# IOKIADDI (It's OK If A Democrat Does It)? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 19, 2013, 8:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622 "2013-08-19T08:47:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/41 "2013-08-19T21:21:08Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Yes, that’s why you’re hardly hearing anything about these Anthony Weiner and Bob Filner things. This use of “can be ignored no longer” is weasel wording. You heard barely anything on the evening news before Weiner admitted it was true (I think one evening story per network). Of course, once the truth is out then it “can be ignored no longer”. Both People and New York Times magazine ran fluff pieces on his family to rehab his image after he “sought treatment.” Now that they’ve caught him lying again they are finally through with the guy. San Diego media knew long before the Filner story broke what he was up to but did little to investigate the matter. Here’s a [mea culpa](http://scoopsandiego.com/columnists/doug_curlee/opinion-san-diego-media-failed-to-investigate-filner-sooner/article_6fca57f0-f87d-11e2-982e-001a4bcf6878.html) from one columnist in San Diego. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/42 "2013-08-19T21:36:46Z")
> [@yorick73](#): > > You heard barely anything on the evening news before Weiner admitted it was true (I think one evening story per network). And that somehow counts as barely covering it to you? One story per evening newscast per network? The sexting was news, his lie about it was news, and then his admission and resignation were news. It was covered continuously. > [@](#): > > Now that they’ve caught him lying again they are finally through with the guy. They caught him lying and they’re through with him, but you can tell their hearts aren’t in it. Or something. > [@](#): > > San Diego media knew long before the Filner story broke what he was up to but did little to investigate the matter. The column says nothing of the kind. It says they felt Filner was a jerk to his staff. > [@](#): > > I’ve covered Bob Filner off and on since he was elected to the San Diego Unified School District Board in 1979. From the beginning, most of us saw how arrogant Filner was and is, how abusive he could be to his own staff members, how he felt elective office entitled him to be all those things and more. > > We all saw that in Filner, and yet we did nothing about it. Filner was often a topic of conversation among us when we gathered at news conferences or when we would gather at the various watering holes many of us frequented together when off work. > > The near universal opinion among us was, “Can you believe this guy? Why does he get away with acting like that?” Then another round of drinks would appear, and talk went on to other things. The columnist speculates that they would have found out about Filner’s harassment if they’d investigated, but that’s not necessarily true. Type A jerks are common in politics, so they may not stand out that much. And it sounds like most of Filner’s awful behavior is from the last couple of years, particularly following his second divorce. ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_fun_ball/32/17664_2.png) [@Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Fun_Ball)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/43 "2013-08-19T21:42:03Z")
**yorick73** : Bullshit, you heard a lot more about Weiner than you did about Mark Sanford Appalachian adventure. It’s hard to get metrics on this, but try going to Google Trends and looking for news searches on Weiner and Sanford and you will see that Weiner had twice as many. This indicates it had either twice the searches or twice the click-through from Google News. Either way, I am still not buying what you are selling. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/44 "2013-08-19T21:43:27Z")
And then there’s David Vitter. ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/45 "2013-08-19T21:56:32Z")
> [@L. G. Butts](#): > > Examples of ignored Dem scandals? > > I disagree with your post in general, but I am willing to keep an open mind. For example, Todd Akin’s comments were really about Todd Akin, not about the Republican party. The Tea Party folks who did not say dumb things about rape did fine. Still, I see little difference between claiming Democrats are gun grabbing treasonous socialists that want to raise your taxes and claiming Republicans are fundamentalist misogynists that want to legislate who you can marry and what you can do in your bedroom. Both parties try to create a caricature of their opponents to run against, and sometime those opponents help in you in this regard as they did with Akin, Mourdock, and Rivard. Finally, the whole war on women thing was never about Akin or Mourdock, it was about the huge number of anti-abortion laws that are being passed nationwide and the attempts to defund planned parenthood. Trying to conflate the two is pretty much bullshit. Bill Clinton’s affair was known by Newsweek for some time before the story broke but they sat on it…until Matt Drudge broke it. John Edwards was traveling with his mistress on the campaign trail yet not a single reporter could figure that out. The Enquirer broke the story about an affair and a love child yet the media ignored it. It wasn’t until the Enquirer caught Edwards at Hunter’s hotel that the media finally caught on to the story. See my link above about local media and Filner. As for the war on women meme and akin, see below: [http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-08-20/opinions/35493942\_1\_akin-medicaid-funds-end-pregnancies](http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-08-20/opinions/35493942_1_akin-medicaid-funds-end-pregnancies) > **[Akin’s ‘legitimate rape’ comments trouble for GOP | CNN Politics](https://www.cnn.com/2012/08/20/politics/akin-political-fallout)** > > Republicans raced to denounce Missouri Rep. Todd Akin’s controversial comments how on rape victim’s bodies prevent unwanted pregnancies. > [@L. G. Butts](#): > > Still, let’s talk about Dem’s peccadilloes being considered a “personal failing” while Republicans don’t get the same treatment. Do you mean like disgraced congressman Anthony Weiner (D) (sexting)? Disgraced Governor Mark Sanford (D) (adultery)? Disgraced presidential candidate Newt Gingrich (D) (multiple acts of infidelity!)