.
February 27th, 2008
06:51 PM ET

News media unfair to Clinton?

 Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say.

Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say.

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

It seems like Hillary Clinton is not only running against Barack Obama these days, she's also running against the news media.

Early on in last night's debate, Clinton referenced a "Saturday Night Live" skit that showed reporters fawning over Obama and showering him with softball questions. She said, "Maybe we should ask Barack if he's comfortable and needs another pillow." Clinton also whined about getting asked the first question more often in the last several debates.

The Clinton campaign has been complaining recently – more so since she has fallen behind – that the news media is tougher on her than Obama. It's a tactic as old as politics: things aren't going well, blame the media.

In today's column in The New York Times, Maureen Dowd questions Clinton's line of attack against the media.

She writes: "Beating on the press is the lamest thing you can do. It is only because of the utter open-mindedness of the press that Hillary can lose 11 contests in a row and still be treated as a contender."

She has a point. If Barack Obama had lost the last 11 races in a row since Super Tuesday, we wouldn't even remember his name.

Here’s my question to you: Have the news media been unfair to Hillary Clinton?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Bob writes:
Hillary needs to quit complaining and get with the program. Just face life. She isn't a likable person and does not come off well against someone who has control of his emotions. No matter how hard the press tries to make her look good, she will find a way to mess it up. She is a fighter and it shows. Obama is a negotiator and it shows. People are tired of fighting.

Amy from Kalamazoo, Michigan writes:
Jack, You'd have to be blind and deaf not to notice some of the media bias against her. Is it something she should bring up in the manner she did last night? No. Is it a totally unfounded complaint? Not at all. If you think the media have been across-the-board fair to all candidates, then you're the one living the fairy tale.

M. from Los Angeles writes:
Hillary Clinton is looking for someone to blame, anybody to blame for her problems. Anybody but herself. She has blamed and fired staff, she has blamed Obama, she has blamed voters for not being "realistic in their support," and now she blames the press. At some point, she is going to have to take responsibility for her own campaign.

Mark from Asheville, North Carolina writes:
Aw, gee, Jack. Just because everything she and President Clinton say and do are attacked by the media, and Obama gets continual positive coverage and commentary, you are asking if the media is unfair to her? I'm shocked, I tell you – shocked! In all my 40+ years watching politics, I have never seen anything like the obsessive, relentless pro-Obama bias that is rampant right now.

Gerry writes:
When CNN used to be called Clinton News Network, Hillary had no complaints. It's not that the media are giving Obama a free ride. It's just that the media are accurately reflecting a strong desire among the electorate to see an end to the Clinton/Bush era. And as the pressure has mounted on Hillary, she has become increasingly less gracious.

Dale from Alexandria, Virginia writes:
Obama has won 11 contests in a row, has received multiple high-profile endorsements, and has passed Hillary in the polls – all in a matter of weeks. It appears that the facts are biased against Clinton, not the media.


Filed under: Hillary Clinton • News Media
soundoff (265 Responses)
  1. Jim Galvin

    No. She has dug, and continues to dig, her own political grave by changing her voice so often.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:22 pm |
  2. Cheryl

    it seems that everything hillary says gets jumped on while barack can say anything he wants and it gets excused.it is 2008 and although we came along way baby, we have not come far enough because a woman can still not compete on a equal playing field with a man.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:22 pm |
  3. Richard, Washington State

    Have the news media been unfair to Hillary Clinton?

    The question should read, "has Hillary Clinton's campaign been unfair to Hillary Clinton".

    The media doens't make the talking points. Hillary and her campaign have provided enough for 3 presidential runs.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:25 pm |
  4. la Boca

    The news media is only unfair to Clinton when they air something that she has said out of her own mouth that she would later realize was a campaign killer!

    Shame on you news media, how dare you show Clinton being Clinton.

    It's time you showed Clinton when she isn't talking or acting so that you can be fair!

    February 27, 2008 at 1:25 pm |
  5. DJ,Iowa

    I don't think the media has been unfair to Hillary Clinton but I do believe that the Main Stream Media (MSM) has not been fair to the American People.

    What i mean by this is that i believe that there is so much more to Barack Obama that the main stream media is not bringing to the American people so that they can make an informed vote. Barack Obama is not all all glorious and perfect and the MSM should be reporting the other side of him.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:27 pm |
  6. Chanel from Boston

    I think to some extent the media has helped bring to light the unlikeable factor in Hillary. I do not blame the media because she just does not come off as likeable. Her strong personality and the "unlikeable" persona that she displays is really no ones fault but her own. *shrug*

    February 27, 2008 at 1:29 pm |
  7. Adrienne M New York

    Maybe it has been unfair, but I also think it is rediculous to use an exaggerated-for-comedic-effect skit as part of your kitchen sink effort to prove your worth as our next president.

    I find these desperate measures, and apparently not-well-planned feable attacks show a level of naivete on the part of the Clinton camp not indicative of the great "experience" case she's alleging

    February 27, 2008 at 1:29 pm |
  8. Independent Voter in Fort Worth Tx

    No...the media is not unfair for God's sake. If your come across as desperate, angry, frusterated and demeaning those are the stories that get reported.

    She actually has a LOT OF HELP from the media...everyone is telling her what she needs to do to turn her campaign around. Now I'm thinking that is just not a real good sign.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:30 pm |
  9. William

    Absolutely not. She seemed to have no problem when the media was giving her attention when she was the front runner in this race. Now all of a sudden the table has turned she is complaining. She needs to actually sit down and think to herself what she really wants, because she is believing her own lies she is telling the American people. Take a hike Hillary, your time came and passed. Bill can't win you this election like he did for you in New York

    February 27, 2008 at 1:31 pm |
  10. Lynn, Pound Rdge, New york

    The News Media unfair to Hillary Clinton?

    What's there to be unfair about? They say it like it is..."All the news that's fit to print "...or hear!

    The trash with which she lambastes Obama is the rhetoric that she will use on her staff and other opponents when she gets into the White House.

    What you see is what you get. So,can you really see today's Hillary as tomorrow's President?

    Voters beware!

    There is no such thing as "Mrs. Nice Guy" in this game.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:31 pm |
  11. Endy Chuku

    For someone who claims she has been vetted for years and was tough enough to ascend to the office of the president of the united states, Hillary should stop whinning about the media being unfair to her. I listen to political news on CNN, FOX, MSNBC, C-SPAN and others and I have untold negative things about Obama.
    To answer your question, the Media has been unbiased on their coverage of both the candidates.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:33 pm |
  12. Mark - Asheville, NC

    Aw, gee, Jack. Just because everything she and President Clinton say and do are attacked by the media, and Obama gets continual positive coverage and commentary, you are asking if the media is unfair to her??? I'm shocked, I tell you – shocked!!

    In all my 40+ years watching politics I have never seen anything like the obsessive, relentless pro-Obama bias that is rampant right now. Many of us out here know why: it's to get him nominated, and then to ambush him with a far begger smear campaign than was set upon Kerry, Gore or Dukakis. The only thing that amazes me is that Obama's supporters refuse to see this coming.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:35 pm |
  13. mike studders, bay city, mi.

    I do not blame the news media for Hillary and Bill hurting themselves, because in my humble opinion, they have. She is not as exciting as Obama and that is just the way it is. This has been a pretty good campaign and a pretty good news story. Hillary has not shown that she is as careful in her attacks. Remember "parse," Obama is better at it!

    February 27, 2008 at 1:37 pm |
  14. Alex Downs

    I don't think the News Media has been unfair to Mrs. Clinton. She has had a combative relationship both to the media and ANY of her critics. She is a polarizing figure that turns shrill and defensive when she is questioned. Obama on the other hand seems reasonable, objective, conciliatory and has held on to a sense of humor. If you were at a bar next to these two who would you give the break to? The defensive argumentative shrew or the cool, charismatic cumcumber?

    The Media can't go after Obama in the same way because he doesn't present himself like the open target Hillary presents herself as.

    Long Beach CA

    February 27, 2008 at 1:37 pm |
  15. Brian From Fort Mill, S.C.

    Yes, Jack. It's all part of the vast left wing conspiracy – sorry, I mean the vast right wing conspiracy – uh, actually the dog ate my teleprompter.

    Are you suggesting that all news media is out to get Hillary? I don't think so. Her problems started when she married Bill. Did the news media cause Bill to have all those extramarital affairs? Did the news media cause the Whitewater scandal? Did the news media produce the film "Wag The Dog?" What about travel-gate? Did hillary suddenly become unlikable since Obama showed up? Wasn't her approval rating among Democrats around 50 percent when Barack Obama was a nobody? It only dropped about 20 points, which puts her a few notches above Bush.

    To be sure, the news media is by no means perfect. Yes, there is some bias from time to time, from station to station. But to say that it's all the news media's fault that everybody hates Hillary is insane.

    I just hope that she doesn't make Bill sleep on the couch for another four years. I feel his pain.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:37 pm |
  16. Mike Nunn

    I am not sure if the media has been fair to Clinton – I do know that it has given Obama a pass. It seems like a coronation. Even McCain seems to be wimping out. After the conservative commentator really gave it to Obama, McCain backed off. What in the hell is the problem? After the Black News organizations had their success with Imus it seems like there is a moratorium on going after the Black Politician.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:38 pm |
  17. gerry

    When CNN used to be called Clinton News Netwrok, Hillary had no complaints.

    It's not that the media is giving Obama a free ride.Its's just that the media is accurately reflecting a strong desire among ther electorate to see an end to the Clinton/Bush era.

    And as the pressure has mounted on Hillary ,she has become increasingly ingracious.

    Gerry

    February 27, 2008 at 1:38 pm |
  18. Ed

    No they have not!!! Media been fair to both candidates

    The Clinton's just like to whine alot to gain people (women) sympathy

    February 27, 2008 at 1:39 pm |
  19. M. Hayden (Los Angeles, CA)

    Hillary Clinton is looking for some one to blame, any body to blame for her problems, any body but herself. She has blamed and fired staff, she has blamed Obama, she has blamed voters for not being "realistic in their support," and now she blames the press. At some point she is going to have to take responsibility for her own campaign.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:40 pm |
  20. Tiffany from Greensboro, NC

    Hillary just doesn't want to take credit for her own mistakes. She clearly cannot manage the White House if she can't manage her campaign and her finances. Who is she going to blame when she can't accomplish what she plans if she is President. Probably the right wing conspiracy and George Bush. Mark my words Jack, if she is president and things don't go her way, she will claim that it wasn't her fault. She did everything perfect.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:40 pm |
  21. michael

    Mr. Cafferty,

    Hillary Clinton is right. I've been saying for months to friends how she is getting beat up by the media. Especially your network CNN. She clearly won the last two debates yet your panel always calls it a draw. With all of Obamas AHs and Ohs and his constantly agreeing with Clinton's positions, how can your pro-Obama staff call it a draw. You guys at CNN need to stop treating Obama with kid gloves, you're just helping his campaign and popularity. I am writing as an independent voter.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:40 pm |
  22. Cheryl, Upstate, NY

    Jack,
    It would clearly seem that Hillary is trying to make it appear as the media has been unfair to her, I personally don't see it. She's has been reaching for weeks and this is just simply another ploy to get people to feel sorry for her. Maybe she should quit changing her face and maybe then she would get some positive media coverage. She's really starting to get on my last nerve! Crying one minute, Vicious the the next. Pick a face and stick with it. You don't see Obama trying to get any sympathy. Complaining about the media coverage just makes her look insecure!!
    "OBAMA 08"

    February 27, 2008 at 1:41 pm |
  23. Missy, Texas

    Yes.

    Sexism is worse than racism in America. When someone says something racist, Sharpen calls for them to be fired. But when the media says something sexist about Clinton and judges her differently than they judge Obama for the same actions, it is okay. Also, If you are critical of Obama you are a racist. If you don't support the black man you are a racist. If you don't have white man's guilt, you are a racist.

    Unlike Michelle Obama, I am very disappointed in what this country has become.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:41 pm |
  24. Ellie Carter

    NO the news has not be unfair to Senator Clinton. I feel they've been MORE than nice because had this been a man who lost 11 wins against her he would have been crucified!!! Let's keep it real.

    The Clinton campaign is yet again blaming everyone else but themselves. Hillary continues to make excuses for why she continues to loose supporters to Sen. Obama. She claims she's been misunderstood, however, she's had 35+ years to make herself UNDERSTOOD! She was also a First Lady, that in itself should have provided her with some clues as to how to behave in front of the camera. You don't rant and rave, you don't whine about having to answer a question first, you don't mince words like reject and denounce. She can't bait Obama about Farrakhan when she won't even provide her tax returns, what is she hiding? Why is she stalling by saying she'll provide them when she's nominated or MAYBE sooner? Whaaat?? It raises the question yet again, what is Sen. Clinton hiding? That makes me go hummmm?

    February 27, 2008 at 1:41 pm |
  25. Amy, Kalamazoo

    Jack,
    you'd have to be blind and deaf not to notice some of the media bias against her. Is it something she should bring up in the manner she did last night? No. Is it a totally unfounded complaint? Not at all. If you think the media has been across the board fair to all candidates, then you're the one living the fairytale. Have fun in lala land.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:41 pm |
  26. David T.

    Jack, there very well may be some truth to this, but as an outsider, I must say she IS a natural target.

    I was very curious as to why so many people in general seem to 'hate' Hillary Clinton. A little digging produced so much garbage – some of it downright scary – that even if one-tenth were true, why on earth would any Democrat want to elect her?

    Should she manage to get elected, I can only anticipate more years of political war – the Clinton years revisited – with the Republicans frothing at their mouths, trying any and everything to bring them down.

    Maybe this has all registered somewhere in the news media's collective subconscious..? After all, nobody wants to ask HER the really tough questions about some of these sordid affairs. She would no doubt just 'lawyer' them to death anyway.

    And THIS would be Washington politics as usual...

    February 27, 2008 at 1:41 pm |
  27. Joe in DE

    The media has shown a tendency to present negatives about Clinton thAt might indicate why she is not doing so well. They don't do this with Obama. If he should lose Ohio & Texas, you can look for that type of covrage.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:42 pm |
  28. Deb

    The media treats Senator Obama the same way it treated Bill Clinton when he was running for president. Barack Obama is new and interesting and the media will always cover that story rather than the same old politics. Hillary is a victim of being on the stage too long – and that's her own doing.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:42 pm |
  29. Ralph

    I think at the end of the day its how each candidate acts and reacts that leads to them winning the nomination. If it's your candidate that's losing you blame the media. It's not the media it's the candidate!

