As per my last post, it’s too early to tell whether or not the Spitzer scandal will hurt Ms. Hillary.
Whether or not it hurts that Democrat of questionable ethics, it does represent a tremendous boon to the GOP, provided, that is, they don’t blow it. While numerous Democrats have had their own scandals since Bill Clinton lied about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky to a federal grand jury ten years ago, that was the last Democratic scandal to attract major sustained media attention. Until today.
Stories about improprieties involving such Democrats as West Virginia’s Alan Mollohan, Louisiana’s William Jefferson, even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Leader Harry Reid did not attract as much sustained media attention as did stories involving Republican in similar situations.
If Tony Rezko had been a leading fundraiser for a Republican presidential contender, his trial would rival the tribulations of Britney Spears as a subject for tabloid television.
Do you think the media would have paid more attention if an aide to a Republican governor were arrested for having sex with a teenage boy? They all but ignored when an aide to the Democratic governor of Massachusetts was arrested for such activity.*
Spitzer’s is the first Democratic scandal to attract national media attention. It should serve as a reminder that corruption is not just a Republican problem.
It’s too much to hope, however, that the media will look into John Murtha’s pay-to-play fundraiser, where lobbyists contribute to the Pennsylvania Democrat’s
slush fund campaign coffers so that could press this Pelosi ally to sponsor earmarks for the companies they represent.
Given the sex and hypocrisy (the New York Democrat had prosecuted a prostitution ring) angle of the Spitzer story, the media simply can’t ignore it. And if the GOP doesn’t overplay its hand, it may well help the GOP, by reminding voters that Republicans do not have a monopoly on corruption.
Until today, the only thing which distinguished the partyies’ scandals was the Democrats’ success is keeping theirs off the front page.
*Given that this guy married another man, you’d think the gay organizations, given their support for “marriage equality,” would have denounced his shenanigans as making a mockery of marriage in general and his union in particular. That is perhaps fodder for another post.