McCain Campaign v.s. NY Times

On Monday, September the 22nd, The New York Times ran an article highlighting the fact that McCain's campaign manager Rick Davis used to be president of an advocacy group pushing for looser regulation of the now-bankrupt mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  Today, The New York Times ran an article about the McCain camp's response (consisting of insults) to the yesterday's report.  McCain's senior campaign advisor Steve Schmidt, when talking to reporters, stated that the Times is no longer "by any standard a journalistic organization", claiming that the Times is "completely, totally, 150 percent in the tank for the Democratic candidate".  He went on to say that, "Everything that is read in the New York Times that attacks this campaign should be evaluated by the American people from that perspective."  Oh, really?  So when a reporter writes an article that shows a possible conflict of interests in a campaign group, that means that they're rooting for the other political party?  I thought that journalists try to uncover any such of conflicts, no matter which political party it pertains to, because that's their job.  But I'm not surprised that Schmidt's playing dirty by accusing the Times of partisan politics.  He's just trying to deflect the news of Davis's prior job, and by any means necessary - even insulting the integrity of a major national newspaper that, as Bill Keller, executive editor, said in response, "is committed to covering the candidates fully, fairly and aggressively".