    February 27, 2008 at 1:44 pm |
  30. BobW Rochester, NY

    Harping about unfair media coverage is the cyber-age equivelent of shooting the messinger. The media follows the public's interest, not the other way around. Just because you don't like what you see in the mirror, it doesn't mean the mirror is broke.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:44 pm |
  31. Andrea

    I have read articles about how the Clinton campaign has treated the press by making demands and threatening them. This is all a way to divert attention from her failures. The sad part is that she has people buying into this nonsense. It's time to pack up your bags and exit stage left, sister!

    Omaha, Nebraska

    February 27, 2008 at 1:44 pm |
  32. Antonio MADRID

    The disadvantage of having been around the block a couple of times is that there are bound to be issues that at hindsight should not have been supported. Yes, Hillary is taking more heat from the press latley because she is very uncomfortable in the position as the underdog, does not know which posture to take and the fact that there simply is more contradictive material to dig on....

    February 27, 2008 at 1:44 pm |
  33. Martin Grondin of Devens, MA

    Jack, not at all. The media has been more than fair. If anything, she has abused the media's time given to her to launch negative attacks on Obama and to make snide remarks.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:44 pm |
  34. Bob R

    Hillary needs to quit complaining and get with the program. Just face life. She isn't a likable person and dose not come off well against someone who has control of his emotions. No matter how hard the press tries to make her look good she will find a way to mess it up.

    She is a fighter and it shows. Obama is a negotiator and it shows. People are tired of fighting.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:44 pm |
  35. Dawn (Las Vegas, Nevada)

    I guess the answer lies in which candidate you support. I think this tactic has worked very well for Sen. Clinton because for the past few weeks the media has been concentrating on what they deem the negatives that are coming out on Sen. Obama.
    First to get or answer a question in a debate? Give me that opportunity anytime!
    Let's please get real – it is the end for her, she needs to get out. Please media, get the guts to promote that 11 loses for Obama would have been his political death for the Presidency.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:45 pm |
  36. KARYL - CT

    Jack –
    Of course you have. In this MALE dominated area (ie; POLITICS)
    women are always pushed to the rear. It has been a very long struggle for women (any woman) in politics to gain any acredibility thats worth what any male would get in the same position. Look how long it took for women to get the VOTE ! Now that we have a woman who has the qualifications, tenacity and strength to get this far, she is still being harshly portrayed esp; by the media. Her chances of getting a position that has previously only been achieved/given ( by whatever means ) to a male, are slim to none. And, not because of ability or anything along that line, BUT because she's a WOMAN. The medias' have portrayed this race as one of "BLACK MALE, REPUBLICAN, or WOMAN" – and that's a FACT JACK !

    February 27, 2008 at 1:46 pm |
  37. Don in Buda, TX

    Jack, I'm voting for Obama but I am not anti-Hillary. Last night was the most pathetic display I think I have ever seen out of a presidential contender. It was just 10 months ago that Hillary loved the media and all the "ultimate nominee" hype. Now that someone else is getting the hype it's "poor me". I think the media has been over and above board regarding Hillary. After all, if her last name was "Smith" would anyone be talking about her?

    February 27, 2008 at 1:46 pm |
  38. KB from Iowa

    Clinton reminds me of my mother in law...the passive aggressive master. First she is proud to be in a race with Obama, then she slams him in a dramatic display for the media when he isnt there to defend himself , and then she loves him again at the next debate when he sitting right next to her. She's testy at the debate facilitators for her percieved advantage to Obama in the debates, then sweetly smiles and says 'but she doesn't mind answering their questions.'
    I'm worried if she gets into the white house and continues to use these tactics, she'll set women back decades.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:46 pm |
  39. Chuck in Eugene Oregon

    Jack, It is hard to believe that the news media has been hard on Clinton. I have seen both sides of the Isle working. I have watched every major news channel CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, and FOX. I although a Obama supporter, believe that you have been very fair; at times I questioned some of the things you have done with Obama as being fair. My point of view is that Obama, having come in to this race in Clintons mind as being an easy one to beat was everything but that. He has developed on hell of a grass roots net work of people working for his campaign, and he has pretty much stuck to one platform, delivering great charasmatic, stimulating and moving speaches. He has not waivered, having not discounted any one he has included every state from what I can remember. The problem from my point of view is that Mrs Clinton is in shock, she can not quite grasp how it is that this man has not only come from behind; he has lamblasted her from all directions, drawing in republicans and drawing from what she considered her safe group of voters. Any one that is about to fail, or is failing starts looking at all possible areas as to where to place the blame for said failure; this is human nature. Eventually to look directly in the mirror and realize that the buck stops here. Mrs Clinton is not a failure by any sense of the word, she is a great public figure; the problem is she just has not been able for what ever reason to reach out and touch the same cord with the American People as Obama has. Maybe it is her personality, maybe it is her speach writter, or her campaign staff, or a combination of all. For what ever the reason, blaming the news media is not the answer. As I recall she was touted in the media as being a sure winner from the beginning; which did not come to fruition.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:47 pm |
  40. Ron

    It has been a complete character asasination of Hillary Clinton and everyone has jumped on the band wagon .Thats why Obama will win and he is riding the wave all the way to the top with out doing anything or saying what ,how and when he will do anything as president..Its all being taken care of by the media and the people as he comfortly sits back.and watches it unfold.Shame on Barrack and shame on the media and people who follow it

    February 27, 2008 at 1:47 pm |
  41. David Considine

    Not all of the media, all of the time but some of the media has been consistently negative in addressing not only the candidate but also her husband.
    From my perspective, the leader of that loud- mouther anti Hillary pack has been Chris Mathews. and his hasn't gone unnoticed.
    There was his on-air non apology, apology when forced to realized that many viewers, many of them women thought he had crossed the line.

    Take a look at the footage of him the night of the New Hampshire primary. He started the show that night, sure Senator Obama had won, and proceeded to trash the Clintons, and assure his audience that the media would not be fooled by any "come back kid " speech ,as he felt they had been in 1992. Maybe Chis needs a new network..with maybe the call letters A.B.C....you know, for the All Barack Channel!

    February 27, 2008 at 1:47 pm |
  42. Howard

    The media didn't make Bill Clinton compare Barack Obama to Jesse Jackson. The media didn't write that Xerox line. The media didn't convince Hillary not to release her tax returns. The media didn't convince her to vote for the Iraq war.

    Her mistakes are her own. The reasons to vote against her are her own. The media is a straw man for her own failings.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:49 pm |
  43. Hunter

    Absolutely! CNN and all of the news media should be ashamed for playing favorites! Just look at yourself Jack, Everyday I watch the situation room and all of your topics are anti-Clinton. When the topic gets answered you pick 5 anti-Clinton comments and at least 1 pro Clinton. Its disgraceful that someone in American could possibly lose an election because of the media controlling peoples minds. “Shame on you Jack Cafferty”

    February 27, 2008 at 1:49 pm |
  44. Manuel, Pearland, TX

    The media has been very biased toward Obama, and you Cafferty are leading the way.

    Your statment..."Clinton also whined about getting asked..." says it all.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:49 pm |
  45. Karen

    It's obvious that the Media favors Obama and compares him to a rock star and acts like he is the second coming of Christ. The Media has been very harsh and much more critical of Hillary. I bet if Hillary got the endorsment of Louis Farakan, the Nation of Islam and was connected to a racist church, people would be asking questions.
    I am sure if she or anyone in her family announced that for the first time in there adult life she is proud of the US, the media would have been all over her. Sen. and Mrs. Obama get a free pass, never mind that she went to Princeton and Harvard.She did not mispeak.
    As an American and a Veteran of the USAF I resent her comments. There have been times I have not been happy with our Government, but I have always been proud of the US and always Proud to be an American Citizen.
    Give me a break!!!! The Obama's have been given every break anyone could possibly want and yet his wife is just now Proud of the US???? Try covering some of the things coming out of the Barak Campaign for a change. If Obama wins the Primary, I will not just vote for McCain I will campaign for him and I'm a Democrat! At least McCain supports and is proud of being an American Citizen and loves this country. I do not believe the Obama's even like America, let alone support America. Their church that they are so proud to be a member of only supports Africa, is racist they do not support AMERICA!!!!! WAKE UP!!! Do your research like the media is supposed to for a change!

    February 27, 2008 at 1:49 pm |
  46. John

    Good grief! If Hillary whines about being questioned first, how the heck will she ever handle hostile foreign dignitaries?

    February 27, 2008 at 1:49 pm |
  47. Nanc

    I really do beileve the media has taken the rock star approach to Obama. As such I react to his coverage much like I would Paris Hilton, etc: Just make it stop!

    That said, I'm sorry to say that you've lost me as a viewer. I so loved your cantankerous and mostly on the money views. The degradation, which I believe is undeserved, with which you attack Hillary is too much and too ugly.

    PS: Can I have a refund on your book that I bought with such enthusiasm? The pages now go to cover the bottom of my birdcage.

    Nancy
    Minnesota

    February 27, 2008 at 1:50 pm |
  48. Stacy in Newark

    No. Clinton LOST 11 in a row. Come on, there is no overtime if you are not tied with your opponent after the end of regulation. What really ticks me off is the fact that she told katie couric that she would be the nominee, no questions about it. Katie asked her three times, and she said the same thing- "there is no doubt in my mind, I will be the nominee." I don't smell a media bias, but I do smell an deflating ego.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:50 pm |
  49. SEO

    I would say that the press has been the factor most responsible for handing this race over to Obama. There has been no end to the glee when Clinton stumbles, and only too many people in the press eager to turn each new episode into points for Obama, and a debit for HRC. I'm appalled at the press, and not sure how I can vote for a candidate annointed by the press, but not vetted by the press...

    February 27, 2008 at 1:51 pm |
  50. Ryan, New York, NY

    The media hasn't been unfair to her at all. In fact, up until her 3rd place finish in Iowa, the media had all but made up its mind that she was the unchallenged frontrunner and gave her positive spin most of the time. In the Political Ticker, she's got 200 more stories tagged for her, and a good chunk of them are positive. Like Obama said last night, if you're going to tout your 35 years of experience, you're going to have to accept the bad that comes with the good and mountain of material to attack her on from the past 35 years.

    She's been the most talked about candidate for over a year, getting free publicity from all the attention. She's just upset now that she has to share the spotlight with Obama. Hopefully it'll move off her completely if we're lucky.

    Oh, and for those of you who are going to bring up that Tim Russert unfairly raked her over the coals last night, watch Meet the Press regularly and tell me that he doesn't ask tough questions all of the time.

    February 27, 2008 at 1:51 pm |
  51. Kimberly in Texas

    Hillary has been treated more than fair in the press. If it were not for her being a Clinton, we would be asking ourselves, after 11 straight losses, why is she still here? Almost every headline still consist of how will Clinton comeback and can she pull it out on March 4th. Simply amazing...what does Obama have to do to lock this nomination up?

    February 27, 2008 at 1:51 pm |
  52. Jacci Buelow

    Come on, Hilary! Quit the whining, already! It's certainly not very "presidential," and we're tired of it. Oh, and knock off the slams you're throwing Obama's way in your speeches. You are an embarrassment to women everywhere!
    Jacci in Wausau, Wisconsin

    February 27, 2008 at 1:51 pm |
  53. Chris

    The media has held Hillary to a much higher standard. The reality is that polling would likely suggest that Americans, at the end of the day, considering terrorism and other complex/diffcult issues - a Clinton/Obama ticket would out poll Obama and ? Hillary needs to hint/emphasize that Obama is on her VP short list to reframe the debate - she needs to do it now! - before it's too late. Unfortunately for her team, the train may have left the station.

    February 27, 2008 at 2:15 pm |
  54. Judy Beard

    No I do not think the media has and/or is unfair to Hillary. She has made her bed now she can sleep in it. Seems as though all she did last night was whine about one thing or another. Grow up Hillary and take responsibility for your self and your actions. No one to blame but good ol Hillary.

    February 27, 2008 at 2:57 pm |
  55. sean

    Whats the fuss ? She gets asked first becoz she is the one who wanted more debates, And its always Ladies First.

    February 27, 2008 at 2:57 pm |
  56. kim

    Say what you want but Hillary is being judged as a woman and the comments about her voice, her crying, her weight, her husband, her 'whining' are all comments meant to put this woman in her place and keep the glass ceiling intact. So it doesn't matter how qualified she is or what she says because sexist male voters are not listening, have made up thier minds.
    I can't stand Obama, he is only 4 years older than me and I DO NOT think he is qualified to be president. He is going to be slaughtered in the general election when the gloves come off. I am writing in Al Gore's name when I vote, I will not vote for Obama.

    February 27, 2008 at 2:57 pm |
  57. Matt

    She needs to spend less time campaigning against Senator Obama and the media and start campaigning for herself. The only thing she can point her finger at is her arrogance because that is what has lost her the momentum in this race. This COULD have been a slam dunk. These primaries prove that the people do have a voice. Senator Obama's grass roots campaigning is a pure example.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:06 pm |
  58. Dennis

    Nope, she's just jealous that the whole country likes Obama, and nobody likes her.

    Dennis (San Francisco)

    February 27, 2008 at 3:06 pm |
  59. David,San Bernardino,CA.

    Of course the media is against Hillary. Anything she does or says is used against her and made to portray her as an angry,spiteful woman. Obama is treated as perfect and sent to the United States directly from heaven and whose every word is divine scripture. One of these days the public is going to figure out that they have been snookered,but by then it will be too late.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:08 pm |
  60. eva

    Didn't the same question was asked by Lou Dobbs last week??? 73% – yes, 27%- no.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:08 pm |
  61. george

    If Hillary Clinton was the tough guy in the race, Barack Obama became the Oprah candidate. This is a bit like what's happened in business....women are still only 3 percent of the CEOs in Fortune 500 companies. Meanwhile, it's become more acceptable for a man to take an afternoon off to watch his kids play ball than for a woman. There are double binds and double standards. It showes how hard it still is for a woman to be seen as both competent and likable. And it leads to a conclusion that "What defines leadership to most people is one thing. It's male.

    We have ended up in a lopsided era of change. Now we see a woman running as the fighter and a man modeling a 'woman's way' of leading. We see a younger generation in particular inspired by ideas nurtured by women, as long as they are delivered in a baritone.
    So, has the women's movement made life easier? For another man?

    February 27, 2008 at 3:10 pm |
  62. Linda, Boulder, CO

    I think the press is very biased against Senator Clinton and for Senator Obama. I was relieved to see the SNL skit, because it was so spot on. I hope Campbell Brown watched it, because she was more a cheerleader for Obama than a moderator. It was hard to watch the last CNN debate for that reason.

