My, my. It seems that the New York Times, also rightfully known as Barack Obama’s personal news agency, isn’t too happy with Bill Clinton these days.

In what’s supposed to be an objective report about Clinton’s appearance in some popular TV shows and about some of the criticism leveled against him by Obama supporters, the journalist who wrote the piece – Paul Vitello – seems to have a hard time not lashing out at Clinton himself.

When one reads the report, it’s highly interesting to see that Vitello spends a lot of time and attention to criticism directed at Clinton, yet neglects to inform readers about his supporters. A lot of people have come out in recent days in support of the former President, explaining that he’s not an Obama surrogate and, what’s more, opining that it’s refreshing to see a partisan Democrat appear objective.

It is not often that we see leaders of either political party speak with respect about leaders of the other party.

Now, Vitello does quote one defender, Jon Stewart. Stewart did indeed defend Clinton, arguing that the ‘love-bar’ some Obama supporters use to measure whether one is supportive enough of Obama or not is insane. But he then writes:

The night after his appearance on Mr. Letterman’s show, Mr. Clinton was on “The Daily Show With Jon Stewart,” where Mr. Stewart defended him against the charge of aloofness and suggested that the only way to satisfy some Obama supporters would be “to get a tattoo or some type of permanent bumper sticker” placed on his person.

Without smiling, Mr. Clinton said: “The purpose of this election is not for people to pass emotional hurdle tests. This is not a Rorschach test. This is about winning an election that can change the future of the country.”

Without smiling? You can watch the video at Comedy Central. Clinton smiled. He had fun during the show. The only reasonVitello may have written this sentence down is to make Clinton, once again, look bad. Not sympathetic, etc.

It is strange to the formerly pro-Clinton NYT, become so strongly pro-Obama that it even goes after the Clintons.