And the Fake Moral Outrage from the Right...er...Media.
By Brad Friedman on 2/14/2005, 4:34pm PT  

No, it's not Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute (Akroyd on SNL, circa 1979) but it might as well be.

The bloggers continue to break the news. And the news media continues to fault them for it. Feeling appropriately endangered much, boys?

AmericaBLOG gets the goods (and unfortunate --- no, really unfortunate --- naked pictures) on Gannon/Guckert's days as a gay male prostitute.

RAW STORY reports on WH press spokesman, Scott McClellan's possible gaiety and whether he may have come across Gannon/Guckert during alleged trips to gay bars in Austin. (Apologies for the almost-accidental disturbing turn of phrase there).

And the corporate media turns apoplectic as they begin to realize that we're doing the job they ain't. NY Times lashes out today and CNN's Judy Woodruff devoted the bulk of her Inside Politics hour this afternoon to us terrible bloggers.

The most appalling part of it all, ironically on a day where we had to hold CNN's feet to the fire for claiming an identical photo was a nuclear plant in both Iran and North Korea, is the MSM's new line that bloggers in the Gannon/Guckert story crossed the line by going into his private life.

To which we'd respond, as Aravosis has pointed out on several occassions, that one would think it somewhat troubling that a prostitute (gay or straight, former or current) used a fake name in the White House press briefing room and received, apparently, classified CIA briefings from the Administration. That's a legal issue. Not a personal one. We'll even leave the "moral" issue out of it for the moment.

Secondly, we note that it's only when leftie bloggers report on such things that it becomes an issue at all. In this case, the notion of "crossing the personal line" recently and continuingly floated by WaPo's Howard Kurtz and other soon-to-be dinosaurs is, pardon us, nothing but bullshit.

Setting aside the legal questions mentioned above, the assertion is being made that it's somehow inappropriate to question the sexuality of those in the administration, and/or Republican party in general, and/or their whores (in this case literally) in the media who have attempted to forward specifically anti-gay laws and constitutional amendments. Isn't it appropriate to point out when such people are saying one thing (supporting anti-gay laws) and doing another (being gay)?

So where was the collective fake moral outrage from the media when the internet (or the MSM themselves) reported for example that Al Gore was supporting public education, yet --- outrageous! --- in his private life he was sending his children to private schools?!

Did Howard Kurtz declare his self-righteous and self-serving indignation against the rightwing media that reported on that non-story at the time?

Of course not.

Lines are crossed by lefties only. While the wingnuts draw those lines where ever they damn well please (where it suits their political agenda, in other words).

And the so-called "liberal" media buys it. Hook, line and sinker. What a world.

Looks like we're on our own here, folks.