Thanking Senator Clinton for her good service on behalf of the working-class does not preclude anyone questioning her recent pandering.

Two votes? But she has a lot more votes that have negatively impacted working class people. Personally, I think "metamorphasis" is too nice a word. It assumes that there's a full body alignment. With Clinton, you know that her new 2 week old "Man Act" is...just words.

The NY Times has chronically given Senator Clinton the benefit of the doubt. The headline presumes that she has actually made that transformation.

Note that the headline for the Obama article embeds several criticisms of him: "Tagged as Elitist, Obama Shifts from High-Flown to Folksy."

The Clinton headline is "With Right Props and Stops, Clinton Transforms Into Working Class Hero." The headline acknowledges that this is all theater, but there's no suggestion that that is a bad thing. In fact, rather than "Folksy," she's a hero.

Add to this a flattering article about Bill's work in NC (with no accompanying article about Michelle Obama) and you have a paper that is clearly pushing its hometown candidate.

It would be easy to do this on the last five days of coverage.

One additional thought.

When you are an established political figure, there is always an effort by political handlers to dress the candidate down. Think Lamar Alexander's plaid shirt. John Kerry's hunting vest, George Bush's cowboy boots. They are all costumes, but they work because they already have stature.

Obama has the problem that many people are trying to create the impression that he is not established, that he is too new, of presidential stature. If he campaigns in jeans in a T-shirt, everyone will call him un-presidential. He has to wear a suit and look authoritative nearly all the time.

The fact that he has until very recently certainly drove his own car, pumped his own gas, went to the store to buy milk for his family and paid his own mortgage doesn't seem enough for the media to identify him as a regular guy. But then again he is not playing a character.

Present, pander fits but if you prefer I take it deeper I am quite happy to discuss how Hillary's gas tax holiday proposal does not help the working class and is cynical attempt to capture votes of the uninformed. We can talk about her attacks on economists (who she touted when some endorsed her health care plan) and wall street traders (family and friends) as an effort to convince them she's on their side. Or, how her statements on Iran and OPEC are not about making us safer or more energy independent but about a few votes. But, it's your blog so feel free to provide examples of Obama pandering to the rich.