be ostracized. What are they afraid of? I dongt think that's what we're looking for in a President.

- tr88

July 25, 2008 at 8:41am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What a bunch of twats the Obama and his people are. I hear he won't be flying back to the US after his Grand Tour of Foreign Places -- the waters will part and he will walk back. If i were getting the 24/7 rock star, lips planted firmly on buttocks, treatment that he gets from the media, and couldn't break away from a crusty old guy like McCain, I'd be concerned too that my fawning public will just get tired of the act and go back to their X-boxes. He's insufferably smug now -- would rather have his Berlin Transfiguration before 250,000 non-voters than shake the hands of and thank the men and women who put their lives on the line so hollow men like him can travel the world (hey, Barry, what's your carbon footprint?) and make pompous asses of themselves. Makes me kinda nostalgic for John Kerry.

- Audacious Aardvark

July 25, 2008 at 8:43am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This is hilarious, even if it's not satire. I love the new euphemisms for the aggrieved: - "reporters whose coverage was deemed unfair" and - "reporters who have covered Obama's biography or his problems with certain voter blocs" To anyone actually paying attention, those are obvious codewords for lying gooper swiftboating douchebags posing as journalists doing fluff while actually seeking the next stupid fake gotcha quote scandal they can leak to Drudge for more cocktail weenies on the Straight Talk Express. What's the matter, does it mess up their poor little Rovian ratfucking plans when someone refuses to play along with their "let's pretend neither one of us knows who I am" game? Poor little neocons, I guess they better go crying back to Ron Fournier for a different assignment.

- melior

July 25, 2008 at 8:44am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm a reporter at Talk Radio News Service, and I've got to say that all the media Obama Love makes me a little sick. I'm not a hater, either, but try to remain objective for both fronts- what a concept- an objective journalist? I applaud anyone that does the same.

- S. Dawn Jones

July 25, 2008 at 8:45am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This article and TNR made the drudge report. Hopefully it will increase your circulation.... Hope springs eternal, doesn't it....

- jdyer

July 25, 2008 at 8:46am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hmmm - The press is surprised when the candidates want to control how they release information and present themselves. Gee, do you ever think that's because you over-interpret and scrutinize every trivial piece of information you can get your hands on? At the same time the media is complaining about lack of access to Obama, they are ridiculing McCain for minor gaffes in his speeches. "Here, put your fingers into our cage and let us have a bite."

- Dave

July 25, 2008 at 8:46am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The bill and hillary show begins.

- willie

July 25, 2008 at 8:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I guess January's papacy has been tarnished a bit huh?

- michelle

July 25, 2008 at 8:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Barack Obama and the press break up? Hardly, the affair has not ended. Perhaps a few reporters are getting a cold shoulder because they may deviate from the throngs of media who are clamouring to tell Barrack's story for him. But I reject the title of this article in it's entirety - the affair is not over and if this piece is meant to show those not on Obama's bandwagon - "See! See! We aren't biased towards Obama! He's mean to us as well!" Nope, all the major networks are still swallowing every single drop of Obama's sappy-silly and ignorant orations. It is nice to see an article like this, but it also feels premeditated - like maybe Obama's handlers decided to lash out at a NYT reporter to give the rest of the media a story to help their cause? iq0

- erikiq0

July 25, 2008 at 8:52am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obviously there is no room for less then glowing press or even a tough question about the "Chosen One" Don't get caught because the Obama camp will make you sit in the corner with a dunce cap that reads "get with the program." It is hard feel sorry for the press, when most of Obama's aura has been created by the press. Yet, recent headlines would lead you to believe Obama's running unopposed. I think the media is still "with the program."

- Mark Hoffman

July 25, 2008 at 8:52am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If there is any doubt the press has problems with Obama well rest assured it has no problem with Obama and will over look anything that is described in this article. The press will just bend over and take it when it comes to Obama. He is a showmen and his people know it. How do you protect a showmen. Keep the people away from him off camera and off stage. Control them. The media is so in love with him that they fear criticizing him in any way for fear of not being present at the party or “HISTORY” that they the media thinks it is helping write. Media want to make history just report and be fear. That would be ground shaking!

- Rick Clay

July 25, 2008 at 8:52am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obviously there is no room for less then glowing press or even a tough question about the "Chosen One" Don't get caught because the Obama camp will make you sit in the corner with a dunce cap that reads "get with the program." It is hard feel sorry for the press, when most of Obama's aura has been created by the press. Yet, recent headlines would lead you to believe Obama's running unopposed. I think the media is still "with the program."

- Mark Hoffman

July 25, 2008 at 8:52am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"But the press wants to put its love somewhere, and, right now, that love is up for grabs." Isn't THIS the real problem! Following the candidate, reporting only on the process and horse-race, focusing on the unimportant is what makes readers frustrated. My suggestion is to leave the candidate's side and seek out the background reality of what Obama has actually accomplished and who he really is? It may make the campaign mad but it will certainly make media consumers happier. Believe it or not, Americans are still more likely vote for a less-than-perfect person for President, than they are to vote for an over-sold phony.

- Dave in Colorado

July 25, 2008 at 8:53am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If there is any doubt the press has problems with Obama well rest assured it has no problem with Obama and will over look anything that is described in this article. The press will just bend over and take it when it comes to Obama. He is a showmen and his people know it. How do you protect a showmen. Keep the people away from him off camera and off stage. Control them. The media is so in love with him that they fear criticizing him in any way for fear of not being present at the party or “HISTORY” that they the media thinks it is helping write. Media want to make history just report and be fear. That would be ground shaking!

- Rick Clay

July 25, 2008 at 8:54am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Liberal Fascists! St. Obama and his disciples will only love and respect you if you do as he says. Twisted, just twisted and frankly damn frightening if you ask me. With his stadiums and crowds world wide, chanting of his name. Reminds me of another famous orator who filled the streets with chants. Its all starts somewhere. I will tell you one thing, Obama is not my messiah, he and his religion of Obama scares me more then all the earths eco warnings put together. Liberal Fascism is very very dangerous.

- John Douglas

July 25, 2008 at 8:54am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Does Sen. Obama really have any reason to trust the media. Look how they ran with the Rev. Wright story without any care of the repercussions of it for those actually at that church. There was wall to wall coverage, a LOT of it taken out of context so the media could protect and push their narrative (what they are accusing Sen. Obama's camp of doing now). Yet when Hillary Clinton and John McCain had their own problems they didn't get anywhere near that type of focus. For all the talk about how Sen. Obama gets the bulk of the media attention not all of it is good attention or fair. A large part of it has been negative. After that little event why should he be overally friendly with the press. The turned on him at the drop of a hat when it benefited them. Now that he's learned how the media can truly be (and he learns fast clearly) he's adjusted. Why are they surprised or even upset? The media did this to themselves. Did they think they could do and say anything and he'd be all smiles no matter what?

- Orlando

July 25, 2008 at 8:54am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This guy is goinfg to be a bigger mistake than that peanut farmer we elected. He has passed no legislation and can't seem to make a decision when he is required to vote. "Present" is not decisive enough for a president. The press will find what the people already see. This guy is a fraud.

- Joe Pepe NYC

July 25, 2008 at 8:56am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama's cultivating a hostile relationship with the Republican-owned media? That's the best news I've heard about him in months.

- Forrest

July 25, 2008 at 8:56am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It appears to me that some in the media have a tendency to distort and lie and try to shove the rubbish off on the public as the truth. The entire article sounds as though some reporters are upset because they don't have access to Senator Obama and they want to cry foul. Any right thinking individual would not want a liar around them because some in the media do not know what the truth is, and have a tendency to create a perception of what is true because they have a big name behind them such as "The New York Times," etc.

- Betti Sanders

July 25, 2008 at 8:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hmm -- Obama's skittishness around reporters might have had something to do with that trumped-up Jeremiah Wright non-story. Maybe he's worried that he'll forget his flag pin one day and get jumped on. My point? It's a two-way street: if reporters want access, they should report responsible, relevant information.

- Bill

July 25, 2008 at 8:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You are a mere mortal reporter. How dast you attack the supreme being Obama with facts, or report truthfully on the chosen one's poll numbers. Obama and his minions shall cast you into the depths of purgatory for such blashphemy.

- Darrel

July 25, 2008 at 8:58am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This is sickening to the stomach to see the press behave in such a manner with Obama. We citizens are not stupid. We are watching your bias in the press and will continue to act by watching less cable news and reading less newspapers. The people elect presidents, not the media. The citizens of this country will hold you accountable.

- Jrosado

July 25, 2008 at 9:01am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

But when is the media going to INSIST on a REAL original or CERFIFIED copy of his birth certificate?

- Carl

July 25, 2008 at 9:01am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What I can't understand is how our national press are collectively so stupid. Why could they not have looked at this man's past and have seen what he was lacking...anything substantial. Why are they now so surprised that this man loves himself and that's it..he has no love left for his country, even his family. He will use each and every one of them to get what he wants for himself. He is beyond arrogant...he is dangerous.

- lezah2

July 25, 2008 at 9:02am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

By just about any measure the press has is Obama's biggest supporter, ready to bend with his every wish. With some outlets, the NY Times and MSMBC it's like watching or reading a 24-hour per day info commercial. The complaints aren't unique to McCain. I believe Clinton made many of the same charges. It's very chilling, in a way. If Obama is elected, I think youi'll see on of the most closed, vintictive groups in the country. Anyone who doesn't agree with them agree them will vilified, ridiculed and will face reprisals. "Freedom of the Press" will be in real danger.

- Rich

July 25, 2008 at 9:03am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Finally, though for all the wrong reasons, the press can report on both candidates in a non-biased fashion, as they should have been doing all along. Just imagine the altered course this campaign season might have taken if the MSM had been vetting ALL the candidates. It's too late to right the wrongs done in the Democratic primaries, but it is not too late to VET OBAMA before the general election. What a veritable field day the press could have! Imagine it! All of the truths that have been circulating over the internet FINALLY reaching the masses via the mainstream media. There is still time to do the right thing here, and even if you are doing it out of anger and frustration over the way the Obama campaign has begun to treat you, we care not. You will be forgiven. We just want to know this candidate before it is too late.

- Susan Leff

July 25, 2008 at 9:04am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Axlerod (Obama's brain) knows that if Obama mingles with the media away from his handlers, he is going to say something stupid or sound ignorant on economic issues, for example. So Obama is kept on a short leash. That means that media access will be controlled and limited now that Obama is the presumptive nominee. Obama's great weakness is that he can't express himself extempore.

- Patrick C.

July 25, 2008 at 9:04am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Let's face it, the same thing that doomed Hillary's campaign is being repeated by BHO: the sense of inevitability. This guy is a fraud, and no amount of slick marketing is going to change that fact. You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool them all of the time. The American public is catching onto this charletan.

- BB

July 25, 2008 at 9:04am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I agree with pretty much everyone here. Quit the whining. I frigging get so sick of reporters, and how they want personal status, they want to be able to ask the tough questions and prod into personal lives, but turn the table, question their words, and they cry foul

- Irishspacemonk

July 25, 2008 at 9:05am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I just returned from Germany, where the press has apparently crowned Emperor Obama. It was really sad. My wife's cousins were like Obama and the "other guy". The press shows beatific poses of the anointed one close up, looking up at his smiling demeanor and from far away ( I had a better view of the Dolphins in the cheap seats) shots of McCain looking down trodden. Every news show has the Emperor glowing and in charge, where as in balance the challenger McCain is depicted as a geriatric caricature. To me he is going around telling everyone what they want to here and doesn't seem to have any backbone at all. BTW, I am a registered Democrat who will not be so easily swayed to vote for the Emperor.

- WOW

July 25, 2008 at 9:06am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It is hard to believe in "Change We Can Believe In" when the Obama campaign (and possible administration) will be even more secretive than that of Bush. Is Robert Gibbs really a Carl Rove in sheep's clothing?

- Rich Spencer

July 25, 2008 at 9:08am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Just how many kos kooks limp wristed fatso george soros loving America haters are on these blogs anyway. How much are you morons getting paid to boost this empty suit?

- Paul

July 25, 2008 at 9:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama is an empty suit with big ears.

- edie

July 25, 2008 at 9:12am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Here's an idea for the press: present the facts straight first...then give your opinion whatever it is. This election is not about the press. It is about the candidates and the people. Do your damned job! Then do your pontification and interprestion and analysis and teasing out the "really significant detail". Public disgust with the press is at the highest level I can remember because of the lousy job it is doing reporting on all candates. No wonder newspapers and TV are losing audience. It is impossible to trust anyone in the press/media to tell it straight because they are so busy playing their little careerist games.

- csb

July 25, 2008 at 9:14am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama already revealed his ability and willingness to Lie, such as the Lies told to FoxNews about his knowledge of Rev. Wright's decades-o-hate from the pulpit. "The Press" felt no need to follow that up. What Are the ground rules here...Lie to the public all you want but don't Lie to the Press? The press is in bed with Obama's tale. I consider this nothing more than a repositioning of its support for the Bama, a cover story.

- bluecollarbytes

July 25, 2008 at 9:15am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

We have just experience the most arrogant President in History but the chosen one makes him look Normal. Obama thinks he is great, but the only change Americans will get is instead of an White Political Ho we will have an political Black Ho for President!

- black saint

July 25, 2008 at 9:15am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Just to recap the lede so I understand Mr. Sherman's point: An article appears with a headline purporting to show that Barack Obama continues to lag behind with white voters, an incredibly damaging headline and one mostly unsupported by the poll being reported on, as the reporter himself later admitted. Oh, and I almost forgot. This article is on the front page of the New York Times, which sets the journalistic agenda for much of the American news media. So the article could prompt newspapers, tv stations and bloggers all over America to write up "white voters hate Obama" stories. So Obama's campaign faces an immediate crisis with this article, and what does the reporter think they should have done? Call him privately to complain. Good to know that thin-skinned narcissism will never go out of style in the American journalistic profession.

- TomH

July 25, 2008 at 9:16am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Does Sen. Obama really have any reason to trust the media. Look how they ran with the Rev. Wright story without any care of the repercussions ..." Sen. Obama is so spoiled. He doesn't grasp the favorable media coverage he is getting. Perhaps if the media would start asking the hard questions of Sen. Barack Obama, he might start along with his criminal supporters who are hacking into websites, using Microsoft, T Mobile and Georgia state computers to terrorize citizens start answering some hard questions. Why is it that Donald Young, an intimate friend of Barack Obama from his church was murdered and the FBI is not involved in investigating this? At the very least does not Barack Obama require protection as this murderer is still at large? Why is it Lawrence Sinclair’s intimate details have not been investigated by NBC to either be exposed as fraud or set as fact that Barack Obama is a bi sexual? If Lawrence Sinclair is a non issue then why is the Obama campaign running a site on Wikipedia to stage information on Lawrence Sinclair? Why is it now that experts have exposed the Barack Obama birth certificate as a forgery that NBC is not trying to find out why is it that Ann Dunham showed up on Mercer Island with baby Barry visiting a friend when women of that era never traveled with children? Could it be as the friend stated she was on her way to Hawaii which would mean that Barack Obama might have been born in Canada to match his British commonwealth Kenyan father’s British status? Why has no one bothered to demand why is it Barack Obama is recorded as born at 2 hospitals in Hawaii and only as a “live birth” recording which means he was brought in already birthed and born somewhere else? Barack Obama has gotten away with too much of this clever past. His sister is registered as being born both in August and September which leaves the conclusion Ann Dunham has her children out of the United States in the nations of her lovers and then comes in and illegally registers them in America as Hawaii allows late birth registration. For the sake of the United States as a nation, the press had better start reporting on this as the last thing this nation needs with all the problems we have in finding out in 2009 that Barack Obama is not qualified to be President because he is Kenyan or Canadian and impeachment starts because he had a birth certificate forged covering this all up. It is bad enough when Bush gets hounded for doing nothing and Bill Clinton’s sexual problems gets him into impeachment problems. The press knew all this before and covered things up. The press should investigate this. Now, that would be refreshing!

-

July 25, 2008 at 9:17am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I feel so bad for Adam. I wish the Obama campaign was nicer to him. He deserves people to please him. Obama is a bad man because he acts like an adult doing adult things. Adam deserves better. Please don't cry Adam. It will all be okay (I hope). I can only hope and pray that Uncle John will become president and you can feel good again. waaaaaa! waaaaaaaaaa!! I am Adam Nagourney and I am a huge girl. sniff sniff.

- Crosar

July 25, 2008 at 9:17am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Is this what we can look forward to? 4 years of an Obama administration crushing all dissent by any means required? What would he do with the full power of the federal government behind him? Bush is no prize but he allows dissent. In fact you would have to be blind, and deaf to miss the dissent against bush.

