I have already made clear my feelings that Republicans should not be too happy about Spitzer's downfall when our own house is far from clean. However, I think it is fair to assess the great disparity in how the media covers Republican scandals versus Democrat scandals.

Fortunately the good folks over at Newsbusters have already done the heavy lifting for me. They conclude:

An examination of the fifteen ABC, CBS and NBC morning and evening news shows through Wednesday night finds Spitzer was called a Democrat just 20% of the time — twice on CBS, once on ABC, and never on NBC.
. . .
[T]he bottom line is that in the early days of their scandals, Vitter and Craig were labeled as Republicans on every broadcast news program — 100% — that mentioned their wrongdoing. For Democrat Spitzer, four out of five news programs (80%) have skipped his label. On NBC’s Today and Nightly News through Wednesday night, reporters never once acknowledged that Spitzer was a Democrat.

I have no problem acknowledging the fact that Vitter and Craig are Republicans. As elected figures, they should be expected to be identified by their Party. What I do have a problem with is the great lengths the media goes to in order to hide or bury the Party affiliation of scandal-ridden Democrats.

This is not paranoia or a conspiracy theory. As Newsbusters' study shows, it is borne out by the facts and it is part of the reason why so many Americans no longer trust the information provided by the mainstream media.

Earlier today, WaPo columnist Marc Fisher posted a story about Virginia's new fundraising...sorry...abusive driver fees. Fisher took AG Bob McDonnell to task for a bit of self-dealing. But the ever-vigilant McDonnel staff caught Fisher's error and he re-wrote the post to reflect reality...that McDonnell doesn't have any personal, financial interest in the collection of the abusive driver fees.

Needless to say, the original Fisher column gave Lowell at Raising Kaine a juicy opportunity to bash McDonnell. And, I'm sure, laughed at his own jokes throughout the process.

Now that Fisher has corrected his post (and still kept his snark intact), will Lowell do likewise? Or would that just muddle the narrative?

And the comments to Fisher's post, by the way, are worth reading. Seems the revolt against higher ticket fees may not be as wide or deep as the digital crowd thinks it is (or ought to be).

Update...

Lowell has since amended his post to reflect the change in Fisher's article. While this is refreshing to see, the rest of the post -- including the delightfully misleading headline, remain intact.