I must be out of it, but I don't know any good journalists who have excused Clinton's problems.

There have been as many investigative reporters on this newspaper working on Clinton's many problems as I can remember there were working on Watergate.

Maybe some of today's papers have too many 'feel-good' features, but there is a lot of good news out there.

If an investigative reporter finds out that someone has been robbing the store, that may be 'gotcha' journalism, but it's also good journalism.

The biggest difference between Kennedy and Nixon, as far as the press is concerned, is simply this: Jack Kennedy really liked newspaper people and he really enjoyed sparring with journalists.

Sure, some journalists use anonymous sources just because they're lazy and I think editors ought to insist on more precise identification even if they remain anonymous.