- sonofdy

July 25, 2008 at 9:19am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Right on. And the commenters who "want to know more", give me a break. Do your homework, go to Obama's website and everything is there, including his 50 pages health care proposal. That is vs. John McCain's one page. Reporters can start whining when they start reporting the news. Greg @ TPM was doing his job. Go to work and ask McCain about all his dementia, oops, gaffe slips.

- M. Carroll

July 25, 2008 at 9:22am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Nail him to a tree?" Isn't that the Jesus thing coming out again? There is only one Messiah and Barack Hussein Obama is His name. Humble yourselves in His mighty presence.

- Audacious Aardvark

July 25, 2008 at 9:29am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I'm a big boy. I can handle it." Doe he mean he can handle it the next time? Because Nagourney was a complete whiner in this encounter.

- Jay

July 25, 2008 at 9:30am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Here I thought reporters were honest, hardworking, dedicated members of the Fourth Estate. This sounds more like "You scratch my back or else.." I would guess these are graduates of the Hanuman University of Journalism.

- J. Kuriyan

July 25, 2008 at 9:30am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sounds like that reporter from Chicago who Obama never responded to then we she printed it he called and yelled at her.

- mary

July 25, 2008 at 9:33am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's just a little lover spat. The press will roll over and spread em wide once he shines those bedroom eyes their way again. How can they resisit?

- Strat

July 25, 2008 at 9:34am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

TO Forrest: A Republican owned media? If this were true the media would be in love with McCain? Not to bright are you? Barack Hussein Obama is affirmative action run amok. RW

- Ruth Werre

July 25, 2008 at 9:37am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Call me cynical, but I think the "press" is about making money and journalism/infotainment careers. And here, a member of said press has a complaint about the un-professionalism and self-importance of one of their subjects . . . then blows that through their microphone and calls it "news" and "analysis." Pretty rich.

- Sophie in VA

July 25, 2008 at 9:40am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Adam Nagourney? Who cares? He is not one of America's pre-eminent journalists. Insightful? Hardly. Unfortunately, he does have clout.

- richard riewer

July 25, 2008 at 9:40am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Call me cynical, but I think the "press" is about making money and journalism/infotainment careers. And here, a member of said press has a complaint about the un-professionalism and self-importance of one of their subjects . . . then blows that through their microphone and calls it "news" and "analysis." Pretty rich.

- Sophie in VA

July 25, 2008 at 9:41am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Very happy to see that the Obama campaign doesn't take any crap from anyone. Looks like he just might repair the damage that has been done by the Bush folks.

- Keith

July 25, 2008 at 9:43am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It is amusing to see Obama supporters create excuses out of thin air for their man stifling the access of the press to information related to the campaign. These same people get hernias when Bush does the same thing. Can't wait until President Obama starts screwing the press over. How many of his supporters will see the connection between his arrogant behavior and the arrogant behavior of our current president.

- mrdon

July 25, 2008 at 9:45am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The press gave George Bush a free pass for two elections. I expect they will do the same for Obama. I trust used car salespeople more than I trust the press or Obama.

- Donna

July 25, 2008 at 9:45am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Remember when the left side of politics defended Adam Nagourney because Cheney called him a bad name? Good times.

- bercold

July 25, 2008 at 9:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's frightening how stupid many people are in this country, that they would vote in a guy who wants to negotiate with terrorist nations, dismantle our nuclear defense system, and is completely airbrushed by a communist media conglomerate. Just enough stupid people, apparently, to eek him a win in the election, and completely turn America into a 3rd world nation beholdened to its "leadership". I do not feel bad for the reporter in this situation. However, I certainly hope he will stand strong and find a big way to expose this tyranny... because that's exactly what it is. This reporter could become an American hero overnight. (Or, he could be bought off, bullied, and meshed back in with the rest of the liberal media wasteland.) Do America a favor and do the right thing, Mr. Nagourney.

- Erin

July 25, 2008 at 9:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I never hear people like Sy Hersh making this complaint--mainly because some reporters think it's still their job to get the story, rather than act like inmates at a pate factory farm.

- Steve Paradis

July 25, 2008 at 9:48am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I now this is a left leaning publication, but to honestly suggest the Obama lovathon has ended is just flat out intellectually dishonest

- Fukudome

July 25, 2008 at 9:52am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The McCain ad is spot on. The media are fawning sycofants who even wear BHO kneepads when conducting an interview. It's really disgusting.

- Ron in Acreage

July 25, 2008 at 9:52am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I am certainly glad to see the Obama "mystique" being taken apart. This guy has no experience and no substance. He has exercised poor judgement on a number of occasions and arrogance constantly. The press played their part in building this monster and I hope they dismantle it. The McCain advert showing fawning reports is a great idea. I hope he includes a clip from Chris Matthews' show of the BBC's Katty Kay screaming like a teenage girl at a Beatles concert "Oh Obama is just so good looking". What a disgrace. Not surprising though coming from a regular panelist on Matthews' show considering it is a 30 minute commercial for the DNC.

- Biggles

July 25, 2008 at 9:53am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This is a funny piece, let me give the press some cheese to go with the whine. Cry babies are what you sound like. You should understand that the press has to be handled carefully because if they are not they will write any damn thing, remember nothing is off the record with the press. The press will expose you and attempt to ridicule and destroy you. Richard Nixon had a great quote regarding the press, "The media will pump you up with steroids and then accuse you of being on drugs." The media cannot be trusted, they will sell you a WAR and then ask, why did we go to War? The media needs to take some responsibility and do their jobs and cut the trysts and affairs that go on in Iraq (ie Lara Logan).

- tiger

July 25, 2008 at 9:55am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

How dare the New York Times be offended if His Holiness Barack is offended by the NYT. Are the Gray Ladies unaware that they are dealing with The Chosen One. They would do well to be cautious so as to not anger Him who is to be Exalted above all other Candidates for Global Leader.

- LD Cary

July 25, 2008 at 9:55am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When the camapign circles the wagons, there MUST be something to protect. Can it be, BHO's inner guard is trying to keep the chink in his armor from being discovered? As a long-time investigator, my take is that someone is trying very hard to HIDE SOMETHING !!

- TRoosevelt

July 25, 2008 at 9:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The press as a whole are backstabbers. You can be the darling one minute and they will trash you the next if they think they can sell papers from it. I wouldn't trust them either.

- len

July 25, 2008 at 9:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Maybe the Obama campaign's increasingly controlling media operation is the result of taking on all the Hillary staffers after she dropped out...?

- Malcolm Granger

July 25, 2008 at 9:58am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Good for the Obama campaign. Tight message control is very important, as is a tough media strategy. It's about time that a Dem candidate for President sees that the media is not their friend. The GOP have been punishing members of the media for their coverage for years. The NYT still doesn't get to travel with Dick Cheney.

- bob

July 25, 2008 at 9:58am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

the MSM embellished an empty suit and now they want substance. "We the People" are sick of it all.

- Rosemary Altiere

July 25, 2008 at 9:58am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I completly Agree, but I'll go even further than that and say: If B. Hussein loses, it will be because of racism, black will feel like they have been sucker punched. If B. Hussein wins, blacks will feel empowered, reverse racism will rule the continent. It's a lose, lose situation. I predict racial wars similar to the daily occurences in SF. Diversity is a lost cause, even other major countries are starting to realize that.

- Ben

July 25, 2008 at 10:00am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I can guarentee you that it is the tainting the press has done for both campaign's, especially Obama's, that has me not wanting to vote for either of these seemingly morons. Do we really have a choice when the press supports one candidate 300:1. Whatever happened to partisan reporting? Personal feelings need to be checked and report what is the reality vs.political hype. I cannot support Obama with the way he is portrayed by the press as the walking on water, greatest thing to come down the pike guy, he is being portrayed as. I would love to hear what his former Harvard university buddies have to say. Oh I forgot Obama has imposed that gag order. It makes you wonder what is he hiding? Austrailia and what they stand for looks better each day compared to what we have to look forward to when either of these Bozos are elected.

- mb

July 25, 2008 at 10:01am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Many probably will not remember the first Cabbage Patch Dolls, and how the press media,created this entity, in order to sell the product. Every Christmas since then, there has been a new toy for the average American to go crazy over and buy. The common intelligent person did not fall for these schemes, and I pray that the American people will not fall for the medias love of BO. The American people as a whole have a tremendous amount of common sense and will eventually see the McCain is qualified and has the courage and experience to be commander in Chief of the USA, not the liberal media, who instead of reporting the news is in the business to create confussion etc. to sell the news. Wake up people your playing into the medias hands. but then papers are folding everywhere Good!!!!!!!

- CMHinsley

July 25, 2008 at 10:03am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh, this is rich. Corporate Media spends every minute of every day of the campaign reporting every tiny (and often unsubstantiated) "gotchya" issue they can find and then get all indignant when a candidate tries to get some control over their message? Puh-LEEEEEZE!!! Get over your big, bad, influential selves...

- csavage

July 25, 2008 at 10:03am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Your article almost made me tear up. Especially when you bemoan the fact that you (media) were in LUST with him up until the point he won the primary. Now your concern is that he doesn't want to see you anymore. Reminds me of a teenage girl who was deflowered by the high school quarterback then is given the cold shoulder and doesn't know why. Please explain how we can take your word, or any of the main stream medias word as unbiased now that you have admitted bias on behalf of the media.

- JJames

July 25, 2008 at 10:03am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hard to feel too sorry for these clowns in the media. They relish the opportunity to tear down a person who they have decided is to high. But they won't do any hard word on some of the real stories that have adversely affected our country. They want to dig into Obama's life, but looking at the war, corruption in contracting, deregulation of the finance sector, the horrid bankruptcy law, tax cuts and wars that have put our public finances in a deep hole, waste and fraud in the military budget, it goes on and on. How about reporting on policy? I am sure you could get an interview if you proved yourself at all interested in policy. Quit crying and get to work.

- sparc

July 25, 2008 at 10:05am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This article is silly. The press never really liked Obama, he was too inaccessible to them. And you forget the "first time" the press started bashing Obama during the last half of the primaries. I remember all the attacks over bowling and other trivia. So this lame 'trend' story is inaccurate and really childish.

- James

July 25, 2008 at 10:06am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yea to the NEW REPUBLIC and to Mr Sherman for reporting what is going on behind the scenes! Obama's campaign team is adept at using the media to their advantage...Apparently this includes going to extremes to send threats to corral the reporters into cooperating to propagandize his campaign message. Why are people so afraid to speak the truth about him? What connections does he have that we continue to see biased coverage? With all the one-sided reporting seen in the DNC primaries, and the ongoing overwhelming coverage of Obama in the past months, the US has become like some 3rd-world countries who have rampant corruption in the political process. Why are the typical media standards of unbiased reporting not being upheld by seasoned reporters? In this political campaign, the media has shown favoritism and bias even after the bias is continually pointed out. Some are wondering - what gives? and others are totally in the tank for Obama without having the real story and background on the candidate.

- Mediahound

July 25, 2008 at 10:07am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

OK, folks. I love seeing the cabal of once frothing at the mouth supporters who fell for this silly idea of the end of politics as usual as a reason to take on a political neophyte for President. The press was dying to see the man beat Hillary and now they can't stand it that they can't continue to hold his hand. Boo-hooo...I haven't yet come around on the fellow and probably won't but at least the press is starting to see the water behind his green ears.

- tdm

July 25, 2008 at 10:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama owes the media little to nothing. They were the ones conflating him with the man that they ficticiously dubbed his "spiritual adviser", the media played up the racial division through endless horserace polls, the media has graciously omitted lie after lie and gaffe after gaffe uttered by the utterly pathetic John McCain. The media has a corporate bias more than anything else- tv media for example is a business who's goal is to make as much profit as possible. Print media is no different. They want to sell copies and gush about brangelina and crap like that. It is not Barack or his campaign's job to help sell copy.

- Stew118

July 25, 2008 at 10:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Why do so many Obama supporters talk like 10 year olds and have the literacy of a 9 year old. I can get an idea of what you're saying, but WOW, is this an average result of our public school system? Or is it just a liberal thing? I went to public schools and I wasn't this uneducated!

- Benjamin

July 25, 2008 at 10:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If you think Bush was given a "free pass" during the last 8 years, then you're living in la-la-land. That statement is freakish. Bush has been tripped up, burned, run over, dragged, stoned, tarred & feathered on an absolute daily basis from both American and foreign press establishments since BEFORE his inauguration. Get your eyes checked.

- Lisa

July 25, 2008 at 10:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This entire article is an exercise in self-validation. "We in the media are not going to be abused," although there is not a single shred of evidence that the disciples will betray their messiah. Nov. 4th will be an interesting test of the media's influence over the American sheeple.

- MrMoose

July 25, 2008 at 10:11am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

How dare this reporter not do his job of printing whatever the sacred Obamamessiah wants printed!! His job is to take Obamamessiah press releases and print them as fact. The purpose of the media is to get the Obamamessiah elected, end of story!!

- The One

July 25, 2008 at 10:12am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I guess those claiming the media's in the tank for Obama are ignoring the fact that CBS edited an interview to make McCain look better--he totally botched the timeline for the surge--his pet issue--and they edited it out of the interview, rather than making it the headline. Jay@7: "? If this side show minstrel wins the election, white citizens are sunk." Wow. You just called the first viable African American candidate for President a minstrel. I... don't know what to say.

- Greg

July 25, 2008 at 10:13am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's hard to overstate the laziness of the press, particularly in reading and reporting polls.

-

July 25, 2008 at 10:14am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

My question is what has McCain done to close the divide on race. Why is it up to Obama to do this. For that reporter to single out Obama without looking at polling on McCain is extremely bias and I would be pissed too.

- larry

July 25, 2008 at 10:17am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Perhaps if the press were not hounding the candidate and his campaign for the slightest slip up to latch on to for days while ignoring his opponent's repeated gaffs and misstatements, you'd be getting more access. When the message can make or break you, and the press is looking to break you for better ratings, I cannot blame them for wanting to shut you out. Just look at what happened with that bit about the "refined" Iraq policy. John McCain's campaign released a press release saying that Obama was going to move closer to McCain on the issue, and when Obama used the word "refine" the press corps jumped on it for days. All while the candidate's position never changed. I really don't know where this "Obama Love" claim is coming from. The press keeps taking McCain's attacks and are hitting Obama with them in strawman setups. Just look at the recent "reporting" on the "Surge". Every question asked is designed to trap Sen Obama into saying "the surge worked". The next thing you know, they'd be having a field day with it all over the news for weeks and John McCain would be declaring a major victory over what constitutes as essentially nothing. Who exactly is it the press is working to get elected again?

- Robert, RI

July 25, 2008 at 10:17am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Dear Mr. Sherman, Im impressed, very impressed. I do sometimes read articles from TNR but am in no way a fan of it's writing or political bent. You sir bring a much needed breath of fresh air. Your article was fair, honest and pointed without being poking. It informed,was thought provoking and most of all did not tell the reader what to think or what conclusion to come to. I apreciate that more than I can tell you. Fella, you showed yourself to be a pro, Kuddos to you. I wanted to inquire about one issue which was mentioned early in the article for follow up. Not to sound like a conspiricy theroist, but, much has been mentioned in various press areas about Obama and Clinton actually going to the Buildiberg meeting. What can you mention to us?

- Steve From Westchester

July 25, 2008 at 10:17am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Wow, what a whiny article. Someone needs his binky.

- Tracy

July 25, 2008 at 10:18am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

At some point the main stream media will realize that their personal relationship with a candidate and his or her campaign should have nothing to do with the coverage of said candidate and campaign. Unfortunately we still haven't reached that point. The main stream media LOVED George W. Bush and HATED Al Gore and it showed in the coverage. The main stream media loves John McCain and it shows in its willingness to treat verbal flubs as just that, verbal flubs. If Hillary or Obama had the same number or nature of misstatements they would lead the coverage. Don't get me wrong, such flubs probably don't merit coverage. Obama rightly views the media as the enemy because the media has staked out that position...it is today the enemy of every front runner and can only play gotcha journalism.

- Marklev

July 25, 2008 at 10:18am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Excellently said---arrrogance card is usually played by someone who doesn't get their way---at least thats what I dedect for TNR article

- nbb1956

July 25, 2008 at 10:20am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The media's love affair with Obama is diminishing? Couldn't prove it by me. Chris Mathews says that he "gets a tingling in his leg" whenever he hears Obama speak. That isn't obsession? Before Obama spoke in Berlin, 2 rock groups performed and the Obamobots gave out free food and flags. Yet in the coverage last noght, not one program thought to tell it's audience that the event was staged specifically for photo-ops. Obama id running a Presidential campaign like he is a candidate for "American Idol". And the press is lapping it up . . . or as we say, drinking the kool-aid.

- Lynn

July 25, 2008 at 10:22am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yeah, the media really hate Obama. He's only on the cover of People and Newsweek this week.

