I believe MSNBC has been kinder to Obama and less kind to HRC, however, I also believe she has bought this on herself with her aggressive behavior towards Senator Obama. Every day it is something new from her. Yesterday all I read was how she said Obama cannot win, a fact that is more true to her campaign than his. Tell falsehoods every day it isn't going to fly, unless you are McCain of course, that coverage is sorely lacking in substance.

I'm soooooooo tired of this "waaaaaaah, the boys are picking on me, Mommy" BS of Hillary's campaign.

It's so pathetic and unprofessional. Not to mention anti-feminist.

This is all about whining like a little girl.

I say this as a 56 yr. old white woman and life long Democrat.

As an Obama supporter, Olbermann is over the top pro-Obama even to me.

But, the network vascilates a lot. That stupid David Gregory show last night was over the top Obama bashing post Hardball. Usually, that show is dominated by the likes of Scarborough and Blankley who seem more than willing to pile on Obama. Gregory tends to let them get the first and last word on any debate, too. It's a stupid show. Hope it fades away fast.

MSNBC is a pretty crappy network overall. Chris Matthews is bizarre and Dan Abrams has no business even being on the air.

Not according to this clip:
http://www.jedreport.com/2008/04/the-tale-of-bos.html

Chris Matthews and guests connect Hillary's Bosnia tale to the "depends what is is" line and wonder aloud if peeople are going to start thinking there's "something wrong with this family."

Rendell says: "It's stunning. Does Keith Olbermann get checks from the Obama campaign?"

Presumably this is after Olbermann listed Rendell as one of his worst persons in the world. Olbermann listed a bunch of nasty things Fox News said about Clinton, much worse than anything on the other news networks. It was an impressive list, with dates. Olbermann took Rendell to the woodshed for not taking those comments into consideration.

Olbermann was right down the middle up until February. After Hillary lost the 10 straight contests that put her in the hole she is currently in he started reporting, truthfully, that Hillary was in a big hole. That was when she started her attack the media strategy. Olbermann started going hard after Hillary when it became apparent that her strategy had devolved in to "Me or nobody!" but largely her campaign’s problem with the media stems from the fact that she can't stand it when they report the truth. That she is losing.

Isn't Andrea Mitchell the hack that was actually on the Tuzla mission dodging sniper-fire with Capt. Pantsuit?

Didn't she know that Hillary was full of shit and didn't say A WORD until CBS video exposed Hillary for the fraud that she is?

For Ed Rendell to say Fox has been the most balanced is telling. Camp Hillary expects things their way all of the time. The fact that MSNBC, CNN and the other media are FINALLY exposing Hillary's 35 years of experience lie is, in my opinion, a little late on the uptake.

If the media had done their job, Obama could still be running against some fine candidates with REAL experience like Biden or Dodd. Hillary LOVED the inevitable narrative and didn't bitch about coverage 3 months ago. What changed? Her resume, perhaps?

Hopefully most people do know of the close association of Andrea Mitchell to "the establishment" and that she is married to Alan Greenspan. This democratic campaign at least started out as establishment vs antiestablishment.

It almost seems as if the guys on MSNBC have a rotational pattern . . . one beats up on Obama and then the next one beats up on Hillary. Maybe that's their way of emulating Fox -- fair and balanced ?.?

I do like the concept of the College Tour and though Obama showed well. McCain is next and then maybe Hillary.

I couldn't say because they lost me back around the time of Shuster's suspension. I quit watching MSNBC.

Before the primary came down to just the two, Hillary & Obama, I watched Hardball and Countdown. But after a while it got harder and harder to watch because of the bias. I got angrier and angrier over it. Then around the time Shuster was due back, I just couldn't stomach any of it anymore. Especially Olbermann.

I'm a Fox fan now and also switch between CNN & Fox. Once in a while I might catch a little Hardball but its rare these days so I wouldn't know if they've tried to cover up their bias more.

The only show on that network that I can still watch is Scarborough - or Morning Joe. Now Joe Scarborough tells it like it is, either way. And it helps that he likes Hillary even tho he's a republican.

Fox and CNN are definately the least biased tho.

MSNBC is a sick joke of a news show. Mathews with his tingling legs and Olbermann with his man crush on Obama are just too disgusting for anyone other than Obamamites.

Rae

This is simply more campaigning from Karl Rove's playbook (which the Clinton campaign seems to have adopted wholesale). This time, it's the 'elite media' who are so horribly biased against their candidate,... except, of course, for the 'fair and balanced' Fox network.

When it comes to Republicans, the Clintons seem to have decided that, if you can't beat them, join them. Negative campaigning, fear-mongering, race-baiting, attacks on the media, scorched earth tactics,... come on, does that sound like a Democratic campaign? No, this is Republican all the way. It's no wonder that Karl Rove admires Clinton's campaign - he designed it!

Yes, Republican tactics work, if you have the stomach for them. The politics of fear works (but the ghost of Franklin D. Roosevelt might haunt your sleep). Race-baiting works, though for Democrats, it has to be reasonably subtle. Attacks on the media get these corporate giants to roll over in attempted appeasement. If you care about NOTHING but winning, Republican tactics might seem appealing.

But they don't ALWAYS work, and they don't work against ALL candidates. We've lost the last two presidential races, but that's no reason to clone the Republican Party, is it? The Clintons are running scared. That's why they're adopting Republican tactics. But those of us who still have a backbone think that there's another way to win. And that way is Barack Obama's.

Unlike Hillary Clinton, Keith Olbermann cares about the future of our nation more than the Clinton's Legacy or their egos. So if they don't like what he has to say, perhaps they should try focusing on the possitives that she has to offer and less on the Jerry Springer trash her campaign spews out there everyday.

Hillary's campaigning stinks of Rove

"The other day, NBC's Andrea Mitchell ran a soft-focus piece on Hillary's girl-hood, and there's been a more Hillary-friendly feel on the network in recent days."

The Media has actually been pro-Clinton all along.

Just not pro-Clinton enough for HRC.

And meanwhile it's been open season on Obama for over a month now.

A better balance may be in order.

Andrea Mitchell?!?!? Mrs. Alan Greenspan? How the hell is she allowed to "report" anything?

Yeah, MSNBC stinks pretty much overall...but don't all the cable news channels, really? I rarely watch Hardball any more--I gave up after one of the many Ann Coulter appearances. I don't have a stomach for the freak show. And Dan Abrams loves, loves, LOVES the sensational freak show segments.

I suspected there was a behind-the-scenes war between the Clinton campaign and MSNBC. I didn't blame them for getting mad about Chris Matthews' relentless personal insults at Hillary Clinton, and David Schuster (though I think he's a good investigative reporter) made an insulting remark about Chelsea, though I think his was clumsy, misdirected anger, and not as malicious as Matthews' remarks.

As for Keith, he has become pretty angry with the Clintons and hasn't made an attempt to disguise it. So I haven't detected any "make nice" attempts re the Clinton campaign there.

But I never expect Keith's show to be free of his personal slant of anything. It's obviously an opinion show, and it's obviously a show about Keith's personal opinions, at that.