Finally the New York Times condescends to cover the story everyone’s been talking about.

At least it does clear up one thing: the question wasn’t mistranslated, the questioner misspoke and said Mr Clinton when he meant to say Mr Obama.

Tee hee, they must be thinking in Pyongyang.

We suspected their choice of Bill to pick up the imprisoned journalists was to needle Hillary, and she certainly seemed needled at her latest press conference in Africa when someone asked not for her views but his.

UPDATE Here’s the video. Some reporters are saying it was a translation cock-up and when the questioner asked her what was President Obama’s view it was relayed to her as President Clinton!

Laura Ling’s sister on the Today show.

Here’s what we wrote yesterday about the Bill Clinton mission to North Korea coming just two weeks after Pyongyang’s attack on his wife:

It looks suspiciously like an attempt by the North Koreans to humiliate Hillary by demanding to deal with her husband. Little do they know it’ll just make her look good because the MSM will play it as Hillary deploying her great asset.

Maureen Dowd is suspicious too. “Maybe,” she writes, “it was some clever North Korean revenge plot, giving the limelight to Daddy to punish Mommy.”

But the MSM is in full cheerleading mode. The Associated Press: “Score one for the tag team.”

And the New York Times manages to note that a) the North Koreans asked for Bill, and b) they asked for him around the time of the Hillary spat, without joining the dots.

Or rather it draws the opposite, innocent conclusion about North Korea’s motives: “Mr. Clinton’s trip to Pyongyang came just two weeks after North Korea issued a harsh personal attack on Mrs. Clinton . . . The episode evidently did not stop consideration of sending her husband as an envoy.”

A big, big win for the Clintons and for the Obama ethic of diplomacy and engagement.

Hillary’s take on North Korea a few weeks ago was that they were just looking for attention and like any good mom we should ignore them.

Having Bill turn up to secure the release of the two journalists is hardly ignoring them.

Whose idea was this exactly? It looks suspiciously like an attempt by the North Koreans to humiliate Hillary by demanding to deal with a “proper” politician in the shape of her husband.

Little do they know it’ll just make her look good because the MSM will play it as Hillary deploying her great asset. Here’s some early video.

Now, now, children! North Korea has replied in kind to the Secretary of State’s thoughtful analysis of their behaviour. The New York Times reports:

North Korea’s Foreign Ministry, bristling at an earlier Clinton comment likening the regime to ‘’small children” demanding attention, released a statement Thursday saying: ”We cannot but regard Mrs. Clinton as a funny lady as she likes to utter such rhetoric, unaware of the elementary etiquette in the international community. Sometimes she looks like a primary schoolgirl and sometimes a pensioner going shopping.”

The arrogant Bush administration is no more and showing other nations respect is now the mantra of US foreign policy.

Hillary’s contribution to this new era of humility? Comparing the North Koreans to attention-seeking children!

One for night owls or very early birds: Secretary of State Clinton talks to Greta van Susteren on Fox. First showing at 3am, with the repeat at 6am.

She’s far too much of a pro to aim any subtle digs at her inexperienced boss. Isn’t she?

The first hint of a crack between them, which we thought when she was appointed was going to provide us with almost daily entertainment.

Almost more intriguingly, absolutely no follow-up to the Washington Times story in the rest of the press apart from Greta van Susteren on Fox, despite the White House and State Department reaction being a no comment rather than a denial.

President Obama’s uncanny ability to come up smelling of roses faces its toughest test yet in Iran.

First problem: the protesters are appealing for the support of the outside world. If the administration doesn’t give it, and the revolt is suppressed, it looks cowardly.

Second problem: in the run-up to the election he praised the “robust debate” going on in Iran, as if it was a healthy democracy. If the protests prevail and the election is shown to be fraudulent, he looks a bit silly.

We might add a third: Hillary’s low profile means he can’t blame it on her.