I have said for years that Hillary is our next president. And people have always said the same thing: “Not with those negatives!”

But these people weren’t counting on the cooperation of the news media in helping Hillary out. Cooperation like we see in this morning’s puff piece on Hillary in the L.A. Times.

Here’s how the piece is being sold at the top of the web site right now:

The theme — that the perception of Hillary is changing — is picked up in the story itself, which opens like it was written by one of Hillary’s publicists:

Carol Levesque, a retired New Hampshire social worker, used to think Hillary Rodham Clinton was not cut out for the White House. Levesque looked askance at Clinton’s decision to run for the U.S. Senate. She was lukewarm about how Clinton conducted herself as first lady to an unfaithful husband.

Now, Levesque is an avid fan. After seeing Clinton three times, she was wowed by the New York Democrat’s apparent brainpower.

Don’t forget: we also have the chance to break new and progressive ground!

Levesque also cites a factor that Clinton says she often hears: “I really hoped someday I would live long enough to see a woman as president.”

That slapping sound you hear? It’s Hillary’s advisers giving each other high-fives.

Naturally, Levesque is seen as an emblematic figure:

Levesque’s conversion offers a window into how Clinton has emerged as the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination: One of the most demonized politicians in America has begun to win a second look from skeptics. And among women and seniors, such as Levesque, she has built big leads over her rivals.

What about the idea that there might actually be something behind Hillary’s negatives — you know, like Hillarycare, Whitewater, the deception over the the travel office firings, possibly corrupt profits in cattle futures, or the Magic Reappearing Rose Law Firm Billing Records, just to name a few? According to the article, this mountain of baggage amounts to nothing more than “attacks” by Hillary’s “detractors”:

Yet she also has high negative ratings in some polls. For more than a decade, she has been attacked in a shelfload of books, on countless websites and in repeated direct-mail drives. Her detractors see her as a calculating opportunist with a crisis-ridden past.

The article even manages to spin health care as a positive for Hillary:

And Clinton’s signature issue — healthcare — is a big draw for many women.

“It’s a problem for a lot of people’s families,” said Melanie Sowa, 40, a South Carolina homemaker who supports Clinton because of her gender as well as her pledge to make healthcare more affordable and accessible.

The disaster that was Hillarycare? That doesn’t get a mention in this puff piece. Let me say that again: the article talks about how great Hillary is on health care — and doesn’t mention Hillarycare.

If you grabbed one of the L.A. Times editors by the collar and screamed in his face: How could you not mention Hillarycare?!?! . . . I’m sure the answer would be: That’s old news.

Indeed. As is the case with all of Hillary’s negatives. As I explained back in June:

Hillary has more skeletons in her closet than any other candidate on either side of the aisle. But unlike the scary unknown skeletons in the other candidates’ closets, Hillary’s skeletons are familiar, like old friends.

Those negatives aren’t scaring the voters, folks. At least, not if Hillary’s good friends at the L.A. Times have anything to say about it.