"Yesterday, for example, we learned that if you are a scandal-ridden CEO who happens to also be a Republican, partisan affiliation will become part of the story.
We also learned that if you are a crooked financier who has bilked his clients out of billions, your donations to Democrats is not, however, "newsworthy".
Advertisement
Here in Dallas, WFAA-TV reported on Republicans deciding on whether or not to keep the money donated to them by Mr. Stanford. However, there was no mention at all of the Democrats receiving funds. Someone who doesn't pay a great deal of attention would automatically assume this is just a Republican Scandal. However, the numbers don't add up. When you look at Congressional Quarterly's list of donations, you find some pretty interesting facts:
- Of the $835,550 in donations made, a whopping 84% or $703,500 went to Democrats.The question here is, why the bias reporting locally from a television station? As Matt points out, if a if you are a scandal-ridden CEO who happens to also be a Republican, partisan affiliation will become part of the story...but if your a Democrat, it's not "newsworthy." Sadly, this is the news media culture of today.
- Of the 60 individual donations...44 went to Democrats.
PS For all of you that will claim I am just trying to grasp at a straw, I think Chris Fields makes a good point - if the liberals can do, we can't?
UPDATE: Just received a phone call from
Recommended
Advertisement
"Republican Rep. Pete Sessions of Dallas was one of Stanford's favorites; he has contributed more than $4,000 since 1989."It's not to nit pick, just to highlight there was a reference that Mr. Schechter overlooked. It was a very graciouos call back and certainly unexpected, and it should be positively recognized.
However, that will not make the news and the perception will remain that this was a GOP scandal. I am hoping I am wrong, and we'll see another story on the overall problem on the left side of the aisle. We'll see...
Join the conversation as a VIP Member