Shapiro write something worthwhile about the campaign. Or something worthwhile at all.

Tell us again why you didn't officially join the Clinton campaign when your boy Blumenthal did? Had you not put in enough dues shilling for Hillary on Salon's dime yet? That must be so hard for you.

Now, the next time your waiting for that phrase to tell you when to file your story- don't. Please. I'd rather have no trail coverage at all than your 'coverage'. Don't make us suffer because YOU couldn't land the job you really want: on HRC's staff.

The level of stupidity achieved -- and maintained -- in this kind of political "coverage" is not short of chilling.

Is Shapiro truly unaware of the import of 2008? Of the meaning of the choices we face? MoDo has at least the excuse of mental illness.

Man, this is absolutely the worst dreck I've read this pre-primary political season. So, you're on the road and obviously don't have anything meaningful to report, so Obama becomes some incarnation of Shecky Green? This is as trite and meaningless as the sort of blogger crap journalism that the Times passes off.

who really liked this post? It's a funny insight into the reality of campaigning, a strange story that Obama obviously enjoys telling. Anybody can pontificate on the 'import of 2008'. I liked it.

Journalists have to get bored of hoary rhetoric, and this piece is just the kind of insight into how journalists come to view that stuff. Nice work Walt.

Reminds me of some of Hunter S's less insane insights into campaigns.

So does this piece illustrate a real issue? No. Does it give us a relevant insight into a candidate? Probably not. But that doesn't mean it is without value.

It's bad enough that too much campaign reporting is about the horse race and not the issues, but now Shapiro gives us this: no substance, no process — it's what's left on the track after the race.

The candidate is supposed to get raped by TV's Joe Franklin.

The media controls the vote. This is becoming more obvious with every presidential election. Shapiro writes a piece about Obama's visit to some small town, and it gets printed in Salon.com. What am I supposed to think after reading this? Is Obama prepared to be president? It does show his maturity, as he does adapt. He is smart too. What does the media think of this? The media is threatened by smart black men. That's what I'm learning. So far, so good, Obama. You haven't stumbled yet, but the media is waiting for you.

I thought the little story about Obama's little (very little) story was interesting - and somewhat insightful ... about the candidate and about the existential necessities of campaigning. As for insight about the candidate - self-deprecating and all that, but, um, lacking in substance, running on *personality*. As for insight about campaigning - thank goodness on this (American) thanksgiving day that it never occurred to me to run for office. As for Mr. Shapiro - don't let the inevitable, anonymous complainers and insulters generated by the internet deter you...

What I am wondering about is why the author of this article-the obvious Jew is trying by all means to ruin Obama and to support Mrs. Clinton. The obvious for everyone, with eyes and ears, thing is that Mrs. Clinton has accumulated within her time on the national scene enough sins (and plain crimes) to be the embodiment of sins (and crimes) herself. Mrs. Clinton is not smart, and everybody with eyes, ears, and even only meanaverage intelligence could have seen it and should confirm this notion. Mrs. Clinton is extremely high handed and has very aggressive and wars like core. Now Obama, on the contrary, is really smart, and squeaky clean of all crimes of previous federal administrations, and prefer even "bad peace to good war", as he emphasized a number of times. Ms. Clinton, while the co-ruler of the country during Mr. Clinton presidency, had been extremely interested to eliminate the state of Israel, she got the change of her heart and mind only when she started to run for New York senate position, and needed badly votes of numerous New York Jews. Any Jew with the respect to his/her national and religious heritage should not easily forget and forgive Mrs. Clinton's tendencies and actions in this area. I, for example, can't, and, among other things, if she is in power (I truly hope that not), I expect her negative actions towards the existence of Israel. However, this is the secondary thought now, under the circumstances, as the election of such high handed, aggressive and obviously not smart person, as she is fully proven to be, would imply more essential and obvious disasters, and, practically immediately after her appearance in White House in the official capacity. Jews are considered to be smart, possess the deep devotion to their cultural and religious inheritance, and to have pretty good premonition. It doesn't seem that the author of this article possesses any of these qualities.

Shecky Obama? Why imply that Obama was trying to be a comedian? It didn't strike me that Obama was trying to be funny, but rather was relating a story about the value of keeping one's commitments. And second, what does The Aristocrats have to do with anything? And third, if you read other journalists articles about this same incident, it becomes clear that Shapiro didn't really get the gist of this situation at all. Or maybe he's just prejudiced.

I think there's some insight into a fine, warm character here. I appreciate the effort.

I myself find Ms Clinton high handed but I still think your Oprah post is your best.

First, this is a blog about life on the campaign trail -- not a serious analytical political column. Second, why is everyone so quick to take offense? It was a cute blog about how a story gets repeated over and over at various campaign stops (which is true). It was not some sort of secret pro-Clinton hit piece against Obama. It was told with affection, I think -- or at least with a wink about some of the perils of political reporting.

Was it a bit "insider?" Maybe. It is a POLITICAL BLOG, people. I think Mr. Shapiro assumes that interested political wonks are reading this blog. Not a bunch of prissy political wannabes who only seem interested in guarding the interests of their own particular candidate choice.

Loosen up.