"Criticizing Flip-Flops Is No Longer in Vogue"

Howard Kurtz, the host of CNN's "Reliable Sources" on Sunday asked several journalists why they felt the media was ignoring Barack Obama's latest flip-flop on public campaign financing. Here's a small excerpt from the program:

KURTZ ASKS CNN ENTERTAINMENT CORRESPONDENT, LOLA OGUNNAIKE: "Lola, John Kerry four years ago was savaged for saying, "I was for the $87 billion before I was against the $87 billion," and that, of course, a question about war funding.

"As a viewer when you watch the coverage, does this make you think, well, Obama, he talks about the audacity of hope and he's just another politician [flip-flopping on the issues], or is that not your reaction?"

OGUNNAIKE: "No, not at all. In fact, I mean, I'm inclined to say that flip-flopping is so four years ago. It's just not what anybody is talking about anymore. It's so passé.

"I mean, people want to talk about Michelle Obama and her great toned arms and how does she get those pecks. I mean, no one wants to talk about flip-flopping. I'm sorry, Howard, but that's just the truth."

KURTZ: "But that sort of strikes at the heart of what we [the media] do. I mean, if a candidate says one thing trying to win the Democratic nomination, wins the nomination, and then throws that out the window.... and we don't blow the whistle, then what is our purpose here?

"I'm not buying the notion that flip-flops are out. Apparently, only certain flip-flops are out, maybe flip-flops by certain candidates.

"Now look, you know, Obama is entitled to do whatever he wants and make the case... But if George W. Bush had done this, blown off public financing, as he considered doing during the 2004 campaign, there would be howls in the media about one candidate trying to buy an election."