- K Haugen

July 25, 2008 at 10:22am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yeah, when Bush acted like this it made the press swoon for "beers with Bush." When a Democrat fights back, it's bad. When a GOOPER does it it's manly. Get over yourselves.

- Lauren M

July 25, 2008 at 10:25am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This article is classic reporter whine --- long on compalaints ("I'm not getting my way") and short on substance. Transparency is politics is a myth, like the myth of objective reporting. The Obama campaign must be controlling of their message and protective of the candidate. The press is entitled to nothing --- they are responsible for getting the story, writing the story based on the facts, and not be so thinned skinned when they are criticized for their work that is shoddy, misleading or sensationalized to sell copies or enhance one's reputation.

- Tony DiBiasio

July 25, 2008 at 10:25am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ahh I see, when McCain complains about the media's love affair with Obama - the press has to drop everything to disprove said love affair by proposing pushing these nonissues. At no time do we focus on the media's love affair with McCain (even though he banned news coverage himself and if you take the time to look around you can see how stringent his handlers 'wrangle' in the press that is following him around the country). Same crap we had to deal with 4 years ago, the media doesn't serve the people anymore, just where the money flows from and at this time it flows from McCaine and the Republican party. And it is frightening to know that there are people in this country that like to hide their racism by tossing in words like 'stupid people,' 'negotiating with terrorist,' 'no experience,' and 'arrogance' when referring to a candidate that doesn't go through weeks of flip-flopping and trying to change history of the Surge, bubbling on the geography of the world as much as McCain who was supposed to be experienced.

- Dereck

July 25, 2008 at 10:25am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I have no sympathy for this media pity-party. The MSM are a bunch of drooling adolescents with no journalistic chops whatsoever. Obama dissing you now? Ain't that too bad? He's dissed: Hillary Clinton (a person far more qualified to be POTUS than he), Bill Clinton (best and most popular Democratic president since FDR), white Americans (by talking down to us about race), black americans (by talking down to us about faith-based initiatives), his own grandmother, his own pastor, our constitutional right to privacy (by voting for FISA), working americans (by secretly supporting NAFTA), injured American soldiers in Europe (by preferring to shoot hoops rather than visit them). I mean, did you think you the almighty MSM ... who pontificate daily from your little studios and editorial desks ... were immune? Look up the word "hubris" in your online dictionary and you will find that it applies not only to the scariest political movement the world has seen since Germany 1933, but it also applies to the MSM who have helped to deify him.

- Hank

July 25, 2008 at 10:26am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Arrogant? Presumptuous? Obama? Obama's vassals and courtiers? How can this be?

- Ted

July 25, 2008 at 10:26am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

My it seems like all the trolls have come out of the woodwork.

- Micheline

July 25, 2008 at 10:28am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I wonder why the press and the Dum Congress' ratings are about the same... because they're all in bed with Obama instead of the People. They don't care about what the People want or what People think - it's all about their socialistic/marxist beliefs and agendas. We, the People, see this - more have come to this truth after this Obama tour. The People will vote in November and the Dums in Congress and the media will see the truth... but will still not change.

-

July 25, 2008 at 10:34am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If the story had not yet been published it would have been appropriate for the Obama campaign to contact the author with complaints. If it has already been published, the campaign has to respond quickly and publicly to control potential damage caused by Nagourney and Thee's shoddy work.

- ratfood

July 25, 2008 at 10:35am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Awwww. Did Obama and his handlers have their wittle feelings hurt?

- Gary

July 25, 2008 at 10:37am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You're ignorant...your vote for mcsame is a vote for the killing of the USA...are you still upset a black man beat Hillary

- FBizzle

July 25, 2008 at 10:43am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The so-called "news" media = Whiners. Obama, his handlers and supporters = Temper tantrums. McCain, his handlers and supporters = Yawn. The American People = Irrelevancy. The United States = Extinction. The World = A mass of dysfunctional cry-babies!

- Gary

July 25, 2008 at 10:45am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If Gabriel Sherman is right about Obama trying to restrict press access, after all the fawning coverage he received early in the campaign, it's probably because Obama is hiding lots of things he doesn't want people to know. Obama couldn't even give a straight answer to Katie Couric, who is not exactly part of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, as to why he would still oppose the troop surge in Iraq, even after hindsight clearly shows that it was successful. The truth is that, for Obama to be elected President, half the electorate must be fooled into believing that Obama Is Always Right, and facts and logic and rational thought must be ignored if necessary. Voters are not allowed to ask HOW Obama's policy proposals will solve problems--they are asked to believe that Obama himself is the answer, as Jesus said that He is the Way and the Truth. The truth is, Obama rose rapidly through the notoriously corrupt Chicago political machine, with help from convicted felons (Rezko), old radicals (Ayers and Dohrn), and a black-supremacist preacher (Wright), and backed into a U.S. Senate seat when his opponent self-destructed in a sex scandal. He is a great unknown with a silver tongue, who asks voters to believe that his magic words will transcend all problems and change the world, without telling us how. Obama is a man of many words and few deeds, and his success depends on remaining a great unknown, so that voters believe in the Wizard and never find the little manipulative man behind the curtain. So, Mr. Sherman and other members of the press, DO ask questions, LOTS of questions, and DO get upset if you don't get straight answers. As Saint James said, faith without works is dead. If voters are to place their faith in a man who placed his own faith in Jeremiah Wright, we want to know about his works, before the election.

- Steve Z

July 25, 2008 at 10:46am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hey, get used to this. Marxism will require tight control of the press. At some point, the brilliant members of the media will figure out they've all served well as the useful idiots they are. All bow to the Global President. NOW!!

- James

July 25, 2008 at 10:46am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

. One Obama pundit sycophant on MSNBC said in June that the press loved BO not just because he was the New Man but that his press people were nicer to them than Hillary's. As if that was a valid reason to faun over the messiah. When I lived in a developing country in the 1990s, I thought that their press was a mouth-piece of the government that didn't have a clue about actually reporting and holding politicians to account. Then I returned to the good ole US of A to find that our press had degenerated into a bunch of cheerleaders for an immoral and unnecessary war that seeks narrative over facts. If you don't like how you are treated, *** get off the damn airplane *** and do some real investigation and reporting. .

- JSF

July 25, 2008 at 10:46am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Huh? Commentator publishes article claiming Obama has failed to made a difference in closing the racial divide, and the Obama campaign publishes in response an article refuting the charge, and the latter has crossed the line? You're in the wrong business, sir. This is what public discourse is all about.

- Robert Vanderet

July 25, 2008 at 10:52am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama will do all he can to prevent reporters from looking into his years at Harvard. There is gold there.

- George Abbott

July 25, 2008 at 10:53am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The press shouldn't be putting "its love" anywhere. The press should be neutral and objective. What a farce.

- Ginny

July 25, 2008 at 10:54am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The reporters all have Battered Women's syndrome. The more Barack abuses them, the closer they cling to him. "He's really a good guy. He'll change". Why would he want to? He bitchslaps the New Yorker up the side of the head and we'll get articles apologizing about how mean they are to Barack and how wonderful he is. And some of this abuse is hysterical. Holding 10 minute interviews to 10 minutes! How horrible! Maybe if we kiss his feet and bring him nice articles to play with he'll let us get 11 minutes! And God help the candidate who is actually nice to the press! If you're Bill Richardson or Mitt Romney and let the press into everything and speak honestly with them, the press dumps you like a sack of potatoes. The Press only likes bad boys. The nice young gentlement who offer them flowers and candy get stood up. The candidates with the metaphorical leather jackets who use them and leave them get all the love. Hell, I'll bet a lot of them just love McCain for his comments about the ones covering him being the junior varsity team. Hey, he insulted us! Maybe we should love him after all. Sick, sick people.

- Matthew H

July 25, 2008 at 10:55am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Telling his friends from the younger days not to talk? Sounds just like what the Clinton camp did in '92. And we all know now why they did that. Bill had a girlfriend in every Arkansas town and those that knew it received a "visit" from someone in his campaign, telling them to not talk to reporters about his "private life in Arkansas". Wonder what the Obama camp doesn't want us to know about his private life?

- Rob

July 25, 2008 at 10:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well I know that I don't want anything you want then. So you aren't 'all the people.'

- Dereck

July 25, 2008 at 11:02am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Are you guys looking for the vets that were held captive with McCain? Are you looking for the family of the fellow captive that John McCain let go before him? How about the real story about how he can wreck 5 planes? More importantly, were his arms broken when he ejected from his plane after it was shot down? How about those medical records. I think that more and more, the press wants to create stories and also be a part of the stories. If that is the case, then air your dirty laundry and let the press run after you. Let's see how you fair that.

- YunekFlava

July 25, 2008 at 11:05am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What is Nagourney whining about? They contacted him first before issuing a rebuttal. His compliant they didn't contact him is false. He should move beyond the false image of an infallible fourth estate.

- John Doe Washington DC

July 25, 2008 at 11:08am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Can you say Euro-Envy?

- Kyt

July 25, 2008 at 11:08am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This makes one wonder whose "permission" will be needed to speak, if he were to be elected! This is a "Production" not a valid campaign.

- Steve/Jax

July 25, 2008 at 11:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If the media did its job instead of behaving as if they were in partnership with the Obama camp, this article would never have been written because if Obama had been properly vetted, he would never have gotten this far. Instead you'd be griping about Clinton.

- EVAN

July 25, 2008 at 11:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

MSM is a bunch of garbage. Hey, maybe if you reported on the news and FACTS, the Obama camp would be more open to you. I think the Obama camp changed it's tune after the whole Rev. Wright debacle...and I don't blame them. Then there is "bittergate", and hard-working whites. Now he supposedly has a latino and jewish problem, since less than 100% of them support Obama. The MSM is not reporting the news. They are manufacturing the news, and there is a BIG difference. If I hear one more reporter say that Obama is being "presumptuous", I don't know what I'll do. I remember a reporter saying, after Obama clinched the dem. nomination, that it would be "nice to have this campaign season be about the issues". Well, that lasted for a day or so. Now we have Obama being bashed by the MSM for being "presumptuous" (aka looking presidential) AFTER they were bashing him for NOT looking presidential enough...not to mention accusing him of "flip-flopping" on issues he has been very consistent on (Iraq, for example). I mean, these folks should be ashamed of themselves! McCain has been mounting gaffes, lies, and misinformation for WEEKS now, and they just sort of brush them aside to talk about the type of lapel pin Obama is wearing. And this is "journalism"??? (And they wonder why there are so many "low information" voters out there) McCain doesn't know about geography (Iraq does not border Pakistan), swears he's an expert on the surge (also claiming it was HIS idea when it wasn't), yet can't even get the timeline right, confuses Sunni and Shiite, yet the MSM STILL touts him as a "foreign policy expert". WHY? McCain is arguably running the WORST campaign ever, and yet the media is attacking Obama? Is that what being "fair" consists of? Give me a break.

- MC3's

July 25, 2008 at 11:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The media has become a bunch of whiners. Maybe it would do them some good to go back to journalism school?

- Jacob

July 25, 2008 at 11:15am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama was a creation of the press and pundits who were bias against HRC. With his very limited credentials and bragging rights, this is precisely the reason why his close fanatics inner circle is very protective of him. But, he's going to be president of this county and believe me, this will be the start of the U.S. downfall here and abroad. The American people has really no choice at all with McCain who's old and sometimes confused, we have no other alternative. We're doom!

- danec

July 25, 2008 at 11:18am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

all of you pilghrams (of the responders) must be obama lovin blind men, or women

- john wayne

July 25, 2008 at 11:19am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If I were obama, I will do exactly what he is doing and more! Furthermore, stop trying to deceiving americans with the fallacy that the media is in bed with mccain. The question you have to ask yourself is: what type of coverage is obama getting? The media goes about shelling out negative coverage about obama, while mccain is having a field day everyday making one gaffe or the other without anybody reporting it. And when they do cover mccain, they edit out any gaffe he may have made. CBS was caught pant's down the other day, when it edited out a serious gaffe that mccain made during his interview ith couric. You guys can't deceive us, we know where the media love lies: mccain.

- Dew5050

July 25, 2008 at 11:20am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Where did all these strange people come from? They are not the usual posters. And the posts are not up to the usual standard.

- ReganaD

July 25, 2008 at 11:21am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Welcome to "Change" - goodbye freedom of speech and welcome to the age of "print what I tell you to print"! Change! Youth and arrogance, yeah, that's a change!

- Miss. Pink

July 25, 2008 at 11:26am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Only reporters could be so dumb. This is the same campaign that has for months portrayed any criticism or scrutiny of Obama as distracting, divisive and racist. He flat-out makes stuff up (the Senate banking committee that he isn't on is only the latest, and if he were a Republican he'd be torn to shreds by now), changes his positions and denies that he's doing so when the record is perfectly clear that he is, is unable to admit when he is wrong (the surge), uses his wife in the campaign and complains if anyone criticizes her, uses his kids on tv and five minutes later feels regret, and on and on. Here we have a 47-year-old who's never achieved anything of note and yet has material for TWO autobiographies. The guy is simply a fantasy wrapped inside a mirage hidden within a totally concocted persona. He IS 'the candidate' of the film. He will be another Nixon (that statement is now inoperative), another Clinton (it depends on the meaning of is) and he's Tom Wolfe's creation incarnate: mau-mauing the flak catchers. He's the Jayson Blair of American politics and he's counting on all the white guys in the media to feel too guilty to challenge him. He wouldn't be where he is if he were not black, and that's just a fact, and that is the only new thing about him. It's not enough, don't you boys on the press bus get it? Are you all smoking the same thing? Who ever thought it would take perky Katie Couric to put this phony on the spot? He dumped Rev. Wright and he'll dump all the reporters who helped him as soon as he gets what he wants.

- Not fooled

July 25, 2008 at 11:28am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

After Couric's "cut and paste" interview with McCain, deleting his biggest gaffe from the interview and substituting a different answer, as shown on Keith Olberman's "Countdown", combined with Couric's badgering Obama on the alleged "Surge", I can understand Obama's growing impatience with big corporate Media. They are not reporting news but propaganda for McCain. MSM credibility has gone into the toilet beginning with the alleged ABC "debate" by that empty suit, Gibon.

- William

July 25, 2008 at 11:30am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Absolutely right on. The press loves promoting the myth that they are left-wing and objective. In fact, the american press is literally owned by the Coporate Republican Right which allowed itself to be imbedded by Rove and Bush for the Iraq Massacre, which they knew had nothing to do with 9/11. CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, FOX, Hearst, etc. etc. etc. making it close when O'Bama should and would be ahead 72%-11% like he is around the rest of the world where there is MUCH, Much more honest and intellegent media.....

- Jon Svitavsky

July 25, 2008 at 11:32am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The Press is so full of themselves. They are the true whiners.

- Butai

July 25, 2008 at 11:33am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When did the press corps get the idea that they're entitled to be treated like little princes and princesses? Perhaps all those years of being played and pandered to by John McCain gave them a false notion of their individual importance. An independent press is crucial to a democracy; self-involved reporters, not so much. Adam Nagourney and his friends need to get over themselves, start doing their jobs, and quit expecting hand-outs from politicians and campaigns.

- sabine

July 25, 2008 at 11:34am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You know, there are a lot of blind people in America today - they like to make light of the situations in the world and then ignore the corruption that has gone on for 8 years. Some actually make a living out of that corruption. So yes, those that want to waddle their way to the saloon "McCain & Bush" and drink deep the brew out of those kegs in the backroom. Go ahead, just remember those kegs are filled with the dead and the dying troops and innocent dead citizens in two countries (one we didn't need to go into at all) and the false dream of economic windfall of profit from Iraqi Oil. High gas prices, foreclosures, poorly educated citizens - yes happy dreams and fantasies will stave off this coming chaos and who can deliver those fantasies? Why the McCain crew that's who, so drink deep the lies and the idiot flip-floppery and saddle up on that horse that is the decay of your morality.

- Dereck

July 25, 2008 at 11:35am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You know Obama has been drag through the news. Every time we look around there is a new lie that the news has printed about him. His wife the news do not print anything good about her. There is nothing I have seen her do, except tell the truth. She is a strong Black Woman. But you try to tear her down. I do not blame Obama for how he feel about the new these day. He know who is for him and who is trying to destroy him. Because of the color of his skin there are those that do not want to vote for him. They want Bush back. His private life is his business. We have a enough news around the world that you can be writing on. Than maybe you would not be getting those midnight calls.

- Millie

July 25, 2008 at 11:36am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Did the public tire of your "Is Obama a Muslim?" stories. Did the public tire of your "Is Obama black enough?" stories. Did the public tire of your "Is Obama to exotic?" As far as I see the only reason the press wants access to the candidate is not to report on his policies but just to find out enough of the truth to mix with lies in order to maintain this corruption in Washington.