? Disgraced Senator David Vitter (D) (Prostitution)? > > Oh wait, it just occured to me that Sanford, Gingrich, and Vitter are Republicans that were forgiven for their various sex scandals while it remains to be seen if Weiner, the only Democrat, will be. We could talk about Edwards (D- the scumbag) and other politicians of either stripe that never made a comeback, but I think you are full of shit when you say Democrats are given a free pass and Republicans are not. Let’s get some examples, surely you have some. Weiner was forgiven…until he lied again. Now the press is as angry as a woman scorned. In case you’ve forgotten, when the Vitter story broke the media was talking “Conservative Crisis”. The Mark Sanford story was on the news every night for quite a while. Note that I did not say Democrats are given a free pass. The media ususally just needs to dragged kicking and screaming to the story. Once it breaks then everyone reports on it. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/46 "2013-08-19T21:58:59Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > No, I don’t. I remember I remember Hillary’s “right wing conspiracy,” I remember Christine O’Donnell’s “I am not a witch,” I remember Willie Horton, I remember John McCain’s “black” baby… but a John McCain affair? Just not ringing a bell. Apparently there was nothing to the story, so it didn’t make bigger waves. But the NYT did their best. See: [John McCain lobbyist controversy - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain_lobbyist_controversy) ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/47 "2013-08-19T22:02:30Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > And that somehow counts as barely covering it to you? One story per evening newscast per network? The sexting was news, his lie about it was news, and then his admission and resignation were news. It was covered continuously. Each network ran exactly one evening news story before he admitted that he did send those pictures. That’s wall to wall coverage for you? ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/48 "2013-08-19T22:15:10Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > And then there’s David Vitter. Vitter managed to get out ahead of his scandal. I’m not sure if that helped him or not. I’m actually surprised that he still has a career in politics and, quite frankly, I wish he didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/49 "2013-08-19T22:15:42Z")
Yet another example of “working the refs.” Note to all Pubs: “working the refs” = “cheating.” ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/50 "2013-08-19T22:20:20Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Apparently there was nothing to the story, so it didn’t make bigger waves. But the NYT did their best. > > See: [John McCain lobbyist controversy - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain_lobbyist_controversy) I’m looking at the dates of the articles cited on that Wikipedia page, and it looks like it was more or less a four-day story. That’s not incredibly powerful evidence of the press running amok. That’s roughly the same amount of press time as reporters got when they complained that they couldn’t take pictures of Obama and Tiger Woods playing golf together earlier this year. ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/51 "2013-08-19T22:22:06Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > The column says nothing of the kind. It says they felt Filner was a jerk to his staff. > > The columnist speculates that they would have found out about Filner’s harassment if they’d investigated, but that’s not necessarily true. Type A jerks are common in politics, so they may not stand out that much. And it sounds like most of Filner’s awful behavior is from the last couple of years, particularly following his second divorce. Read a little closer: > [@](#): > > But we never asked those questions on air or in print. We never really tried to find out what was behind the near-incessant rumors that always floated around Filner. We never tried to confirm any of those rumors, or, if we did, we quickly gave up when presented with the denials, or refusals to talk about it. > [@](#): > > We watch ever more highly credible women coming forward to tell their stories of encounters with Filner, and we should all be thinking, “I should have done that story. I should have asked, or demanded, the support to go after that story.” What do you think he is referring to? ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/52 "2013-08-19T22:28:20Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I’m looking at the dates of the articles cited on that Wikipedia page, and it looks like it was more or less a four-day story. That’s not incredibly powerful evidence of the press running amok. That’s roughly the same amount of press time as reporters got when they complained that they couldn’t take pictures of Obama and Tiger Woods playing golf together earlier this year. The point is that the NYT decided to run with this story with no evidence at all. Of course there was nothing to the story but the Times printed it anyway. Like I said…even a whiff of scandal and they are printing stories about it. The Edwards affair was known for months but nobody in the mainstream media bothered to look into the story until the Enquirer published irrefutable evidence. [Here’s](http://townhall.com/columnists/byronyork/2010/02/08/why_the_media_ignored_a_scandal/page/full) an OpEd on the media’s coverage of the Edwards scandal. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/53 "2013-08-19T22:33:10Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > The media is strongly pro-Republican. Really? You think the Washington Post, the New York Times, the Chicago Tribune, CNN, and MSNBC are “strongly pro-Republican”? That’s absurd and I call bullshit. Please provide a cite to back up such a ludicrous claim. FTR, I’m not claiming there’s some sort of liberal media hegemony but to claim that the media is “strongly pro-Republican” is aggressively in denial of reality. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/54 "2013-08-19T22:34:59Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I’m looking at the dates of the articles cited on that Wikipedia page, and it looks like it was more or less a four-day story. That’s not incredibly powerful evidence of the press running amok. That’s roughly the same amount of press time as reporters got when they complained that they couldn’t take pictures of Obama and Tiger Woods playing golf together earlier this year. Running amok is not the claim being discussed. Question is if major MSM outlets run such poorly sourced stories about Democrats. Another example of this would be the GWB National Guard documents story. Show comparable high impact stories about Democrats/liberals by major media outlets which were based on so little and turned out to have so little basis, and you’re making a valid comparison. But harping about Filner and Weiner et al don’t detract from Yorick’s point. [I happen to agree with Yorick about this and about the broader point as well, but I’m not sure I’m up for a full debate about it considering the subjectivity of the matter and the makeup of the board. My intention here was just to clarify the specific point being made.] ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_fun_ball/32/17664_2.png) [@Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Fun_Ball)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/55 "2013-08-19T22:37:46Z")
Meh. I think it is bullshit and nothing you ( **yorrick73** , alas) have said has convinced me. Politics these days is ugly and dirty with each side trying to paint the other as evil, without morals, incompetent, and downright un-American. Whether we are talking about the socialists or the plutocrats, making the case that one side is getting it worse or giving it worse needs some pretty hefty evidence and you have not provided it IMHO. In my opinion President Bush always got a free pass on many of his programs. Warrantless wiretapping, extraordinary rendition, weapons of mass destruction, yellowcake, using RNC email addresses, the list went on and on. And that does not even include shit like the huge increase in domestic spending with Medicare Part D, the bank bailout (TARP), and other programs. But I guess IOKIARDI, right? Now we have President Obama who is just as bad and just as unaccountable with his continuation of the NSA programs, drone strikes, Fast and Furious, prosecution of whistle blowers, etc… From where I stand they all seem to get a pass on the important stuff, but if any kind of salacious detail that will sell papers comes up, they all get nailed to the wall. YMMV. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/56 "2013-08-19T22:48:44Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > What did he lie about? He’s probably talking about Kerry infamous “Christmas in Cambodia” story where he claimed he heard Nixon’s Christmas speech in 1968 in which Nixon denied the US was in Vietnam and claimed that he was nearly shot to death by some drunken South Vietnamese soldiers celebrating Christmas. Of course Nixon wasn’t in the White House then and Buddhist soldiers wouldn’t be celebrating Christmas. However, I think “lie” is too strong. More like misremembered/confabulation. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/57 "2013-08-19T23:01:52Z")
> [@yorick73](#): > > Read a little closer: And then keep reading close until you’re reading stuff that isn’t even there. > [@Columnist](#): > > But we never asked those questions on air or in print. We never really tried to find out what was behind the near-incessant rumors that always floated around Filner. We never tried to confirm any of those rumors, or, if we did, we quickly gave up when presented with the denials, or refusals to talk about it. What I’m reading here is that the columnist feels bad he never pursued the story and he’s assuming his colleagues also failed to look into it. I don’t know that that’s the case, and I don’t know if he does either. It reads as a very self-serving apology. But the bigger issue here is that you presented this as deliberate inaction by the press, and there isn’t a word in the story to support that. > [@yorick73](#): > > San Diego media knew long before the Filner story broke what he was up to but did little to investigate the matter. You said they knew what was going