"Roberts Decision Unsettles Dems"

The other day, I was shocked to encounter a news story that seemed to tilt its coverage against the Mediacrats. What the... ? I had to read it twice to be sure. Even the headline (above) was discomforting. Here's an excerpt:

For the eight Democrats on the 18-member Judiciary panel and the 44 Democrats in the 100-member Senate, the choice over how to vote is riddled with short-and long-term political ramifications... ...As members of a divided, minority party, many of their considerations are at odds, such as how to appease a liberal donor base while appealing to swing voters, and trying to sort out whether voting no makes any difference to what sort of nominee President Bush submits in coming weeks to fill a second high court vacancy....

Wow. The author used the "L" word in a news article, plus labeled the Democrats "a divided, minority party." Which I guess they are. Alright, someone needs to come clean. Which editor was sleeping off a fifth of Jim Beam when this gem belly-crawled past the news-desk?

I've got to admit, I've seldom seen such characterizations in the mediacratic newspaper I read on a daily basis. So, what news service produced this story? The Associated Press? Nope. Knight-Ridder? Nah. Agency France Presse? Uhm, no. Al Jazeera? Surely you jest.

No, the author was none other than Margaret Talev of the McClatchy News Service . Hmmm. Never heard o' that one before. If Fox News is any indication, McClatchy might have a big future in store.

We'll know the trend is for real when a news story -- describing the area affected by Katrina -- estimates the size at, "roughly three times the diameter of Michael Moore."

Margaret Talev: "Roberts Decision Unsettles Dems"