    When Clinton wears pants; she's so unfeminine. If she wears a dress, there's talk about cleavage. If she cries, she's faulted. If she speaks strongly, she's shrill.

    When there is a panel on CNN, it is hard to find one (well, excepting Carville, until he was taken off, and Begalia) who has anything positive to say about Clinton, while they drool over Obama. David Gergen did point out the other night that while he was in the White House that he observed Hillary to question and doubt NAFTA, and want to focus on health care, but that's as close to any balanced reporting that I have found.

    The press are gleefully reporting the campaign like a reality show, or info-tainment or something.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:11 pm |
  63. Alex

    Of course the media is tougher on Clinton than Obama. For one thing, she's been in the public eye longer and has more political history (let alone experience) than Obama. Also, sad and ugly as it is, it's much safer in America to be publically tougher on a woman than a black man, both legally and financially. The media runs on advertising dollars, and integrity took a back seat to the bottom line a long time ago.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  64. JimS.

    ABSOLUTELY YES, the media has been unfair to Clinton. From the very first primary in Iowa, they were ready to count her out after Obama winning one puny little state. They got caught with their pants down in New Hampshire, totally broadsided because they were so in love with the Obama story.

    From the beginning, the press has tried to make the story, instead of just reporting it. It continues today.

    What's amazing to me is that even though polls say most people think Hillary would be more ready on Day 1 thank Obama, people still prefer him with his lower qualifications. Why does the press not dig into these seeming contradictions? Because they're still so in love with the story they're trying to write.

    The other dumbfounding mystery is why the Obama fans don't see how they're being brainwashed, Pied-Piper like. In thier obsessive adulation for their new Super-Hero they still don't see the disparate coverage.

    I'll never trust CNN again. Never.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  65. Don Green

    Media has been very impartial. I still would like the media to tell us what Hillary's 35 years of experience serving the country consists of. Just because you deliver newspapers doesn't make you a reporter nor does being a presidents wife mean that you made presidential decisions.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  66. Lanie Pietrowski

    Is the media unfair to Hillary Clinton? The media is unfair to the American people! The media exaggerates any and every angle on every story...or just makes a story up if they don't have credible information. As far I can remember, the media has elected all the presidents since JFK. Wake up America! the same corporate macines and special interest groups that OWN our government OWN the media as well! Maybe the media, lobbyists, politicians, corporate scum and special interest groups should step aside and let the American people elect the candidate who is best candidate for our interests as a nation not their interest in global imperialism. We all lose so the media can continue to stroke the corporate hand that feeds it.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  67. Jane from Texas

    The Media is too kind to Hillary, or else they could bring up the real bad things that she has done.

    Obama is too much of a gentleman to debate Hillary. I have watched all the debates and I would have loved to have slapped her numerous times. Obama needs to really take her own. I am tired of him helping her in the chair, pattng her on the back and both saying how good friends they are.

    Where I live, Friends do not stab you in the back and during the debate Hillary is question about what she had done and she replys "Oh, I just need to have a laugh ever now and then on the campayne." Now that remark is at the cost of her good friend Obama,

    Hopefully there is not another debate, but if there is, please get the moderaters that can control Hillary. She is slick as her Husband, Slick Willie.

    I have already cast my vote for a democrat an it wasn't Hillary and that was for many reasons.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:18 pm |
  68. Martha

    The media is very biased against Senator Clinton. Even in the debate last night where they were suppose to be even-handed, they gave Senator Obama more time than Senator Clinton. And last night he said he would attack a country that was not directly threatening us if he felt that they were some sort of danger to this country. WAKE UP DEMOCRATS! In this election, Senator Obama will lose to Senator McCain (unless he runs with Senator Clinton as her VP).

    And Mr. Cafferty, you're citing Maureen Dowd as if she could be even-handed about Senator Clinton? She has never made a secret of how much she loathes BOTH of the Clintons (it's a thin line between love and hate, or maybe I mean lust and hate. . .MoDo seems to have the hots for the ex-President).

    The media will not be able to help Senator Obama against Senator McCain in the way they are doing now. When will you do your homework? Did you LISTEN to the two last night? How could anyone listen to them and say that he is as, or is more, qualified than she. I am very sad for my country.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:19 pm |
  69. Steven Scott

    Ottawa´, Canada

    As an addict to the best reality show going, I do not find the coverage biased at all, except biased to in depth analysis of both sides' positions on the issues. Clinton's positions are getting as much analysis as Obama's. Besides it is not the media who are keeping Obama's name in the news. By constantly throwing mud, sorry, I mean the kitchen sink, at Obama the focus becomes Obama rather than her own policies. As Obama stays on his message the reverse does not happen. She has only herself to blame if the mud she throws happens to land on her as much as him. In regards to the debates, one of her supporters is right, she is a better debater, but being a better debater does not mean winning. Obama may be more hesitant in his answers, but he holds his own, and defends his policies well. In doing so one can argue he wins the debate: if his policies are as good as her's then the choice comes down to personality and charisma, and he does better in that department, partly because he refuses to get into a mud slinging competition.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:20 pm |
  70. Nasif

    Absolutely yes. Third world and Islamic countries had accepted and elected a woman to be a president or prime minister. But in AMERICA, the so called most democratic country in the entire world, has a problem with a woman been president. It is very unfortunate and very sad.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:23 pm |
  71. Bruce Taylor,Berkeley/Sacramento,CA

    The next thing we will hear is that voters are being unfair as well.

    Two questions/issues raised in the Ohio debate need to be addressed and satisfied:
    1. Why won't Hillary Clinton release her tax returns?
    2. Why won't she release the White House archives?

    These issues are directly tied, in the first instance, to her financial backers and business dealings, and in the second instance, her claims of experience.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:35 pm |
  72. Teresa, Tallahassee, FL

    I am the first to give people the benefit of the doubt and the last to go looking everywhere for slights real or imagined but one thing I did notice, even before Super Tuesday , was that photos displayed of the two candidates were often markedly different. Next to a photo of Obama smiling would be a photo of Clinton without a smile, if not something less flattering. I am sure these photo choices were subconscious decisions on the parts of the editors but they do send a subliminal message.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:35 pm |
  73. Chipster

    Yes, Andrea Mitchell & Tim Russert couldn't be better Obama advocates if they were on Barack Obama's campaign team. She made a great case for why her qualifications for the job are superior and they called it a "draw?"

    Obama may be an excellent candidate but it's easier to criticize Clinton because she has worked on civil, women's, children's, and human rights since high school. When someone has done less, there's less to criticize. Sure, she hasn't always succeeded but you can't achieve anything if you do nothing and she has achieved a great deal.

    However, I believe the media's attacks on Clinton are more self-serving than performance analysis. Obama is fresh meat, if you'll excuse the phrase for its brutal honesty. The media has covered Hillary: up, down, inside & out. What's left for them to create media events around her? Get real! Obama is a better target for their overblown, exaggerated ratings grabbers.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  74. Mike in Davis, CA

    The media has been more than fair to Sen. Clinton. When an underdog comes out of nowhere to dominate the clear favorite, it's newsworthy. The same thing happened when the NY Giants beat the New England Patriots in the superbowl. The difference is, the Patriots didn't blame their loss on anyone but themselves.

    I also find it ironic that Senator Clinton was quoting Saturday Night Live as proof of the media bias. When you think about it, both Hillary and SNL are institutions whose popularity peaked in the 80's and neither are considered relevant anymore.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  75. Dave McHugh

    When is the last time someone wanted a commander in chief that whines! She's dug her grave and there is no bottom in site. She does not know how to inspire and she has imploding.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  76. Wyatt

    The reason that the media has been negative towards Hillary is because she is giving them plently of reason to be negative!

    -Starting with Former President Clinton's very unpresidential attacks on Obama in S Carolina

    -Falling so far from grace....last year she acted like the annointed one, then burned through millions of dollars, and is now on the verge of elimination from the race

    -She has campaign people sending the pics of Obama to start a smear campaign

    -The silly and outrageous charges of plagarism against Obama

    -She has been negative when there really hasn't been a good reason to be negative.

    -In the debates she comes across as whiny and seems to have a sense of entitlement.

    -She hasn't changed her message in months and keeps repeating the same old lines (which Obama is doing too, but then again if it ain't broke...)

    -Then on top of all this, she attacks the media for being biased!

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  77. Matt

    No, the media is not being unfair to Hillary. This sounds like another one of her bi-polar moments and it's the media's turn to be the subject during her ever changing personalities. I guess experience doesn't teach you how to deal with losing.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  78. Dell Six, Okmulgee, OK

    The News Media HAS been biased against the Clinton's from the beginning. When Hillary was ahead in the polls they were slamming everything Bill would say & do, not to mention the cartoons that make Hillary look stupid. (I'm keeping a collection of them for future reference). First she was this hard, cold B & when she did show some emotion they scorched her for that. I now despise Keith Olbermann & Chris Mathews, who both flower up everything that Obama does & they criticize everything that Hillary & Bill do. If the media would just give all candidates a fair shake I would be satisfied.

    Thank you for taking my comment. Makes me feel better for the moment, until I read another biased report.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  79. Julie in MN

    Well, the media covers things that the Americans find interesting and newsworthy. Barack Obama's message and leadership abilities are just that and people want to hear more. Hillary is more of the same...so folks aren't interested........ a simple concept really.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  80. Annette

    Even though I have not settled on one candidate yet, I do feel that the media has been harder on Hillary. Maureen Dowd, for example, seems to be on a campaign against Hillary through her editorials in the New York Times. And, without actually giving many concrete specifics as to why she is so negative on Hillary.
    I felt Tim Russert, during the debate last night, was definitely harder on Hillary, than on Obama.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  81. John, Boise, ID

    Well Duh! Yes Jack. The media has absolutely failed in its job... you included.
    You let Obama get away with outrages statements like "In Iraq I was RIGHT in voting NO". How dare you let him get away with making Iraq a black and white issue when it is in fact very complex. How dare you let him get away with a hypothetical when you don't question him on apeasement for Saddam Hussein or negiotating with Saddam with no preconditions. Why perhaps don't you suggesting that voting no was really a cop-out and avoids make a hard decision.

    How dare you let him get away with re-defining the health care issues to "affordability" when you know he has absolutely no "secret sauce" to reduce costs compared to anyone else...especially when his budget spending only increases! Do the maths Jack!

    How dare do let him get away with "Change" "Hope" and "Yes we can" , Plagiarized from Bob the Builder, when you know he has very left wing liberal policies, which you know very well, will polarize "Washington" just as much as Bush.

    It is beyond belief how the media, especially CNN, are being sucked into the same black and white thinking of what they allowed to go completely unchallenged for 6 years under the Bush administration.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  82. Amy

    Well, there was that story on her bust size, yes? Did anyone do a "boxers or briefs?" segment on Obama?

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  83. Travis Johns

    My answer to the "media" is unfair to Clinton. YES,
    You've been unfair... Mr. Russert was RUDE to Hillary and ask her for a YES OR NO over and over. Not once did he ask Obama for a yes or no. NOT ONCE!

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  84. GJ

    We HAVE come along way .... BUT we still need a Woman or man who can play fair on that equal playing field with anybody else.

    I cant believe that Hillary would interupt so many times in the first 16 mins..... it was really embarasing ... she wouldnt let ANYBODY get a word in edge wise.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  85. Adam Kontras

    You reap what you sew. Nothing like demanding 5 debates, slamming the opponent for only accepting 2, then whining that the media is unfair. If you felt that 2 weeks ago, why would you demand debates by... the media?

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  86. Bryce

    I seem to remember when Hillary spouted off about the Obama campaign not being able to stand up against the Republican smear machine. Well, I guess the Obama campaign is doing better than the Clinton campaign. If the Clinton campaign cannot beat the Obama campaign than I just do not get how she thinks her campaign will fair any better.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  87. bill from Pa.

    I think Hillary will be the more prepared to begin whining on day one.
    This is just one more example of her pity party candidacy. She has acted like she's entitled to the nomination and the country should just fawn over her and not stand in the way. She's not mature enough to lead America. The act needs a curtain call, and hopefully the voters of Texas and Ohio will provide it.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  88. Phil

    Stiop Whining. Be a man. or a lady in pantsuit.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  89. Geoff

    I do think that there has been an apparent slant towards Obama during the last several weeks (especially after Super Tuesday). It seems on the outside that the media has picked their darling in him and want to help him into office. However, what is seen through the TV might not be reality. It could also be (and I believe to be the case) that the Obama team is simply handling his PR better than the Hillary camp. If one is to be successful in anything, they must play to their strengths. Obama's team (who have continually proved themselves) could be putting him in the right place at the right time. What appears to be a media bias could simply be good campaigning.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  90. Ken

    We cannot afford this great nation to be run on emotions. She may have to 'cry' again to win a state.

    I listen to the actual debates and speeches they give live. I almost always turn off the news channels after that when they come up with these slightly exaggerated eye-catching headlines that focus on one small aspect of a debate or speech.

    We need to get past using such basic terms like 'unfair' when talking about the most important post in the world! I implore the general public to listen only to the meat and potatoes (real live debates and speeches) and forget about 1 persons opinion (whomever writes the article).

    Everytime I listen to her (Clinton) I like her less and less. Sound more like the old and we desperately need something new.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  91. James P. from Washington State

    No doubt that most of the news organizations have looked closer at Hillary Clinton - but for good cause. She entered this race with a lot of baggage, some of it hers and some of it from her husband.

    Having three daughters, I have always told them that they can do and acheive almost anything - but to always be honest. I have questioned in my mind about Hillary's truthfulness.

    The changes in character / attitude (did not want to use the term mood swings) also causes me concern which all the media has picked up on also.

    Yes it would be great to have a female president, but we need one that we could feel we could identify with and it is not her.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  92. Jerry Gasquez

    Dear Jack,
    I keep hearing Obama say Change. What is he changing? Will he change his way towards the United States Flag of America by placing his hand over his heart? Will he place his hand on the bible if he should make it to the presidency? Will he make our borders secure and change his ways about illegal immigration? Will he change the free trade act so more middle class Americans can get jobs here at home? I mean he keeps saying change, but what is hhe going to change?

    Jerry G

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  93. Bonnie

    Absolutely. I'm from the Walter Cronkite era and I have never been more disappointed in the media as I am with this Presidential Election. Walter would never have given his opinion on the events of the day. He would have ONLY presented the people with the FACTS and only the FACTS and let people come to their own conclusions. He treated his audiences with respect. Whatever happened to that kind of journalism?

