CNN TV
SCHEDULE ANCHORS & REPORTERS CONTACT US HEADLINE NEWS



February 27, 2008
Posted: 06:51 PM ET
 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


Jim Galvin   February 27th, 2008 1:22 pm ET

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

Cheryl   February 27th, 2008 1:22 pm ET

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.

Richard, Washington State   February 27th, 2008 1:25 pm ET

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.

la Boca   February 27th, 2008 1:25 pm ET

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!

DJ,Iowa   February 27th, 2008 1:27 pm ET

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.

Chanel from Boston   February 27th, 2008 1:29 pm ET

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*

Adrienne M New York   February 27th, 2008 1:29 pm ET

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

Independent Voter in Fort Worth Tx   February 27th, 2008 1:30 pm ET

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.

William   February 27th, 2008 1:31 pm ET

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

Lynn, Pound Rdge, New york   February 27th, 2008 1:31 pm ET

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.

Endy Chuku   February 27th, 2008 1:33 pm ET

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.

Mark - Asheville, NC   February 27th, 2008 1:35 pm ET

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.

mike studders, bay city, mi.   February 27th, 2008 1:37 pm ET

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!

Alex Downs   February 27th, 2008 1:37 pm ET

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

Brian From Fort Mill, S.C.   February 27th, 2008 1:37 pm ET

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.

Mike Nunn   February 27th, 2008 1:38 pm ET

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.

gerry   February 27th, 2008 1:38 pm ET

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

Ed   February 27th, 2008 1:39 pm ET

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

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

M. Hayden (Los Angeles, CA)   February 27th, 2008 1:40 pm ET

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.

Tiffany from Greensboro, NC   February 27th, 2008 1:40 pm ET

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.

michael   February 27th, 2008 1:40 pm ET

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.

Cheryl, Upstate, NY   February 27th, 2008 1:41 pm ET

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″

Missy, Texas   February 27th, 2008 1:41 pm ET

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.

Ellie Carter   February 27th, 2008 1:41 pm ET

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?

Amy, Kalamazoo   February 27th, 2008 1:41 pm ET

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.

David T.   February 27th, 2008 1:41 pm ET

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…

Joe in DE   February 27th, 2008 1:42 pm ET

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.

Deb   February 27th, 2008 1:42 pm ET

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.

Ralph   February 27th, 2008 1:44 pm ET

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!

BobW Rochester, NY   February 27th, 2008 1:44 pm ET

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.

Andrea   February 27th, 2008 1:44 pm ET

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

Antonio MADRID   February 27th, 2008 1:44 pm ET

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….

Martin Grondin of Devens, MA   February 27th, 2008 1:44 pm ET

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.

Bob R   February 27th, 2008 1:44 pm ET

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.

Dawn (Las Vegas, Nevada)   February 27th, 2008 1:45 pm ET

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.

KARYL - CT   February 27th, 2008 1:46 pm ET

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 !

Don in Buda, TX   February 27th, 2008 1:46 pm ET

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?

KB from Iowa   February 27th, 2008 1:46 pm ET

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.

Chuck in Eugene Oregon   February 27th, 2008 1:47 pm ET

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.

Ron   February 27th, 2008 1:47 pm ET

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

David Considine   February 27th, 2008 1:47 pm ET

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!

Howard   February 27th, 2008 1:49 pm ET

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.

Hunter   February 27th, 2008 1:49 pm ET

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”

Manuel, Pearland, TX   February 27th, 2008 1:49 pm ET

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.

Karen   February 27th, 2008 1:49 pm ET

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!

John   February 27th, 2008 1:49 pm ET

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

Nanc   February 27th, 2008 1:50 pm ET

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

Stacy in Newark   February 27th, 2008 1:50 pm ET

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.

SEO   February 27th, 2008 1:51 pm ET

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…

Ryan, New York, NY   February 27th, 2008 1:51 pm ET

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.

Kimberly in Texas   February 27th, 2008 1:51 pm ET

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?

Jacci Buelow   February 27th, 2008 1:51 pm ET

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

Chris   February 27th, 2008 2:15 pm ET

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.

Judy Beard   February 27th, 2008 2:57 pm ET

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.

sean   February 27th, 2008 2:57 pm ET

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

kim   February 27th, 2008 2:57 pm ET

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.

Matt   February 27th, 2008 3:06 pm ET

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.

Dennis   February 27th, 2008 3:06 pm ET

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

Dennis (San Francisco)

David,San Bernardino,CA.   February 27th, 2008 3:08 pm ET

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.

eva   February 27th, 2008 3:08 pm ET

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

george   February 27th, 2008 3:10 pm ET

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?

Linda, Boulder, CO   February 27th, 2008 3:11 pm ET

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.

Alex   February 27th, 2008 3:13 pm ET

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.

JimS.   February 27th, 2008 3:13 pm ET

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.

Don Green   February 27th, 2008 3:13 pm ET

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.

Lanie Pietrowski   February 27th, 2008 3:13 pm ET

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.

Jane from Texas   February 27th, 2008 3:18 pm ET

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.

Martha   February 27th, 2008 3:19 pm ET

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.

Steven Scott   February 27th, 2008 3:20 pm ET

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.

Nasif   February 27th, 2008 3:23 pm ET

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.

Lin   February 27th, 2008 3:34 pm ET

Yes, I think they have been unfair to Mrs. Clinton. If Mrs. Clinton were a man, they would say she is forceful, determined and challenging to Mr. Obama. However, being she is a woman, she is considered a bitch. It’s not fair that we hold men and women to different standards with regard to politics. I think the media is having a “love affair” with Mr. Obama, which if he wins, I hope the honeymoon lasts to the end of his term.

Bruce Taylor,Berkeley/Sacramento,CA   February 27th, 2008 3:35 pm ET

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.

Teresa, Tallahassee, FL   February 27th, 2008 3:35 pm ET

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.

Chipster   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

Mike in Davis, CA   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

Dave McHugh   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

Wyatt   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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!

Matt   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

Dell Six, Okmulgee, OK   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

Julie in MN   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

Annette   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

John, Boise, ID   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

Amy   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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

Travis Johns   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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!

GJ   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

Adam Kontras   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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?

Bryce   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

bill from Pa.   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

Phil   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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

Geoff   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

Ken   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

James P. from Washington State   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

Jerry Gasquez   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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

Bonnie   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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?

Tom from Boston   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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!

Bill   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

Kevin- Webster, MA   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

Sean Carroll   February 27th, 2008 3:36 pm ET

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.

Jeff   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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.

al   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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.

Poly   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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.

Pat   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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.

Peter from Pittsburgh   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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…

Bill   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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.

Lamar in Dallas, TX   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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?”

Adam Kontras   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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

Cheryl S   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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

Charles   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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

Marie Norton   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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

Wil   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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.

Don   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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.

Tor Blaisdell   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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!

Terry   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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

Robert E Vadas   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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

Paul   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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

Kathryn   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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

Patrick   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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

Annice   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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.

joel   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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

Cara   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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.

Miguel   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

The Media has given Obama the victory. I wonder if we can take them to court in the years to come when the country has gone to SHIT!!!.

Thank you so much to you and all your friends, couldnt help it could you, you just had to go and screw it up.

THANKS!!

rk   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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.

Bob   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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.

suzanne   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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…..

oknanageorge   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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.

Matt   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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

Guillermo   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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

Ben   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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.

Terry   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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.

Tom   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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

dave in ct   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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.

Bethany (Edison, NJ)   February 27th, 2008 3:37 pm ET

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 sh