Carl Bernstein isn't just, on the basis of his Watergate-busting fame, a liberal icon. He's also a certified Hillary Clinton expert, having devoted years to researching and writing a definitive biography of her, A Woman in Charge. So his comments tonight on Hillary's graceless reaction to her stunning defeat at the hands of Barack Obama carry special weight, and are likely to reverberate through Dem circles. Here's Bernstein's brutal take, appearing on CNN .

CARL BERNSTEIN: One of the worst nights of Hillary Clinton's life. She had a chance at the end of the evening to be magnanimous, to say something about where her campaign is going to go. Instead she was shopworn, tired; it's exactly what they don't need, the Clinton campaign, and she's going to have an uphill fight from here in.

View the video here, not only to hear Bernstein's remarks, but to watch a Hillary acknowledge Obama's victory only in passing while spending most of the same sentence speaking of primaries to come.

Exit polls are saying that Barack Obama won big today in South Carolina, taking more than 80 percent of the black vote. Maybe more important, Hillary Clinton and John Edwards are battling for second place.

How might this change the nomination picture, and what does this say about the race card the Clintons have injected into the campaign?

On the east and west coasts today, two liberal columnists unleashed a torrent of vitriol at Hillary and Bill Clinton. At the Los Angeles Times, contributing editor Jonathan Chait [a past master of political hatred] asked Is the right right on the Clintons? Consider these blistering excerpts [emphasis added]:

• Something strange happened the other day. All these different people -- friends, co-workers, relatives, people on a liberal e-mail list I read -- kept saying the same thing: They've suddenly developed a disdain for Bill and Hillary Clinton. Maybe this is just a coincidence, but I think we've reached an irrevocable turning point in liberal opinion of the Clintons.
  
  • Mark Finkelstein's blog
  • 36 comments
  • Read more

It appears the Clinton News Network is going to be a little less Clintonian as primary season heats up.

According to Greg Sargent of the Talking Points Memo's Horse's Mouth blog, James Carville and Paul Begala, due to their pro-Hillary positions, will be persona non grata until after the nomination.

Makes one wonder what took CNN so long to come to this obvious conclusion.

Filed in the "Better Late Than Never" section, Sargent reported Thursday (h/t Wizbang):

Photos Posted Below the Fold

The Jerusalem Post caught another fauxtography scam out of the mideast this week. It appears that Hamas legislators have staged fake power outages to illustrate how oppressed they are for the benefit of journalists. The Journalists were treated to a photo op of the Hamas legislators sitting in their halls of power surrounded by burning candles in rooms with curtains drawn. The scene was set to show how they have had their power cut by the eeeevil Jews. Only problem is, midday sunlight can clearly be seen against the curtains. So, the candles were unnecessary. All they had to do was open the curtains and they would be able to see just fine. Obviously Reuters (and others) allowed Hamas to manipulate the facts. But that didn't seem to bother any of these so-called journalists who were quite happy to go along.

The Jerusalem Post says of the fauxtography incident:

Imagine for a moment Fox News's Brit Hume or Chris Wallace regularly contributing to a popular conservative website like Captain's Quarters, Little Green Footballs, or Michelle Malkin.com.

Do you think the media would have a field day with a supposedly "fair and balanced" anchorman being so intricately connected to such a rightwing entity?

If the answer is "Yes," then why does MSNBC's Keith Olbermann get a pass for his posts at the far-left website Daily Kos, and the appearance that this is becoming a regular gig?

Consider that on Friday, Olbermann published his third posting at DKos in less than two weeks:

http://www.youtube.c...

*Feels the conspiracy attacks coming*

One of GOP presidential candidate John McCain's greatest potential weaknesses is his view(s) on immigration. He supported an amnesty program in 2003, and most recently "comprehensive immigration reform" which many (especially on the right) considered just another form of amnesty. Now, in the thick of the primary season, McCain has said he "gets it," and "now understands that we need to secure the border" before any sort of immigration reform is enacted.

But how has John demonstrated that he "gets it"? By hiring open borders advocate Juan Hernandez as one of his advisors! I have watched Hernandez numerous times on pundit shows (like "The O'Reilly Factor") and Juan comes across as a genial fellow. (He has a habit of referring to debate opponents as "my friend.") However, his views on [Mexican] immigration are far from the mainstream, especially so from the conservative point-of-view. As Michelle Malkin and Bryan at Hot Air have shown, for example, Hernandez stated in 2001 that Mexican immigrants (presumably legal and illegal) “will think Mexico first…”I want ‘em all to think Mexico first.” In addition, Hernandez related to Rep. Tom Tancredo that the United States and Mexico "are not two separate countries, but 'just a region.'” Then there's Juan's defense of Mexican bus drivers who transport illegals across the border and his promotion of letting illegals open bank accounts.

As expected, no one (yet) in the MSM has picked up on this story, especially the important angle of how the revelation of having Hernandez as a campaign adviser will impact (further) McCain's image with conservatives.

As NewsBusters has been reporting the past couple of weeks, the media have been lambasting former President Bill Clinton for his atrocious behavior on the campaign trail.

On Friday, the wire service Reuters deliciously jumped on the Bill Bashing Bandwagon.

In an article titled "Bill Clinton Again Wagging Finger, Raising Eyebrows," author Deborah Charles began with a mainstream media lede that would have been unimaginable a few months ago (emphasis added throughout):

NewsBusters reported in December that Internet behemoth Google had a disclaimer cautioning readers that the website of conservative magazine the American Spectator "may harm your computer."

For some reason, this warning no longer exists.

