Deborah Howell, the ombudsman at the Washington Post, finds that her paper's coverage of the Allen-Webb and Cardin-Steele races was biased in favor of the Democrat. In Virginia, Howell concludes, the coverage was too anti-Allen ("a profile of Allen was relentlessly negative without balancing coverage. . ."); in Maryland it was too pro-Cardin ("I longed for a more critical eye, especially in the Cardin piece, which seemed relentlessly positive").

But I bet those in power at the Post have no regrets -- unless Allen and/or Steele win, in which case they'll regret not having been even more partisan.

JOHN adds: Has this election cycle represented the high water mark of liberal media bias? I'm not sure; there hasn't been anything as out of bounds as the 60 Minutes document forgery. But day in and day out, I have the sense that the current cycle might set a new standard. The liberal media are determined to drag the carcass of the Democratic Party across the finish line, come Hell or high water.