I repeat: It is a widely known fact that the media is biased.

“I think she is encouraged to stay in so that they can hit her with stuff like this. Do you see what I mean? “

Sorry.. I don’t have blinders on and your statement makes no sense whatsoever.

Some of us remember when journalists were more impartial and actually reported the news rather than twist and spin it. The get paid to report news and need to be held accountable when they report falsitiies or embellish the news. Spare us the sweetness routine – Eric Boehlert was on the money about the way the media treats Clinton and it was going on way before Barack Obama decided to run for president, FYI.

I think you get my point. I think the media are people just like us. They aren’t impartial. They are driven by ratings and play to what people will tune into. I think a perfect example is Mike Hucabee. Here’s a guy who had no chance of winning, is far right wing and yet non-right wing media outlets didn’t tear him apart becuase he’s a likeable guy. He reminded me of a bassett hound in a greyhound race. You just gotta like him, even root for him in some odd way.

The media are people too and people are nicer to people they like or make them feel good. It may not be right, but it is what it is. I know it’s not popular to say it here, but poll after poll reflects (polls, not my opinion) Hillary is on the attack more than Barack. That creates anomosity and the media feeds into it. If the immpression is you are the agressor, you will naturally bring more heat upon yourself.

No, it’s uniquely biased against Clinton. If they were solely going after juicy scandals, they would’ve blasted Axelrod for spreading a blatant lie as well as Obama himself who directly accused the Clinton campaign–without proof–of leaking that non-controversial photo to Drudge when it was the Free Republic, who had circulated that photo, specifically discussing sending it to Drudge, just two days prior.
Proof: http://andrys1.blogspot.com/2008/02/source-of-obama-photo-from-kenya.html
Free Republic site: LINK
Obama lying: LINK

If Ferraro is blasted for her foolish opinions, with Clinton being held personally responsible, at least Obama should be responsible for himself and his staff. And here’s one last one: major Obama supporter, Dick Harpootlian (a white man), the SC Democratic chair accused Bill Clinton of being Lee Atwater and never was he fired during that crucial primary. Hell, it was barely brought up.
Harpootlian: http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/23/clinton.obama/index.html

And that’s not even mentioning Jesse Jackson, Jr.’s, the national co-chair of his campaign, launching an inflammatory attack against Clinton; Michael Eric Dyson, a supporter who alleged NH Clinton voters were likely racist–without proof; or mayor Shirley Franklin of Atlanta, another supporter, who slammed Bill’s “fairy tale” remark as racist. There’s much more. The corporate media is engaging in blatant lying by omission.

When it comes to political news the media spin is very much politically based and politically biased. Many/most of the main stream media outlets are owned by the right wing. Look up the Republican Noise Machine on Google.

What Boehlert was saying is not that the media works hard to put Clinton in a “good light” as you claim, but just the opposite. She is victim to some of the worst spin:

When people suggest that the press employs a separate standard for covering Clinton, this is the kind of episode they’re talking about. There simply is no other candidate, from either party, who has had their comments, their fragments, dissected so dishonestly the way Clinton’s have been.

Another point Boehlert made is that Kroft continued on the line of questioning which is why no doubt that Clinton had to respond not once but 8 times.

None of the muslim rumor came from the Clinton campaign, regardless of the claims of the Obama camp. If it is hurting Clinton now, it is because the Obama camp is pressing the issue, although it’s been proven to not come from the Clinton camp.

The media FYI, does not “prop her up to knock her down” — they simply just repeatedly “knock her down” and have for years.

On the flip side, Barack Obama gets a free pass from the media.

You totally miss the point on what Boehlert is saying. I’ll leave it at that.

I am an Obama supporter, but I agree with you. However, I don’t think the media spin is poltically based. It seems to me that they just run with whatever is juicy and controversial. So they work hard to put the Clinton candicacy in good light (she is a fighter, etc.) though many of us believe that if the tables were turned and Clinton had won 12 straight and had a substantial lead, he’d be asked to exit the race. They want Clinton in the spotlight because they love to use her and Bill to stir up controversy. They want to keep the punching bag hanging up and then knock all the ratings out of it they can.

That said, I do wish she wouldn’t have said “As far as I know.” I don’t know why she didn’t just stop at “Of course not.” She has been forceful in answers at other times, and has cut reporters short of this kind of baiting, but here she didn’t and I think her quote hurt Obama, but now is hurting her. The Muslim rumors have not been helped by some of the actions of the Clinton campaign and the rumors are growing deep roots. I don’t know how many people I have heard recently not just speculate that Obama is a Muslim but say so matter-of-fact’ly. It has been a lot.

So I wish the media would just be honest and not prop her up to knock her down, but I also wish she would be clear (and tell her surrogates to be clear) that racial and religious speculation are not helpful.