- What's the matter?

July 25, 2008 at 11:39am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Wait...is this article some sort of a joke?? In find the insinuation that the media isn't 100% behind Obama offensive and an affront to my intelligence. The entire press corps fled the country, walking in lock-step behind Obama's self-righteous field trip of Europe/the Middle East, kissing the ground underneath his precious feet, and fawning over his fluffy, meaningless speeches, to the point that ONE reporter covered a McCain campaign appearance in New Hampshire. In addition to this blatantly unfair coverage (along with countless other things Mr. Sherman ignores), the recent refusal of the NYT to run McCain's op-ed after publishing Obama's piece AND after printing at least 6 other McCain op-eds throughout the years further demonstrates some serious media favoritism. It seems quite clear to me that Mr. Sherman's delusional analysis is only a valiant attempt to downplay the media's love affair with Obama in hopes of recasting the relationship as something rooted in and dedicated to neutrality, which it most certainly is not, has not been, and will never be.

-

July 25, 2008 at 11:40am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Anytime the press writes about itself as the subject of a sob story, it's bankrupt reportage. It is NEVER about YOU, understand? No one cares about your problems, and your problems don't reflect on a candidate's measure. Writing about yourself is an easy way out of a day's reportage; writing the hard story about McCain's blatant lying and emerging bumble-headedness IS news.

- Marci

July 25, 2008 at 11:43am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The Marxist vs the Fascist in '08 Vote the Constitution Party

- delquattro

July 25, 2008 at 11:44am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

so much for logic. the press can privately despise obama and his campaign from now until november, but as long as it is unwilling to PRINT or AIR negative stories to temper the fawning coverage, the "obama love" continues.

- Judah Kraut

July 25, 2008 at 11:44am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

TO: Lupercal, Michael, Brandon, Stan, Taleigh, Orland, Robert, Dereck... I can tell by your names and your writing that you work for the Obama campaign. Leave the comments to us please!

- ylem

July 25, 2008 at 11:46am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's because of people like you, the ignorant racist of our society that give this great country "America" a bad taste in the mouths of so many. It's you and your kind thats got us in the mess we're in with the world. As long as minorities are being discriminated against then all is well with America you jerk????

- phdbound

July 25, 2008 at 11:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm sorry but Obama is a monster of the media's creation. You wanted him, so you got him. Who cares how biased you were? Nope, you had a plan, and now that monster is wanting out of the lab. Here's the thing I don't get. The man makes SPEECHES and has shown no evidence that can or did anything. When the Jeremiah Wright story broke, reporters let him dictate the terms to discuss it. They seems so in "love" with Obama that they bought that he sat in that church for over 20 years, but knew nothing. Yeah, I have a bridge to sell you for cheap. In fact, he insults people all the time when he "clarifies" his true feelings by talking down to people, but nope the media loved Obama. Well, maybe if you practice some nonbiased reporting then you wouldn't be sounding like whining kids now that you realize Obama has played you like a fiddle. He won't get my vote, but I have to give him credit for showing that the media has too much bias, to the point that they do not give ALL the candidates equal time. Are the media following McCain, Barr or McKinney. Nope. So stop whining since you created the bias.

- Delores Williams

July 25, 2008 at 11:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"....recreates the Straight Talk Express bus, so reporters can assemble with McCain and shoot the breeze...." bias exposed: What is not mentioned here is what McCain's speechwriter and long-time friend and aide Mark Salter had to say about the new digs: (Washington Post reports 6.30.08) Specially configured for the candidate, it features a special area toward the front where McCain will conduct group interviews with the press, in the same way he does on his chartered bus.... McCain senior aide Mark Salter quipped this morning that "only the good reporters" would get to sit in the specially-configured section for interviews. "You'll have to earn it," he said.

- story

July 25, 2008 at 11:48am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

About McCain and the press. Nobody seems to question McCain's self assumed entitlement to Foreign Policy, 'Great American Hero' and hence National Security. But Sir/Madam, I beg to differ from Shawn Hannity and Fox News for at least one reason. General Andrew Jackson never called himself a great american hero. He knew how to do battle and win wars. Not only did he win but also he took states from the super-powers of his day - Florida, for example. What is "the surge" in Iraq? Did Iraq Sunnies not rebel against Al Aqaida pre December 2006 before the surge in March 2007? General Jackson did not use Florida or Lousianna in his political campaigns. That there is some semblance of peace in Iraq now is not due to the surge or at all. Look at this way. Lets play the numbers game. Iraq's population before the war was circa 20 million. 60 percent Shia, 20 per cent Sunni, 20 percents Kurds and others. Each had its own agenda, in particular among the Shia. So to totally blanket Iraq requires a foce of around 450,000, assuming 90 percent non co-operation. I worked this figure out before the war and based on this predicted the invasion would not succed as the planners have it. I am not military man but anyone excepth Shawn Hannity after watchin event unfold until 2005/2006 could have predicted that a surge is needed if and only if the Sunny leadership could urge their followers to rebel against Al Qaida, Mutala Al Sadr also halted his Militia activities. Does John McCain take the credit? In my considered view, no. McCain says Iraning is training Al Qaida repeatedly at atleast two venues and get away with it. Checlosovakia ceased to exist in the early 1990s, yet many still says Checlosovakia. If McCain were to become the commander-in-chief and he declares war Yogoslavia, which country should the pilots bomb? Serbia or Bosnia? Assuming McCain is not just confused and this the extent of foreign policy knowledge, would McCain not be worse than Bush? Why? Because McCain graduated bottom of his clas at his naval academy? George Bush is a Yale and Havard graduate and furthermore McCain own commanders have hitherto said that McCain is a slow learner wo does what he knows very well and thoroughly. The president needs to be fast thinker. McCain's granfather was admiral so also was his father. McCain graduated among the bottom three as navy pilot and shot down in Vietman and captured as prisoner of war. For being a POW he has our sympathies. But question arises whether influemce wielded by his parents sealed his fate since he graduated bottom of his class. Consider another individual whose parents have no influence in the Navy graduting at the bottom of class would such an individual have become a Navy pilot? Now this the real the deabate not the myopic opinionated and unreasonable news and conclusions offered by the Fox all stars and Fox news.

- Frank

July 25, 2008 at 11:50am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think the press has been obviously biased and doing a poor job at least most glaringly for the last eight years but really for quite a bit longer. These days the press have let themselves become a mouthpiece for the elite and the decision making class. They have too much power which they use to shape opinion and perception. They should not be friends and cohorts with the politicians but they are. The media like our government and corporate elite has lost all touch with the average American. Rightly Obama is handling them at arms length so that they can't get close enough to stab him in the back. After all the network misinformation leading to Iraq war along with everything else crooked thats happened. Now we see the news media trying to report a close race to prop up McCain so they have a job for the next few months. At this juncture these lazy reporters should stop complaining about enforced distance from Obamas camp, shut it and start doing their jobs again. Report and investigate the news instead of angling for an invite to the next cocktail party. What an embarrassment the fourth has made of itself. Just another formerly worthy institution bereft of all ethics in the new millennium. EVERYONE at the top in America is a traitor, they have lead the country astray repeatedly because they are only out for themselves, never thinking or doing what is best for the republic.

- Craig

July 25, 2008 at 11:55am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

what a load. "some people" - mainly just petty sniping by anonomous sources. isn't there real news to report & not McCain talking points to rehash ?

- dcm

July 25, 2008 at 11:56am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Let me get this straight: Adam Nagourney is complaining about someone else's arrogance? If he's never had an experience like this, he's long overdue. And if he expects to be treated like a political "friend" then that suggests a lot more about media bias than Goldberg and the rest. His poll story was BS-- reaching for something in data that data could never reveal.

- nogoatee

July 25, 2008 at 11:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I've said since this candidate's hollow rise began that he would self destruct - and he will. We're beginning to see more and more articles like this.

- Chris

July 25, 2008 at 12:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I find it humorous that not only does Obama and his campaign believe the entire country is behind him, but his followers, their false beliefs fueled by the media's love affair with Obama, absolutely cannot fathom that everyone isn't supporting him. Well, guess what - he doesn't have anywhere near 50% support of the country. McCain, as bad as he is, has kept it close because there is a very large chunk of us in this country who do not support Obama's policy stances and have serious questions about his character. To claim the media is keeping McCain in it ignores the truth and the obviousness of the media's overal infatuation with their creation. I do agree that these media prima donna's whine too much and believe themselves to be bigger than the stories they cover, but I'm not so sure that Obama's campaign doesn't believe itself to be beyond reproach - we know the arrogance of Obama is almost nearly as large as the faux personna the media has helped him create so it wouldn't surprise me if they were playing heavy handed.

- DJH

July 25, 2008 at 12:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Got to go along with you Delores. Although Obama probably will get my vote, I agree that the media needs to stop crying about the situation. McCain does as well for that matter; they wanted him to go abroad and "see for himself", and now they all whine like children; "oooh is Obama too egotistical?" the press sing; "Why isn't he at home discussing domestic issues like me?" harps McCain. Simple folks; you got what you asked for.

- Backstage Betty

July 25, 2008 at 12:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I am no big fan of the press and I do think they are pulling for Obama. That is why it is iteresting to read these comments from his own crowd of supporters. Maybe there is some hope that BHO will be unmasked for what he is: an empty suit and pawn of other powerfull interests. He has shown it over and over again that without a telepromter he is lost for words and often does not have a clue. Mr. Obama is a product of Chicago politics and Chicago is arguably the most politically corrupt city in the nation. There is nothing in Chicago and Illinois Democrat Party politics that happens without a permission of the inner circle. If the people want to be ruled by King Richard (Chicago's mayor) and his cronies, then it is their decision and they should vote for Obama.

- Shawn

July 25, 2008 at 12:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If you think Bush trounced on our rights...he did them in an effort to protect us and catch the terrorists who live among us. Obama is going to trounce on our rights in an effort to shut us up!

- diane

July 25, 2008 at 12:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

All the press really wants is a close contest because they think people (readers / viewers) will be more interested. If one candidate starts to look like he might get a bit of a lead, they start trashing him and building up the other one. It's comical. Obama did a really nice job this past week. He could have fallen on his face. Would anyone even like to think about the speech that John McCain could have given in Berlin (and Bush would have been a joke)? Okay, that doesn't mean that Obama would make a good President -- just that he can deliver a speech and handle himself well on the world stage. But give Obama the credit he deserves.

- Paulette

July 25, 2008 at 12:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The buck stops at the leader! You can immediately recognize real leaders by their continual inspiration to, at the moment it arises, deal intelligently with every issue, without having to rely on outside counsel, prearranged plans, or cheat sheets. It takes at least a quick mind, a sound inner foundation, and a well trained memory. Without this quality, how could one ever confidently debate the issues, or, more importantly, deal effectively for our country when the need arises? It takes more than just a team of lackeys or a badge that says “Great One”.

- DGF

July 25, 2008 at 12:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What Press?? I am a liberal gay man living in NYC with my African-American partner. We are both democrats, but we are also informed,intelligent and objective. We both still do not know who Obama is, and frankly we find his speeches quite average in the vain of the black ministirial genere, but other liberal white folks just swoon?? This is the same American Media that did not ask any questions leading up to the Iraqi war that is not asking the questions now. we learn more by listening to the BBC or reading The econosmist about the politicans and our country than any medai outlet here in America. We use to laugh and think how rediculasly biased Fox news is and then we realized CNN is as bad or worse just on the liberal side, which ironically we both support. However democracy and intelligent debate demand objectivity. Lastly, since when did news people sitting around asking 4 other news peoples opinion on issues nightly become news?? we dont want Roland Martins opinion, we just want to hear the facts, hear from the streets and let us form our own judgements and opinions. Journalism in America is a JOKE!!!! Lets see how the Love affair ends, more importantly lets see if the Media takes responsibility later.

- New Yorker

July 25, 2008 at 12:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I still don't understand why people can't see the Chicago Politics going on with Obama, you're evil for being the least bit critical of the man. I get weekly threats from teh Obama campaign that if I speak to the press or oppose anything Obama brings up or says at the National Convention that my political career is over. So yeah Obama is the great for uniting people... by slowly creating a fascist regime.

- A Democratic National Delegate

July 25, 2008 at 12:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This is merely a "pause". Americans are now aware of the medias efforts to make Obama the President. The media is attempting to "fall out of love" temporarily -- the ultimate goal will always be to carry him to the White House.

- Mike

July 25, 2008 at 12:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"The decision to mislead reporters is a troubling one," they wrote. "We hope this does not presage a relationship with the Obama campaign that is not based on a mutual respect for the truth." I imagine that they typed that while sitting on a pile of WMD's and while trying to suck McCain's Bar-B-Q sauce out from under their fingernails. Why didn't Katie just edit herself into Obama's entourage, like she edits gaffes out for McCain? Or maybe one of their "independent analyst" "retired" Generals wrote it for them on stationary from his defense contractor employer. Atleast the writers and Pravda didn't whine so much. The media has shown its hand in the last 2 elections, and the last 10 years of pro republican coverage. They are now getting the back of the hand from the democrats, which is much less than the punishment they deserve. yeah Pravda means "truth".

- feckless

July 25, 2008 at 12:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

We need to know if Senator John McCain is confused. We need to know how long he has been confused. We need to know whether his buddies called him a "MAVERICK" as the euphemism for "CONFUSED".

- Frankie G

July 25, 2008 at 12:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The pampered national press often complains of such tactics. It's like "exclusive interviews" at a super Bowl presser. Can't happen. Won't happen. As a former editor/reporter for several decades, I am amused by this public posturing because it reflects so well what editors hear all the time as excuses for why a story is not up to any wow! factor. If the poor babies cannot stomach a candidate or his handlers, step aside and let someone else try. I'd bet all the reporters on the Obama meal train would be horrified if they got reassigned for complaining. What he is doing is a parallel life to any major college coach, for instance. The local reporters are there because they have to be and so the handlers can ignore them. A new, important assignee may appear to get preferential treatment because the coach/candidate wants to encourage all the reporting they can. It is no more favoritism than the expected attempt to control the spin by indoctrination. Even the most popular subjects of interviews, without exception, will eventually adopt the bunker mentality. And, for the most part, they have answered all the questions they feel they need to answer at this point. I also agree with the previous observations of “some people” or general groupings like “classmates.” That in itself is shoddy reporting.

- Mikey Editor

July 25, 2008 at 12:18pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Message to Gabriel and the rest of our "journalists." You are officially dubbed IRRELEVANT. I can't believe all of you get paid for this crap. Try protecting the American people and covering something with substance. Investigate something.

- Jason

July 25, 2008 at 12:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ha! Reporters interviewing reporters ANONYMOUSLY complaining about TRANSPARENCY. I suppose they don't want to be a source in a story about their lack of access because it might hamper their access. Guess we're really down the rabbit hole now.

- julianprucha

July 25, 2008 at 12:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The press had better do it's job looking into both these candidates, neither one is fit to be President. Both will throw the borders wide open and continue to welcome the hoards of illegals along with drugs, crime, the draining of our resources and most likely WMD. look for attacks on our country on all sides when either one of these idiots gets in. They came after us on our own soil shortly after Bush got in. To his credit he went after them, to his shame he left the door wide open on our border and did nothing to stop them and in fact tried to "legalize" 20+ MILLION of them. My home state of California is upside down 15-17 BILLION and probably more but instead of deporting the millions here they want to raise taxes. Both McCain and Obama are pro illegal. Neither one is fit to lead us. General Petreaus for President.

- frank3108

July 25, 2008 at 12:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The only people who don't like Barack Obama are those who know him really well....

- Charles Conyers

July 25, 2008 at 12:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Why doesn't anyone address the question of where does Obama stand on reparations. Is this a taboo subject?

- Ralfe

July 25, 2008 at 12:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The tide is beginning to turn. Mr./Ms. Average American do not identify with, and will not vote for, Obama. Obama's campaign is revitalizing the center-right base and the press is starting to get feedback to indicate this. I have cancelled my subscription to People (they will feature Obama on its cover soon) and I have put my hometown newspaper on notice for its display of bias, as well. I no longer watch Oprah, CNN, MSNBC, and others when their liberal reporters speak and I know I am not alone. Watch as the press begins to realize the Obamabots are not the ones paying their salary. A different story will begin to emerge...

-

July 25, 2008 at 12:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

American Media: Incompetents Feeding Stool Softener to the Incontinent New IMPROVED American Media: 100% Self Absorbent

- ricky

July 25, 2008 at 12:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Andrea Mitchell, wife of former Federal Reserve Czar Alan Greenspan was miffed because she didn't get a personal interview with Sen. Obama while he was in Baghdad. She told Chris Matthews that she was going to headline a written piece with the following "Sen. Obama rejects Gen Petreaus' on the ground assessments" Of course this was a lie but she didn't care because she was angry. Many journalists have redefined the "surge" so they could make up stories about what Sen. Obama said instead of simply reporting what he said. Unlike some Americans and American journalists - Sen. Obama doesn't think in terms of black and white. He understands that the world is mostly shades of gray. Grow up America.

