Over at NRO's Media Blog, Stephen Spruiell observes that "the media's recent coverage of Jack Murtha's history of corruption stands in sharp contrast to the lack of such coverage back when the media was celebrating him as the leader of the anti-war left." Indeed,

it took an internecine power struggle among Democrats in order to get the mainstream media to remind the public of Murtha's involvement in Abscam. The NYT has a stake in the success of the Democrats' congressional majority, and its editorial board seems to understand that Murtha's election as majority leader would have been disastrous. So only now, when it serves their interests, do the members of that board report on Murtha's integrity, or lack thereof.

The NYT's behavior is scandalous, of course, but I'm still glad that the Times and other such institutions are starting to take some ownership (so to speak) of the Democratic party's conduct now that its conduct will make a real difference.

Posted by Paul at 09:16 PM  |    |