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.

The article is called ‘The Mellowing of Willliam Jefferson Clinton’. A heads-up from Politico here, with a picture of the cover.

They reckon the interview could go online before the press day of Sunday.

UPDATE And here it is.

The New York Times has some thoughts on how the Secretary of State is settling in.

Her relationship with President Obama? Fine, except she perhaps needs to remember she’s not in high school anymore…

On a recent afternoon, at Mrs. Clinton’s suggestion, the two moved their meeting outside to a picnic table on the South Lawn, next to a new swing set installed for Mr. Obama’s daughters. “We just had the best time,” she said.

Remember the lobbyist McCain was supposed to have had an affair with? Here she is, on The Early Show this morning setting the record straight. There was no affair.

Watch CBS Videos Online

She sued the New York Times and has now settled. The NYT says no money or apology was issued but has clarified the record with this statement: ‘The article did not state, and the Times did not intend to conclude, that Ms. Iseman had engaged in a romantic affair with Senator McCain or an unethical relationship on behalf of her clients in breach of the public trust’

The most ill-conceived partnership of election year? No, not McCain and you know who. The New York Times and Bill Kristol.

Anyway they’ve fired him now, so they can stop pretending their readers are an open-minded bunch who, like good bipartisans, just love to hear different points of view.

Bill’s off to debate Matt Damon, supposedly.

Maureen Dowd, that is, in the New York Times, after a long post-election holiday. One of our favourites.

Always at her best when writing about Hillary and this week is no exception.

One of the tried and tested methods of undermining a US-backed regime is to portray it as hopelessly corrupt.

Not least because when a developing nation is drenched in dollar aid there invariably is corruption on a massive scale.

So in one sense it’s no surprise to see Kabul getting the Saigon treatment.

But on the other hand this is now Obama’s war, so what is the NYT up to? 

Setting him up with a reason to get out? Underscoring what a “mess” he’s inherited?

Watch this space.

No one had the press eating out of his hand quite like JFK.

But his daughter’s “charm offensive” – she gave a series of interviews yesterday – seems to have backfired in spectacular fashion where the New York Times is concerned.

When asked . . . to describe the moment she decided to seek the Senate seat, Ms. Kennedy seemed irritated by the question and said she couldn’t recall. “Have you guys ever thought about writing for, like, a woman’s magazine or something?” she asked the reporters. “I thought you were the crack political team.”

Read the full interview here, clock the number of digs the reporters (not surprisingly) get in at her and watch yourself lose count at about 20.

What goes around comes around.

The paper that had little sympathy for Gov Palin over the fake Sarkozy call runs a letter from “the Mayor of Paris” criticising Caroline Kennedy.

Except it wasn’t from him at all.

The University of Kansas held an election post-mortem last week with campaign staffers from both sides.

From Team Obama: the only time they were really worried was when the Paris/Britney ads ran. Steve Hildebrand said: “I thought if they can brand him as a celebrity rather than as a serious leader then we’re in serious trouble.”

From Team McCain: suspending the campaign and going back to Washington was intended to neutralise the gaffe about the fundamentals of the economy being strong, but it backfired. “That was when [their] charge of ‘erratic’ really started to stick,” said Sarah Simmons.

The New York Times has a full report.