I'm not talking about the editorials on the editorial pages, but the remarkably blatant editorializing in the "news" stories covering Karl Rove's resignation from the White House. An AP story by Terence Hunt retrieved from news.myway.com begins by describing the whole of the Bush administration as "turbulent." Perhaps, but the color of the paragraph indicates that the turbulence was Rove's fault. If blaming Rove was Hunt's intention, then Hunt must believe Rove ordered the Islamofascist hijackers to fly airplanes into buildings.
The next paragraph is breathtaking in its complete, but subtle, condemnation of the Bush administration:
It was a major loss for Bush as he heads into the twilight of his presidency, battered in the polls, facing a hostile Democratic Congress and waging an unpopular war. A half dozen other senior advisers have left in recent months, forcing the White House to rebuild its staff at the same time the president is running out of influence.
Terence could have saved a lot of syllables by simply writing, "Rove's retirement further dooms Bush's failed presidency."
This blatant Bush-bashing in the news sections is just one of the reasons Americans don't trust the press. Terence Hunt would do himself, his employer, and his trade a big favor by leaving the hard work of reporting to reports and pursue his life-long dream of being a pundit.
Perhaps the liberal mania against hard work and success drives people like Hunt to vilify ultra-successes like Bush and Rove. The latter two men achieved the very pinnacle in their fields. Liberals like the mediocre, the also-ran. Achievement is to liberals what a banana peel is to a dog: they see people enjoying it, but they can't get past that smell.
Others on Rove's resignation:
Blogs of War (good round-up of blog reactions)