But this type of article is why I have never been able to get interested in the taping of AP reporters phones. If you want to claim the right to have secret sources, at the very least, you should have enough ethics not to publish crap like that. Those who do not have the courage to publish their names when they give these types of comments, whether they are true or not, are no more credible than rag sheets. They deprives us of the right to decide whether the info is credible or not.

I noticed that Hot Air has the story now as it comes up on a google search - though I did not click to see the comments. If anything the need for the AP to write such things likely means that they consider him powerful. Otherwise why attack a Secretary of State?

He is a loser, therefore you cannot show him as somebody competent, or at least not during a long period. Hence what seems the nth version of " Kerry is not liked: . Look, look, the Obama administration has to rein him in.

Note that there is very little factual support for this version in this article itself. May be a couple of remarks concerning things that Kerry said and the WH has not fully supported, which is nothing surprising. If something concrete transpires from the article, it is that there are huge problems that predate Kerry's entrance in the government and that "gasp" he is not Superman. He did not fix problems like the Middle East yet, 5 months after becoming Secretary of State.

This question of media narrative is becoming more and more irritating. We got the same thing in the Senate campaign. Markey has lead polls by 7 to 20 points, and even leads polls that the Gomez campaign sees as positive for him. However, the narrative of a Democrat that does not connect and is stiff continues to be pervasive in every single report, even those who say it is unlikely that Gomez will win. Also prevalent in the coverage is the reference to Brown and how it could be possible that Gomez could win just like him. I guess it is also possible that the independent candidate can win, but is it likely? And is it reasonable to continue with the idea that Markey does not connect and Gomez does. Really? So, why doesn' t he do better?

It is the same "follow the narrative" that allows stories like the one MBS posted. It is clear that the facts in the story are correct. But they hardly support the main point of this story.

Now, I may have to swallow my words tonight if Gomez wins, or in the next few days if Kerry quits out of frustration, but I do not think any of those two hypothesis are likely. It is just that political reporting has taken a turn toward fiction.

The media narrative about Kerry is never going to change. It's horribly unfair, but old habits are hard to break, evidently. And it looks like the effort to paint Markey as the second Kerry in terms of temperament and personality is well under way. Sad, really, because both men are anything but stiff, out of touch, aloof.

It is also amazing that the media is STILL in love with the pathetic Brown - quoting, without comment, his comment that he would beat Markey. This ignores that the polls were already moving to a Markey win when he opted not to run. Also, how many articles spoke of Gomez as handsome and charming (and various other positive words.)

I think the very assignments that Obama has given Kerry indicate that the article is wrong. I like the coordination between Obama and Kerry on Israel/Palestine - where their messages have really complimented each other. Obviously, if Obama did want Kerry to make as strong a try as he is doing on this - it would not be happening and Obama would not have made the speech that he did - speaking to the young people in Israel. As you say, the media is already writing this as a failure - minimizing small successes like the Arab League's change on their plan and the improvement in relations between Israel and Turkey - likely both mostly Kerry's work. They do not a Mideast peace make, but they are two important accomplishments. (Imagine if they were accomplished by Hillary.)

You guys keep me sane.
I heard the same garbage about the "charisma" of Brown and Gomez on NPR yesterday. Just amazing.
(though I do have a question about the Markey campaign: why hasn't his campaign mentioned his stellar record on the environment?
The mailings I've seen seem to be all about gun safety..If it works, and we get Markey in there, fine. But it strikes me as a strange strategy not to mention all of the strengths of one's record).

I watched the returns on NECN, which I can get on cable here in Vermont. It was ridiculous how ga ga they were over the "charming" Gomez and how strong a run he ran. All I could think was that this creep called a distinguished gentlemen who served the state for 37 years, "pond scum". Markey was far more charming than either Brown or Gomez.

Well, so much for the narrative that Gomez was going to surprise.