The simple truth is that the firm belief - it is on the order of a religious doctrine - within the mainstream press that their own monolithic political alignments do not bleed through into their coverage is a falsehood on the order of the Piltdown Man. It is more obvious in the questions that don't get asked than in the ones that do. For example, when hundreds of thousands of citizens overwhelmed the Chick-Fil-A restaurants the most common reaction in the press was (1) it's not that big a deal, and (2) quick, let's get the cameras on the dozen or so gay activists and away from the lumpenproletariat. A far more professional reaction would have been on the order of "what the hell is happening here?" and any journalist worth his or her salt in the old days would have been pounding it against the stone wall of blandness that is the administration's position toward politics that are out of accord with its lofty pretensions.
The very fact that the 0bama administration has had the brass nerve to demand Romney's tax returns is a direct indication of just how little that same sort of question has been - and continues to be - avoided with respect to 0bama by the press, and the continuing conviction on the part of that staff that it will always be so, as it most certainly will. Yes, there is a double standard with respect to the candidates and journalists are proud of it because they established it and continue to protect it as a manifestation of power. These are worse than lapdogs, they are proud lapdogs.
Nevertheless, that consistency - the consistency of a mobster used to monthly payments - is of some comfort to conservatives running against it. The playing field is tilted, yes, but dependably so. That's as much as we are likely to get.
The media is being brought kicking and screaming back to reality. I think Obama is egging Mitt into making some offhand birther statement as in “where are your records?”.