Well, I guess we were overdue for Adam Nagourney's 87,000th New York Times front-page story about how incompetent Democrats are. (Here's a list of earlier examples.) Sure, I say Democrats are pathetic, too -- but my posts don't appear as news (rather than opinion) on page 1 of the most important paper in America.
I'm sure Nagourney thinks he's objective, but here's the passage that tells you he's completely in the tank for the GOP:
[Some Democrats'] concern was aggravated by the image of high-profile Democrats, including Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, challenging the legality of Mr. Bush's secret surveillance program this week at a time when the White House has sought to portray Democrats as weak on security.
Who on earth came away from those hearings focusing on Kennedy as the primary critic of the program? The stories I read and the clips I watched focused on Arlen Specter and other Republicans, as well as Russ Feingold and Pat Leahy -- not Kennedy. This simply isn't an accurate statement of what happened.
And, of course, the notion that Ted Kennedy is a huge liability and embarrassment for Democrats is rampant on the right and almost nonexistent elsewhere (the last time Gallup polled, Kennedy's favorable-unfavorable ratio was 48%-38%; President Bush's most recent Gallup ratio is 46%-53%, and he was at 37-48% last month in the New York Times/CBS poll).
I suppose Nagourney (and coauthor Sheryl Gay Stolberg) simply confused the act of writing news with the act of writing a GOP fundraising letter ("Ted Kennedy and the liberal Democrats in Congress...").