I love the Washington Monthly’s blog (Political Animal). I consider it required reading, and I think Steven Benen does some great reporting. Still, I marvel that a guy who has been following politics so long seems constantly mystified at the fact that neither the press nor politicians behave rationally; that politicians so often say things that are demonstrably untrue and the press so often covers stories with a mixture of ignorance and bias. Here’s the latest example:
I continue to marvel at this scandal. Here we have John Ensign, a “family values” conservative Republican, who had an extra-marital sexual relationship with his friend’s wife, while condemning others’ moral failings. Ensign’s parents offered to pay hush-money. He ignored ethics laws and tried to use his office to arrange lobbying jobs for his mistress’ husband. The likelihood of Ensign being indicted seems fairly high.
And yet, there’s no media frenzy. No reporters staked out in front of Ensign’s home. No op-eds speculating about the need for Ensign to resign in disgrace. Instead, the media’s fascinated with Charlie Rangel.
Rangel is facing a probe from the House ethics committee, while Ensign is under scrutiny from the FBI.
Why would Rangel “tarnish his whole party” in an election year, while Ensign’s sex-ethics-corruption scandal be deemed irrelevant to the Republican Party?
The answer to Benen’s question is really quite simple. Rangel is black. Rangel is a Democrat. Or, we might express it as follows: there is an unwritten, but rigidly observed rule: It’s (especially hypocrisy) okay if you’re a Republican.
Post a Comment