"OK, let’s just get this over with: Yes, in the closing weeks of this election, John McCain and Sarah Palin are getting hosed in the press, and at Politico.
And, yes, based on a combined 35 years in the news business we’d take an educated guess — nothing so scientific as a Pew study — that Obama will win the votes of probably 80 percent or more of journalists covering the 2008 election. Most political journalists we know are centrists — instinctually skeptical of ideological zealotry — but with at least a mild liberal tilt to their thinking, particularly on social issues.
So what?"
My take: That's fine, but it also seems to me that many -- if not most -- of the truly damaging stories about McCain have come from Politico. For example, I think they asked McCain how many houses he owns -- and also broke the story about Palin's clothes (which appears to be not exactly correct, anyway, since some of the clothes were returned, etc.). I've long wondered why the McCain campaign continues to grant them such access -- and even to help promote them. So I guess you could argue that -- by continuing to grant exclusive to Politico -- McCain DOES deserve negative press ...
Granted, the McCain campaign has been less than perfect. Everyone makes mistakes. Joe Biden (God love him!) makes mistakes. But clearly, there is a double-standard. Biden's gaffes are forgiven; Palin's are obsessed over. McCain gets criticized for running "negative ads," yet Obama has been more negative. I could go on and on (and on and on)....
Finally, the Politico story is frankly a startling admission from a supposedly respected site. Even assuming you buy their argument that they are biased for Obama simply because he is winning (not because of ideology) -- this is still an open admission of poor journalism...