We submit, you decide

Rough day for our little friends over at the armed propaganda wing of the Republican National Committee. They've jumped the gun on an inquest in identifying the Purdue Tragedy Body; they're at least half an hour behind the lumbering Observer in announcing the Missing Scout Rescue; and in the great federal prosecutor flap, they make clear again that "fair and balanced" has got a bad case of the where-you-stand-depends-on-where-you-sits:

But some other e-mails challenge the claim prosecutors were fired for their performance, and that has oddsmakers betting on whether the attorney general will keep his job. Among the e-mails that are particularly worrisome are two written by former Gonzales Chief of Staff Kyle Sampson, who in one weighs the prospect of former U.S. Attorney Bud Cummins testifying before Congress.

"Worrisome" to whom, one might ask?

Long about your first or second semester (registration is still going on, Foxsters!), you should be getting comfortable with the idea that not all adjectives are created equal. Some are straightforward and unobjectionable. Others require that people on both the sending and receiving ends share a particular viewpoint. Sometimes that's just friendly-but-dumb, like the idea that rain constitutes "bad weather." At other times, as above, it makes clear whose ideological pocket you're in.

The specific case at hand is a tricky one, sure. And Fox isn't the only source that wears its ideology on its sleeve, though it's probably the most consistent and shameless. But that's why you hire real editors and pay them decent bucks: so they stop your reporters from shooting themselves, and you, in the foot.