- Jean Brown

July 25, 2008 at 12:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Adam N. complains: "If you have a problem with a story I write, call me first. I'm a big boy. I can handle it. But they never called." Some big boys never quit sucking their thumbs.

- Ricky

July 25, 2008 at 12:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

One only needs to look at where Obama came from to understand how he is acting - Never forget that he grew up in Chicago politics. The press makes the same complaints of Illinois' current governer. The Speaker of the Illinois House very rarely speaks to the press. Illinois is one of the most corrupt political states in the Country and it is where Obama got his start in politics.

- The KQ

July 25, 2008 at 12:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The press has given Bush a pass for 8 years. No, not a pass, praise. (Tell me again just how manly he looked for "Mission Accomplished".) Now they complain that Obama's people are like Bush's people. Maybe Obama's people learned the lesson. Clinton gave the press pretty much unlimited access and ran a basically transparent administration and we know how that worked out. The very same NYTimes started it off with an outrageous series about Whitewater and ended with the media unable to talk about anything but Monica. Andrea Mitchell's complaining about not getting to see Obama shoot his 3 pointer ("We don't really know what is going on because he didn't allow us to go so we could ask the relevant questions" or words to that effect) was a tantrum worthy of spoiled brats and royalty. The Village needs to get over itself. We want change and that means them too.

- Suzan

July 25, 2008 at 12:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The media has enough credibility problems of their own. It's amazing to me that they have the gall to try and demonize Obama, when they dropped the ball on Bush's mad war, you know like the WMD fiasco. Where were the tough questions then? The media is now worried that all of thier corporate sponsors are going to turn on them because they are protraying Barack Obama in such a positive light, so now they are "flip-flopping" about McCain. C'mon, this is a man who is so old and apparently suffering from senility or Alzheimers, because he keeps making stupid foreign policy comments, that the press here in the U.S. keeps "forgetting" to report. When are we going to stop doing "politics as usual", and get about the business of getting this country back on track. We have "serious" issues that need to be addressed: Four dollars a gallon fuel prices, high food prices, and let us not forget about the subprime mess, and the fact that most of our large banks, like Citigroup were "cooking the books" so to speak! Where's the news report about that? Does the American people even know that the reason we are in this financial crisis is because of the "risky" loans the banks were trying to do, you know the corporate buyouts? Funny, I haven't seen any of this reported on Cnn,Fox News.ABC, CBS and of course they didn't have it on NBC or MSNBC....Just like Enron, the banks were making long term deals and financing them with short term paper! Need proof? Check out : The Trillion Dollar Meltdown: Easy Money, High Rollers and the Great Credit Crash by Charles R. Morris. And please let us not forget, oil is now being speculated on the stock market, so the higher a barrel of oil sells for, more of our presidents friends and cronies are getting richer, while we are getting poorer and poorer. And one last note, remember, in Iraq, the government, sanctioned by our government, was handing out $8000.00 per family. We got a measly $300 per family to stimulate the economy! Gee and we even get to pay taxes to have our government screw us!

- Lynda D. Brown

July 25, 2008 at 12:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I totally agree. If you are going to tell the story, then tell the whole story as to why some of you reporters are being ailienated from covering this campaign. Why are you (journalist) not being held to the fire for not reporting the gibberish that McCain in saying. And why is this campaign all centered on what Mr. Obama is doing. It's wonderful to listen to someone speak with some intellegence. This country in torn to pieces. some can't afford the bare neccessities. What happened to McCain talking about that? You know why he is not, because he and his party have no plans. As I see it, they have thrown all who are not "RICH" under the bus.

- phdbound

July 25, 2008 at 12:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This writer also conveniently fails to mention how the NYT article grossly misrepresented the facts of the survey, so much that the writer cited issued an acknowledgment of its misrepresentation.

- joe

July 25, 2008 at 12:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"And there's been widespread grumbling that the campaign revoked New Yorker writer Ryan Lizza's spot on the trip as retribution for the magazine's recent satirical cover." Are you sure about that? After reading the actual article Lizza wrote effectively deconstructing the Obama's mythic political genesis in Chicago, I suspect his press revocation has more to do with his balanced reporting than the dust-up about the cover.

- Assezmalicieux

July 25, 2008 at 12:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You know why not to many stories are going to be written about Michelle Obama, because God forbid someone finds out who her hair stylist is or where she shops for her children's clothes.

- phdbound

July 25, 2008 at 12:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You are not journalists, you are lower than fertilizer.

- John

July 25, 2008 at 12:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

There's plenty of "real news" even "real campaign news" going on; but the marquee political journalists and pundits don't bother much with stuff that's outside the campaign narratives established by the Times, WaPo and broadcast news divisions. No one who paid attention to what was done to Al Gore in 1999-2000 and John Kerry during the Swift Boat smear could be surprised that the Obama campaign is wary of this crowd. The Washington press corps liked Obama well enough when they could project their banal sociology onto his campaign and use him as the anti-Clinton. Now that he's looking like a more hard-headed and complex candidate than was expected, a smart politician who's not so easy to pigeonhole, the narrative's shifting a bit. We're hearing about his "ego", his "presumptuousness", and -- my personal favorite -- the McCain campaign's complaints about press favoratism toward Obama. All these little themes will find their way into the coverage; there's not too much original reporting or independent thinking going on among the newsfolks who command the most attention. You can see from this piece that they think it's all about them, rather than about the candidates, or the voters, or [try to imagine it] the future of the country.

- sabine

July 25, 2008 at 12:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't buy the hype the MSM is in the bag for Obama? Was it during the Wright junk? Was it the attacks on his wife? Was it pushing hard the 'bitter' comment story? Truth is he is still being trashed by the likes of Candy Crowley, Mayfowler, Politco.com (i.e. Republico.com), on and on. Where is this great love? No, it is really an appreciation of how he has run his campaign. I see no reason why the MSM should not show interest in a guy who draws thousands to his rallies in and outside the US, doesn't play the usual games, and tries to shoot down all the MSM gotcha moments. Oh I know, just because we built him up, let's now rip him to shreds, typical MSM (now puppets to the National Enquirer types)tactic.

- EMJ

July 25, 2008 at 12:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

So does this mean that the column writer who the Obama People have called an "opponent" was propogandist for the Obama People? There is a difference between "reporting" the news and "fixing" the news. There is a difference between writing an believed in "opinion" and manufacturing or partially manufacturing an opinion with enough "twiking" from those who will bennifit. Free Press issues all over the place; mostly ignored, but there none the less.

- John P. Smith

July 25, 2008 at 12:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You have just admitted that if a candidate doesn't do what the press wants, the press will start writing negative stories. So much for journalistic integrity and JUST REPORTING THE NEWS. As others here have said, it is not the candidate's job to give you a story. The press is supposed to report on centers of power, not to BE the center of power.

- StLMO voter

July 25, 2008 at 1:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Amazing! I have never in a campaign publicly in print and TV seen so much whining! If not from the press, it's from the opposition. The word arrogance is thrown around ad nauseum. Code word for quite a few in the know. Operative word this week is "presumptious". Keep in mind you have a student stealing Obamas prayer from the Wall in Israel and it being published the next day in the newspaper, (nothing sacred here eh?) Republicans hunting down a 25 year old thesis paper Obama wrote in college but oooooooo can't find, has to be disarming terrorist info. There is this FALSE notion that the media loves Obama while McCain makes more gaffes in one week that are played down by the MSM. There's your media love affair. So no it's not arrogance. The arrogance is some of the MSM perceiving that they are carte blanche in reporting on Obama and his campaigns arrogance if his campaign doesn't stroke or feed the media egos!

- Kay

July 25, 2008 at 1:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I agree, this is serious. So with that Mr. McCain needs to start telling us what are his plans for the American people, instead of trying to turn us against Mr. Obama.

- phdbound

July 25, 2008 at 1:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Wow a negative article about Obama in the New Republic? Who of thunk it? Just because the dems have a guy who is not going to be swift boated by the fear and smear Republicans people can't stand it. Just because hundreds of thousands of people in and out of the US like the guy the right wing MSM can't stand that so spending every waking moment in search of that 'gotcha' moment. Call us a cult, make ridiculous Jesus type claims (yeah, now that's a true Christian Right, or shoudl I say that;s a Right Christian). Obama like Clinton is going to win becaus ehe doesn't play the old tired 'New' Republic, uh I mean the Republican smaer, fear, and destroy games.

- EMJ

July 25, 2008 at 1:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

" I would like to see one take no prisoners not worried about future access real jounalist do a honest no hype expose on Obama. " Here it is. "NBC's Andrea Mitchell was the one journalist with the courage to name what she was actually seeing happen: Obama faking even being interviewed by the press. "Let me say something about the message management. He didn't have reporters with him, he didn't have a press pool, he didn't do a press conference," either in Afghanistan or Iraq, noted Mitchell on the air. Instead Obama manufactured "what some would call 'fake interviews,' because they are not interviews from a journalist," Mitchell went on."

- anotherview

July 25, 2008 at 1:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

After watching this guy for awhile now I am convinced that Obama is nothing like his handlers are trying to portray him. In unscripted moments, he flubs, dubs, umms and ahhs his way to saying practically nothing. If he does say something of consequence, it always seems a bit out of plumb. Kinda leaves you scratching your head. I can see why his unscripted face time is closely guarded. It is looking more and more that he may be an empty suit.

- G Jiggy

July 25, 2008 at 1:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sen McCain's whining about the media isn't very Presidential. CBS covered up his(McCain's) Anbar/surge time-line gaffe screw up...what more is he wanting? They could have aired it, which would have made him look even more out of touch with reality! This strategy didn't work for the Clinton's... If Sen McCain stuck to the issues only, he'd do a lot better. The whining & attacks are pushing moderates away. Also...he should NEVER ever again challenge Sen. obama to a debate! With his recent fumbles, why would he want to stand on stage next to Sen. Obama ?

- Will

July 25, 2008 at 1:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Wow! The comments here are amazing. Rightly, there are those blasting the brattiness and sense of entitlement of the press. Then there are these weird complaints about how the press is failing to report the "real Obama," who is, in no particular order, arrogant, dumb, elitist, hiding something, tyrannical, etc. All of this fails to address the simple fact that a lot of solid reporting about Obama the candidate can be done without having to gain access to his plane or bus or even interview him. McClatchy reporters knew more about Iraq WMDs without using Bush administration spin sources than the entire MSM; I.F. Stone used to report more effectively than nearly all of his peers without resorting to the access ass-kissing that now characterizes press reporting. Need I add that I have found far better information about their campaigns in blog entries from writers who are working as campaigners? In brief, access to the candidates is simply not necessary to provide solid, ethical, information-rich reporting on the candidates, their campaigns, and their policy positions.

- BLGer

July 25, 2008 at 1:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Penndem, why is telling the truth whinning? Everytime someone tells it like it is, you Obamamaniacs cry "whinning". Truth hurts doesn't it. Obama is a flipp flopping, lying, press ducking, .......there I'm whinning. It's all true. If you want to support this guy "no matter what" then do it - but don't criticize everyone who isn't.

- Joann

July 25, 2008 at 1:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Move along now, nothing here to see. Just a few broken strings. Every puppet goes through this, geeing when he should be hawing. And just maybe the puppet-master pulled the wrong string.

- daryl

July 25, 2008 at 1:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

My question for the author. If Adam N. of the NYT was upset that the Obama campaign did not call him A SECOND TIME with their full objections to his FACTUALLY CHALLENGED TO SAY THE LEAST article before they spoke with other reporters, did he call the Obama campaign to complain before he gave his quote to you?

- Ricky

July 25, 2008 at 1:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

" Posted by Steve Paradis 115 of 200 | warn tnr | respond I never hear people like Sy Hersh making this complaint--mainly because some reporters think it's still their job to get the story, rather than act like inmates at a pate factory farm." Steve, the analogy is funny although I don't exactly get the point. If you mean a factory full of hysterical honking geese with funnels forced into their mouths and pablum crammed down their throats then you would love the opening scene of the Laurel and Hardy film,"Saps at Sea". Hardy is driven mad by working in a horn factory. Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com

- Monte Haun

July 25, 2008 at 1:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Excellent points, Lynda. You just saved me getting all worked up and submitting a post essentially expressing the same sentiments as you have. Some of McCain's comments (in particular, his confession that he's not "good" with economic issues) received precious little attention. And in an apparent effort to educate himself, he hired Phil Gramm, who summed up the economic disaster in the US by calling Americans a nation of whiners. Unacceptable and indefensible. But you won't hear that from the press. Because then McCain wouldn't love them anymore.

- LAKR

July 25, 2008 at 1:38pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'd have more respect for the press if they called McCain's "gaffes" what they are: revelations of ignorance. I'm so sick of of the sugar-coating.

- LAKR

July 25, 2008 at 1:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Great story - it's always nice to see a member of the media write a story whining about how badly the media is treated. I've worked with the press for 15 years, and the truth is that most of them are consumed by an arrogant, self-important pursuit of exclusivity and access. They find it almost impossible to resist the temptation to get a 'scoop' and they are obsessed with forcing a narrative upon the subjects of their reporting, and will react to the slightest perceived offense or lack of sufficient butt kissing by sullying a person or entity's reputation in writing. The deliberately create a dialog that makes it difficult to provide a positive context to any action or words, and they are generally taken to dishonesty and deception to create stories that are controversial and based on the personal biases that motivate their advertisers and subsequently their reader demographic. They've become increasingly lazy over the years, and instead of reporting substance and issues, they'd rather write petty stories about the public spectacle and characatures that they themselves twist into an ongoing theatre. Any individual or entity that tries to control their public image and force the editorial community to actually do a service to the public instead of simply feeding these increasingly lazy diarists with more daily tripe risks a litany of mischaracterization. The only way to win is to give in, or to be smarter than they are. The Obama campaign is far smarter by and large than the media and they hate it - they are forced to follow along. Hence, stories like this one in which a reporter is arrogant enough to believe that how a reporter feels about his or her job and petty grievances is in itself newsworthy. They won't like this comment, but for the most part it is true: they wish to make PR hacks into evil monsters, but they of course are unwilling to admit that the first person they call when they need something is a PR hack who they demand and require to serve up all of the necessary ingredients to their reporting on a silver platter so that they can "write" the bit and act like they've done a service to humanity. Manipulative, deceptive and essentially lazy is what they have become over the period of the last 10 years in particular. Oh, yeah ... and they love barbecue...

- hack

July 25, 2008 at 1:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Anyone considering voting for this blithering idiot better first have a clear understanding what he actually stands for. Obama's statement in Berlin that he was "a citizen of the World" was NOT idle chatter. The following from WorldNetDaily: Obama's $845 billion U.N. plan forwarded to U.S. Senate floor 'Global Poverty Act' to cost each citizen $2,500 or more Tom DeWeese at NewsWithViews said the plan "is very telling" about what Obama would do as president. DeWeese, president of the American Policy Center, warned the over-arching plan includes the ideals of consolidating all international agencies under the U.N., regulation by the U.N. of all corporate environmental issues, license fees charged by the U.N. to use air, water and natural resources, a restructuring that would give hand-picked non-governmental organizations huge influence, authorize a standing U.N. army and require registration of all arms.

- Greg Neubeck

July 25, 2008 at 1:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Maybe the press would feel better if they were invited to the Obamas' personal residence and greeted with a backyard BBQ, a la Casa de McCain?

- ndeneen

July 25, 2008 at 1:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

" Posted by Steve Paradis 115 of 200 | warn tnr | respond I never hear people like Sy Hersh making this complaint--mainly because some reporters think it's still their job to get the story, rather than act like inmates at a pate factory farm." Steve, the analogy is funny although I don't exactly get the point. If you mean a factory full of hysterical honking geese with funnels forced into their mouths and pablum crammed down their throats then you would love the opening scene of the Laurel and Hardy film,"Saps at Sea". Hardy is driven mad by working in a horn factory. Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com

- Monte Haun

July 25, 2008 at 1:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

" Posted by Steve Paradis 115 of 200 | warn tnr | respond I never hear people like Sy Hersh making this complaint--mainly because some reporters think it's still their job to get the story, rather than act like inmates at a pate factory farm." Steve, the analogy is funny although I don't exactly get the point. If you mean a factory full of hysterical honking geese with funnels forced into their mouths and pablum crammed down their throats then you would love the opening scene of the Laurel and Hardy film,"Saps at Sea". Hardy is driven mad by working in a horn factory. Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com

- Monte Haun

July 25, 2008 at 1:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Gabriel you're a hater. Obama won't talk to us. Obama won't share secrets with us, Obama didn't tell us he was talking to Hillary,..... Obama's team rebuked what we wrote about him,.... Obama would not let our cameraman on the plane,... The problem with the press is you people think everybody owes you something. I'm glad Obama has a tight ship. He's no different that Bush in that respect. With the exception of one person that fell off the wagon Bush has kept a very tight ship. I don't like Bush at all but I respect that aspect of his organization. If you people did more fact based reporting more people would talk to you. But the majority of you spend your time gossiping like a bunch a little girls rather than actually reporting on something worth while. You titled your article "The Break up" and all you wrote about was not being able to get more stuff from the candidate. If it was up to me I would take a page out of Prince's career and not talk to the press at all. You people don't deserve the time of day.

