From Ace:
This is an awful lot like the Mark Foley scandal. The story had been out there for years but, conveniently enough, it was only pushed into the MSM before an election.
In this case, the arrest report wasn’t leaked earlier when it would have given an Idaho GOP challenger time to suddenly whip up the makings of an insurgent campaign. Instead, it comes far too late for that, making it almost certain Craig will prevail in the primary for lack of a real challenger and then be defeated by a Democratic candidate.
How do these lucky breaks keep accruing to the Democrats?
The Roll Call reporter who broke the story himself questions the timing by wondering how it could be that this was never broken previously.
He could help answer that himself by divulging not the name but the partisan leaning and organizational association of who tipped him the story. Of if it was done anonymously, he ought to say so.
Dirty tricks like this aren’t all that dirty. It was Craig, after all, who colluded in this by trying to hide what could not be hidden, leaving himself at the mercy of partisan opponents as regards the timing of the inevitable leak.
And yet the media is awwwwwfully interested in the skullduggery aspects of stories like this when the GOP is behind them — or even whispered to be behind them. Indeed, the rule is generally this: If a leak hurts a Republican, the MSM focuses on the content of the leak. If a leak hurts a Democrat, the MSM plays down the actual information divulged by the leak and instead focuses on the skullduggery of how the leak came to happen.
Obviously, in both cases, the MSM is casting the GOP as the bad guy. A leak that hurts a Republican proves the Republican is the bad guy. A leak that hurts a Democrat also proves the Republican is the bad guy, because what’s he doing spreading malicious information?
The MSM now routinely “questions the timing” of even terror alerts but apparently has no interest in the well-timed outing of closeted gay Republicans engaging in highly questionable behavior. Even though this is the second time running that a Late Summer Surprise threatened to turn an election in the direction of Democrats.
Related: To both the Craig and Hillary! stories.
While the media floods the zone on Craig, they seem curiously uninterested in the details of Hillary’s shady fundraising from Peter Paul — despite the fact she might soon be under oath and required to answer questions about the matter in court.
Nope…no liberal media bias!
Liberal Media Bias? Banish the thought!
Comment by david drake — August 30, 2007 @ 8:54 pm
[...] Craig story three years old? [...]
Pingback by Blue Collar Republican » Blog Archive » Blog Burst - August 31, 2007 — August 31, 2007 @ 6:56 am
[...] he was right — The media held the Larry Craig scandal as an “Ace in the Hole” (turns out, for three years), until they needed to play it in order to distract from something else, such as HRC and her links [...]
Pingback by Hsu’s Your Diversionist Daddy? « Countenance Blog — August 31, 2007 @ 8:35 pm
The story was held back because the reporter did not consider the previous allegations/accusations to be solid. It wasn’t until Craig pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor that it was printed.
Liberal bias? Sounds to me more like responsible journalism. Don’t print rumors or unproved allegations like some gossip rag.
Comment by Joan — August 31, 2007 @ 9:18 pm
The story was held back because the reporter did not consider the previous allegations/accusations to be solid.
Uh-huh…with that much time elapsed. Sure. OK.
Liberal bias? Sounds to me more like responsible journalism.
I’ve never heard the expression “responsible journalism”. Seems like an oxymoron.
Was it “responsible journalism” when Dan Rather rushed to air a story with forged documents? Was it “responsible journalism” when NBC recently referenced a Sharpton parody site as an authentic source for actual Sharpton words? Was it “responsible journalism” when the MSM sat on the Foley story for over a year until the election cycle was in full swing? I could go on and on, but your naivité makes me chuckle. In each case of “responsible journalism”, it just so happens to be beneficial to liberals. But I’m sure that’s just a coinkidink.
Don’t print rumors or unproved allegations like some gossip rag.
Or like CBS News, or the NY Times. Same diff as “gossip rags”, I suppose.
Seriously…THREE years, and you’re defending that? Are you a journalist or a liberal (pardon the redundancy)?
Comment by Crush Liberalism — August 31, 2007 @ 10:10 pm
I wonder if would’ve been released earlier if the “shoes” belonged to Barney Frank?
Comment by tnjack — September 4, 2007 @ 12:24 pm