When did being undisciplined become a good thing?

[babylonsister]

http://www.ta-nehisi.com/2008/08/99-problems-and-the-press-will-always-be-one.html

When did being undisciplined become a good thing?

Here's a good one--Obama's campaign is too disciplined. This is the sort of story in which the reporter ends up saying more about their profession, than about the alleged subject. Anne Kornblut claims that Dems are pissed that Obama's Chicago operation is tight, leak-free, and doesn't defer to Washington. Kornblut does not offer a single quote to back up this contention--not even an anonymous one. Instead we are treated to the following:

Some Democrats on Capitol Hill have complained that he is not inclusive enough. They gripe that he is running his own campaign in some states, rather than the traditional coordinated effort; that he is not focusing on working-class white voters as he had promised at the end of the primaries; and that he has taken sides in some House primaries.

Amazing. I'd love to know what you guys think, but what I'm getting is that reporters are pissed that Obama--or his surrogates--won't write their stories for them. These guys ought to be ashamed of themsleves. I have no pity for them.

[fasttense]

1. It's the Rove strategy of taking a candidates best feature

and turning it into a negative. But aside from the rigged Gallop polls, it ain't working because they come across just plain stupid.

McSame sounds like a four year old when he says to Obama "You're too good. You're too perfect to be president. You're not like bush at all."

[babylonsister]

2. But 'supposedly' the Dems are complaining, despite the writer

not mentioning the name of one. Lazy reporting through and through. Or dare I suggest she's fabricating? If not, why the lack of facts?

[babylonsister]

3. Because I can. nt