- Fulltime Observer

July 25, 2008 at 1:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

people like you will say anything and do anything to undermine intellegence. look for something, look for anything to feed your own narrow mindedness.

- phdbound

July 25, 2008 at 2:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Let's have a bit of honesty here! During the Democratic primary debates, the press repeatedly set up Obama and trashed him with "gotcha" questions--including the late and much-revered Tim Russert. Adam Nagourney has been snarky at times, and at other times unnecessarily arrogant, in his Obama coverage. I think it is understandable that the campaign would want to protect Obama from some of the "foul play" and spin the corporate press is inclined to indulge in! I doubt you will see complaints from the alternative press--who tend to print the facts as they unfold, without excessive spin! The arrogance of the mainstream political press is no small thing!!!! Admit it!

- Kate Madison

July 25, 2008 at 2:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Bob Cesca's article on the myth of a media infatuation could not have come at a more timely moment as I travel around and read the self-righteous spin of the corporate whores. At a moment when McCain has made several outrageous gaffes (from Iraq Afghanistan border to the surge caused the Anbar awakening to claiming the surge was a state of mind), the press covers for him and continues what has been overwhelmingly negative and critical coverage since Rev. Wright in mid-March. The latest 2 spin words are "arrogant" and "presumptuous" since the gaffe vultures couldn't cath him in one on his astonishingly successful overseas trip, and therefore must doggedly deflect attention from McCain's continued series of highly embarrassing misspeaks.

- Michael Zilber

July 25, 2008 at 2:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Americans are not whiners, just American journalists. As your market is so saturated with good and bad reporters, don't you think you'd be a little less transparent if you were barack and you were looking directly into what was at stake? Wear the shoes once in awhile and stop whining.

- Randall Frey

July 25, 2008 at 2:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The Obmanation's promise of transparency is a lot like the Clinton's promise of the most ethical administration ever. When dealing with Marxist's you must always remember their creed: "some animals are more equal than others."

- Cara

July 25, 2008 at 2:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Nye, nye, nye, nye, nye. This incessant whining is getting to me. You complain that you do not have access but each time you are given the access, like over-indulged, spoiled school kids you spit and destroy the relationship. Adam Nagourney, himself has admitted that he himself mis-represented the most pertinent pieces of information of the poll in question. How could he have been so wrong unless he was trying to sabotage the Obama campaign and create news? I read the objections made by Obama and found those objects to be valid. Nagourney additted that he had erred. So, why are you complaining? The American press should do its job. Had that been the case then instances of violations of constitutional rights would not have occurred -- prosecution of Democratic governors, firing of AGs, promotion of DOJ staffers who were yes men, torture memos, Judith Miller and the WMD, etc. Do your job. Stop whining.

- John Paul Telhomme

July 25, 2008 at 2:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

and so are the bible toting thugs who brought their children to the lynching of his ancestors.

- phdbound

July 25, 2008 at 2:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Fascinating. An article about the media complaining they don't get a fair shake from the people they are covering. Grow up, people. And not one person has the balls to go on record with their bitching. Except Tumulty, who seems bewildered that "ten minutes" really means "ten minutes."

- Kris

July 25, 2008 at 2:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Very good comments and logic on this blog, kudoos to all. My take is 2 fold. 1- Obama has to act arrogant and entilted because there is no experiential substance in his background, what else can he offer except attitiude? Last time I checked attitude has nothing to do with leadership and we need leaders not rock stars. 2- The press are not reporters, they are marketers of anything sensationalistic or titilating. If you look to them for news, you will be disappointed. I always vote for strong proven character first, experience and capability second and espoused policy third. If you have the first two, reasonable policy should follow regardless of party. This is why the Democats failed with Clinton and lost 2 elections to an inadequate GWB; because they offer partisanship first, fake eperience second, and no strong character at all in thier candidates. Kennedy was thier last offering of character and they haven't gotten it right since.

- Marky-poo

July 25, 2008 at 2:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

All in my family are so sick of Obama and his rock star appearance and sick of the press. After voting for Obama in the primaries, we will not be voting for him in the general elections. We will be voting against the press, against Obama's arrogance, against Obama's insulting and crude-rude followers, against Donna Brazile and her Chicago mobsters taking over our democratic party. NOBAMA in this house.

- Mrs. Phoenix

July 25, 2008 at 2:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Many of you seem to feel Obama should cut off the press if they disagree with him or paint him in a negative light? SO, all of you support the use of propgandist techniques during an election? Hmmmmmmm. Sounds like a spat between two spoiled and arrogant children to me, the press on one hand and Obama on the other. Why don't they both grow up?

- Mark

July 25, 2008 at 2:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh you poor babies. Listen to yourselves whine! What a pathetic article this is. You all are so important that how could anyone want to ignore you!!

- Linda B

July 25, 2008 at 2:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

That's what you guys get. Remember the shenanigans (albeit stupid questions) during the "debate in PA? The O team has finally figured out that most reporters graduated at the bottom of their respective classes, and they would not have anything to do with a bunch of moronic fools! LMAO!

- michael

July 25, 2008 at 2:34pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"If you're getting an interview, and they say ten minutes, it's ten minutes." Oh dear! What's wrong with those Obama people? Shocking! Simply shocking!

-

July 25, 2008 at 2:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Most headlines I read are Obama has a problem with (insert group), drawing 200,000 ppl in Germany and the press talk about how it might turn some voters off. If he went around kissing babies and shaking hands I'm sure the press would ask if he washed his hands and face or is he looking to give them the flu. Meanwhile MacDaddy is bumbling around saying some false and some disturbing stuff and the press is going "awww gramps made a funny". In 2004 the press didn't need to try and make Kerry like bad, he did a lot of that on his own, but this time I can see and actual effort to make Obama look bad and McSimple look good or neutralize a bad gaffe

- Nathan

July 25, 2008 at 2:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I am so sick and tired of these closet racists and bigots coming on the blogs spewwing their hatred for this black man that will be our next president. At fisrt they all hounded Obama because he didn't go to Iraq and abroad and now that he did, you criticize him because is well liked...WOW!!! he can't win for losing, but at the end of the day we all know that he is our next POTUS because everytime Mcsame opens his mouth he puts his foot in it and everyone is beginning to see that he is in the early stages of alzheimers, so get used to it and watch this Black American Man show the world hoe it's supposed to be done!!!lol

- dayday

July 25, 2008 at 2:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

... yeah... he was elected Editor-in-Chief of the Harvard Law Review, a job that takes about 24 hours out of every day. What a story editing those law review articles will be!

- Robert Vanderet

July 25, 2008 at 2:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

How about the Mantra of "Where is equality for all men and women?, Reprarations, is that all you can think about when referencing AA's? Come on Who is really thinking about themselves?

- Smuhamm

July 25, 2008 at 2:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"How 'bout the media reports news, and doesn't try to get laid by the candidates?" ++++++ You know what? None of this is about "trying to get laid by the candidates." It's about trying to ensure the access that allows exactly what you want: the reporting of news. +++++ Maybe I've just been reading too much blog snark lately, but the kneejerk media-bashing is starting to feel really lame and tired. People love to rail on the press, and many are gleefully anticipating its demise. I'm honestly starting to think the mainstream press should go on strike for three or four days, all Ayn Rand style, and let America see what life is like without a powerful, active, connected news media. I suspect it wouldn't be pretty.

- Chris

July 25, 2008 at 2:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

man i swear, the real prom queens are these journalists. gee, why would a politician running for office not trust the media? i mean, the media is so unbiased and didn't lap up lie after lie about the war, every minor gaffe and pseudo-scandal, obama's bowling score ad naseum, i could go on and on.........the real love affair is with themselves and their need to be coddled and accepted by powerful people.

- masso

July 25, 2008 at 2:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

GOHT DAYUM AMERIKKUH!! GOHT DAYUM AMERIKKUH!!

- Rerund Jeremiah Wright

July 25, 2008 at 3:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"But they never called. They attacked me like I'm a political opponent." ...uhhh, that's because unless you're totally in the tank for Obama, unless you report ONLY the good and ONLY what 'his holiness the ONE' wants, you ARE considered a political opponent!

- Dan

July 25, 2008 at 3:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And another thing too...don't you people think that not only the "PRESS" but also Hillary's people, mcsame's people, everyone who is biased against him who wants to believe even fabricate bad things about him have tried to find it??? but they can't because there is NOTHING BAD OUT THERE!!! quit trying to make shit up!!!GOD!!! A black man IS GOING TO BE YOUR NEXT POTUS!!! I know you can't stand the thought of it, but you need to wake up and face reality and get used to it. lmbao

- dayday

July 25, 2008 at 3:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

All of you folks are barking up a wrong tree. Obama is just an ornament on the propaganda juggernaut created by the extreme fascist left. He is neither good nor bad for he is just a tool. The majority of the Democratic party is an amorphous blob of gutless followers pandering to the loudest screamers and is afraid to stare down the radicals in their midst. That is why Joe Liberman was pushed out of the Party. The media outlets play along with this charade because they are in the business of SELLING what THEY call "news" and that's their ultimate bottom line. It is not Barak "vaseline man" Obama that has to be examined, but the radicals that back him up. These radicals who pretend to be reasonable are the ones who are killing an honest, reasonable and very necessary dialogue in this country. Democrats have to present intelligent arguments to the Republicans. Republicans have to provide logical answers to Democrats and in the end they have to agree on the best course of action. So far I see little of this, just a lot of posturing, theatrics and media manipulation.

- mik the disappointed

July 25, 2008 at 3:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama's ancestor's were either in Kenya or busy being Caucasion when lynchings were going on in the U.S. You do know the Messiah's mama was white, don't you? And that his father was from Kenya? Idjit.

- ATTN: Phbhound

July 25, 2008 at 3:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Does anyone think that the vast majority of Americans pay any mind to the media? The vast majority already know who they are going to vote for and no amount of media manipulation will change their minds. I admit that I tune out McCain. He hasn't said anything new or relevant in weeks. I don't listen to him anymore. I know a vote for him is a vote for the Republican brand and no way I will vote for a Republican anytime soon, not after 8 years of the current moron in the White House. I will vote for Obama (or any Democrat) over any Republican. Media be damned.

- toritto

July 25, 2008 at 3:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

how bout macsame's? he wasn't even born in the united states....lol!!!

- dayday

July 25, 2008 at 3:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If this story is supposed to convince us red-staters that the press is no longer in Obama's pocket, try again. When reporters start pointing out that Obama's statements and policies are either nonsensical, megalomaniacal, dishonest, naive, or all of the above (my personal belief), I'll have a little respect for them. Until then, this is a bunch of Hannah Montana groupies complaining that they can't get backstage. Scott

- srlucado

July 25, 2008 at 3:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama will throw anyone under the bus if they soil his royal cloak and dagger, even his lap dog bed-partners, the legacy media.

- Mike S.

July 25, 2008 at 3:34pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sherman's statement that the Press certainly helped Obama get where he is and the implication that he therefore somehow OWES the media seems to want to establish an entitlement relationship. It also begs the question "Which of the media does he owe?" Just wondering.

- Wes Cain

July 25, 2008 at 3:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Why would anyone want to interview Obam-uh? When he doesn't have a script, this guy can't get a sentence out withot a couple of dozen uhs, ahs, ehs, mms. This guy is better than a sleeping pill. At least Bush's sentences are short and sweet.

- Helen Back

July 25, 2008 at 3:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Artigiano: Amen my brother!

- Wes Cain

July 25, 2008 at 3:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama is going to win. It's a good thing my car runs on hope.

- Ed Wood

July 25, 2008 at 3:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

whats with all these "the media love obama" people (and the anti-obama racism in here, you think i don't know what the "88" in "tr88" is mr. tr88, you bone-head scum, thats nazi-skin-loser code for Heil Hitler my fellow posters). i seem to recall a certain ultimate-fluff story about obamas bowling score that went on, on all major news outlets, for several weeks. terrorist fist-jabs, the new yorker cover, childish people harping on the middle name his parents gave him, how michelle obama is "bitter", when to any sane person she appears perfectly happy.....the list goes on. if they loved him, why did they cover that stuff? what the media likes isn't right or left, what they like is sex, violence, fluff and a good show. obama has been putting a good show on what with all the folks who come to hear him speak. that comes across very clearly to me. mccain's show, well, kinda sucks. he's lucky though, the media are being far too kind too a man who doesn't even know that afghanistan doesn't borders iraq.

- masso

July 25, 2008 at 3:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama is going to win. It's a good thing my car runs on hope.

- Ed Wood

July 25, 2008 at 3:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I can't say this enough, Hussein is a sinister, evil person." --kansasgirl Well gee there missy, did the dandy in $3000 suit, the slicked back died hair who preaches hate in the shiny 40,000 seat SuperCathedral clue you in that God told him that? Did he tell you that God told him to ask you to give him money, so he can "say-eve the whole dang Worl" from the visionary and charasmatic leader who insires people to wake up and do good? What are you doing next Sunday? I've got some videos to show you to shatter your world. -C

- chris

July 25, 2008 at 3:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Personally, I'm fed up with the press and will call them out at every opportunity if they report lies, rumors, innuendos and the like. They can get off their high horses and start justifying the privileges they were granted in the Constitution Their job is to protect our democracy from power-hungry fools like Bush and Cheney, a job they have neglected for the last 8 years.

- CDW

July 25, 2008 at 3:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You republicans are pathetic! What a bunch of losers!

- Joe

July 25, 2008 at 3:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When the Democratic Parrot in Chief utter the Holy words the Press should bow down and repeat,repeat and repeat.

- MFB

July 25, 2008 at 3:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Why is it that I tend to doubt that ALL of your framily voted for Obama in the primary and that now ALL of your family is going to vote against him in the general....that's quite a group epiphany!

- Wes Cain

July 25, 2008 at 3:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You know what? The prima donas in the press need to grow up. The race for the presidency is not being done for their entertainment, nor to advance their careers.

- Lenny

July 25, 2008 at 3:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

racist much?

-

July 25, 2008 at 3:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I will vote for McCain. McCain loves the USA.

- A.C.

July 25, 2008 at 3:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

i find it absolutely frightening that the barack devotees posting here feel that the press should run their articles past the obama campaign staff before publishing them ! so this is the 'change' we've heard so much about ?! no criticism of the Dear Leader will be tolerated ? did i fall asleep and wake up in north korea ??

- el polacko

July 25, 2008 at 4:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The MSM installed Sen. Obama as the Democratic nominee by giving him a free pass while clobbering Sen. Clinton. Now they are obligated to continue their positive coverage in order to install him in the White House.

- Yellow Dog

July 25, 2008 at 4:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh, I feel so sorry for you press people. The reason why you are cut off is because of the Kerry "swift boat" experience, which you reported on like mad-cow crazy tabloid journalists. Throw in continually letting your readers and viewers down on proper "truth" coverage of the the Iraq war from the run-up till today and your basic snobbish holier-than-thou attitude towards not only your readers (with increasing newsstand costs)but those you cover and there you have it. I'm proud Obama is showing some backbone with you. If he is to win, he'll have to show more of it. Substance this substance that. Wait for the debates. "Where's the beef" is a great trap. Just wait.

- Edward R. Matthews

July 25, 2008 at 4:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Am I an Hyphenated American and my people were here when this nation began? Race does not matter to me but White America did not build this nation by itself, it had free labor for 400 years. I imagine you have a career, imagine your company profits and freedom if you had free labor. Well of the many contributions of White America, free labor was the contribution of Black America.

- Oliver

July 25, 2008 at 4:18pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I fully believe that the Obama hard-liners would have no problems building concentration camps for "non-believers" and "agitators" not barking the party line.

