Once upon a time I as in college in Los Angeles and had the honor (I used to think) of writing as a college correspondent for the Los Angeles Times. Consistently ranked among the top 5 consumer newspapers in the nation, the Times was a journalism student’s dream come true. It was my inspiration as a journalist. Until now. In an editorial this weekend criticizing the DC policy that strips government funding of abortion, the writers drop in a line that is almost inconspicuous:
Whatever one thinks of public funding for abortion — and we believe abortion should be treated like any other medical procedure for funding purposes — Congress’ heavy-handed prohibition intrudes on the home rule the district was promised.
And perhaps what’s most disturbing about this statement is that it was presented not as a thesis statement in which to frame a debatable argument but as an understood bit of information in the midst of a bigger picture.