Rampant bias at the NYTimes

Yes, that's a bit redundant. But Richard Stevenson's article on President Bush's New Orleans speech was so egregious in its partiality - remember this is a "news" piece - as to surprise even long-time critics of the Grey Lady.

The title of the piece gives you a clue: "Amid the Ruins, a President Tries to Reconstruct His Image, Too." Actually I thought the speech was about a huge project to rebuild New Orleans but let's get to meatier stuff.

The violence of Hurricane Katrina and his faltering response to it have left to Mr. Bush the task not just of physically rebuilding a swath of the United States, but also of addressing issues like poverty and racial inequality that were exposed in such raw form by the storm.

The challenge would be immense for any president, but is especially so for Mr. Bush. He is scrambling to assure a shaken, angry nation not only that is he up to the task but also that he understands how much it disturbed Americans to see their fellow citizens suffering and their government responding so ineffectually. [emphasis added]

I don't think I've seen a clearer case of overt editorializing. Which is fine for the Op-Ed section. Not the news. Stevenson then closes with:

...But it is not yet clear that his performance will stanch the political wounds he has suffered or ensure that he can avoid being hobbled through his second term, not just by what he lost in the faltering response to Hurricane Katrina but by the rising death toll in Iraq, sky-high energy prices and worrisome deficits.

Sounds a bit like a Angry Left wishlist.