- John

July 25, 2008 at 4:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Unfortunately the media has been outsmarted and they dont know not what to do, except complain. Fact is the media is over coverring Obama, and it has its positives and negatives. The media got caught up in the Obama's presence and began fawning over his speeches and tried to push the "rock star"/perfection image on Obama. The smart man he is... HE TOOK ADVANTAGE OF IT. But because the media was caught up in potraying him as a rock star, they failed to see the nuance in his positions and the command of language that he has. Case in point, the eternal search for the apparent "flip flops." Its outgrowth, Repubs calling him the "messiah" and an "empty suit." If a guy who is Harvard Law educated, is an empty suit, what the heck are the REST OF YOU. Fact is that people will vote for Obama because they like his stance on issues over McCain. I hope this self-indulgent and arrogant "break up" this "journalist" describes is real... so we can start to FOCUS on MR. McCAIN, oh but wait is that what you REPUBLICANS really want... MY GUESS NO!

- Amazing

July 25, 2008 at 4:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sound almost Nixonian, cept Nixon didn't go that far with the press. Couple observations. One, people who are that thin skinned usually make poor leaders, I mean why try and descredit a reporter. Remember Obama, never do battle with someone who has a barrel full of ink. Second, I think the intense efforts to discredit these pieces by reporters will stop once the press gets over its love affair with Obama and start doing some real reporting on him, the issues and his background. They won't have time to tear apart every negative piece IF the press ever wakes up.

- Robert Cashman

July 25, 2008 at 4:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

> I would like to know a little more about Obama > by those who REALLY know him. How can they > tell classmates from Harvard not to speak > to the press without permission. One of my closest friends was at Harvard Law same time as Obama. My friend and everyone he knew in that class was very pleased about Obama becoming president of the law review, not because he was the first African-American, but because he was widely liked and respected by classmates.

- Keev

July 25, 2008 at 4:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You are being unfair to Obama. If you had no substance, no experience, and lot's to hide..you' want to be hidden behind a wall like a gaffe with legs he is.

- TheGreatRedondo

July 25, 2008 at 4:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Two quotes from A. Nagourney: "I'm a big boy. I can handle it." "They attacked me like I'm a political opponent." Based on #2 I have my doubts about #1.

-

July 25, 2008 at 4:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Ala - Ak-Obama!"

- bill

July 25, 2008 at 4:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I find it ironic that Adam Nagourney could bitch about Obama taking his complaints to bloggers instead of consulting him directly. Obama's a "big boy" too and if Nagourney had issues, he could have addressed it with the the campaign first. Moreover, Obama's criticisms of the Nagourney article were legitimate. The logic in Nagourney's article, "Poll Finds Obama's Run Isn't Closing Divide on Race," is completely flawed. It is based on the assumption that Blacks have a much more favorable impression of Obama (80%) and a much less favorable impression of McCain. The favorability numbers for white people for both candidates are within the margin of error. It seems to me the correct headline is: "McCain has a real Black people issue" rather than "Obama has a race issue." Obama seems to be doing just fine. Another logical flaw is assuming that the difference in opinion between white and black people is completely attributable to race. If you check out similar polls between Clinton and Bush, you'll probably find very similar numbers -- white people about tied, but black people overwhelmingly in favor of Clinton. Would the headline then have been "Bill Clinton Fails to Close Race Divide?" I don't think so. Instead of taking these criticisms and addressing the issue directly, Nagourney seems to have taken it personally. If he were a professional, such personal grievances wouldn't show in his work, but I'm afraid Nagourney is not a professional. He's a whiney, egotistical asshole.

- RCE

July 25, 2008 at 4:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Why does the press continue to miss all the news? Like why not report that most or many of the Germans came to see and hear the German rock bands who were hired to perform as a lead in to the Obama speech in Berlin yet not one word in American news media coverage?

- Big D

July 25, 2008 at 5:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The thin-skinnedness of the Obama campaign is becoming a bit troubling, as are the barriers being assembled around the candidate. Perhaps this is just an excess of caution, something one does when you're in the lead and feel you must protect it at all costs. Kind of like what the Lakers did when they were up by 24 points over the Celtics. But why antagonize friends? Has Obama become blinded to who actually are his friends? And for that matter, why not grant interviews to a foreign journalist or two? (Germans, for example, may not vote here, but a little personal outreach could, in the long run, complement the rock concert stuff and do loads for the nation's tattered reputation.) I'm beginning to sense a real lack of openness in the campaign, reminiscent of who - W and Nixon? I suppose that it's possible that Obama is utterly humorless (witness the reaction to the New Yorker cover), but that's not a disqualification for the job of Commander in Chief. Although a little jocularity can come in useful. Witness Ronnie. But the super-sensitivity to the straightforward (in my view) Nagourney piece and a not unflattering look at Obama's South Side history in the New Yorker (what? he's a real person? he got where he is by being politically astute and not through divine intervention? Would people feel more comfortable reading hagiographies? OK. Maybe they would. Obama didn't lose a PT Boat or a jet fighter. But he needn't show the physical courage of a Forest Gump or the grittiness of an offensive to qualify for the oval office. Otherwise, Jesse Ventura would be president. Obama doesn't have to be a hero. But could that be a lack of courage, a lack of toughness, an overly sensitive ego that I'm seeing? Sure - this campaign has been a rigorous test if there ever was one, and Obama seemed to deflect attacks with flair and ease early on - but this could be a really disappointing presidency if it devolves into secrecy, becomes hyper-calculating, makes enemies lists. Don't do it Barack. Don't be like W, afraid of the job. Listen to your own rhetoric. And tell your staffers to remove whatever it is that's blocking up their you-know-whats.

- David S.

July 25, 2008 at 5:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well, I mean, how long can the press collectively perform oral sex on Obama without getting a bad taste in their mouth?

- TJ

July 25, 2008 at 5:08pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hey, what is it with all the "Obama is Evil" talk? I mean, I don't get that vibe from him at all. And most all the blogs I read don't seem to feel that way. If he really is a bad person, and skeptical me is being BS'd by all of this, then please - enlighten me with your knowledge. If you have verifiable facts, then be showing them. All of us want what's best for America, right? So if you know something about Obama, don't you think you should share? -C

- Chris

July 25, 2008 at 5:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Does anyone else see angel wings in the sky behind Obama? Joyce

- joycehanscom

July 25, 2008 at 5:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

kind of make you think just what he is hidding... that right... that he shouldn't be elected

- jimmydot

July 25, 2008 at 5:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The liberal, corrupt media crated Obama. They ran the primary debates and they believed that we would all fall for him and buy into his socialist agenda. The guy is a fraud and we all know it.

- Garland

July 25, 2008 at 5:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You guys haven't seen anything yet! Wait until he is in office. We will all find out what totalitarism is all about. You can already see what's coming when anyone who disagrees with them is called racist. You think things are politically correct now??? When Obama gets into office George Orwell will take a back seat in language redefinition. Pray for us all!

- Susan

July 25, 2008 at 5:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The who Berlin trip was a propaganda fraud. The media never reported that 80 percent of the crowd did not understand a word of English and that they were there before Obama spoke for a free rock concert.

- Garland

July 25, 2008 at 5:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I was a political reporter for more than 40 years. The press should have no "love" for any candidate, nor hate. Too many young scribes are spoiled, pampered and whiny. If you can't get the information, keeping calling and calling. Or find another way. Persistence pays off. Complaining does not.

- Pat

July 25, 2008 at 5:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The press is a joke. WTF is the NYT crying about, they haven't been a serious news contributor in a long time. In fact, nobody really has. Nobody covers the lies of either candidate, ESPECIALLY McCain. Jesus christ, how much does this old fart have to flip flop on and forget before the media starts drilling him? He was pro abortion, now he's against it. He was pro gay marriage, now he's against it. He was anti bush tax cuts (specifically citing how they benefited the rich MUCH more than he poor), and now he's mysteriously for them. He lied about what the troop surge actually is (an increase in troop levels) He lied about his trip to iraq, claiming he went with no body army or escort (LOL he spent HUNDREDS of thousands of US money for his little escort) He took credit for the GI Bill that he didn't even vote on. The list goes on..and on..and on...and NOBODY is reporting it. Way to fail us all media.

- Stephen Z

July 25, 2008 at 6:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Couldnt have said better myself. Bravo

- ROB

July 25, 2008 at 6:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yep ! real conspiracy here, folks! Since Walter Annenberg unveiled his $500 million "Challenge" for school reform in December 1993, 21 grants have been awarded from his gift. The Challenge generated more than $600 million in matching grants from private and public sources and spent $1.1 billion on initiatives at 18 sites. Nine grants were awarded to major urban areas. These awards included matching grants ranging in size from $10 million to $53 million. Sites included Boston, Chicago, Detroit, the Houston metropolitan area, the Los Angeles metropolitan area, New York City, Philadelphia, the San Francisco Bay metropolitan area and South Florida.

- D-Man

July 25, 2008 at 6:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The usual non-reporting. What the public should really know is why did the 3 networks send their anchors on Obama's foreign campaign and education trip while ignoring McCain's trips? The answer is bias and a strong preference for Obama. Twenty first century journalists are very similar to twentieth century cheerleaders.

- C J Dunmore

July 25, 2008 at 6:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This featured "reporter" should stop whining and trying to "keep the negro in his place" and do some real reporting on George Bush and his Iraq war crimes and John McCain and his lies for a change.

- Frannie

July 25, 2008 at 6:38pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What I want to know is: is there any truth to the rumor that Barack Hussein Obama is not a US citizen? Inquirying minds want to know.

- Ruth Werre

July 25, 2008 at 6:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

There is no doubt that the mainstream media are pulling for Obama, but when push comes to shove, the media always looks out for itself first. They'll throw anybody under the bus if it advances their cause.

- LRV

July 25, 2008 at 7:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I must say that I am completely disgusted with the news media, in all my 78 years, voting since IKE, I have never seen such biased opinions put forth by the "supposed" American press. Fair reporting NO.

- Marty

July 25, 2008 at 7:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

No offense, but how do all you coke snorters get into Harvard and Yale? Seriously? And you are supposed to be the leaders of the free world?

- steve in k.c.

July 25, 2008 at 7:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Screw the press. If they would do their job instead of the crap they do now, they might find out that the candidates wouldn't have to do what they do. Hell, look who helped Bush with his Iraq war. Look at the display of the WH press corps including David Gregory. Finally look at how Helen got shut out for doing her job. The rest of the suck a---- are willing to sell their souls to get to the golden getto of GE or whatever corporation owns their media or newspaper.

- Markus

July 25, 2008 at 7:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

God forbid that the MSM should question The Annointed One. He will prevail. Resistance is futile. The thrill is running up my leg.

- lithophysa1

July 25, 2008 at 7:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Anyone who has worked with Gibbs in the past knows what he is like -- and this article captures it perfectly. The sad thing is what it says about Obama that he continues to promote this man.

- donnie darko

July 25, 2008 at 8:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If I could find ONE person who could tell me any GOOD reason to vote for Obama, I might. I don't mean reasons like 'he's not Bush', or he "inspires" people. He appears aloof and tempermental like when he threaten to kick a fellow Illinois legislator's a**, when he was corrected on something. I see nothing different about him than any other typical Senator, only he's black and reads a teleprompter well. Being physically black and having a white political demeanor must be the reason for the "love affair" along with a huge desire to reconcile racial differences, which is only going to get greater, either way. Name one thing, of note, he has done! Oh, he must be the youngest person ever to write two autobiographies to illustrate his disgust for whites. It's all an illusion which will be clear in a few weeks.

- gofer

July 25, 2008 at 8:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Mr Obamas' success can be attributed to one word. Soros. Without his money, he would still be just another community activist. Follow the money.

- Conservo

July 25, 2008 at 8:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Personally, I'm fed up with the press... They can get off their high horses and start justifying the privileges they were granted in the Constitution" +++++ Privileges? PRIVILEGES? Are you kidding? There are no "privileges" "granted" by the Constitution. Human beings have rights -- among them freedom of speech -- and the Constitution simply dictates that government cannot infringe upon those rights. How in the world do you formulate such an idea in your brain, that communication is a "privilege"? God, people like you are scary.

- Chris

July 25, 2008 at 8:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Waaaaaaaaa!!! I'm a reporter and Obama's people aren't kissing my a$$. Waaaaaaaaa!!

- KMB

July 25, 2008 at 8:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I love to hear liberal scum whining!

- tdrag

July 25, 2008 at 8:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What the press has to realize is that when they get in bed with someone, only one of them gets to be on top. Looks like the media, starting with Chris Matthews who gets tingles up his leg when Obama speaks, needs to just realize that they are on the bottom. Is Matthews married? If so, don't you just wonder what Chris Matthews wife thinks about her husband getting all tingly over Obama. did she cringe when he shouts uncontrollaby "look at him"..... Since Matthews helped bring us another other Democrat he probalby tingled over-Carter, his Obama-worship should scare the heck out of all of us....Carter was the President from Hell. Scarier even more is that Obama is only slightly to the right of Marx. I cannot imagine why the media wants to become Pravda clones. Truly foolish.

- joanne

July 25, 2008 at 9:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When you are trying to sell an empty suit to the american sheeple you have to conrtol, control, control. Eerybody who STill thinks this guy is different stand up and take a gullible bow.

- DIck Tuck

July 25, 2008 at 9:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I am a bit puzzled by exactly WHAT the complaint of Adam Nagourney is and why Gabriel Sherman takes up cudgels for him. Wait a minute, Adam? Gabriel? Thinking back I find it strange that the terrible cover of the New Yorker was allowed by another liberal jew. Thinking back, I also notice that as Obama has moved from a strong contender to a sure thing, Jon Stewart, another liberal jew, has spent an inordinate amount of time showing him up as a tacky show. Is it just me, or are we witnessing a subtle effort by the Liberal American Jews to stop the Obama tide?

- Chris D'Souza

July 25, 2008 at 9:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Gramm, in response to 1 comment here, never said americans are whiners. He said "We have sort of become a nation of whiners. You just hear this constant whining, complaining about a loss of competitiveness, America in decline." And if I may apply one of Obama's most frequent statements--"what I meant was," == to Phil Gramm, Gramm said he was referring to the POLITICIANS, not the everyday american citizen/resident. The Press did not create a myth about Obama; they supported it, gushingly. Now that they realize that voting americans actually want to learn more about their candidate and the press are now asking for details, suddenly the Obama camp is getting nasty. Funny how that works.

- mickdon

July 25, 2008 at 9:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama cures cancer.

- steve in k.c.

July 25, 2008 at 10:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama is running for president, right? Yet we know very little about him. We hear him make grandiose set-piece speeches. We see him looking presidential as he meets EU leaders for brief visits -- at which nothing substantive is discussed. However, the man behind the mask remains a mystery to most of us. So when is Obama going to reveal himself to us? And when is he going to give the media real access?

- Patrick C.

July 25, 2008 at 10:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yes as one who worked in a field office during the PA primary for the campaign I also got a sense that things were a bit controlled. I was constantly told at campaign events not to talk to the press. The crowd was herded into to one pen and the press into another seperated by a barrier. I was also told when trying to get food donated to the field office that when I solicit merchants that I do not "speak" for the campaign. One big shot surrogate came into our office on the eve of the primary to congratulate us on how well we had kicked their butts in terms of outworking them and we ended up losing by 9 points state wide. One volunteer guy from Chicago told me I was getting in the way after two of us had donated $200 in food and were setting it up for the canvassers on election eve. As an experienced trial lawyer for almost 30 years I felt treated like one of the high school volunteers. I am very dismayed. That being said its very unfortunate how these people have lost their way. Hopefully Barack will not once he sees whats going on.

- mar

July 25, 2008 at 10:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I agree, you republicans are pathetic... if you are the american's we are to be - this country is in trouble.

- rlp-politcal

July 25, 2008 at 10:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You know I was getting that feeling, that all of this went to Barack Obama's head, and now he feels more entitled to the crown (apparently of the entire world) than the Clintons did. I think this fool really believes he can save the whole earth and rule it. What an arrogant punk. WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE BARACK OBAMA, MR. HOPE BOY 15 MONTH SENATOR?? NOT VOTING FOR YOU ANYMORE

- Tony V

July 25, 2008 at 11:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When will the majority of the MSM finally get it that Barry O. and his handelers are way above everybody else? He no longer needs the underlings in some of the press to do his bidding for him. The man is a total fraud. Listen, really listen, to what he says and watch, really watch, what he does and you will behold the REAL Barry O.

- Donald D.

July 25, 2008 at 11:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I have to agree. Can someone tell me when CNN morphed or was bought out by FOX? Serious question here- the only guy I like anymore is Cafferty, he needs his own show.

- susanai

July 25, 2008 at 11:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Get used to it. The media has created Big Brother Obama, and should know that a free media is the last thing any authoritarian government wants, particularly a Marxist one. But the time and candidate to stop him was the Democratic Primaries and Hillary Clinton, who both left and right assisted Obama in trouncing. We are beginning to see the outline of the Rough Beast, his hour come round at last, slouching toward Bethlehem to be born . . . THE MEDIA HAS GIVEN US THE TWO WORST CANDIDATES FOR PRESIDENT IN HISTORY IN 2008!!!!!

