I agree with most of what has been posted. I quibble with a few things.
The thing about requiring titles on all breeding stock isn't so much what it says about the dog, it is what it says about the owner. Breeders who title their breeding stock (in something, whether it is obedience, field, conformation, agility or tracking or whatever) have demonstrated a willingness to subject their dogs and their breeding program and the results to outside scrutiny. They aren't just telling puppy buyers "I know what is best," they are proving that their dogs can do something other than produce puppies and, more than that, they are demonstrating their willingness to do stuff with their dogs.
I disagree that responsible breeders don't (ever) advertise in the newspaper or on the internet. As long as responsible breeders screen prospective puppy buyers adequately, it doesn't matter where the buyers come from. I also disagree with the implication that the ONLY responsible puppy buyers are people who want to wait a year or more (responsible breeders don't breed very often, after all) on a waiting list. It can happen that way, but a responsible breeder and a responsible puppy buyer can come together at any time during the process, and there is nothing wrong with that. While good breeders typically have people interested in the litter before it is whelped, many of these highly selective puppy buyers are also highly selective about what they get--they likely want a particular gender, maybe show quality, very likely particular temperament, and sometimes even a particular color or markings. If a breeder has a bunch of puppy buyers lined up for pushy, bold male show quality puppies, and she has a litter of quiet, easygoing, female, pet quality puppies, that doesn't necessarily mean she did anything wrong.
Health screens, of course, are non-negotiable. Check that OFA website for the names of the sire and dam and relatives before you ever even go look at a litter!