TIME has broken the unwritten and unspoken code. They are calling it the way they see it. How dare they!

Oh, let's just admit it: John McCain is a long shot. He's got a heroic personal story, and being white has never hurt a presidential candidate, but on paper 2008 just doesn't look like his year. And considering what's happening off paper, it might be time to ask the question the horse-race-loving media are never supposed to ask: Is McCain a no-shot? Last week, the McCain campaign's case against Barack Obama went something like this: He's irresponsible when it comes to Iraq, naive when it comes to Iran, and a big-government liberal when it comes to the economy. But now Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki has more or less endorsed Obama's plan to withdraw from Iraq, forcing McCain to argue that Maliki didn't really mean it, and even the Bush administration has accepted a "time horizon" for withdrawal, if not a precise "timetable." The Bush administration has also engaged in some diplomatic outreach with Iran, just as Obama has recommended, a severe blow to McCain's efforts to portray Obama's willingness to talk as appeasement. And on the economy, a TIME/Rockefeller Foundation poll found that 82% of the country supports more federal infrastructure spending designed to create jobs. When big-government liberalism is all the rage, McCain's courage in opposing water projects or the farm bill becomes less of a selling point.

But, but... this bad news for McCain must be good for McCain, right? The networks always find something good about McCain in every news piece that's good for Obama. That's how the game is played. Isn't it?

The media will try to preserve the illusion of a toss-up; you'll keep seeing "Obama Leads, But Voters Have Concerns" headlines. But when Democrats are winning blood-red congressional districts in Mississippi and Louisiana, when the Republican president is down to 28 percent, when the economy is tanking and world affairs keep breaking Obama's way, it shouldn't be heresy to recognize that McCain needs an improbable series of breaks. Analysts get paid to analyze, and cable news has airtime to fill, so pundits have an incentive to make politics seem complicated. In the end, though, it's usually pretty simple. Everyone seems to agree that 2008 is a change election. Which of these guys looks like change?

Still, the trip so far has done for the media what the media claims Republicans fear the trip will do for the voting public. With some hems and haws, reality is setting in. The NY Times addresses its own narrative:

For Obama, a First Step Is Not a Misstep

After meeting Iraqi leaders and American officials, Senator Barack Obama seemed to have navigated the riskiest part of an international trip.

A smooth trip is news because we have been told for the last week how important it was not to make a huge gaffe. The idea that Obama could actually orchestrate the mechanics competently is part of the story, of course (I note that I've seen no lime green jello backdrops.) But the bigger picture is the air going out of the McCain rationale for being President. "The Surge is working!" propagandists don't even understand the implications of their simplistic claims. To the voters, it means "Great! Let's get out", and blows a hole in the Republican strategy of staying whether things are good or bad there (although it does make a better rallying cry than "ethnic cleansing is working!" or "Bribery is working - for now!".) But from the perspective of the Presidential race, McCain's "President without a purpose" campaign will continue until November.

This doesn't guarantee an Obama win, but it certainly guarantees some painful and embarrassing moments for McCain - and for the press, as they gyrate their way to figuring out how this is all good for McCain, who loves to be an underdog. Good, because he, at least, is going to love the rest of the campaign.