Less Than Candid

That draws some flak online, from the likes of Josh Marshall:

"It's basically a non-point because campaigns don't choose just anyone to serve as a delegate. They pick the absolute hardest core supporters of their candidate. So the odds of any delegate getting flipped are basically nil.

"It's also another example of the fog of nonsense that has increasingly enveloped the Clinton campaign. Spin is one thing. And it's not a bad thing. But to have utility it must be tethered to some relevant facts, some kind of reality. Otherwise it just descends into ridiculousness."

Are presidential candidates allowed to take a vacation? Does Obama's decision to take a week off mean he's burned out? Thinks he's got it wrapped up? Is caving under pressure from his wife?

And should we in the press just leave him alone?

"For days," says Politico, "the Obama campaign refused to confirm where the senator and his family were heading on a short Easter vacation, even as rumors spread among the press corps that they were bound for the Virgin Islands. So that presented a conundrum for news organizations: Should they send a correspondent on the -- presumably enjoyable -- assignment to the Caribbean, to investigate the white sand beaches and clear blue waters? As it turns out, CNN was the lone cable network to play a game of 'Where in the World is Barack Obama?' Chris Welch, an off-air producer covering the Obama campaign since the Iowa caucuses, headed out to the islands. . . . Even so, Fox got the scoop on the vacation location -- which they've replayed several times throughout the day."

Rather than just cover Carville's "Judas" charge, Marc Ambinder examines the underlying issue:

"James Carville cannot even explain why Gov. Bill Richardson owes something as prestigious as his presidential endorsement to Hillary Clinton. It is self-evident to him that Richardson has betrayed Clinton. The Clintons gave him so much, it seems, that anything but complete fealty is traitorous."

Despite "an internal logic to Carville's argument," Ambinder continues, "a large part of the Democratic Party has demonstrated conclusively that their loyalty to the Clintons and their appreciation for a decade well done does not extend to an automatic stamp of approval for Hillary Clinton's candidacy."

I've written the last couple days about the debate over that Politico piece, by Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen, that journalists should stop the pretense and just admit the Democratic race is over.

Now David Brooks asks whether Hillary is just being selfish since, in his estimation, she has only a 5 percent chance of winning: "For nearly 20 years, she has been encased in the apparatus of political celebrity. Look at her schedule as first lady and ever since. Think of the thousands of staged events, the tens of thousands of times she has pretended to be delighted to see someone she doesn't know, the hundreds of thousands times she has recited empty clich¿s and exhortatory banalities, the millions of photos she has posed for in which she is supposed to appear empathetic or tough, the billions of politically opportune half-truths that have bounced around her head. No wonder the Clinton campaign feels impersonal."

Time's Michael Scherer has some Politico-related thoughts on grabbing attention online: