I loathe Howie Kurtz.

In any event, this might shift the coverage--if we were living in a world where journalists actually did their job, these sorts of criticisms might actually shift coverage.

We don't, though, so there won't be much of an analysis--just an endless repetition of words out of the mouths of talking hairdos.

Wow, if Howie Kurtz says it, it must be true.

Way to work those refs, Bobby, er, I mean, Hillary!

Sargent wasn't watching the same segment that I just did

*Blargh*

CNN does it again. They really are an embarrassment.

Hillary told an gathering today about how she "got a little hot over the weekend"

Does any one still doubt that it was a staged bit. In other words; The feigning of the Shrew.

What normal personal goes around, days later, actually bragging about how they threw an temper tantrum!

There is not a genuine bone in her body.

If she has gotten more negative coverage, it is probably because she keeps getting caught lying, and race baiting, and getting angry, or acting like a child, etc etc. Why would Obama get negative coverage? He hasn't been the one acting like a giant joke this whole time. It isn't like it is negative coverage from the media investigating Hillary, like she wants them to do to Obama. If the media wanted to go after Hillary all they would have to do is look at her "35 years of experience" and it would be over. The media has given the Clintons a HUGE free pass this whole time, and they just whine about the media being out to get them because they can't accept that losing was their fault. It HAS to be the media because Hillary and Bill are perfect.

CNN is pathetic for following that crap.

I can't believe complaining is their strategy for turning around her losing streak. Wow. What was their strategy meeting like?

"Ok, ok, I've got it. First, we'll try to smear him. It's never worked before, but we'll try again anyway."

"But what if it doesn't work?"

"Oh, well then we'll complain. Yep, we'll complain a lot."

!!!HILLMENTUM™!!!!

So Hillary is losing the election because of the monolithic Media octopus?

After all this campaigning, all these endorsements by establishment figures (including a former President), all these speeches, all the primaries and caucuses. After well over 100 million dollars spent to get the word out. After being endorsed by the NYT and a fair proportion of regional newspapers, including one in my hometown.

Even after all that, Hillary can't get her point across.

Because of the Big Bad Media.

We've heard this same line over and over from Republicans, only they call it the Liberal Media. Does it make any more sense this time around?

Not to me.

So Hillary's campaign dweebs are workin' the refs for all their worth, because that's about all they have left. Their strategies -- all 28 of them -- haven't worked, their plans (I hear that giggling in the back; stop that!) have resulted in an historic implosion.

So now they have to get the refs to start calling the close one's her way?

Is anyone really fooled? I suspect the MSM (Dan Balz ran this one up the flagpole earlier today) will do some stories on this, mainly as a CYA and so they can tell Wolfson to shove it where the sun don't shine the next time he calls to be an ass.

I don't object to hard questions, it's just that the reporter herd doesn't seem to do a real good job of this in any coherent way. Some do, most don't.

It's a rabble, and the Netizens add to the din to the point that all kinds of crap gets aired out that wouldn't have survived the fact-checkers on the old news desks, before the publishing companies were bought out by GE and all the fact-checkers fired.

It's all just a game. It's depressing.

I think what we need are cyborgs that speak the news in slow monotone and simple sentences. Something like this: "Hill-er-y Clin-ton made a speech to-day. She said, quo-ta-tion, "Yakkity yak! yakkity yak! Plagarism! Press bias! Shame on you! Inexperience! Danger! Danger! Be afraid! Be very afraid! Oh, let the heavens open and light pour down! Sreech! Howl! Whine! Sniff (poor me), yakkity yak! yakkity yak! Excuse me while I wipe my misty eyes. Sniff." End quo-ta-tion. Hill-er-y Clin-ton sat down. The crowd of doz-ens threw their hands to-geth-er at a slow to med-i-um rate of speed. Hill-er-y Clin-ton signed ten auto-graphs. Hill-er-y Clin-ton's mouth was fixed wide with teeth showing. End of news trans-mis-sion." No human presence from those pesky news people with their noxious capacity for emotional and intellectual response. Wouldn't that be better? No, wait: the quotations might lead people to believe that Hillary is a strident, self-indulgent, vindictive hothead. And that of course would be bias.

By the way, as I sit here worrying about how graciously Obama can catch a kitchen sink hurled at close range, I'm also wondering how debate audiences are selected. Do they let the media guys pick and choose? It would be guys, right? Oh, and did you hear those outrageous media people booing Hillary at the last debate? And she's such a nice woman. Why would anyone think bad things about her?

At least KO mentions she was "ticked " about the lying fliers and runs her reason for attacking Obama.

Good for KO.

Excerpted from a post which itself is an excerpt from a comment below:

All day today has been about "why have there not been as many negative stories about Obama?" and not one pundit or "analyst"--not a single one--has presented the logical follow-up: what if there just are not as many negative things to report about Obama?

I mean, I am sure people have been looking, right? Clinton's vaunted opposition research team and the GOP opposition research would have scoured through a million sheets of paper even if no-one in the media had (and they have.)

Clinton just thinks that it is the job of the media to regurgitate their talking points (and graciously allow the other party's talking points to be presented also.)

Entire post is here

This latest gambit won't win Clinton the nomination outright, but a week of negative Obama stories out of the MSM might just get her out of Ohio with a win.

Media hypes claims that media hypes too much?

I don't think this particular gripe will make much difference to the viewing public, unless the CNN moderators are intimidated or otherwise instructed to treat Obama more "roughly" in the debate. Most of these "accusation" items don't seem to have much lasting impact on polls or primary results. The daily charges on the part of the Clinton camp convey a sense of desparation, the smell of a losing campaign, ready to do anything and say anything to grab headlines and manipulate the media for attention. It offers nothing positive about Hillary Clinton, and is obviously a negative "kitchen sink" approach in which each day brings a new complaint or "accusation du jour". This is a loser's strategy, and the reporting is nothing more than infotainment: reporting on reporting on reporting. No one takes it seriously.

Now she's whining about always getting the first question..the latest Grand SNL Media Conspiracy....

Democrats visualize running for another 9 months with this political paraplegic