Clinton Camp Complains That Media is Pro-Obama

I’ve got to say, this one takes the cake. The story is from the Washington Post:

DES MOINES, Dec. 18 — After weeks of bad news, Hillary Clinton and her strategists hoped that winning the endorsement of Iowa’s largest newspaper last weekend might produce a modest bump in their media coverage.

But on Sunday morning, they awoke to upbeat headlines about their chief Democratic rival: “Obama Showing New Confidence With Iowa Sprint,” said the New York Times. “Obama Is Hitting His Stride in Iowa,” said the Los Angeles Times. And on Monday, Clinton aides were so upset about a contentious “Today” show interview that one complained to the show’s producer.

Clinton’s senior advisers have grown convinced that the media deck is stacked against them, that their candidate is drawing far harsher scrutiny than Barack Obama. And at least some journalists agree.

“She’s just held to a different standard in every respect,” says Mark Halperin, Time’s editor at large. “The press rooted for Obama to go negative, and when he did he was applauded. When she does it, it’s treated as this huge violation of propriety.” While Clinton’s mistakes deserve full coverage, Halperin says, “the press’s flaws — wild swings, accentuating the negative — are magnified 50 times when it comes to her. It’s not a level playing field.”

Since when has the press been rooting for Obama? Hillary Clinton has always been the favorite of mainstream media types. Sure, Obama is new and exciting compared to Hillary, but she is the media staple. She draws scrutiny, in my opinion, because she often attracts it. Besides, Bill Clinton hasn’t helped her during this campaign season in my opinion.

Since this campaign began, Hillary has told everyone she is tough and has the experience needed to be president. Yet throughout the campaign, she’s complained that the “men have ganged up on her” and now apparently the press is ganging up her as well.

She’s made dumb mistakes like the Philadelphia debate where she couldn’t answer the question about driver’s licenses for illegal aliens. In fact, at the next Democratic debate in Las Vegas, Wolf Blitzer allowed her to simply say “No”, that she didn’t support driver’s licenses for illegal aliens when a week before that, she said she did. It wen unchallenged and the media gave her a pass.

If her campaign is going to complain every time she gets bad press or every time Obama gets good press that it’s media bias, that’s a tough sell in my opinion.

So if she isn’t the clear front runner, it’s media bias? I’m not quite sure I get it.

The fact of the matter is that Obama is indeed resonating with Iowa voters in my opinion. If you vote for “change”, I don’t think Hillary toting Bill around appears to represent that. Obama, on the other hand, does in the eyes of many Iowa voters.

Update From Angry:

I concur. Toting Bill Clinton around and making constant references to his accomplishments or deeds during office doesn’t exactly portray a candidate for change, rather it promotes more of a dynasty image in my opinion of her carrying on Bill’s work. In fact she’s made references to Bill taking part or “giving her advice” on policy issues. Hillary has made her own bad press and continues to do so by reacting and responding to every little thing as if this is a highschool student council election. That’s the mentality she comes across with to me.

She whines and complains about every little bad press piece about her and actually put a stop to a bad press piece about her in GQ I believe it was Nate? She literally strong armed them by telling them they would not be allowed to do a planned piece on Bill if they did a negative piece on her. She followed that up by constantly attacking Obama with the lowest of low blows and actually resorted to digging up information out of his elementary school files all after calling for no mud slinging amongst fellow Democratic rivals and declaring they had a united front.

I have some advice for Hillary on being the candidate for change….file for divorce. No self respecting woman this day and age would hold together a marriage simply for political gains other than a cold calculating self serving person. The Clintons have what has been referred to as an LLC. Limited Love Corporation. They “love” each other just enough to maintain their political status. CHANGE that.