The assignment that Hastings walked away from, writing an inside look of the campaign to be published after the election seems like an excellent way to cover the long term story. It seems like a great way to get the inside story, unless Hastings was so in the tank that he couldn't be trusted to keep his journalistic word.

No wonder people think so lowly of journalists. Just because he fiancé died in Iraq doesn’t mean its now his “mission” to undermine politicians he disagrees with. Seriously, Michael Hastings is a hack.

I meant to write "Except," not "Accept." My apologies.

A fascinating admission of where we are in our culture and in journalism.

"The bias argument is not something that really interests me." Hmmm. What is bias? Bias is an inclination or prejudice in favor of a particular person, thing, or viewpoint. It's swaying the truth in favor of the one you favor. But the truth doesn't interest Mr. Hastings. What interests Michael are "human relationships" – how he *feels* about whatever he covers.

He likes this, "because once people start telling the truth you can't accuse them of being a hypocrite." Accept, he never says or shows that anything Giuliani said was wrong, or that he was not telling the truth – he only accuses Giuliani of not having enough experience to know what war is like. That's something quite different

The Giuliani described sounds like another candidate still in the race! No one is calling him a hypocrite for his war pronouncements when he never served.

Really, we have to call reporters on their blatant disinterest in the facts of reporting and their preference for their own feelings. No wonder porn in a hotel room is such a replacement for reporting!