In a highly unflattering article about the campaign of Connecticut's Democratic Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal, who is running for the U.S. Senate and currently enjoys a wide lead in the polls, the Times reports [emphasis added]:

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.

And yes, that anonymous quip has been quickly picked up by the right-wing blogosphere today. (To my ears, it sounds like it was coined by a Republican.)

But imprecise writing like the kind displayed in the Times invites all kinds of questions, such as, who is actually calling Blumenthal “Martha Coakley in pants”? Are they Democratic party leaders or just registered voters? Is that a put-down the Times reporter heard himself? Was it spoken off the record? Did the reporter read it somewhere? Or is it just something that's mysteriously floating through the air of the Nutmeg state? And if Democrats are calling Blumenthal that, why won't the Times simply identify them?

In the end, Times readers have no idea what the answers to these questions are. They're simply told that “some Democrats” are saying something mean about Blumenthal, and that the Times is more than happy to reprint it.

UPDATED: Note the Times' headline:

Rough Start for Big Name in Conn. Senate Race

But a “rough start” according to whom? The Times concedes Blumenthal is way ahead in the polls, so the newspaper doesn't point to any kind of negative voter reaction. And the article contains almost no detailed critiques that raise serious doubts about Blumenthal to date.

What's left? The Times reporter's opinion that Blumenthal's off to a “rough start.” That he didn't perform well at an early debate. That his answers are too long. And that “some Democrats” are mocking the candidate.