The New York Times’ ombudsman slams the paper of record for its shoddy reporting techniques

In an article signed by four reporters that raised more backlash against the daily than the candidate, the Times Thursday cited unnamed McCain advisers who, “convinced the relationship had become romantic,” had asked Iseman to keep away from the senator.

“The article was notable for what it did not say,” wrote Hoyte in his column to be published Sunday. “It did not say what convinced the advisers that there was a romance.

“It did not make clear what McCain was admitting when he acknowledged behaving inappropriately — an affair or just an association with a lobbyist that could look bad,” he said of alleged comments McCain made to his advisers.

In short, four reporters missed a blatant gap in the story. Perhaps the spirit of Jayson Blair still permeates the newsroom.  Or else, this cadre of reporters is just that incompetent. Think of it this way - this Times’ report on McCain is no worse sourced than the story from Larry Sinclair about Barack Obama’s crack use and random gay sex.

Of course, it could just be bad editing. Perhaps there are facts to bolster the unsubstantiated assertions.

But I doubt it.

The only thing this has done is helped galvanize the Republican base around a candidate for who there were significant misgivings.  The leftist press has acted beyond the call of duty, delivering cohesion where there was only dissent. Thank you, dear gray lady. Your help is always appreciated.