Get Me Rewrite!

It looks like the NY Times had to insert a few last minute, unexpected phrases into their tale of an Obama triumph:

The campaign, infused by tensions over race and sex, provided unexpected twists to the bitter end as Mr. Obama ultimately prevailed over Mrs. Clinton, who just a year ago appeared headed toward becoming the first woman to be nominated by a major party. The last two contests reflected the party’s continuing divisions, as Mrs. Clinton won the South Dakota primary and Mr. Obama is the projected winner in Montana.

The bitter end, well perhaps an unfortunate wording there. Yeah, they had to add nuance. And nice work on the thin resume:

The victory for Mr. Obama, the son of a black Kenyan father and white Kansan mother, broke racial barriers and represented a remarkable rise for a man who just four years ago served in the Illinois State Senate.

Just remarkable, not meteoric? Nuance. Some chagrin:

Mrs. Clinton paid tribute to Mr. Obama, but she did not leave the race. “This has been a long campaign and I will be making no decisions tonight," Mrs. Clinton told supporters in New York. She said she would be speaking with party officials about her next move.

In a combative speech...

Apparently not enough nuance for the NY Times. The Gray Lady gnashing her teeth, but Hillary belts it out. Jimmy Carter gets the spotlight:

The race drew to its final hours with a burst of announcements — delegate-by-delegate — of Democrats stepping forward to declare their support for Mr. Obama. The Democratic establishment, from former President Jimmy Carter to rank-and-file local officials who make up the ranks of the party’s superdelegates, rallied behind Mr. Obama as the day wore on.

Maybe not the best idea to tout a Carter endorsement of Obama right before he speaks to AIPAC today. But when has the NY Times, or Barack Obama, ever shown good judgment?

P.S. Apoplexy on CNN and MSNBC.

Maybe the Clintons should take over some Latin American country. Sidle up to Hugo? Or...Long live Clintonism:) (Why do they hate us?) UPDATE: Maureen Dowd:

Clintonologists know that Hillary is up to something, but they aren’t sure what. Theory No. 1 is that it’s the Cassandra “I told you so” gambit: She believes intensely that he’s too black, too weak and too elitist — with all his salmon and organic tea and steamed broccoli — to beat her pal John McCain. But she has to pretend she’ll do “whatever it takes,” even accept the vice presidency, a job she’s already had and doesn’t want again, so that nobody will blame her when he loses on Nov. 4. Then she can power on to 2012.

Dowd thinks the organic tea is effete too, and if Barack puts Hillary on the ticket he'll appear hen-pecked. WaPo's Dana Milbank reports on the hostility of Hillary and her crowd to the MSM:

The honored guests were not in a partying mood, however. One older woman pointed at a reporter accusingly and said: "He is the one who destroyed our heroine!"[snip]

Terry McAuliffe, the campaign chairman, took the stage and read the full list of Clinton's victories, from American Samoa to Massachusetts. Introducing Clinton, he asked: "Are you ready for the next president of the United States?"

This brought laughter from the reporters in the back of the room, but Clinton induced the crowd to boo the "pundits and naysayers" who would have run her from the race. "I am so proud we stayed the course together," she told her backers, who interjected cries of "We believe in you!" and "Yes, we will!"