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  94. Tom from Boston

    I am so tired of losers bashing the media for their own lack of success. Clinton isn't giving the American voter enough credit. We can look past a supposed biased media and make up our own minds thank you very much. She isn't losing in the primaries because of the media; she is losing because the majority of voters simply prefer Obama. And her husband was wrong – this isn't a "fairy tale," it's a nightmare for his wife, and one that surely is costing Hillary a lot of sleep. Sorry Hillary, the voters are rejecting you for Barak Obama. It's over. Be gracious, step aside, and give the Democrats a fighting chance to unify and recapture the White House!

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  95. Bill

    I think they have been unfair. I have yet to hear Obama really present any details explaining how he is going to manage the "levers of power" in Washington to unfold this wonderful image of togetherness he proposes. In this light, I haven't seen the media pressure him on these points. I've seen the media pounce on every word that Bill or Hillary Clinton say highlighting the negativism of it. Yet I'm begining to see more cheap shot comments from Obama, that appear to not draw any attention. And I must admit, I do wonder why that is so. I'm begining to see that Obama plays politics just as much as all the other candidates, but he's just too likeable for the media to place their attacking eye on it appears to me. The media is enamoured with him and appears ever busy with hype, but lacking content. Guess that isn't sensational enough.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  96. Kevin- Webster, MA

    The media has been more than fair to Hillary. Her failure is no being reflected in a blame game as she is in denile that it is her.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  97. Sean Carroll

    Absolutely not. When you look at any campaign, the media is going to cover the good, the bad, and the ugly. They did that to Guiliani, they did that to John Kerry when he lost to Bush in 2004. It just so happens that the bad and the ugly for Hillary are occuring at the most crucial time in her campaign....and she's frustrated. You didn't hear her complain during debates 1-5 when most of the questions and time was devoted to her, Obama, and Edwards because they were viewed as the most viable candidates. And, isn't getting to answer the questions first seen as an advantage because it allows you to frame the debate? I competed in debate, and I always hoped to answer first.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  98. Jeff

    It was a vast right wing conspiracy a few years ago and now it's a vast media conspiracy?

    This delusional thinking ignores the plain fact: her own party is rejecting her. Her playbook never considered this possibility and she is apparently unable to acknowledge her own underpinnings.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  99. al

    Yes.

    1) the men don't get scrutinized over their choice of wardrobe or makeup as Clinton does.

    2) Chris Williams has been showing incredible bias against Clinton for years, and is allowed to continue to do so. (ie: saying she only got a senate seat because of Bill, cutting off Rachel Maddow when he asked her her thought of Clinton, and it wasn't what he wanted to hear, etc)

    3) She gets slightly emotional at a rally and the claws came out.

    etc etc.

    While I will completely agree that she has made her own mistakes along the way, there is no way anyone can convince me that the media hasn't been harder on her than anyone else throughout this process.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  100. Poly

    Hey, when SNL spoofs you, there is ALWAYS some merit to what they are saying–even if it is funny. They spoofed the media about election coverage–and now the media coverage has become an issue.

    I think the media has been very unbalanced, and mostly in favor of Obama. As far as they are concerned, he can do no wrong.

    Mostly, it is in the characterization of the nomination process. If Hillary says anything about Obama, it's an "attack", a "slam", or some such thing. Obama, on the other hand, is only presented as responding–this is just not accurate. He sends out attacking flyers and gets out robocalls, but no one ever talks about those...only Hillary's response.

    The media has not even properly vetted Obama. There is virtually no discussion of his voting record or anything else related to the issues. Everything is American Idol-esque: the "it" factor, looks, youth, rhetoric.

    I am planning to vote on based on the issues, and sadly cannot rely on the media to properly articulate them.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  101. Pat

    Yes, Jack, this has been evident for some time that there is a clear bias against Clinton. In fact, I remember seeing you on The View last summer where you clearly stated the Hillary Clinton would not be the first woman president. If that's not showing an automatic bias against a candidate, I'm not sure what is.

    Take for example the Wisconsin primary. CNN's website ran a story saying "Clinton doesn't congratulate Obama, again." However, after reading the story, the last lines read that she did in fact call him, but for 10 hours your network kept this misleading story on the front page of the site.

    I don't expect the Obamaniacs to see this, but they sure will when the media turns on Obama, which they will when their punching bag Hillary is out of the race.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  102. Peter from Pittsburgh

    Its an insulting question and the implications from Hillary are insulting.

    Has the media given Obama a pass? Well, as a responsible voter and with all the information avaiable to the average fellow like myself, what the "main stream media" is doing or not doing is no excuse not to investigate each candidate that is running to be my president.

    the suggestion that the "media" is somehow at fault for Hillary's downturn is an insult to the voters, as if they are blind rats following the pied piper at CNN.

    I have more assurance in my judgment and ability to investigate facts and candidates. I would hope my president would have that same trust in me and the other voters of this country...

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  103. Bill

    Yes they are Jack, but then again you are in the back pocket of Obama so you would not think so. Just like when you said Hillary "whined" rather than say "she commented". Hope you can keep your love affair with Obama going if he gets nominated.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  104. Lamar in Dallas, TX

    At a rally 2 weeks ago here in Dallas, Barack Obama took a moment to blow his nose (in front of 18,000 fans!)

    If Hillary had done that, her picture would have been plastered all over the front page.

    Right now, there's a lovefest between the media and Obama.

    But keep in mind, "What the media giveth, the media can just as quickly taketh away!"

    Remember the Howard Dean "scream?"

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  105. Adam Kontras

    You reap what you sew. Nothing like demanding 5 debates, slamming the opponent for only accepting 2, then whining that the media is unfair. If you felt that 2 weeks ago, why would you demand debates by… the media?

    Los Angeles, CA

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  106. Cheryl S

    I think the difference in treatment is proof-positive that the media is just reflecting the nation: we are more sexist than racist.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  107. Charles

    I'm inclined to say NO. The media has been there for Senator Clinton when she has been up or down. She got help from the media when news of her campaign funds were running low. She was the BUZZ when this whole elections thing kicked off and the media surely helped her with her crying incident after losing Iowa. Most only see and remember what going on in the now. Senator Obama's string of eleven victories and superdelegates not flocking to the Clinton camp has left Mrs. Clinton with a "Sour Grape" mentality. Hang in there Mr. Cafferty, the "Let's get ready to rumble" hasn't sounded yet between the Dem's and Republicans. Charles in Crestview, FL

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  108. Marie Norton

    Of course the media have been unfair. In a recent interview, Katie Couric has the audacity to ask Hillary Clinton "how she stays healthy on the campaign trail," but does not even begin to ask questions related to her political platform. The same question was not posed to Obama. It is sexism at its worst.

    Casselberry, FL

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  109. Wil

    She is whining. She is losing so she is going to do anything that it takes to win. She said it last night. This is a campaign and I am going to do what it takes to win. If she thinks that she has to whine to win then she is already lost. Its time she give it up.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  110. Don

    It is a totally irrelavent matter. What IS relevant is her reaction to it, be the unfairness real or imagined.

    She is trying to become the most visible, most harassed, most hated, most "unfairly" treated leader in the world. If she feels the need to pause and point out how unfair it is that she has to answer all the questions first during a PRIMARY debate, what will she do when it matters?

    The best thing she could do now is nothing. The more she opens her mouth lately, the more she trails in the polls.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  111. Tor Blaisdell

    Maureen O'Dowd talking about the "utter openmindedness of the press" is probably the funniest most laughable thing ANYONE will say in 2008...and it's only February!

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  112. Terry

    Jack,
    The media are not unfair to anyone. If Obama were a deadly bore and dumb, the media would report that. If Hillary were a warm ,friendly and inspiring person, thats what we would see. Since Hillary is losing, she needs a scapegoat and the media is it.
    Terry
    North Carolina

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  113. Robert E Vadas

    hmmmm, maybe it was the media...or, perhaps it was her vote for the war, her denials that it was a mistake, her divisive campaign, her personal attacks on Obama, her poor campaign strategies, lack of organization in key states after Super Tuesday, her connections to corporate donors, her lies about her role as an advocate for workers rights while on the Wall-Mart board of directors, her support then non-support for NAFTA, her refusal to reveal her money sources, or her bizarre rants in Cleveland about pillows and being asked questions "first." hmmmm not really sure...right? What bothers me most about Hillary is her inability to reflect on her own contributions to her demise while blaming men, the press, and all but herself for one of the great "chokes" in political history. As one who twice voted for Bill and voted for her in 2000 I have slowly been weaned away from her and toward Obama with his message of hope, his disarming and calm demeanor, sense of humor and ability to understand complex issues. What Hillary also does not seem to comprehend is that I believe that Obabma is sincere AND capable...a rare combination! That Hillary thinks I have been duped by the media is insulting and exemplary of why she will lose. I urge her to drop and lets get behind Obama now!
    Bob Vadas, Potsdam, NY

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  114. Paul

    Cafferty is a sexist, Clinton-hating douche.
    When Hillary was 100+ delegates ahead, they called it "a tie".

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  115. Kathryn

    I don't see that the press is treating Hillary Clinton unfairly. If anything it seems everyone is bending over backwards trying to be overly considerate to her, especially on MSNBC. I think she needs a voice coach and the abiltiy to read others. For example, during last night's debate, Brian Williams was brilliant when trying to get her to stop talking before the first commercial break. "Hold that thought." he stated, and she finally had to comply as the break began. She might try listening and condensing her responses. On the question, most know it is over for Hillary Clinton and I am amazed that she doesn't seem to realize it and some of the media members are acting like her candidacy still has a chance, that is what I would criticize the press for. Do they need to make this seem like a contest to get readers and viewers or are they intimidated by the fact she can call them sexist? Maybe Tuesday night it will be clearer to her and we can all move forward. Sincerely, Kathryn Dugovich

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  116. Patrick

    Just wait til Hillary finds her voice again. Then you media guys will be in BIG trouble!

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  117. Annice

    Hillary may be defensive because the American people are about to make one of the biggest mistakes we have ever made if we put Obama on the ballot. CNN and others are biased. Reporting is done by almost all men. Maybe CNN keeps up the negative reporting on Hillary so we can have another Republican Pres. Republicans are only supporting Obama because they think they have a better chance of beating him than they Clinton. Shame on you media.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  118. joel

    has the media been unfair to Hilary the answer is Hell yes. They need to back off .

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  119. Cara

    I think the Clinton campaign has taken a very different approach than the Obama campaign. It is not at all unobjective to observe that the Clinton Campaign has waged some pretty old-school tactics, raising innocuous issues hoping they would be inflammatory.

    The Obama camp has chosen a much less specific and directed approach, thus he naturally invites less fact checking when he doesn't fire as many negative "facts." I agree with the prior blogger that Obama is very human, as is Hillary. He, however, has written some self-effacing books that pretty much own up front much of the dirt that could've been dug - thus rendering it "old news."

    Both candidates say they did not favor NAFTA. Last night, the moderator fired at least four contradictary quotes from Hillary stating her support - her reply was to begin to reference the single incident where Obama was quoted as saying something in favor of it. The moderator promised he would get to Obama, but insisted she respond only to her statements. They looked for contradictions...there were more for HRC. Even she only found the one on Obama and quoted it before the moderator.

    Then, there is the tax return issue. He has disclosed, she has not. His fundraising supports the source of his money. She lent her campaign 5 million and is withholding tax returns that might indicate where those assets were earned.

    There is more coverage and more questions because there is more there. She is a pro and she is handling it better than most of us ever would - except when she whines about it.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  120. rk

    I thin Obama has alot of love among the press. It seems as if everyone is going at clinton while the press lobs softballs at Obama. The guy hasnt done anything in both Illinois or US senates, yet the press loves to report on his dream speeches. Give us a break. Report all sides equally. By the way...I can care less about either one of these candidates.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  121. Bob

    Although I will vote for Obama or Clinton in November, Hillary absolutely gets treated differently and has to field different questions than men do. Even Katie Couric was asking annoying questions (are you uptight/do you get hysterical?) of Hillary that Barack was never asked on 60 Minutes. Unfortunately this country has to be more focused on electability of a candidate instead of plain old ability. I don't agree with everything (voting for Iraq and NAFTA) but still happen to think Hillary would be an excellent president.

    I agree Obama has a lot of charisma, and that serves any candidate positively. It is easy to portray Obama as a rock star because of his youth and great speaking voice and Hillary as a nagging mother. But is youth and a great speaking voice substantial reasons enough to overlook Hillary? I have nothing against Obama, he will be president someday. He has the momentum and looks more and more like he will be the democratic candidate, but he is untested. I try to vote with my head and not my heart.

    By the way, what has charisma brought us? Everyone says Bush has charisma (LOL I never understood this) and he's the kind of guy that 'I'd like to get a beer with.' I'm sorry but those are pathetic reasons to vote for a president.

    As Hillary said she's trying to 'break through the highest and hardest glass ceiling there is.' It was and is an uphill battle for her, but I don't think she expected any different.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  122. suzanne

    Media has been very very soft and not probing when it comes to Senator Obama.

    As an observer from another country, it looks like the media has already cast a vote for Obama.

    May I also say that you would think that after 8 years of empty and secret bush years, the media would be plowing at any candidate for concrete answers and not hot air promises

    But I guess they say it can take up to 20 years to change a society.....

