(updated below - Update II - Update III)

I wasn't able to post until now, and still, don't have a great deal of time to do so. Following are a few snippets from today that are quite illustrative of media coverage of the campaign. Feel free to use the comment section to discuss all matters New Hampshire or anything else. I may (or may not) add more observations as the evening progresses:

Time's Ana Marie Cox:

Sitting with a conservative opinion journalist, talk turned to Hillary. "I can't believe the glee with which the press corps treating the Hillary implosion," he said. "You know, I've always thought that you understand people better and write about them better, when you have a little sympathy for them, or like them at least a bit. They have no sympathy for her."

Brian Williams, NBC News:

I interviewed Lee Cowan, our reporter who covers Obama, while we were out yesterday and posted the interview on the web. Lee says it's hard to stay objective covering this guy. Courageous for Lee to say, to be honest. The e-mail flood started out we caught you guys, we never did trust you. That kind of thing. I think it is a very interesting dynamic. I saw middle-aged women just throw their arms around Barack Obama, kiss him hard on the cheek and say, you know, I'm with you, good luck. And i think he feels it, too.

Dana Milbank, The Washington Post:

ABOARD THE STRAIGHT TALK EXPRESS, Jan. 7

For the moment, at least, the John McCain of yore has returned. . . . Ladies and gentlemen, John McCain is back. Left for dead when his campaign ran out of cash last summer, he returned to his endless town hall meetings and freewheeling talks on his campaign bus . . . Revived along with McCain's spirits: A level of "straight talk" bordering on the masochistic. . . . Mac is Back . . . .

Perhaps as important, McCain has learned a small degree of restraint. He has no plans to mention the "Death Star" this time, or to label evangelical leaders "agents of intolerance."

"Yeah, I don't think we'll go into that," he says.

As if to reinforce the point, an aide hands McCain a BlackBerry so he can read a report about a near-confrontation in the Straits of Hormuz between U.S. and Iranian ships. Without pausing, McCain, who once sang the words "Bomb Iran" to the tune "Barbara Ann," dictates a measured statement about "the nature of the Iranian regime."

Time's Carney interrupts. "Shouldn't we just bomb them?"

"First," McCain replies, "we ought to broadcast that Beach Boys song."

Good times being had by all. Over at FDL, Blue Texan examines the recent history of male crying in our political culture. The coverage those incidents received (or, more accurately, didn't receive) speaks for itself.

Here, Howard Kurtz notes the long roster of conservative pundits currently praising Barack Obama. Does anyone actually think that this -- or the media's love affair with Obama -- will continue in any way, shape or form when/if Hillary is out of the way and Obama is the nominee?

The right-wing/media partnership is currently engaged in its catty sadism rituals over Hillary's possible demise. That's the two-headed beast that was single-handedly responsible for milking the sex scandals into Bill Clinton's impeachment against the wishes of most of the country -- and it was the same beast that enabled so many of the abuses of the last seven years -- and they're now finally able to celebrate gleefully what they think is their long-elusive victory over the Clintons. So that -- for now -- is where their attention is directed, and they feel some affection and respect for Obama for having achieved what they couldn't (not only for that reason, but that's a big part of it).

But that is a two-headed apparatus that doesn't go anywhere -- ever. It just changes targets. At this time during the 2004 election cycle, all of their bile was directed at Howard Dean. But it had no trouble switching seamlessly to John Kerry once Dean was vanquished. Anyone harboring some affection for what they're doing now because their target happens to be Hillary ought to be aware that it can and will switch targets, while being driven by the same people and the same tactics, without much trouble at all. That right-wing/establishment-media edifice is an incomparably destructive alliance -- and their tactics incomparably toxic -- no matter who their current target happens to be.

UPDATE: If you find that one (or both) of the following thoughts is entering your brain, it may be helpful to remind yourself that they are fallacies:

* X criticizes negative media coverage of Candidate Y. Therefore, X supports Candidate Y.

* X criticizes positive media coverage being lavished on Candidate Y. Therefore, X opposes Candidate Y.

For a rational person, it is actually possible to criticize negative media coverage directed at a candidate that one does not support. It's equally possible -- for a rational person, that is -- to criticize positive media coverage being lavished on a candidate one likes. Those who can only bear to be exposed to uniformly positive commentary about your favorite candidate are probably best advised to confine oneself to that candidate's website (or, if one's candidate is John McCain, to any establishment media venue).

UPDATE II: CNN's exit poll exposes "The Angry Left":

Almost two-thirds of Democrats polled (65 percent) said they were "angry" with the Bush administration. And almost half of Republicans, (49 percent) said they were angry or dissatisfied with the Bush administration.

And Mitt Romney -- in his latest incarnation of insurgent/outsider candidate -- is pretending to be happy again with second place.

UPDATE III: Without endorsing all of it -- or even any of it -- this comment by Little Brother is one of the best cautionary notes I've read regarding the euphoria and borderline religiosity, both in the press and generally, driving perceptions of Barack Obama's candidacy. At the very least, even for those excited by Obama's campaign, it's worth giving some thought to his observations.