on. The columnist says there were rumors (he’s vague about what was rumored) and they failed to look into them. > [@yorick73](#): > > Each network ran exactly one evening news story before he admitted that he did send those pictures. That’s wall to wall coverage for you? I wouldn’t call it wall to wall coverage, but you’re the one saying the story was buried. By way of reference, about a week and a half passed between the initial story and when Weiner admitted he’d sent the texts. > [@yorick73](#): > > Vitter managed to get out ahead of his scandal. I’m not sure if that helped him or not. I’m actually surprised that he still has a career in politics and, quite frankly, I wish he didn’t. You’re not sure it helped him? He was identified doing something illegal and embarrassing and he remains in the Senate. The liberal media somehow failed to hound him out of office like it did with the liberals in these stories. The Eliot Spitzer story, by the way, was broken by the New York Times. This also fails to address the fact that you’re choosing a selective definition: by insisting that the press ignores these things until it can’t ignore them anymore, you get to say both that they’re ignoring the story and then ignoring if the stories get wall to wall coverage. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/58 "2013-08-19T23:28:41Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Show comparable high impact stories about Democrats/liberals by major media outlets which were based on so little and turned out to have so little basis, and you’re making a valid comparison. I’m not sure the McCain story was “high impact,” but the Washington Post, NBC, and CBS did multiple stories on Senator Bob Menendez visiting underage prostitutes. But the story was a total fabrication, with someone paying teenagers to tell lies to reporters. The right wing media, OTOH, published relentlessly on the story. I think that’s many times more egregious than the McCain story. ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/59 "2013-08-19T23:37:06Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > And then keep reading close until you’re reading stuff that isn’t even there. > > What I’m reading here is that the columnist feels bad he never pursued the story and he’s assuming his colleagues also failed to look into it. I don’t know that that’s the case, and I don’t know if he does either. It reads as a very self-serving apology. But the bigger issue here is that you presented this as deliberate inaction by the press, and there isn’t a word in the story to support that. > > You said they knew what was going on. The columnist says there were rumors (he’s vague about what was rumored) and they failed to look into them. How can you call it anything but deliberate inaction. The columnist does everything but use ther words deliberate inaction. Reporters hear things, like rumors, and follow leads to see if a story is there. Which one of us is using weasel words? > [@Marley23](#): > > I wouldn’t call it wall to wall coverage, but you’re the one saying the story was buried. By way of reference, about a week and a half passed between the initial story and when Weiner admitted he’d sent the texts. One story per network in a week and a half about a sexting scandal involving a sitting Congressman. They certainly weren’t investigating the story…you know, what reporters are supposed to do. Oh, they started investigating Breitbart instead. The mainstream media, after rehabbing Weiner’s image in People and NYT Mag, _again_ missed the story that he continued sexting. They guy who wrote the NYT Mag story said [it never occured to him to actually ask Weiner if he’d stopped sexting](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2013/07/29/new-york-times-magazine-writer-assumed-weiners-naughtiness-had-stopped/) > [@Marley23](#): > > You’re not sure it helped him? He was identified doing something illegal and embarrassing and he remains in the Senate. The liberal media somehow failed to hound him out of office like it did with the liberals in these stories. The Eliot Spitzer story, by the way, was broken by the New York Times. I said I wasn’t sure if getting out in front of the story is what helped him. As for Spitzer there was a federal investigation into the prostitution ring. It’s not like the NYT found out about his activities on their own. Or, if they did, they sat on the story until he got caught. In fact, the story ran after Spitzer broke the news to his staff. Some scoop! ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622/60 "2013-08-19T23:43:08Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > the Washington Post, NBC, and CBS did multiple stories on Senator Bob Menendez visiting underage prostitutes. Can you cite this claim? I don’t recall seeing anything in the MSM until the story became “Menendez Smeared by Fake Story” (& the [Wiki](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Menendez) description of the story and cites contained therein seems to back that up), and Drudge - who pushed the story hard - claimed the MSM was ignoring it. If my impression is correct, then it’s an example of the exact opposite - that the MSM held to a very high standard when contemplating publishing damaging stories about Democrats/liberals, and contrasts sharply with the NYT and CBS standards for McCain & Bush. I’m not asserting that your claim is incorrect, but I wonder if you have a cite for it, e.g. in the form of links to stories from these sources. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iokiaddi-its-ok-if-a-democrat-does-it/666622.md?page=4)