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  123. oknanageorge

    CNN – what does it take for you to remain neutral and play fair? If you have to ask, has the media been unfair, you are living in another world – wait a minute, wasn't that one of your articles on Clinto? As I recall, you said she is living in another worl – out off this world. CNN has run negative on Clinton since day one, it is almost as if yu are anti female. Are you afraid of a woman president? It just goes to show there is no breaking through the glass ceiling, that's a shame. It is clear that Hillary is qualified for the position despite her husbands record, it's Hillary running not BILL. If you gave this much bad publicity to OBAMA there would be a national out cry of racism and what would that do for your station? Sexism is alive and well in the United States. We as citizens deserve better than what the media has given.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  124. Matt

    The media can only report what is happening and whats happening is she is getting her behind kicked. You don't think her campaign has tried it's best to dig up dirt on Obama? There is no dirt, so why should the press or anyone give him a hard time

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  125. Guillermo

    yes the media is biased ,, same reason why they dont address Barrack by his full name

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  126. Ben

    When Chris Matthews gushes that he gets a thrill running up his leg when he hears an Obama speech, you have to wonder if he is really objective. And I have yet to read any detailed analysis from any news organization regarding Obama's record. It seems that the media has created a teflon candidate.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  127. Terry

    Everyone here is blind if they didn't see Mr. Obama's nomination coming at the 2004 DNC. Keynote speaker prior to being elected? The Dems have had this man fast tracked for some time now. And Karen, why are you so angry? Just pray to Muhammed/Jesus/Budda that we don't have to struggle through another 8 yrs of a Bush presidency! For the record, I served honorably in the USMC.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  128. Tom

    The GOP controls the media. The GOP knows that Obama cannot be McCain so they push Obama. It's pretty simple.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  129. dave in ct

    Fact of the matter is this: Hillary Clinton is where she is because she chose to run her campaign like an incumbent. She took it for granted that she would get the nomination. Along comes Obama, who is running a tighter campaign and who is better organized on the ground. She wasn't prepared for this, and that shows in her constantly shifting voices and tactics. She looks desperate.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  130. Bethany (Edison, NJ)

    Mrs. Clinton is a bigger flip-flopper than Mitt Romney! She constantly changes her stance on things such as her Iraq War vote, NAFTA, and now the media. A few months ago she had no problem with the media becase most people (including her) believed that she will surely win the nomination. Then, as people got to know Barack Obama better, they started to realize he was not one to let go so easily. She should be thankful that the media even mentions her name, because if Barack Obama had lost eleven straight primaries and was behind in the delegate count he wouldn't be getting five minutes of air-time a day. People would have looked at him the same way they look at the horrible auditions on American Idol- a little piece of entertainment brought by someone too hungry for fifteen minutes of fame. She is the one who's getting the free pass. In addition, Hillary needs to realize that the media is a business-they have to report what people want to hear, or else no one will listen, and they'd lose money. The networks' willingness to abruptly cut her speech and switch to Barack Obama's should tell her that the American people are calling for something-and it's not her.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  131. Clint Edwards

    The reality is that America is hungry for real inspiring leadership. Obama offers that every time he opens his mouth.

    It draws people from all across the spectrum: right, left, black, white, latino, male, and female. Clinton's largest problem is that she is running against an inspiring person and she is not able to project that same inspiration or hope for the future. She is the past. Obama is the answer for people who don't want to see our presidency become something passed between two family dynasties.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  132. Bryan Littleton

    The media has absolutely been unfair to Hillary Clinton. At debate afetr debate she shows a command of issues, facts, and plans that make Obama look decidedly inept by comparison, yet invariably the pundits give thumbs-up to the junior (and I do mean junior) Senator from Illinois. If a male candidate had Hillary's intelligence, experience, and vision he would have been the nominee on February 6th.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  133. Bamboo

    The media will never be kind to woman. Just like therapists go after our mothers as the source of all out problems and accept that fathers are flawed, so too will society blame women for failing to be perfect while men are simply expected to be that way.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  134. Diane,WY

    Should be beginning to think..instead of being.

    GO HILLARY!!!

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  135. Susan A

    It's high time a woman win the presidency, women are absolutely capable to lead this country just as well as men. However, it has become clear that someone as emotionally disturbed and ungracious as Hillary has put a bad face on her quest. She has brought this on herself. Her passive agressive tactics and incessant nit-picking are not what we need to have the first woman president partaking in. What a shame! I'm an independent, but if by some crazy twist she gets nominated I would have to vote McCain, no matter how I dislike him it doesn't compare to the damage she would do.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  136. Tammy

    I know that the debate last night with MSNBS was very "maachisomo", Tim Russert came off as deranged and after watching Meet the Press for the last 20 years every Sunday, it will be a long time before I "tune" in again.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  137. Sharon-KY

    First of all let me say I am a republican. However, after the way President Bush has been represented by the media, I don't believe we have an ice cubes chance in you no where of having another republican win. Because of this, I have been keeping a closer eye on the Democratic comings and goings. I believe the media has been biased in favor of Obama because he makes a better story. At first, Hillary was the one most people expected to be the nominee. Now, Obama, who has much less experience than Clinton, has come from behind to win most of the last states and take the lead in this race. I also think he is the media's pick because he is so much more charismatic than Clinton. We are a country that is so media and entertainment minded, that we will pick our president based more on how well he looks, speaks and gets the crowd on their feet (Not to mention how many celebrity endorsements he has) over his experience.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  138. LT

    She should be happy that she had to answer the intial question first, it allowed her the oppurtunity to set the tone of the debate and she has failed at this during the last two debates. She is not the front-runner this would have given her a great chance to point out the differences between herself and Barack, but as we have seen she take these oppurtunities to take empty shots at her opponent and the media.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  139. Jason

    It might be old hat for a politician to go after the press when things aren't going well. But it's also very old hat for the press to get defensive and issue the same kind of lame denials that the pols do when their objectivity is questioned. It never seems to occur to the media machine that they might be every bit as biased as they think their readers/viewers are. Press people are like everyone else, in that they operate with certain presuppositions and predispositions that shape how they see the world. It's foolish to think this doesn't considerably influence how they do their job, the kinds of questions they ask (and don't ask), and the kinds of stories they pursue (or don't pursue). To deny this is to indulge in a very dangerous kind of self delusion that not coincidentally helps feed the massive distrust of the press by the public. That means that on principle, any candidate might be on to something in questioning the fairness of the press, even including Hillary.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  140. Mike

    I'm an Obama supporter, but it does seem that the media is being harder in Cinton. For example, last night Tim Russert threw Hillary the "gotcha" question of naming the incoming Russian leader. That's just one example, but there are plenty of others to cite. Although most of the mainstream media attenpts to be fair and balanced (Fox being the most notable exception), reporters and commentators are only human, and perhaps have fallen victim to some degree to Obama's charisma and eloquence.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  141. Julie

    I don't feel that the news media has been unfair to Hilary. However, I do wish the media would show all sides of Obama. His wife states she has never before been proud of the U.S. and it hardly gets mentioned. One of his main backers can't even state one accomplishment of Obama and nobody listens. I think we need someone who will not only help the states but is also proud to be an America.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  142. deirdre

    YES! YES! YES! They have been ridiculously unfair to her. They do lob him softballs, and I am a devoted Democrat, but he has yet to be forced to answer any specifics about how he intends to pay for anything, or run his programs. Worse, history tells us his foreign policy ideas are faulty; it is why Kennedy was so wildly popular at home but nearly dragged us into a nuclear war. Lastly, at least she has a record to defend; the media asks soft questions, blames her for her spouse, chooses her most unflattering pictures, and even uses sexist language in their reporting (or in the case of the NY Post, misogynistic; "Wham Bam!")
    And if anyone dares to make a comment about Obamma, they are forced to publicly apologize for fear of being politically incorrect.
    YES! The media has been and is being unfair, just as they were when she was First Lady. And we are all going to regret not seeing her as the candidate.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  143. Bob Drummond

    Yes; I think the media has jumped unnecessarily on Hillary from everything about her clothes to her grin or voice. It's apparent to all honest watchers that she receives criticism whenever there is any chance at all of finding any. The news is constanly looking for and waiting for anything to excite negative news about her. I've never seen the news saying anything about the way her opponent acts, dresses, smiles, etc!! I'm as fed up with the way the media covers things as I am with the way Jack Cafferty covers this. No one has to guess that he's pro Obama. I would like to see more facts and less sensationilizing everything by the media.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  144. Alex Glen Burnie, MD

    She needs to stop complaining and start accepting the fact that she ran a piss poor campaign. How many times has she changed key positions in her campaign? How many times has she down played a win for Obama? She can talk about all the negative pub she gets but what it boils down to is wins… and once he started winning she should have stepped up and answered… but instead she let him rattle off 10 wins in primaries and caucuses. Now she is looking at polls and doesn’t like what she sees. You can let someone win 10 or more contests in a row and sit back and wait for Texas and Ohio to kick it in for you after they just watch you get smacked around 10 times.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  145. Jude Edminster

    Mysogyny is alive and well in this race. Clinton has been faulted in how she expresses herself in ways that would never even come up, let alone be taken seriously when discussing male candidates. For example, In expressing justified anger while making a point, she is reported to be "shrill and argumentative." Women's voices are naturally higher than men's voices, so what? And reasoned argument is at the heart of any free political system–so why should she be denigrated for engaging in what male politicians do with impunity?

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  146. Rodney

    Hillary came into this race as if America owed her the democratic nomination. Now, she is laying the foundation for her exit strategy... Opps, her excuses for under estimating her competition and a misgiuded dependance on a presumptive right to the presidency.

    It ain't (...and I do mean aint") the medias fault.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  147. Annie W., Woodbridge, Va.

    I find it interesting that Hillary's problems are never of her own making. First we had the vast right-wing conspiracy, now we have a biased media. I'm frightened by the prospect of having someone in the White House who blames everything on someone else and doesn't take any responsibility for his/her own actions. Stop whining and start owning up to your own actions.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  148. Mary

    Media is not only unfair with Sen Hillary, but promoting Obama who not experinced, media is not watching US interest but behaving like a anti-nationals. Why you want to give country into hands of inexperienced person, because you hate Hillary so much that nation goes to hell. It is shamefull.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  149. Pieter Hoff - the Netherlands

    Hello American friends

    For us it is incredible yes that the American press is so soft to someone that never has proven anything. Fist you elect a president who brought you 8 years in war and now you elect someone just because he is black and has beautiful stories but no proven lifeexperience. We are surprised that your press doesn't try to break him in order to see how tough he is. Or are you scared of being punished of discrimination? Since when do we believe fairy tales if we talk about the responibility for the USA but partly also for the wellbeing of the world??

    Pieter Hoff

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  150. Barbara Welch, Des Plaines, IL

    Someone needs to let Hillary know: what goes around, plays around. Turn the page back a few months and the media coverage was all about casting Hillary as the anointed One. We had Hillary here and Bill there, and their words flowed elixir to us all. The Clintons had written the book on how to win elections, and there was no stopping them. If Obama is winning now, he's earned it the hard way.
    Mainstream media has changed a lot since the Clinton's ruled, but one thing remains the same–News has never been about fairness.
    Hillary's new plaint about her media coverage strikes an unwise, strident note.
    Good luck to both the candidates. I'm excited to vote again!

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  151. Susan in Florida

    Definitely, Hillary needs to be accountable and answer to the tough questions. Politics is a tough game. So, yes, she - and most her staff - need to stop whining. At the same time, when she gets tough as the men might do in the same situation, she's criticized for it. She also has a tough time competing on an equal playing field with Obama when some reporters covering him are truly enamored with him - almost salivating on the sidelines as if they're part of a JFK-like Camelot experience. My view: "Get over it." Those reporters should be sent for a "time out." Interpretation of the news and showcasing trends is fine, but when the media coverage borders on the reporter's personal exuberance and the interpretive journalism begins to sway public opinion - rather than the voters doing that - I think things are a bit out of hand. Just my take....

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  152. Bob Fetter

    Jack:
    The "love" shown to Senator Obama by the press makes the fairness shown to Senator Clinton seem negative. Tim Russert's "questions" in last night's debate were examples of this. Hard and fair questions to Senator Clinton and softball, fluff stuff to Senator Obama. It's a "shame" for both of them!

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  153. Shea Grimm

    I think it's patently obvious that the media has a pro-Obama bias, but who cares? Bush pretty much got a free ride from the press during the whole build-up to the Iraq war. It always happens, only a fool thinks the media is unbiased. Clinton could have overcome it, taken the high road, and demonstrated the supposed leadership and experience she keeps beating us over the head with. Instead, she has become shrill, defensive, and sunk her own ship with these ridiculous petty attacks while Obama has remained gracious, smart, calm, and...presidential.

    I think Barack Obama will be an excellent president, and it's nice for a change not to have the media constantly dredging up meaningless innuendo to smear a candiate, although we saw Russert do it with the Farrakhan question, and no doubt more will soon follow once Obama secures the nomination. But I think he's demonstrating that he can handle it, and his supporters are not going to be detracted by dirty swiftboating tactics this time around.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  154. Don

    Isn't it about time for a few tears to well up in Hillary's eyes again and maybe get a few votes that way........Again

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  155. Dianne Southerland

    It's clear that Hilary is being treated unfairly. Who would have predicted that sexism would be a more toxic force than racism in this campaign? As a loyal republican, I have now decided to cast an empathetic vote for Hilary.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  156. Acacia from Philadelphia, PA

    Hillary wasn't complaining about unfair treatment from the media when they were saying she was the presumptive nominee! And you didn't hear Obama complaining then, or ever. Sometimes the media gets it wrong, and I can't believe she thinks the American people are so stupid that we can't figure that out for ourselves.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  157. Doug Pierson Tohatchi, NM

    Frankly, from my perspective the press has been unfairly in favor of Hillary since the election started. There were some naysayers but overall I think that the press has consistently been supportive of Clinton.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  158. Pat Arlington Ma.

    I have listened to many commentaries on a lot of stations for quite a while now. I have certainly noticed that the commentators, even those who used to be more positive, have been very negative lately about Senator Clinton and I fail to understand their reasoning. Personally, I like her feistiness. I continue to think she is a very strong and competent candidate and would make a great president. If given the opportunity, I will certainly vote for her!
    If not, I will be supporting Obama. It will be very interesting to see how the press treats him once he goes against McCain. Man to man,
    now that is a new theme for this country!

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  159. Mike

    I'm an Obama supporter, but it does seem that the media is being harder on Cinton. For example, last night Tim Russert threw Hillary the "gotcha" question of naming the incoming Russian leader. That's just one example, but there are plenty of others to cite. Although most of the mainstream media attenpts to be fair and balanced (Fox being the most notable exception), reporters and commentators are only human, and perhaps have fallen victim to some degree to Obama's charisma and eloquence.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  160. Don

    I loved the reference she made during the debate last night to the Saturday Night Live sketch. I thought the sketch was on the money and the editorial later in the program by Tina Fey was even more true. In fact if I was Hillary, I would hire Tina as my speech writer.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  161. David

    The media is being very unfair to Hillary! Shame on all of you for being there to cover her ever changing positions, her persist irascibility and her tears (let us not forget the tears).

