I see that Tim Graham on the Corner has already noted what has got to be the most biased news story I’ve seen in a while:

Roberts Resisted Women’s Rights
Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. consistently opposed legal and legislative attempts to strengthen women’s rights during his years as a legal adviser in the Reagan White House, disparaging what he called “the purported gender gap” and, at one point, questioning “whether encouraging homemakers to become lawyers contributes to the common good.”

The allegation that Roberts “resisted women’s rights” follows from his opposition to the “comparable worth” theory — a theory that is NOT the same as equal pay (Ed Whelan addressed the distinction at Bench Memos). Nowhere in the article do the reporters identify the distinction or even fully explain “comparable worth”, by which judges rather than employers could decide how much pay any worker should receive.

As you read further down in the Post story, it becomes evident that contrary to the way it is presented the lead, Roberts never seriously questioned “whether encouraging homemakers to become lawyers contributes to the common good.” As the context makes clear, Roberts was making a lawyer joke in a personal aside at the end of a memo about an inconsequential contest.

Carrie Lukas explained the “comparable worth” misinformation on NRO earlier this week.