Or at least it tries to.

The newspaper's Clinton article today is relatively straight-forward report on how Clinton is pitching in to help get Democrats, and especially Barack Obama, elected in November. It details the fundraisers she'll host.

But here's the odd part, with emphasis added:

Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton has raised more than $8 million for former rival Barack Obama's presidential campaign since July and plans to barnstorm the country for even more cash, as the New York senator works to show she is aggressively helping the candidate who cut short her White House bid.

USA Today seems to suggest that Clinton isn't actually working aggressively to help Obama. She's working to show that she is helping Obama.

See the difference between the two? And see why why it's really not USA Today's place, especially since it provides no evidence to back it up, to imply Clinton's campaign work is just for show and she's simply trying to create the perception that she's helping, rather than, y'know, actually helping.

In other words, why didn't USA Today just write this:

Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton has raised more than $8 million for former rival Barack Obama's presidential campaign since July and plans to barnstorm the country for even more cash, as the New York senator works aggressively to help the candidate who cut short her White House bid.