Fineman: McCain wouldn't approve of his own message, so that makes it okay

Greg Sargeant over at TPM Election Central hits on a brilliant point. Namely, that the media keeps reporting on John McCain's bad behavior, then excusing it because they know in their hearts that he's such a swell guy.

[Newsweek's Howard] Fineman was talking about Joe Lieberman's claim that Obama hasn't always put his country first:

Fineman said that while Lieberman's quote was clearly questionable, McCain himself wouldn't sanction it. "I still don't think if you said to McCain flat out, 'Do you approve of that kind of message,' that he would necessarily agree with it or support it," Fineman said.

But Howard, the McCain campaign itself blasted Lieberman's quote out to its press list, which constitutes an official McCain campaign endorsement of the quote....

This from Fineman is really part and parcel of a larger media meme: The bizarre ability of some people to see questionable political behavior by McCain and his campaign as somehow indicative of good character on McCain's part.

For instance, when McCain pandered slavishly to the religious right, some pundits noted that McCain was uncomfortable doing this and didn't really mean it, so it didn't really matter. Similarly, when McCain constantly talks up his POW experiences, which he's perfectly entitled to do, we're always told that he's really reluctant to do this. This is a twofer for McCain, because he gets to showcase his war experiences and simultaneously be seen as modest about them at the same time.

But AP's Liz Sidoti brought him donuts (with sprinkles!), and CNN's John King knows McCain's heart is pure, so why should they have to report all this icky news about McCain. It's so darn unfair of us to expect Sidoti and King to report facts that contradict their pre-conceived notions of the news. Can't we all just let John McCain become president unchalleneged and stop making life so hard for Sidoti and King?