edwards gets a pass from the msm

.

i mean, talk about a story--here we have a prominent senator and two-time presidential candidate

• whose family-man image has been a cornerstone of his every campaign;
• who has [allegedly] conducted a long-term clandestine affair resulting in a child with a woman his campaign hired and then excessively compensated for minimal services rendered; and
  
• who, when challenged last year, not only denied the affair but, in concert with various of his minions, [allegedly] orchestrated an elaborate cover-up of same, going so far as to set up one of his (married) underlings as the self-confessed father of the baby;
  

all while his wife is at home battling deadly cancer.

and it all came to a head the other night in los angeles at the beverly hilton on the corner of wilshire and santa monica boulevards, where the national enquirer--which had first broken the story a year ago and has steadfastly pursued it ever since--cornered the good senator like a rat in a trap after a[n alleged] late-night rendezvous with his [alleged] mistress and [alleged] new baby.

this should be big news, right?

well, apparently not if you're the new york times, the los angeles times, the washington post, the three major networks, cnn, time or newsweek--none of them are touching the story.

why? ostensibly, because it came from a "questionable" news source--you know, one of those tabloids who get a tip, doggedly follow it up, work their sources, send reporters out in the field and nail it down. in other words, the kind of thing that newspapers used to do but seem to be above now (and perhaps a major reason why they're all swimming in red ink while the enquirer's thriving, but i digress).

or then again, could it possibly be a little of that famous liberal bias that they so vociferously deny exists? especially, for instance, when you consider the innuendo-filled (but factually light--especially compared to this) smear piece the new york times ran earlier this year on mccain and that lobbyist he was supposedly fucking.

either way, it's pissing me off--this is a major news story about a major hypocrite who stands to become a major player in the next administration, and it needs a full, public airing.

[disclaimer: while i have great sympathy for senator edwards' wife (who seems to be a class act), i cannot nor nor have i ever been able to abide this pompous, fake-folksy, blow-dried ambulance-chasing socialist phony; therefore, my earnest desire to see this story get the full airing it deserves probably has as much to do with my personal distaste for its subject as with any love i might have for the truth.]