    In the future, I hope that the Media learns to be more amenable to Mrs. Clinton: take only what she spoonfeeds you, turn off the cameras and recorders when she says something questionable, and never-ever make a comment about her unless you get her authorization to do so. If you can't do that, then I suggest you stay away from Mrs. Clinton completely and let her be stodgy all by herself without your constant intrusions. She'll call you next time she wants to be filmed crying.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  162. Wassabi Cracker

    Yes, the media has been very bias. It's not so much against Clinton as it is FOR Obama. Just because she's behind doesn't mean its not true, the perception has been accepted on a number of levels and exposed pretty readily. NBC reporters admitting their infatuation, Mathews talking about a getting a chubby when he listens to Obama, perceptions of Obama as 'messiah.' I think what the press fails to admit is that they are about money, and right now Obama's story = money. McCain supporters beware, Obama as president = money. However, the effects of the Press' adoration of Obama on Clinton's campaign is NOTHING compared to the disservice U.S. Media imposes on its citizens everyday. Lack of any depth, variety, and one-upmanship by media organizations undermine America's ability to get hard, unbiased facts about the state of the world. The press fails to investigate anymore, runs off of an echo-chamber managed by spin-doctors, and fails in there even very basic task of parsing out incorporated presumptions and loaded statements by public officials (like calling a bill that removes carbon emission standards the "Clean Skies For America Act." The press justifies its money grubbing iconoclasty by saying it has to be "fair" (which is not the same as truthful) and thereby legitimizing the sometimes extreme (and obviously wrong) opposing viewpoint of any issue.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  163. Steve

    Perhaps if Hillary spoke on the issues and acted less like the political hack that she is, the voters would tend to listen to her. Unfortunately, she is typical of those who feel that by raising the level of their voice, people will listen to them. I need an airsick bag.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  164. Norman

    It's easier for a black man to get elected then a woman. The thing is that Obama whether you like him or hate him he does speak to people's hopes, he speaks to optimism for many people and research has shown that really appeals to people. Blaming and being negative turns people off. The candidate who has the optimistic message (whether it's realistic is NOT the issue either)...will win the election. HIllary doesn't have that message now.. OBama does.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  165. noname

    Mr. Cafferty,

    Manuel beat me to the punch. Your term 'whined" does say it all. If it were a MAN you were speaking of you would not use that word. You would use "complained," or "apprehended," or "opposed."

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  166. Dee Srellek

    Yes- it is obvious and offensive. I think if the media took the same approach with any other FEMALE candidate there would be more outrage. The press obviously feels that Hillary is a fair target and does not deserve the same respect and consideration as any other candidate. Some of the comments and words used to describe Senator Clinton by CNN, MSBC and others are so demeaning and sexist that it is hard to believe that these "commentators" can get away with it in 2008. So much for "change".

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  167. Jawed Khan from: Ashburn, VA

    People seem to think things are unfair only when things are not going their way.... Votes are not going Clinton's way, she should thank the media for pointing this out to her so she is not shocked at the end.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  168. Shaun Amherst, MA

    Jack,

    The media has been exceptionally hard on Hillary Clinton as of late but they are not to be completely blamed for her dip in the polls. She ran a campaign as if she would be the nominee after Feb 5th and she did not adjust accordingly. I think that is evident in that she didn't come up with a strategy after Super Tuesday and she spent money like a drunken sailor

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  169. Junell Vargas

    I think the media is treating her fairly. I mean she has been attacking obama, remember the "shame on you" gaining negative coverage. Obama has been cool and collected, and i think thats what shows, he didn't start negative campaigning, which if you saw in south carolina, Billary were starting smearing and mis-stating barack's statements. I respect the Clinton's but i think its Barack's time. im starting to fear that the democratics will divide if it gets to this negative attacks, let it just be about the facts. so that we can beat John McCain!

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  170. Dave, Chicago, IL

    Yes, the media is treating Clinton harshly. What was the headline on cnn.com a few weeks ago? (something like this):
    Hilary trails Obama, without Superdelegates.

    It's a spun headline, a smart play on wording. That at a glance, most readers eyes would tell them that headline means Obama is winning, and go on with reading other articles or go back to work.
    If it read, "Hilary has a slim lead over Obama." it would mean the same thing, but that's not what it read. And I believe it was written the way it was on purpose. The media may want Obama to seem like a winner, and thus gear the collective minds of America into thinking that way. Once primed to think in that manner, it is hard to keep the snowball from gaining size and speed, so to speak.
    Headlines are the most visible/important part of a news article. I agree with the argument that the media is overly supporting Obama, and Clinton is not getting a fair stake in the media.

    McCain isn't getting a fairshake either, but that's another topic.....

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  171. J.C. from Raleigh, NC

    Jack,
    Hillary's definition of fairness precludes anyone questioning her self-appointed Democratic presidential candidate status.
    She would like her run to the White House to only be inhabited by columnists such as Joe Klein who goes so far as to call Obama's followers a cult. Speaking of trying to foist the cult label on Obama's supporters, Hillary's "Celestial Choirs" schtick at a rally on Sunday came dangerously close to appearing racial. Were either of last night's debate hosts being unfair when they accepted Hillary's explanation of her routine as merely an attempt to be funny. When has she merely been funny lately? In her debates Clinton has recalled Harry S. Truman. Perhaps she should heed his admonition, "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen." No gender slur intended.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  172. Laura, San Diego, CA

    I am a semi-retired journalist and YES, some media have been very unfair to Clinton. First, the Obama coverage is overwhelming. Second, only Clinton negatives- i.e. down in polls, funds etc.–get covered–not her message and positions. Why isn't the media asking very tough questions about Obama's qualifications to be our President? I haven't seen that.

    Wake up America. This is not a popularity contest. It may be the most important decision American voters have ever made. Do we want to hand our future to a virtual unkown?

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  173. Liz O

    Oh, so giving Hillary the first question is being tougher on her? And to think that all this time I thought they were taking a "ladies first" stance.

    Liz in Flossmoor, IL

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  174. earl illingsworth

    In the very beginning,no, but as the field narrowed, and came down to just Hillary and Obama, I would say with a resounding,yes! Hillary is absolutely correct about getting asked tough questions, first. Why, you ask? Senator Clinton thoroughly answers the questions from" A to Z",and then some. Then steps in Mr. Fluff (Obama), basically agreeing with everything Hillary has said, but adds a few creative exceptions here ,and there to show validity. Folks, if you can't see thru this charade, you should keep reading, "mo dowd's,half life artifacts"! Notice when Obama is asked to respond first to a question, there is a queasiness/fidgety repression in his body language and a paralysis in the fluidity of his speech, because he doesn't have the answers already given to him by Hillary to improvise on! Oh yea, she certainly is getting the short end of the stick, just ask chris matthew's, now I'm being sarcastic. Earl , Provincetown,Mass.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  175. Kirk Mcclanahan Springfield Oregon

    The news media has become the most horrific part of our culture! Their so called unbiased news reporting is not only a laugh but a cry. They have given some posibly good alternatives for president no time and have vilified others so we now have a choice this year for a president who will become a target (literally and figuratively) for the far right wing of our society, or a man who is so old and encumbered by his neocon friends and benefactors that war would become a constant drain on our countries resources for many years to come... oh..truned on the news today to catch up on things and wa lah the bobby cuts trial on all four news channels....I thought only attorneys were ambulance chasers!!!! You all have become the cartoons of the tabloids!!!

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  176. Damon Harris

    Obama is a messiah to the media.

    Hillary is a pariah.

    Its easier to be sexist than racist in the media world these days.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  177. triciad

    Was the media unfair when Sen. Clinton was the front runner and the "inevitable" nominee? Methinks this is the "blaming of the shrew" – or am I plagerizing too much?

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  178. Antoinette

    After 11 straight losses Hillary Clinton remains in the race. The question is, if Barack Obama had lost 11 straight contests in a row do you think it might have been suggested he get out of the race a very long time ago? I think so.

    So, who is really being favored?

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  179. Andrew

    Her big pitch was she was the candidate that will be ready on day 1. So if she is complaining about the unfairness of the media and is venting her frustrations about it, quite frankly it makes her look weak. What in the world would she do when she has to deal with the
    "unfairness" of Iran, Pakistan, China, Russia, N. Korea, Cuba and Venezuela. If she can be rattled so clearly by friendly correspondents asking her moderately tough questions, what the hell will she do when push comes to shove as Commander in Chief? She is not fit for the Presidency. I am not saying Obama is, but he seems to handle the pressure of the campaign and exudes confidence. It gives the impression that he won't crack under the Presidential strain as much as Hillary would. Hillary looks desperate, I can't remember a candidate looking as unpresidential as she did last night.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  180. Joe Brereton

    I think the media often reflects the sentiments of the nation. Right now the media is talking about what the country is talking about and that is Barack. If she was ahead and/or had won the last 11 contests the media would be talking about her.

    I think overall it's a lame tactic to pull sympathy from the masses. It's essentially what's she's been trying to do the latter part of her campaign. At the beginning she took a dominating role; but not that it suits her, she has begun to play the victim.

    The American people are tired of Washington (i.e. Clinton), the media is reporting what they hear...

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  181. Satish Reddy

    I totally agree with the fact that the media actually is supporting her.. If Obama had lost those 11 states in a row, nobody would have considered him as a contender anymore.

    There is no comparison between Hillary and Clinton, she is just another average politician who lives in the past, he is a guy who analyzes things properly and plans for the future. He makes his point clear to the public to get votes, she puts a sad face to get votes.. he is a cool and calm guy.. but no matter how much she tries to stay cool, she can't stay that way for a long time.. she cries, complains or show her frustration one or the other way.

    She is still in the race just because of her last name.

    Guys, this is not the time to fight over who should be the president.. A man, a woman, a black guy or a white guy.. just fight over who is the right guy and who has the right potential to be a world leader.

    Yesterday I heard this speech from Bill Clinton where he said.. 'She was disturbed by the scene of 9/11 in New York, so she got emotional and approved the war, it was not her mistake'.. that was real stupid of her to do that.. as a president of the US, u are expected to make wise decisions and not emotional decisions.

    Coming to Obama's wife.. guys she is just supporting him like any other person.. she is not running for president and she wont' be influencing his decisions in anyway, so dont' worry about her.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  182. Kathy Dudley

    The media has been unfair to the American people. They do fawn horribly over Obama and pick apart Hillary's ankles and her laugh. Hillary has been through this before. I remember how the media used to love to pick apart her appearance and the days in Arkansas when the major news was how she chose to use her maiden name. The interesting thing will be whether the media dares hold Michelle Obama to the same standard it did Hillary when it was her spouse running for office. Somehow it feels as if the issues of standing by ones man or baking cookies will be mild in comparison to what we are soon to face. I suspect Ms. Obama will continue to be treated as her husband and be relatively off limits until the media too turns on them.

    The bright side of all of this is that I had become a new junkie and because the "news" is now little more than the obviously biased opinion of highly paid entertainers of both the right and left, I can use my time more wisely by doing things such as chiseling down my ankles just in case I ever decide to run for public office.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  183. Edward

    YEs, Yes, Yes. She can't dress right, she can't smile right, she wines, she cackles, not laughts. The press has been condescending and mean. Her knowledge and experience is considered old news – never mind it could get us back on track as a country. Are we a nation of superficial flavor-of-the-moment idiots or what. The press is supposed to be open and air minded. Just wait until they get bored with Obama.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  184. Natasha

    The media is supposed to present both sides of the story openly and objectively. However, during the race for the Democratic Nomination, the media have chosen Obama as their candidate. It's ridiculous! Hillary Clinton should have this nomination in the bag and I think she would have if the media were doing their job! I think you all need a journalism 101 refresher course. I think the media needs to start showing the truth! Clinton & Obama have similar ideas, but in reality it is Clinton that will be able to execute the ideas and make things happen. Obama is a nice mild mannered, intelligent man, but he just doesn't have what it takes! He should be Hillary Clitnon's Vice President and then in 8 years, he will be ready to become the president!

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  185. Joe Potter, Jr.

    I believe that Senator Clinton just underestimated the potential of the Obama campaign. She apparently did not think he was a significant threat until he blew her away on Super Tuesday. Now she is on the defensive. Let us hope that she concedes graciously after the Ohio and Texas primaries. That way she can still be Senator Obama's running mate, perhaps!

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  186. Barbara, Goose Creek, SC

    I have always said that it is the Media outlets that actually get to decide who will become the President of these United States. The media is able to reach millions of people on a daily, if not hourly, basis and , therfore, get to "sway" the masses to the candidate of their choice. Apparently the media likes Obama. They may not know why exactly, but there it is.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  187. Neutral in NC

    Jack, your question is 'unfair' to Hillary. By this, I mean that you're trying to evoke feelings of suspicion, sarcasmand/or exasperation from respondents. (Judging from the comments thus far, you've been quite successful!) Perhaps if you used the term 'imbalanced' instead, responses would be more impartial.

    That being said, it's a difficult question to tackle. You're comparing apples to oranges. Take an analogy of a long-standing marriage. You get used to it... you're comfortable to the point of disregard... you're over-critical... there are sparks from time to time, but nothing like that initial magic. For the media, Obama is that spark. The fresh green pastures on the other side that we so often dream about.

    Is it bias by the media? No, I wouldn't characterize it as such, because 'bias' is equated with 'intent.' Is her coverage imbalanced? Perhaps, but I do not think that it is intentional. Who doesn't become jaded by the same-old, same-old? Unfortunately for Hillary, she is the same-old, same-old...

    February 27, 2008 at 3:40 pm |
  188. NJ

    Yes, the media has been unfair. Big shock. I've accepted that the double standard is still alive and well. The gender-biased adjectives are thrown her way. The sexism is so blatant. In addition, sexism is still not viewed with as much disgust as is racism. That's unbelievable.

    I admire her toughness. She knows the disrespect she's up against, because that is still our culture. It's a damn shame. In addition, she's handling it, knows she's damned if she does, etc....and I think she's an amazing woman.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:40 pm |
  189. Karen, New Jersey

    Jack,

    Andrea Mitchell of NBC News and Tucker Carlson of MSNBC programs have stated that Sen. Clinton has gone out of her way to keep herself off limits to the press. Tucker Carlson went so far as to say that if the Clinton camp isn't happy with the press they make threatening calls and send nasty emails.

    The news media has been overwhelming fair to Hillary! Had Barack Obama been on a 11 state losing streak, and then sat at a Presidential Debate and squawked about who is getting questioned first; he would have been laughed off the stage and out of the race!

    The problem with Hillary and Hillary's campaign is that she feels a sense of entitlement. Of course that entitlement is based mostly on her husbands record, not her own.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:40 pm |
  190. Arlene

    There is no doubt that the media has been biased in their reporting. Obama has been given a free pass while Clinton has been put under a microscope. If Obama gets the nomination and after scrutinizing him things don't go well, McCain will get elected. I know the media is controlling these primaries through their reporting. Review your own programs. I don't think your ready for a female to run this country. Shame on all of you.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:41 pm |
  191. Doug M

    I do not think that she has been treated unfairly by the media. I think she has been treated unfairly by Tim Russert! He has never been a fan of the Clintons so I find it a little odd that he played such a big role in questioning her during the debate. You could just tell that he wanted to shed blood and he did just that. Not only did he manage to make her look very unstable on some of her views but he managed to cut her off a few times. I am no fan of Hillary and will be voting for Obama but really, don't give her any ammo. Let her continue to lose these races without any excuse at all.

    February 27, 2008 at 3:50 pm |
  192. Lee Perez from Ft Myers

    I think Hillary had a good advantage mainly due to name recognition, and the protait she is been playing which I have seen many times where spouses always attempt to tell the public he/she can do the same thing their spouse do because of the spouse experience not their own. Well, the more Hillary talks the less people like her and the more Obama talks the more people like him, and the longer this goes more votes Obama will be getting. I also now see Hillary attempting to play the woman part as the victim o the old man club,,,I wonder whats next...

    By the way Hilllary's advantage on the Superdelegate count is also due to her husband's inlflunce and it has nothing to do with her own merits which it seems to be backfiring too.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:08 pm |
  193. Tommy, Kansas City

    How can any of us decide whether the media has been fair or unfair to any candidate. I'm quite cynical, to the point that I don't trust politicians or the media. Watching the debates only shows which politician is more polished and prepared. Listening to the media's representation of each candidate will only provide insight into whatever the media wants to present.

    The only true way to evaluate a candidate is to personally research their voting record, and carefully review the bills in which they voted for and against. All too often (I'm guilty of this too) we just go about our daily lives paying only cursory attention to the political issues that truly affect our daily lives. Then, when it's time to vote for a president (or mayor, or governor) we rely on the media to tell us who stands for what. As a country, we are not as actively involved in politics as much as we would have others believe.

    Don't get me wrong, none of this is the fault of the media or politicians. It is our own fault because we're more concerned with who the next "American Idol" is going to be than what our local politicians are doing to benefit our country on a daily basis.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:09 pm |
  194. Cornell Wilson

    Since Clinton has so much experience, she should expect this from the media and its not that they are being unfair, its that they are stating the facts.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:09 pm |
  195. Glenn

    I do think the media has been a bit softer on Obama than Clinton, but she's a big girl and should just deal with it. Perhaps because this campaign has gone on for a year and a half, they have to do something to keep it interesting?
    My real beef with the media is that they wanted it to be all about Obama and Clinton from the start, so we the people lost some of our highly valued choices. I myself was for Joe Biden, and he was basically pushed aside, along with Bill Richardson and all the rest of the field, and finally John Edwards was deemed obsolete, so the press could get what they wanted.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:09 pm |
  196. Marc

    I think it is ludicrous to even suggest the media has been unfair to Sen. Clinton. The media did not manufacture the schizophrenic circus that is her campaign, they simply reported it.

    Marc S.
    Philadelphia

    February 27, 2008 at 4:09 pm |
  197. Rob M.

    Hillary, Hillary Hillary! I just wish it would be over. She has 35+ years of experience of what? What has she done for Arkansas or New York? She has positioned herself on special commitees and hasn't done a darn thing. Especially when it comes to disabled veteran's. There are House and Senate bills for aiding veterans that have been in these special subcommitees for years and nothing is being done. She wants get her lead back she just needs to shed a few more tears. TEARS won't help when a foriegn dignatary doesn't give her what she wants. The Clinton/Bush era needs to stop now!

    February 27, 2008 at 4:09 pm |
  198. Kira Tierney

    Jack,

    Of course the Media is tougher on Hillary Clinton. Only people with real experience, those that have worked to enact change and have learned from their failures can possibly have newsworthy material. It is much safer in today's world to have little record to run on, which supports the success of Barack Obama. But remember, nothing ventured, nothing gained.

    Kira Tierney
    Media, Pa

    February 27, 2008 at 4:09 pm |
  199. LeLe, los angeles

    She needs to realize that has lost

    February 27, 2008 at 4:09 pm |
  200. Steele Major

    The truth hurts doesn't it? The media is so guilty of giving Obama a pass while beating up on Hillary. If it weren't so obvious then why have you guys suddenly gotten so defensive. If it weren't true you wouldn't even need this blog quesiton. I like both candidates, but the media bias is undeniable!

    February 27, 2008 at 4:13 pm |
  201. lesley - Vancouver, BC

    Jack,
    The NYTimes writer is dead wrong. As long as a candidate has an equal or substantial amount of votes in her column she is still in the race. It is ludicrous to suggest otherwise. YES, this is another example of how the media – and you Jack in particular, are biased against Clinton.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:14 pm |
  202. Janice W.

    Yes, I feel very strongly that Clinton has been criticized at every turn by the media whereas Obama has been treated like royalty. I feel that CNN in particular has been guilty of this. And you, Mr. Cafferty, have been one of the guiltiest parties. Your disdain for Hillary and your support of Obama is very transparent. I don't think older white men can stand strong political women. Nancy Pelosi is treated the same way as Hillary by the media.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:14 pm |
  203. Ronald G. Ross

    What's the matter Jack, guilty conscience? Did Hillary hit home about the news media making Obama their 'darling'? I sure hope that she hit the nerves of everyone of you news casters. You are supposed to be neutral, instead, by a popular poll, over 75 percent of those who responded felt that the news media was leaning heavily toward Obama.
    If I were a wagering person, I would bet, if Obama does win the Presidency, he will bite everyone who helped him, just like a mad dog bites the hand that feeds him. This man, mark my words, has an agenda that he is not talking about, and we will all learn of it, way, way to late.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:14 pm |
  204. Ashley - Athens, GA

    Hill needs to quit her whining! If Barack had lost as many states in a row as she has, he would be OLD NEWS! She's lucky that she hasn't been swept under the rug by the media. If the media is favoring Obama, it's only because he is the superior candidate.

    OBAMA '08!

    February 27, 2008 at 4:14 pm |
  205. Dan Syzdek

    I think if the press can't be fair on the war in Iraq
    Then they are deffinetely fair to Clinton

    February 27, 2008 at 4:14 pm |
  206. Angela

    Jack, I really think that you can polk a fork in her she's done. She really need to cut her loses and try and help keep the party united.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:14 pm |
  207. Mona P, Tustin CA

    The fact that you even have to ask the question tells me you haven't been paying attention.

    BO can do no wrong, say no wrong, not be criticized or even called by his full name. Senator Clinton, on the other hand, can do no right. No matter what she does she's called to task. The Fools – excuse me – anchors at MSNBC are falling all over themselves praising BO while tearing down Senator Clinton. Chris Matthews went as far as talking about the thrill he gets down his leg when BO speaks – watch it Chris you may be moving to the other team there!

    Where is the fair and unbiased reporting of the past – long dead I'm sorry to say. I just hope our democracy can survive – we've seen what happens in other countries when the press is tainted.

    Mona P Tustin, CA

    February 27, 2008 at 4:14 pm |
  208. Corey

    I believe that the news media is doing a good thing. Clinton has shown who she was and did when Bill was in office and now that we have a new face the news pays more attention to him. In with the new (Obama) out with the old (Clinton). While I was watching the debate yesterday one thing that came to my mind was that song that basically said "Anything you can do I can do better, I can do anything better than you." And that's what it seemed like when Obama talked about something that he did that was good for the U.S. or for a certain state Hilary would come back and say well I did that even better.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:14 pm |
  209. Ben

    Hillary may have been getting hit harder by the media, but she deserves to get hit harder! She's lost 11 in a row! Get real, she should be eating up any media attention she can get.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:15 pm |
  210. Alexandre

    I am an Obama suporter but sometimes I think the media is focusing more in Obama. Maybe because he has more soul then her and it's really a pleasure to listen to him then to Hillary soit's legitim that the media, that is composed by people follow more Obama than Hillary. Anyway Obama is gonna win anyway because he proved that he is the best candidaty America had in a long time.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:15 pm |
  211. Patty

    Are you insane, Jack? One would think that Barack is the second coming from media coverage...are we waiting for the Republicans to eviserate this golden child???

    February 27, 2008 at 4:15 pm |
  212. Peter

    kiindly define fair please. now i need a dictionary when ever it comes to Hilary. from denounce and reject to unfair.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:15 pm |
  213. Freida

    Yes, the media has been very unfair to Hillary!!! The media has been having a honeymoon with Obama because he is the new kid on the block. Obama is no John Kennedy!!! Hillary is much more qualified to be President!!! The press has not asked Obama about his Muslim background and his current beliefs about Islam. COME ON!!! I cannot believe that we still have such chauvistic men in this country who will not vote for a woman!!! That is what it is coming down to. Also I think the media is afraid to criticize Obama because he is black!!! He should be investigated and criticized just like all the candidates!!! But the press is afraid!! The press is doing a great disservice to this country!!!

    Freida in Mississippi

    February 27, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  214. Steven

    If she complains about the media and feels the heat of being an established name(which represents what Obama wants to change),I wonder how she will be "Commander-in Chief" on the first day.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:20 pm |
  215. Abner

    Its funny to think that the media has been given Hillary poor treatment, the common saying goes: He who got nothing to say, has nothing to write. Hilllary had not been making news since after super Tuesday, 11 victory in a roll needs something to talk about added to the most prominent endorsements on Obama's favor. Running negative campaigns too will only make matter worse. So Hillary should take a second taught.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:20 pm |
  216. Frank

    Absolutely YES! It is crystal clear that the media has spun the news against Senator Clinton from day one of her campaign. They have seemed determined to help sweep Obama into the Democratic nomination. Whenever Clinton criticizes her opponent, her comments are twisted to make her sound as mean as possible. Whenever Obama criticizes her, his comments are either ignored or down graded to simple comments. Karen (posted above) is absolutely correct in her criticism of the media. Clinton-Obama '08 !!!!

    February 27, 2008 at 4:24 pm |
  217. Scott

    Of course it's being unfair. Hillary is being held to a much tougher level of scrutiny than McCain or Obama. Every move she makes is dissected and scrutinized. She's showing too much emotion, not enough emotion. She's weak, she's too tough. Women are always held to impossible standards and the press has been handing the election to Obama since the beginning.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:24 pm |
  218. Jim in Charlotte, NC

    The Media is but a large hulking beast of reporters used as a continual scapegoat by all. The “blantant bias” people are citing can not be purposeful; it’s not like the media preference, if there is any, is an intentional conspiricy.

    Newspapers and other media outlets love a good story, and at this point in the race, it’s still the young inspirational senator versus the seasoned politician. Hillary was, several months ago, the shoo-in for the nomination; now that she has a real chance at losing, people are getting excited.

    One can also add this to the fact that the race at this point has become, virtually, a reality TV show. The Media follows every single second of this, and Barack Obama and John McCain have their strikingly negative moments too. It’s all about from what persepective you are looking.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:28 pm |
  219. kim

    Beware media...this is just another Clinton trap!! Maybe there is just alot more dirt to dig up on this angelic misunderstood couple.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:28 pm |
  220. Raj Srinivasan

    Well, the media is definitely more excited about Barack Obama's campaign than Clinton's. I don't think her assertion during the debate that she gets asked all the "tough questions first" was true, but when you turn on CNN, you get a lot more focus on Clinton's negatives (ie bad moments during the debate like the "pillow" comment) than her positives.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  221. josh-olathe,ks

    if you can't beat them hillary, please do yourself a favor and join them.don't blame anybody for your own misdeeds and mischiefs.get your campaign bosses and your speech dictator and sort out your 'shame on you'.the media only express their views and they are entitled to.keep up the good work jack.just ignore your critics and move on.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  222. ann

    YES!!
    Its so obvious that Obama is asked softball questions because he cannot answer hardball questions. She can and does and is picked apart.
    Still different treatment for a women vs a man.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  223. Yvonne Burns

    ABSOLUTELY the new media has been unfair to Senator Clinton. If you will listen to your own negative innuendos after making a statement about anything regarding Hillary, you will see that you are included in negative news media reporting when it comes to Hillary Clinton. Simply TRY to leave out the negative remarks. We can think for ourselves.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  224. Ray Jones - Norfolk, VA

    Of course the media is biased in favor of Obama. Have you heard one reporter in the last 30 days say one negative thing about Obama? NO.
    I expect a bias if I tune into FOX but I don't expect it from CNN.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  225. Bill

    Anywhere there are opinions involved there will always be some bias, and the media coverage of policitcs is full of opinions. The fact that the media is reporting a lot on a "popular" political figure seems par for the course these days. Its what they feel a majority of people want to hear about.

    Clinton should be more concerned with losing 11 straight primaries and why the American public is not supporting her candidacy. Maybe her message, the tone of her campaign or her husband's early meddling are to blame, and not the media.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  226. Kandi Edmonds, Colonial Heights VA

    I think that the media has done their job in reporting the good, bad, and the ugly of both campaigns. I think there is a bit of political correctness syndrome effecting everyone, because no one wants to say anything racially offensive, but besides that, the media is reporting the events that occur. Obama has momentum, hope, likability, etc. This is a fact. The media cannot report that he was harsh, or snippy, or wining because he hasn't been. Hillary on the other hand, has shown a barage of emotions, if it were. The media then reports on her tone, her harshness, her compliments, and back to her sarcasm.

    I think the media actually likes Obama and the way his campaign is being run, and that comes over in commentary. Even left-wing media reps admit that he is moving and passionate, even if they don't want to see him be president.

    When you kick the kid in front of you everyday and the teacher lets you get away with it so much that you start kicking her too, while she's required to be impartial, its hard because her shins are still hurting. She does her best, but you complain that she doesn't like you and you go and tell the principal on her. Come on Hil...stop kicking.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  227. Mary Mackley

    No, Jack you and many of your colleagues appear to have missed a basic tenet of journalism:objective reporting. I hear subjective editorials masquerading as investigative reporting. I taught at the middle, high school, and college level for over 35 years and never witnessed such callous equating of opinion and fact. To paraphrase from Shakespeare:
    What's in a word?
    That which a reporter calls truth
    By today's coverage would
    smell as rotten.
    My apologies to the Bard.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  228. Mike

    Jack,

    This is a typical example of a loser strategy, suggesting “hey” let’s just attack the media this might help us win the presidential nomination. I guest it was the media’s fault when her husband committed adultery. Jack, this is just what we need a crying senator with the support of a lying husband who say's I quotes "I did not have relations with Monica” I can't understand why democrats feel like they owe the Clintons anything. What is going to be the next excuse, blame the media for her contributed to putting our solders in harms way.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  229. Michelle

    Yes. The love affair and infatuation the media has with Obama was very clear from the start and it continues. Hillary has made her mistakes and continues to do so but never have I seen completely biased coverage so obvious as during this campaign. The media has influence upon the masses and has propelled Obama to where he is now. Hillary's comment regarding being asked questions first may not have come off sounding great but I was pleased to see it because I noticed it from the beginning of this campaign and it put her on the defensive constantly. Commentators I used to respect I no longer do. Curious to see just how long the love affair will continue. Frankly, it makes me ill.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  230. Carolyn in Las Vegas

    No, the media are not being unfair to Clinton. She has dug a hole all by herself, and the garbage from her 'kitchen sink' tactics is slowly burying her in it.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  231. Melanie

    The moment you used the word "whining" shows bias. While she can be her own worst enemy, MSM has been falling over itself, drooling and fawning over Obama while continually ridiculing Hillary for just about anything she does. You've done everything BUT declared him the Democratic nominee two months ago and probably influencing the primaries for people who can't think past "jumping on the bandwagon". You are too eager to see Obama win and Hillary fall.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  232. Laura Reisdorph

    No it hasn't. What we're seeing is the difference between running a campaign and leading a movement.

