We are against it. But then, we aren’t liberal reporters. If we were, we would need more information before we could take a position.
At Townhall, Guy Benson writes an open letter to reporter John McArdle of Congressional Quarterly:
We’ve never met, so allow me to introduce myself. I’m the Political Editor over at a small right-leaning outfit called Townhall.com. Anyway, I noticed that earlier today, you posted an item on your political blog that engages in speculation about the sealed divorce records of a Republican candidate running in GA-08’s very close House election:
Scott’s six-year old divorce records have become a subject of heightened interest in the 8th district contest ever since a Democratic activist filed a motion earlier this month asking that they be unsealed. A state Superior Court Judge has scheduled a hearing on the motion for the week before Election Day.
In an interview Thursday afternoon with Roll Call, [Democrat Jim] Marshall said that now that the divorce issue has come up, the public should have a right to know what’s in the sealed documents
“I’ve heard consistent allegations of what’s in there and it’s not pretty stuff,” Marshall said. “There are things that go on in marriages that can shed light on the character of the individual.”
Since you’ve apparently taken such a keen interest in one Congressional candidate’s possibly messy divorce, I thought I’d tip you off about another Congressional candidate’s documented messy divorce. In Ohio’s sixth Congressional District, recently uncovered court documents reveal that Rep. Charlie Wilson, a
Democrat[Party Affiliation Redacted], repeatedly abused his ex-wife during their 27-year marriage. I know that you’re aware of this race, John, because you wrote about it last week. Yet, like virtually all of your colleagues in the mainstream media, you’ve managed to overlook this story–which broke two days ago.
What’s really interesting about the spousal abuse allegations against Congressman Wilson, John, is that they’re fully chronicled in unsealed files–and all the documentation you’d need to verify this possibly game-changing development is conveniently provided by the source that originally reported the story.
Benson is right; the liberal media have averted their eyes from the Charlie Wilson affair. The headline of this New York Times story explains why: “For Democrats, Even ‘Safe’ Seats Are Shaky.”
Republicans are expanding the battle for the House into districts that Democrats had once considered relatively safe, while Democrats began a strategy of triage on Monday to fortify candidates who they believe stand the best chance of survival. …
For months, Bill Johnson, the Republican challenger to Mr. [Charlie] Wilson, has drawn little notice and has struggled to raise money. But last week, things began to change.
He was invited to be the guest speaker at a weekly meeting of conservative leaders in Washington that is organized by Grover Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform. Then he appeared on G. Gordon Liddy’s radio show, which he said helped his fund-raising efforts, as did an endorsement from Sarah Palin.
The last thing liberal reporters want to do is report news that increases the likelihood that an upstart Republican might defeat a formerly “safe” Democrat. The rumor-mongering that liberal reporters are engaged in, in connection with the Republican candidate whom Guy Benson refers to, reminds me of the Minneapolis Star Tribune’s effort to bury the candidacy of Republican Alan Fine, who opposed Keith Ellison for what was then an open seat in 2006. Whether newspapers want to publish illegally leaked court files or, for that matter, publicly available court records, depends entirely on whose political party is being gored.
Here in Minnesota, we are experiencing a remarkable instance of how discreet liberals can be when it comes to a candidate’s personal life. Mark Dayton is running for Governor of this state, and his history of mental illness and substance abuse is hiding in plain sight–he has freely acknowledged these problems to almost-complete strangers, yet Minnesota’s reporters and editors have carefully avoided confusing the voters with information that might not reflect well on a Democrat. Somehow one senses a pattern here.