Today's New York Times front-page story critical of Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal is actually the second critical story of Blumenthal in just over a month.

In an April 14 front-page story, David Halbfinger said that Blumenthal's campaign “was supposed to be a glide,” but that “signs of trouble have quickly emerged.”

What were those signs of trouble, exactly?

Mr. Blumenthal flopped in his first televised debate against an obscure primary opponent, and he is ruling out any possibility of a rematch.

He appears almost incapable of offering concise answers to even the most predictable questions, like why he is running for the Senate.

And his reliance on prosecutorial parlance and legal arcana has raised unflattering comparisons to another attorney general in a Senate race who seemed a sure winner only to lose in spectacular fashion. Some Democrats are calling him “Martha Coakley in pants,” referring to the candidate who lost the Massachusetts Senate election in January.

Huh? This sort of thing may be front page news at the Politico, but on the front page of the newspaper of record? Really?

Even when discussing Linda McMahon, the likely Republican nominee, Halbfinger portrayed her as a threat to Blumenthal, despite his “prohibitive lead” over her. Here's what he said:

But the Democrats admit to some nervousness, in part because of the Republican he is most likely to confront next fall: the professional-wrestling impresario Linda McMahon. She promises a campaign much like her brand of entertainment, with blunt, in-your-face, emotional appeals and attacks.

And Ms. McMahon has vowed to spend as much as $50 million, about five times what Mr. Blumenthal can muster.

So McMahon is a threat because she plans to spend a ton of money and turn the race into a pro wrestling match. She seems like a character worthy of a similar profile from Halbfinger.

In fact, McMahon's history - and that of her family - with professional wrestling would seem to be perfect material for a reporter looking for a great story. There is ample material on the surface, including reports McMahon's role in a federal investigation into drug distribution. Hell, McMahon's own numerous appearances on WWE's flagship RAW program are surely worth at least a review by somebody at the Times.

The Times first introduced readers to Linda McMahon, candidate for U.S. Senate, on October 4, 2009, in a largely flattering front-page piece - “Linda McMahon Tries to Jump From W.W.E. to U.S. Senate” -- by Raymond Hernandez, who wrote today's front-page story. A second profile - “Newcomer Stirs Up Connecticut Senate Race” -- by Hernandez was no more critical.

In fact, in the last five months there hasn't been one serious critical examination of McMahon.

Moreover, the McMahon campaign's reported role in feeding information on Blumenthal to the Times makes it even more imperative that the Times follow up with a closer look at McMahon.

Here's how the AP reported it:

Republican Linda McMahon's campaign trumpeted its role in The New York Times report about a Democratic rival's misleading claim he served in Vietnam. Hours later, her Senate campaign stripped the chest thumping from its website.

The campaign posted a headline late Monday on its blog: “McMahon Strikes Blumenthal In NYT Article.” The millionaire wrestling executive's campaign proudly explained how it provided the newspaper with video of Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal falsely claiming he served “in Vietnam.”

And here's Michael Calderone's Yahoo News report of the campaign's role:

Kevin Rennie, a political columnist and blogger, told Yahoo! News that Republican Linda McMahon's Senate campaign emailed him Monday night claiming responsibility for providing opposition research to the Times. Shortly thereafter, Rennie reported in a post that the McMahon campaign “fed” the newspaper the information, including a March 2008 video before a group of veterans. Rennie's post was then plastered across the McMahon's Senate campaign website and was promoted through McMahon's official Twitter account--in a tweet that has also since been removed.

But that Tweet has since been deleted from McMahon's Twitter feed and Rennie's post is no longer displayed on the campaign's site.

“We took it down,” a McMahon spokesman told Yahoo! News. “The substance of the New York Times report is what's important. The New York Times and Ray Hernandez researched, wrote and broke this report, and the questions it raises about Dick Blumenthal raise serious questions that only he can answer.”

One other note: This afternoon, Halbfinger and the Times put up an interview with former Republican Rep. Chris Shays of Connecticut, who says he is a “good friend” of Blumenthal's. In the interview, Shays said Blumenthal gradually embellished his Vietnam story. And at the press conference today, Halbfinger specifically asked Blumenthal about Shays accusations.

Yet Halbfinger and the Times have not noted that McMahon gave $5,000 to Shays since 2005, with an additional $3,000 from her husband.

From now until November, it is crucial that the New York Times and other outlets treat the Connecticut Senate race as more than the political version of a Battle Royal it threatens to become.