- RPhillips

July 25, 2008 at 11:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

With the absolute laziness of the corporate media making sure to BE LAZY and report the most inane garbage for months, you might expect the Obama campaign to not let them try to take advantage of the situation. Most journalists these days would get their patootie's spanked by Edward R. Murrow. They should expect to be treated like little whining children.

- JPM

July 26, 2008 at 12:05am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When the press coverage (of Obama) becomes so adulation filled that almost half of the US population thinks the media favors the guy, a little self-examination IS called for. Whatever the manner a reporter uses to let it be known that examinatin of conscience is taking place is fine with me. As long as it's done. The role of the press in a free society is to report in the interest of the people and let the chips fall where they may--whether politicans and their hacks like it or not.

- Anne C

July 26, 2008 at 12:11am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama is showing his true colors. God forbid should any media write anything bad about him. Mock my words, if Obama gets into office our 1st amendments rights will go down the tubes! He's already censoring every one in his way, including his former classmates and now the New York Times reporter! Wake Up NYT! You are making him out to be a prince and crawling up the a$$ of the wrong man! Your nose is brown for a man who will ruin this country! Turn your attention on Bob Barr is you want to see change for the better!

- Adelyn

July 26, 2008 at 12:12am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I can barely stand to watch or listen to Obama anymore. I was going to vote for him but now he is gone so far over the edge, I mean can there be anyone more arrogant than this guy. He can hardly put a understandable sentence together anymore. That BS with the suit coat over the shoulder. Spare me, is that supposed to impress me with the casual elegance and cool. More like a planned photo op. Who's advising him anyway? They should be fired. He looks more like a prep school graduate who just got a new Porsche and wants to explain all the benefits of fuel injection to me while he trys to put his hand under my bra.

- Lora Spencer

July 26, 2008 at 12:15am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Adam Nagourney is a hack who has been going after Democratic candidates for years. If he wants to be treated like a professional, he could try acting like one. Except political journalists are so far from professionalism these days, I don't know if they understand their role as anything but hacks, fluffers and gotcha players. Why should the Obama campaign contact AdNags with their concerns since he has already proven, over and over and over again in the last ten years, that he has not intention of playing fair. He's just a smear artist. I actually respect the Obama camp more for simply going straight to the public with their concerns. If Adam is steamed or if his feelings are hurt, it's because Obama's not playing by the old rules which insisted that Dems plead and beg for fair coverage, only to be kicked and mocked by Adam Nagourney and his pals in the establishment press.

- LMM

July 26, 2008 at 12:40am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Wow- word of this article must have went out on an Obama list serve.

-

July 26, 2008 at 12:42am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

-

July 26, 2008 at 12:43am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Until TNR and the NYT cover McCain's many mistakes in regard to geography and the rewriting of recent history, I will be unable to see anything other than the fact that these publications already fear the wrath of the GOP and keep their silence to avoid it. Even now, this commentary is framed to omit what exactly the Obama campaign was "irked" about... Shoddy reporting even in this whiny complaint... My guess, is they were annoyed that the media is portraying this race as neck and neck, as though it's a sporting event or horse race, using cheap "too close to call" techniques to tantalize readers with anticipation. When in reality it will be a landslide in November, as we are all sick of the Enron/Tony Soprano style of leadership that has destroyed this country and benefited no one- aside from companies building bombs, pumping oil and contracting death squads. Gabriel- Edward R. Murrow would roll over in his grave if he read this tripe. Not that you would have any idea who that is!

- bostonteapartier

July 26, 2008 at 1:03am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I haven't read al of the entry's above, but I am gettins so "TIRED" of OBAMA!!! this guy is a complete lightweight! At least Hillary Clinton had a few years in the Senate to leverage!

- John

July 26, 2008 at 1:04am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Dems need to respond with "logic"? Are you kidding me???? How logical is a 100 year war? How logical is Pakistan bordering Iraq? How logical is it to pride oneself on foreign policy and be too inept to know Czechoslovakia hasn't been a country in over 10 years? how about no plan except to fight until we win? (more of a pissing contest actually, but = big long-term profits for this supporters!) You would have to sniff glue and have a mild concussion to discuss anything with McCain, and be on his level.

- bostonteapartier

July 26, 2008 at 1:15am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Perhaps a new tact from the right wing will be to exaggerate or lie about uneasiness between the press and Obama. Perhaps it will be the next variation of smear/fear. For now, we are still hearing about how unfair the press is towards McCain, another excuse for Obama's success, and McCain's tedious lack of charisma. Let's see, unfair press, unfair gathering of money, taking or "stealing" ideas for ending the war in Iraq (!- that's a good one), shifting positions, - It's just so,- so UNFAIR! Time to man up, republicans, fight him toe to toe on positions and quit your incessant, childish whining. Besides, your continued focus on Obama just keeps him front and center, and even when it is a constant negative rant, it's still Obama we are talking about! That just ain't good for -um what what's his name- oh yeah, McCain- that's not good for McCain in the long run!

- Ed

July 26, 2008 at 1:26am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What kind of a circus act is this? Since when is the NYT, the latimes etal, the libmedia, going to divorce itself from the Obamessiah?

- Andrew Eppink

July 26, 2008 at 1:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

My observations: 1) The number one way to get a child to look into a locked drawer is to lock it. The number one way to get a reporter to look into someone's world is to try to lock it away. Obama recieved a lot of good will from the press because they believed his narrative. Now, he's locking the door. The kids (journalists) are starting to bend their paperclips. 2) The funnies spin I've read in a long time is that McCain has been getting favorable coverage by the press NOT covering him. Those of you who have written that spin either have no soul or no intellectual honesty. 3) This is the crack in the damn of reporters admitting that they haven't done their homework on Obama. -John

- John Abbott

July 26, 2008 at 5:41am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

He published his 'attack' piece without any sort of call or personal one on one with Obama, so how can he now be grated about having a public response? A personal call to respond to a public article? what other reaction but ignore it does the Obama campaign really have? How can you be docked for responding publicly to public statements being made about you?

- Navak

July 26, 2008 at 5:46am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The Anti Christ is among us now and his name is Obama those that love him so much will be the first in line to take the mark 666

- Larry Smith

July 26, 2008 at 6:24am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Did I hear that a free concert was given prior to his appearence? If that is so,what a fake, as even I would have looked like a crowd pleaser to the world. When will the people wake up to this "Show of Shows"? Both parties should have a revolt at their conventions and elect some one else to represent their parties as both are losers and we sure do not need dumb or dumber. Why do we not have a spot on our voting tickets that state "None of the above"? This would make the parties put forward from the beginning some one who is worthy of being President of the greatest country in the world. I for will for the first time in my life not be voting. We need another civil war to bring our country back to the people and not to the press and special interest groups that now run this country.

- LMW

July 26, 2008 at 6:33am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama is a fraud

- Christian Chan

July 26, 2008 at 8:06am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Nonbelievers, let me translate..."If you have a problem with a story I write, call me first." means 'the campaign always gets to have input on this writer's work'... "I'm a big boy. I can handle it." means 'I got my marching orders from my boss, and I'll do what they say'..."They attacked me like I'm a political opponent." means 'Dont they know I'm on their side?'

- BluestateCon

July 26, 2008 at 8:16am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Shame on you for not joining the cult of Obama!!! You must bow down and put on your knee pads before the CHOSEN one, you peasant!!!!! Beg forgiveness and lick the CHOSEN ones feet 2 times per day for 5 days and all will be forgiven by the Obama.

- Darrel

July 26, 2008 at 8:32am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Repent you slimy reporter! Kiss Obama's ring and promise to forevermore write only complimentary articles on Obama. If you have some spare cocaine to give him, that will speed the forgiveness.

- Doug

July 26, 2008 at 8:34am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Adding to b. Wiesman's comment. Millions of taxpayers dollars went into Obamas district to renovate the delapidated housing through Tony Rezko. Today over half of those units are deemed unlivable. When Obama was asked about this his response was he was unaware of the money coming in. OH MY GOD.

- Don

July 26, 2008 at 8:59am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"...I'm honestly starting to think the mainstream press should go on strike for three or four days, all Ayn Rand style, and let America see what life is like without a powerful, active, connected news media. I suspect it wouldn't be pretty." Can we make it seven days at least? It would be beautiful, actually. On the seventh day, the media would have to actually make a choice on what to report... that is, what is newsworthy. As it is, they simply gorge themselves on every quotidian detail, taking after reality television melodrama.

- aristophanes

July 26, 2008 at 10:12am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

you are hand picking what pots go on here- obviously, so much for freedom of speech!

- censored

July 26, 2008 at 10:54am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sen. Obama is going to be our next President whether the Conservatives want it to happen or not !!!LOL LOL !!!

- Ken /Liz Collins

July 26, 2008 at 6:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Buried in this story is the fact that the press now trail Sen. Obama 24 hours a day, literally as if it is a stake out. There is an unstated dynamic between campaigns and press -- and this press corps has not shown itself to be any friend of Sen. Obama. A bunch of whiners is right; they scrutinize how many times he goes to the gym but let John McCain off with gaffe after gaffe after gaffe. The press pool is nothing but a bunch of "gotcha" lemmings, following each other like buzzards. Very few independent voices are out there actually investigating the issues that are important and holding the candidates to the truth. John McCain has gotten away with carping at Barack Obama's foreign trip with very little blow back: such as McCain complaining about a speech on foreign soil when HE addressed the Economic Club of Canada in Ottawa on June 20, criticizing Sen. Obama during the speech which, btw, was attended and arranged by US Ambassador to Canada David Wilkins (surprising the State Dept. didn't issue a Hatch Act warning on that campaign appearance). McCain condemned Barack Obama's visit to the Israeli Holocaust Museum and using the "never again" phrase, but he used the exact same phrase in his inscription at the museum during his visit (which NOW conservatives decry in Sen. Obama as politicizing a holy site, ditto with the Western Wall, ditto McCain attendance). Conservatives and the press criticized Sen. Obama for taking press questions outside of 10 Downing St. w/out Gordon Brown, but again just Google McCain's trip and you'll see HIS press conference outside the PM's door. The press is doing a lousy job this season -- blogs and "alternative" media are much better at actually questioning the junk put out by the candidates. So please, save me the whining that your feelings are being hurt.

- straight talk my a**

July 26, 2008 at 6:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The signs have been there for a long time that Obama is an auotcrat. If he becomes president - I predict - that he and his group will put Bush and Rove to shame in their refusal to bow to the will of popular opinion. He feels entilteled - chosen by history - just as Bush did and it does not bode well for the future. As a progressive for my entire life it will be impossible for me to vote for someone as obviously self absorbed and undemocratic. This attitude of being the 'chosen one' is in all of his books and permeates his public life. He has surrounded himself with hardcore political operatives that completely negate his avowed goals of 'uniting' the country - and being a force for change. He and his people will be just like the Bush crowd - achieve the goals at all costs - the public good be damned. I have seen bad trends in the Obama people from the beginning - techniques that remind me to much of Carl Rove. I am afraid that Carl Rove has deeply damaged the American political scene and it might take us a long time to forget the successes of his 'Playbook'. The Obama team seems to have learned those techniques too well - unfortunately. Vinod Kumar

- Vinod Kumar

July 26, 2008 at 6:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The signs have been there for a long time that Obama is an auotcrat. If he becomes president - I predict - that he and his group will put Bush and Rove to shame in their refusal to bow to the will of popular opinion. He feels entilteled - chosen by history - just as Bush did and it does not bode well for the future. As a progressive for my entire life it will be impossible for me to vote for someone as obviously self absorbed and undemocratic. This attitude of being the 'chosen one' is in all of his books and permeates his public life. He has surrounded himself with hardcore political operatives that completely negate his avowed goals of 'uniting' the country - and being a force for change. He and his people will be just like the Bush crowd - achieve the goals at all costs - the public good be damned. I have seen bad trends in the Obama people from the beginning - techniques that remind me to much of Carl Rove. I am afraid that Carl Rove has deeply damaged the American political scene and it might take us a long time to forget the successes of his 'Playbook'. The Obama team seems to have learned those techniques too well - unfortunately. Vinod Kumar

- Vinod Kumar

July 26, 2008 at 7:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

@ #86 Patrick C. You wrote: "Axlerod (Obama's brain) knows that if Obama mingles with the media away from his handlers, he is going to say something stupid or sound ignorant on economic issues, for example. So Obama is kept on a short leash." WHERE did you get this idea? Happy to say that you couldn't be more wrong. Read the results of the reporting of any reporter's long conversations with Obama: he's never less than very well informed!

- LMorland

July 27, 2008 at 7:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

That picture of Obama in Berlin. The one where he's waving? with his outstretched right arm to the adoring German crowd. And the inane press plastered it on their front pages. Sieg....what was that again?

- Helen Back

July 28, 2008 at 4:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I can't say this enough. You have no clue. You think that you (as in the press) is responsible for (helping) Obama get to where he is so fast. No buddy, it is because many Americans have given up on conventional institutions like a free press and yearn for a game changing candidate. Barak may have some warts, but I learned about Obama from his website, I studied each candidate, I enlisted my wife, friends and family to donate, phonebank, canvas and etc. And guess what we all could care less that he got no coverage then or tailwinds from the press and I don't care now that the press is so called in love with him now. By the time you all picked Obama up as a national story, most of us had already donated and volunteered. It's pretty arrogant of you to think that it worked the other way around. There is nothing that I have read that compelled me to support Obama more than hearing his 04 speech, visiting his website and the weekly e-mails I recieve from the campaign. Understand, most inteligent people know that ABC is owned by Disney, NBC by GE, CBS by Sumner Redstone and etc. There is clearly no independent free press. If so where were you when Enron was price gouging and causing black-outs in California. Where were you when Cheney placed the profit cap at something like 400% before an inquiry would ensue. Thats when the love affair ended. I read that on a government website back in the summer of 2001 and no major paper or media conglomerate picked up the story. You all were still feeding us the non-sense about Bush's pet nicknames and all. The country is a post-press society, other than those 'hardworking - hardworking whites' in the rust belt that rely on commercials or the national news. Otherwise we know that you will only cover whats popular or what sells issues, not the news that we need to know. You would do better to be like the People Magazine of politics or like TMZ or something. It least that gives you some integrity.

- BOwens

July 28, 2008 at 11:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

That's funny. Please list any major national politician that is not arrogant. List a president, with the exception of Jimmy Carter, elected in the past 50 years that is not supremely arrogant.

- Thom

July 28, 2008 at 11:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Don't you people know that "arrogant" now equals "uppity." Bunch of racists!

- Skip

July 29, 2008 at 10:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Boo-hoo. Today's journalists are a pack of narcissistic candyasses. After the last two terms of excessive deference and refusal to do research or fact-checking most of these losers should go straight to hell. Or better yet, do us all a belated favor and quit your jobs. Nagourney "really flipped out." Flip this, jackass.

- jbgps

July 30, 2008 at 5:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Being hateful is unholy,

- war criminals are fake messiahs

August 3, 2008 at 6:23am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The danger of being seen through rose colored glasses is the backlash of a press spurned. I think the US press has been irresponsible throughout the primaries and campaign. They fall in love and out of love with candidates. They put Obama on a pedestal and now that they discovered that he is not the messiah they are preparing to dump him. I think Obama, himself, is responsible for much of the press's disillusionment, but if it had been more responsible in the first place we might have had different candidates. The democrats, who the vast majority of reporters were clearly supporting, are at a significant risk not winning the presidency in November. Why has the press forgotten "responsible reporting"?

- Ann Arbor Liberal

August 5, 2008 at 12:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I am really, REALLY sick of these hair-sprayed , make -up encrusted media morons. This is the same bunch that snuggled up w/ Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz and the rest of the insane clown posse. Snickering while Bush joked about not finding WMD at the correspondent's dinner, "embedded" reporters who didn't do very much reporting at all. And years of Bushworshipping while the Constitution was basically used as toilet paper..I for one will never forget the recent clip of the reprehensible Karl Rove "rapping" on a stage somewhere while in the background dancing and holding the microphone was none other than David Gregory of NBC. It was appalling. I have no respect for these slugs...none at all...They've been silent through the fake ass war, the misappropration of billions of dollars, war profiteering, torture, FISA, Blackwater, Katrina and every damn thing else...To hell w/ them all....and by the way, to hell w/ Obama's farcical little "race neutral" charade which is premised on nothing more substantive than convincing white people how truly non-threatening he really is. It is ALL corporate sponsored feces...and it stinks to high hell.

- Nat The Turner

August 24, 2008 at 9:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Is Robert Gibbs really one of those limp wrist MEN OF TODAY

- wes

November 6, 2008 at 4:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close