Dishonest and credulous media types? Though the press is apparently getting a little tougher, since he keeps attacking them. Powerline, excerpt from the other day:

Now in fairness to Obama, this exchange followed some pretty aggressive initial questioning from a pushy talk show host. And Obama actually handled himself well during much of the interview. Even so, a political figure who can't explain a controversial vote on key legislation without first attacking the professionalism of the reporter is probably not ready to run for, much less serve as, president. Obama could use more time in the Senate to (a) learn about the legitimate role of the press in this country and/or (b) develop thicker skin.

Obama's problem may be one of temperament. But it's also true that he's spent his adult life in a bubble of likemindedness and adulation. Was he ever forced to argue with conservatives -- or people presenting the conservative viewpoint as devil's advocates -- at the elite academic institutions he's been associated with or on the Southside of Chicago where the terrorist William Ayers and the anti-American bigot Jeremiah Wright pass as mainstream figures? I haven't seen any evidence that he was. We do hear that, as head of the Harvard Law Review (a position he seems to have obtained without being on the road to writing a publishable student note), he listened to the conservative point of view. That's to his credit. But listening when one is in a position of authority is not the same thing as debating.

Do the MSM and Democrat operatives think Americans are stupid and easily led? Barack the cable guy, don't make me laugh. Get 'er done? What has Barack Obama ever done except run for political office? Now we're supposed to elect him based on his competence? (Pay no attention to my liberal record, America.) It didn't work for Dukakis. Guess the Obama as post-partisan glow is fading. And the MSM is barely in the news business these days.