I'm less concerned on the piece Israel Insider's birthcertificategate. They do not have the same reach as the AP - the Associated Press.

AP ate the donuts they gave McCain, drank the GOP kool-aid and has clearly taken sides:

As Josh Marshall and Steve Benen, at The CarpetBagger, observed: When the AP drops the pretense

I argued the other day that the Associated Press seemed to be taking sides, rather blatantly, in the presidential election. With each passing day, it appears the wire service is dropping the pretense altogether.

At this point, it goes beyond just the AP giving John McCain donuts and McCain giving the AP barbecue. First there was the slam-job on Obama that read like an RNC oppo dump, followed by a scathing, 900-word reprimand of Obama's decision to bypass the public financing system in the general election, filled with errors of fact and judgment.

When Obama unveiled his faith-based plan this week, the AP got the story backwards. When Obama talked about his Iraq policy Thursday, the AP said he'd "opened the door" to reversing course, even though he hadn't.

[.]
One almost has to wonder if the AP is trying to be deliberately awful.

The piece seeks to scrutinize Obama's list of alleged flip-flops -- some legitimate, some imaginary -- without so much as a hint of scrutiny on McCain's dozens of reversals.

But it's the Iraq discussion in the piece that was breathtaking.[.]

    His problem is that his change in emphasis to flexibility from a hard-nosed end-the-war stance -- including his recent position that withdrawing combat troops could take as long as 16 months -- will now be heard loud and clear by an anti-war camp that may have ignored it before. So he could face a double-whammy in their feelings of betrayal and other voters' belief in the Republican charge that he is craven.

Josh Marshall said this analysis was enough to make his "eyes bleed," and that's not especially hyperbolic.

[.]