This raises a couple of important questions:

How about Roger Federer losing to Novak Djokovic yesterday...in straight sets no less? Amazing.

And how about the fabulous performance of Maria Sharapova in this Open? Has she EVER played this well? Was this a statement by her setting her up for a dominating year, or a fluke?

Is Tom Brady's ankle really hurt, or are the Patriots playing possum?

Are the Memphis Tigers for real? Can the Zags knock them off their pedestal today?

Has Tiger gotten so good that watching golf is becoming futile?

Is two weeks off too much before the Super Bowl? Does it diminish your enthusiasm for the event, or make it better?

For general discussion and debate. Possible talking point: Tax rebates to stimulate the economy:

The stimulus has been debated in Washington for more than a week as the economic outlook worsened, and now Americans are armed with specifics: Individuals will get up to $600, working couples $1,200 and those with children $300 more per child.

So, what do you think about this plan? Is it just election-year grandstanding, or will this actually help?

Also for consideration is this suggestion by a Neal Boortz caller yesterday: give all Americans one month off from paying taxes! Now THAT'S a stimulus package!!!

How 'bout we start it in February right in the middle of the quarter when the recession might be beginning? Might this stop the downturn right in its tracks, or does this make too much darned sense for Washington to enact?

You wouldn't expect the New York Times (Times links usually require free registration) to refer to work by yours truly without getting it wrong, would you? Why, of course not.

The portion of today's "Taking the Bears to Task" brief by Times reporter Dan Mitchell that refers to my Wednesday Pajamas Media column ("Is the Downbeat Business Press Right about the Economy?"; also here at BizzyBlog) doesn't disappoint.

Here is what Mitchell wrote (link is in original):

The mainstream media is also far too pessimistic, according to Tom Blumer, a blogger for Pajamas Media, a right-leaning Web site. On Tuesday, he quoted a routine dispassionate Reuters report about huge drops in stock index futures before the markets opened. The report, which indicated that the coming trading day might see big losses, amounted to “icing the champagne for the late afternoon,” he wrote — a typical case of the media’s seeking to “party hearty on bad news.”

That day, the Dow fell 465 points after the opening bell, then recovered somewhat as it digested the news of the Federal Reserve’s interest rate cut, closing down 128 points.

Count Craig Crawford as a dissenting voice in the media storm blaming the Clintons for the injection of race into the Dem primaries. The Congressional Quarterly columnist and MSNBC political analyst offered his unconventional wisdom on a special Saturday edition of Morning Joe today.

CRAIG CRAWFORD: I never understood exactly what Bill Clinton said that was supposed to interject race, actually. I know he was arguing at arm's length with Obama about the war and some other issues. It wasn't clear to me -- I mean the most direct reference to race I saw in this campaign was interjected by the media after New Hampshire trying to say that for some reason Obama lost New Hampshire because of racism. I never followed that one either.

View video here.

Teenagers who tumble from the bed to a sudden pregnancy often face this reaction from the people surrounding them: These poor kids made a mistake, yes. But they don’t have the maturity to bring a life into the world. It would ruin their lives, and they would probably be irresponsible and resentful parents. Admitting their immaturity and having an abortion is the truly mature choice.

That might sound like a formulaic TV movie of the week. But then comes “Juno,” the quirky, arty film with a completely different take – and it’s taking the movie world by storm.

The right wing's “big heist” in Iraq led by bankers who “are screwing everyone” all “started with Ronald Reagan crushing the poor, crushing the unions,” actor/comedian Richard Belzer bizarrely claimed Friday night on HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher before proceeding to smear Rudy Giuliani as a “fascist thug with a comb-over trying to suppress his speech impediment.” [This item includes an accurate quotation of a vulgarity.]

Belzer, who plays “Detective John Munch” on NBC's Law & Order: Special Victims Unit, appeared on the show's panel with musician Herbie Hancock and ABC News reporter Martha Raddatz. When Hancock asserted $80 billion is unaccounted for in Iraq, Belzer launched into this tirade:

This is a big heist, this is a big heist. The right wing is in power, the bankers are screwing everyone -- the oil companies, Halliburton -- this is no fucking mystery. These people have been after this. It started with Reagan crushing the poor, crushing the unions, rewarding people, putting them into heads of certain departments of the government and then disassembling those departments because they have contempt for the government.

Almost 16 years ago I joined the Texas National Gaurd. I am no longer in, but I think back to my first enlistment.

I swore to defend the United States Constitution against all enemies, foreighn and domestic.

I DID NOT swear to defend the Mexican Constitution.

I DID NOT swear to defend The North American Union.

I DID NOT swear to defend AZTLAN.

John McCain, though once a war hero who endured far more for his country than I have, seems to have forgotten his oath.

He now allies himself with a former Mexican Government official who has stated that the US and Mexico are  not two countries, but a region.

This same Mexican National basically admits the Mexican government's goal of keeping Mexicans loyal to Mexico City NO MATTER HOW MANY GENERATIONS THEY ARE IN THE U.S.

You do not think the Mexican government has 47 Consulates inside the US by accident?

So, scientists find the dead bodies of dozens of dolphins and baby porpoises near Miami, Florida and across the pond along Scotland's East Coast. These aquatic mammals where literally beaten to death with multiple internal injuries, lacerations, contusions and the like. Back in 1997 the whole C.S.I. treatment was given these animals and guess who these scientists first blamed? You guessed it, the United States Military. It turns out, however, that scientists have now realized that it is the "smartest" fishie on earth that is responsible. Yes, they were surprised to discover that dolphins are outright murderers. So much for a "smarter" more "peaceful" ocean, eh?