    Centralia WA

    February 27, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  233. Jude

    I am an Obama fan but I must say I have been angry at the media lately: when the media decides to publish articles suggesting Hillary should "step aside gracefully" or when they keep on predicting Obama's win of Texas and Ohio it does sway the voters. The media has an enormous impact on these elections and it is time you recognize and take reponsibility for your actions. Then if we look closer we notice Clinton getting interrupted constantly during the last debate in Ohio. It is sad to me that the media prefers to focus on the candidate's behavior (almost accusing her of being bipolar with the mailer incident...) instead of her ideas.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  234. Ed Faison

    Definitely the new media, especially CNN has made Obama a Media Star. In the early days of the campaign Obama was "Rock Star" type headlines. John Edwards, who would have been the best candidate, was left in the shadows and never receive the news coverage he should have had(I didn't support him) and Clinton is always preempted in favor of Obama. This life long Democrat refuses to vote for a media star for president so will be walking to the opposition party come fall.

    February 27, 2008 at 4:48 pm |
  235. Julie Wahlstedt

    I do think the media has been more tough on Hillary than Obama and I did have to laugh at the SNL sketch as I think their writer's saw it too. While I'm all for hope, change and glory I think once whoever the president elect is gets to Washington he or she is going to have to deal with a congress full of kindergardners and get used to words like gridlock, partisanship and No! I think Hillary knows that and is much more realistic and that is what I am looking for in a president I think perhaps Mr. Obama's rhetoric may play in Ohioand Texas now but come next March if he is the president those lofty words may be a bit off the mark and then the press won't be quite as nice because in the end as the saying goes if you want a friend in Washington GET A DOG!

    February 27, 2008 at 4:48 pm |
  236. Rob in Raleigh

    When a Democrat is complaining about how the media treats them (especially a Clinton), it is a sure fire sign of desperation.

    February 27, 2008 at 5:06 pm |
  237. Jim, American in Paris

    Why should Dowd say anything else? She's a journalist and you know when the press gets criticized journalists turn around and say "we're just doing our jobs!"

    Yes the media has helped put up the stage set we see today around Hillary's rival. 2 examples: CNN regularly offers a link to a "top story" from Time magazine. Click on it and you automatically get something positive on the senator from Illinois. If they ever put Hillary you can bet it will be negative news.

    Another example monday this week, the front page of CNN's America votes page we could barely see a tiny phrase saying "Hillary holds on to lead in Ohio" and then serveral hours later when CNN's poll in Texas showed Obama slightly ahead they put a huge photo of him on the same page with giant sized print to announce this!

    The contrasts are blatant.

    Lastly, why can't women get angry in politics or express dissatisfaction without people (including other women suprisingly) calling them dirty names and accusing them of being nasty? Men in politics do this all the time and everyone finds that perfectly normal.

    February 27, 2008 at 5:06 pm |
  238. bonie - London

    does hillary expect to dominate the newshead lines even when she has lost 11 contests in a row?
    In my opinion i believe Obama is getting as much attention as hillary did when she was still winning.

    February 27, 2008 at 5:26 pm |
  239. mike king

    yes, media was absolutely unfair to Hilary. The way media people were criticizing her after debate was definitely unfair and damaging. As an independent supporter, I have noticed quite a few times that Obama is getting much more favor than her. It is very very unfair in 21st century that women are not treated equally.. I can't believe that still lot of man can't accept woman voice. She has real good substance which many people lack of it. Be fair.

    February 27, 2008 at 5:47 pm |
  240. Jared

    If Condy Rice was running and complaining about these attacks, I doubt these same Clinton supporters would be claiming sexism. People are just so loyal to their candidates they will make excuses at every turn to support them. I think people care more about picking a winning candidate and being right than actually picking someone to represent their beliefs. This isn't football, this is real life.

    February 27, 2008 at 6:06 pm |
  241. Martin Lipsius

    Hillary has no one to blame but herself by the way that she and Bill have conducted this campaign. Her recent performances have been embarassing and unbecoming.

    February 27, 2008 at 6:25 pm |
  242. Connie Ohio

    I don't know about the media being unfair to Clinton, as much as it seems it's been too fair to Obama. Meaning that ,if a person were to only go by the recent media and not do their own research, they might begin to believe that Obama is this perfect..god-like creature. A messiah perhaps..no faults, he does no wrong, everything he says and does comes out in gold. Take these comments made by Chris Matthews for example .."This is bigger than Kennedy. [Obama] comes along, and he seems to have the answers. This is the New Testament"..." I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often. No, seriously. It's a dramatic event." C'mon..that's borderline creepy in my opinion. It's a bit too Reverend Jim Jones-esque for me. How long before they pass out the cult-koolaid.

    February 27, 2008 at 6:27 pm |
  243. Rohit Singh

    Media will follow whoever is winning. Media was covering Clinton when she was 30 points ahead. No problems from Clinton then. Now that she lost 11 contests, obviously media is following Obama.

    HRC, how about you win something and then talk about media?

    February 27, 2008 at 6:27 pm |
  244. Barbara

    I agree 100% with Missy from Texas...

    This is sexist at it very best, shame on all the news media for not taking a closer look at Obama. Hillary will be a great president in my opinton.

    Barbara/NJ

    February 27, 2008 at 6:27 pm |
  245. June Meymand

    Obama has won the last 11 primaries in large part due to the media being unfair! Obama has nothing on report to show his work and yet everyone is going crazy over him. This is not an accident! Just report the news as it is and stop with all the opinions please.

    February 27, 2008 at 6:27 pm |
  246. Itzik from CT

    I think people are sick of the inevitability factor. From 1996, George W was the annointed one from that ex-prophet Tom Delay. W was inevitable and was foisted upon us by a Supreme Court that got to vote twice in 2000. Since then we have been awaiting the second coming in the likes of the the inevitable St. Hillary the seasoned and tested. Had she done a little cross cultural language training she would realize that she is running against someone "blessed" for that is what "Barack " means in Swahili or the Semitic languages the name originates from.
    Considering the tribulations our country is now going through thanks to the likes of W and the Clintons, we need to try someone "blessed" as we have been cursed so long.

    February 27, 2008 at 6:27 pm |
  247. kujo

    Hillary just does not get it. She had two very positive moments in this campain, once in New Hampshire and the other in the Texas Debate. After the Texas debate there was such a buzz about what she said. Did it hit home, nope. Next day she was back to negative attacts.

    Obama ran his campain with such a positive approach, it makes everyone walk away feeling good. Add to that the fact that the two have the same position on everything, who else should we vote for.

    If Hillary would of forgotten Obama, stuck to who she was, ran an upbeat campain passing a positive message and hope to the people, Obama would of never been able to pass her.

    Too late now......

    February 27, 2008 at 6:27 pm |
  248. Mik

    She has to blame somebody! That's what the blameless perfect Clintons do. Perhaps it is that vast right-wing conspiracy.

    She and her staff blew it – two BIG mistakes. The first, and it's hard to believe a Clinton who doesn't respond to polls, was to ignore the polls indicating that voters are extremely displeased with the current congress. While she has a voting record that indicates that she is part of the problematic status quo congress, she didn't distance herself from it. Obama recognized the displeasure and brought the message of "change".

    The second big mistake was not releasing her tax info. This is the same mistake Kerry made with the attacks on his military record. He should have just released his military records and shut the critics up. That's what Hillary needs to do. Release the documents and remove all the talk about her being funded by foreign interests. (Unless she does have something to hide.)

    February 27, 2008 at 6:28 pm |
  249. Liz

    Absolutely the media is being unfair to Hillary. How often do news outlets point out that Obama wasn't in office to vote to invade Iraq, and has said on record that he doesn't know how he would have voted if he'd seen the intelligence? Hillary's suits get more scrutiny than any of Obama's positions, policies or accomplishments.

    The trouble is, you're too late asking this question. The media already caught Obama fever and contaminated the rest of the nation with it. Flash over substance. And now it's too late. This was Hillary's chance, and now we're going to get stuck with McCain.

    February 27, 2008 at 6:28 pm |
  250. Nathan B.

    Oh please, they've been more than generous to her, they've practically avoided the big scandal involving her campaign even with a guilty plea. If a Republican was involved in a scandal with such proof as that one, you can bet every station except FOX would be on top of it. What happened to good 'ol unbiased media?

    February 27, 2008 at 6:28 pm |
  251. anthony

    Unfair give me a break! If you believe for one moment that the news is giving a pass to Barack a black man compared to Hillary a white woman then you must high on some type of pills like RUSH. She has been getting a free pass every since she has been in the race because of her name because no one including the media didn't give Barack a chance to beat the Clinton machine.

    Go Barack!!!!!!!!!

    February 27, 2008 at 6:28 pm |
  252. Lynn

    Pure desperation. Hillary is losing control and in the true Clintonesque style must find somewhere to point her finger. She has insulted me as voter. I can see and hear for myself everyday what Obama has done, I don't need Hillary to rehash it. I was at one time truly interested in what she had to say about running our country. Now that much of her campaign is devoted to unnecessary trash talk, I must tune out or change the channel.
    Sorry Hillary, you leave me no choice.

    February 27, 2008 at 6:28 pm |
  253. GFP

    Clinton is beginning to look like a sore loser.

    February 27, 2008 at 6:28 pm |
  254. Nilsonn

    What a mess going on here.
    Everything about Obama is out there, even his tax returns; his grandma barefoot and no electricity still leaving in a little village in Africa. The media has reported how her mother died; where he went to shool, even what what his wife said that he forgets to put the butter back in the fridge. What else people want to know about Obama?
    Hillary has herself only to blame. How can you call your colleagues in the US Senate "Shame on you Obama" and expect the media to be silent?
    The media is pro-Clinton. With 11 losses, they should have said it straight: "She is lunatic and believing in miracles". She is thinking American are stupid. She is making the poor Latino look like stupid that will support her when everybody else has rejected her!!!!

    February 27, 2008 at 6:28 pm |
  255. Nicole in Birmingham

    Hillary Who!

    She should thank her campaign staff for the wonderful job they did! If she plans to run America the way her campaign has been ran I'm glad Obama has the lead. Stop the complaining and crying. It's clear that America wants Obama. Please drop out of the race gracefully and support him.

    February 27, 2008 at 6:28 pm |
  256. Lee from York Pa

    I FIRMLY believe the media has been unfair...
    Look at her record and experience...
    She needs to be our next President...
    Te media gets on a kick and stays with it until something "new" pops up...give it a break!
    HILLARY 08 ALL THE WAY!

    February 27, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  257. Tom

    We are getting rid of Bush no matter what. McCain please. Bush puppet. Bomb, Bomb Iran? We do not need this hothead.We do need a change. We need someone to take control

    February 27, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  258. James-Miami, Ok.

    Is the media unfair to Sen Clinton?.....Jack there`s no doubt about how unfair they are.

    February 27, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  259. VM

    I was wondering what her next excuse would be? She's blamed her campaign volunteers, her campaign manager, race, gender, irrelevant states, pretty speeches, unrealistic voters and fan worship for her losses. It was just he media's turn to take responsibility for the fact that no one wants her to be the nominee.

    I thought it was poor class to whine about it during the debate, not to mention referencing SNL. Go away Hillary.

    February 27, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  260. Mike Smitreski

    If Obama gets the nod, he should at least offer the VP position to Mrs. Clinton, and she should swallow her pride and accept. If they do well together, the Democrats could be in power for 16 years.

    February 27, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  261. Bob

    CNN in particular was pretty biased against Obama when he was trailing (watch the debates: she goes first, he doesn't get to then respond to the same question). And I can't tell you how many people have refered to CNN as the "Clinton News Network". There may be some bias against her now, but then she does have life in her campaign because the evil media continues to give her time. Last nights debate was the hardest hitting questions for both candidates. I for one salute MSNBC for taking this approach so that we can see these candidates when they're off the script.

    February 27, 2008 at 6:30 pm |
  262. seah

    That is the truth

    Seems Obama owns the media, or they own him

    Clinton and McCain get unfavorable news

    I think the problem is the media is afraid of getting called racist, so they are playing it safe, a bit over board.

    Especially since Obama is running on sermons, selling hope and wanting everyone to "help him build his kingdom on earth"

    either the media has been saved or they are being prejudice to the other candidates

    February 27, 2008 at 6:30 pm |
  263. James

    Yes!!! And you know it Cafferty, the media has given Barrack a free pass, and has hit Hillary at every turn.

    February 27, 2008 at 6:30 pm |
  264. Jane

    Excuse my bleak humor, but to frame Clinton's performance in the debate as "whining" in the first section of the question, and then to use a quote from Dowd, a virulent anti-Clinton opinionator, and then to ask this question? Notice how many of the "NO WAY!" responses exactly mirror the terms this very question sets up: citing her "whining" and "complaining" as she has fallen behind – maybe she's just tired of it and realizes how damaging the bias has been. I've been seeing this all along. And, yes, to a certain degree I understand it's because Obama has a more appealing narrative (reality sucks and no one wants to real hear that problems are difficulty and can't be solved by healing our damaged souls) – but the real question is, why is the media not seriously grilling him?

    February 27, 2008 at 6:30 pm |
  265. Kathleen Ritch

    The Media Obamathon started long before the last 11 primaries, in fact, long before the first primary. TV media has given him free, frequent and positive attention, all-the-while repeating negative commentary regarding Clinton. Obama didn't fill stadiums and achieve rock star status on his own - his candidacy was fabricated virtually out of whole cloth by the Media. His speeches have played more frequently and for more extended sound bites than Hillary's. And not just now that he's on a roll. The free and positive attention as well as your total failure to vet him as a potential Presidential candidate has given rise to the "movement."

    It's specious to say that of course you're covering the front runner and giving him more attention. What was your excuse four months ago when you started blasting the sound waves with pro Obama commentary and helped change the political landscape?

    The Media helped foster George Bush's candidacy and the eventual Iraq debacle by its failure at investigative reporting, now it is doing the same thing with Obama. To its detriment the Media has become the message not the messenger. And an ugly message it is.

    February 27, 2008 at 6:30 pm |