This article lays out many good examples of hypocrisy and imbalance of coverage in the press.

I just don't know why you say: "There was no attempt to force Reagan to recant and confess, AS SEN. CLINTON HAS DONE MORE THAN ONCE UNDER PRESSURE FROM THE PRESS."

As if one can ever explain away or apologize enough for lying in the way she lied. You also suggest that she may have made a 'mistake', since she had written the true story in her book. I think she made up the story because her idea of truth/lies is slippery in the first place and that she thought she needed it to win the election. No one if likely to 'make a mistake' (or -- Bill Clinton -- 'be so tired late at night') that they make up a whole story out of whole cloth. If, in fact, she HAD had an experience of 'running from sniper fire' in another part of her life and simply conflated the places and times to come up with the Tuzla story we could understand it; but we haven't heard of such an experience. She just lies. And doesn't care about it. (Like Reagan, I guess.) Not a mistake.

RE: THE PRESS AND MC CAIN: I heard Glenn Greenwald say on Democracy Now this morning tell about how many top journalists have (recently?) spent some time on McCain's land/house/space in which they swung on tire swings, lazed about and ate good food (I assume about the food). That they 'all' 'love' McCain and cannot therefore bring themselves to comment on any of his mistakes (Sunni/Shi'a mix-up) and lies.

This bodes very ill for the general election.

I think:

Journalists who cover politicians should not accept any invitations from them to schmooze in any way; they should not become friends (as I heard about a purported 'buddy-ship' between Gwen Ifill and Condi Rice; this was some time ago and I never heard it again) or attend social gatherings just for journalists (as Judy Woodruff attended Bush's gathering for journalists when he first became president). It is like taking money from lobbyists; it is too hard to refuse their subsequent requests -- and too easy to pull your punches -- once you've accepted their kind and gracious hospitality.

If the debate was the first example of the Clinton rules I'd suggest it backfired. 20,000 angry comments on abcnews.com, many from old people who admit this is the first time they've ever bothered to write in about anything, coverage on all 3 nightly news programs on just how bad of a job the debate did, and every newspaper in the country having to admit it was terrible.

Yeah I'll take a few more fiascos like this.

Obama's more than ready for this. He hit McCain again today. He killed McCain a couple of weeks ago with, "I've got news for John McCain there was no al Qaida in Iraq until we got there." He's always tough on McCain. Obama can handle McCain.

What he, and pretty much all of the Democratic Party, didn't expect was for Hillary Clinton to act like the Republican in the PRIMARY. That's her problem. Every day her negatives go up further, more superdelegates flock to his side and we get a day closer to ending this thing. So now how's it working so far?

Carol, Page 1:

It's all Clinton's fault

I am waiting for the flood of Obama supporters who will tell us that the disparities in Glenn's column are somehow all Hillary Clinton's fault. I can see that I won't have to wait very long because the very first comment here says exactly that.

Straw man.

Joe, Page 1:

If it hurts Obama, it is Clinton's fault...

It is if she's pushing a smear, as she has when she's hounded Obama over his "associations".

When Obama loses the General Election -- that will be Clinton's fault too.

It will be if she takes Obama down with her. Too bad she never fought Republicans with a tenth the ferocity she's using against a fellow Democrat and the candidate who has led this race from day one.

Stop the kool-aid Godbama and his cult need to chill.

Why don't you try dealing with reality first, Mr. Pot.

cabick, Page 2:

the obama campgain is happy enough about clinton rules so long as they're only being applied to clinton.

Right, which explains why Obama has stuck up for Hillary on Tuzla and demurred on Ferraro. But hey, don't let facts get in your way...

had this campaign been about nothing but substance from the beginning, obama wouldn 't have had any clear road to the nomination, given that most pundits agree that hillary's policies (and grasp of policy) are more fully formed than obama's.

A baseless assertion if there ever was one, and I have two words for you: Kyl-Lieberman. And an acronym: NAFTA.

so his campaign, with the help of a press largely operating by "clinton rules"

The press that annointed Hillary as the front runner last year? The press that ignored the fact that Edwards beat her in Iowa? The press that continues to prop up her candidacy by pretending this is a close race? When this is all said and done, Hillary owes the press a big thank you card.

has instead focused on portraying clinton as an amoral, grasping political beast whose only motivation is cold ambition.

Liar.

cwd2017, Page 2:

don't question obama! as the wednesday debate proved, one cannot question barack obama except to ask softball questions.

Straw man.

the press treats him like a cross between jesus and michael jordan.

Have you been in a coma for the last month and a half?

obama finally got pressured wednesday night, and he didn't look good.

How good do you look with a ton of bullshit dropped on your head?

January 20, 2006

AUSTIN, Texas --- I'd like to make it clear to the people who run the Democratic Party that I will not support Hillary Clinton for president.

Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation. Enough clever straddling, enough not offending anyone This is not a Dick Morris election. Sen. Clinton is apparently incapable of taking a clear stand on the war in Iraq, and that alone is enough to disqualify her. Her failure to speak out on Terri Schiavo, not to mention that gross pandering on flag-burning, are just contemptible little dodges.

http://freepress.org/columns/display/1/2006/1304

So when Hillary invoked Anne Richards in her Texas debate and Richards' children called on her bluff, here is the proof that Richards would never have supported Hillary's bid for the White House. Molly Ivins and Anne Richards were joined at the hip, two stalwart women from Texas who fought patriarchy and sexism till the day they died.