Hold Clin­ton and Trump to the same stan­dard

Baltimore Sun - - FROM PAGE ONDE - Michael T. But­tner, Bel Air

I can not be­gin to com­mu­ni­cate how dis­ap­pointed I am in the Sun’s cov­er­age of the two huge po­lit­i­cal events of this past Fri­day. In Sun­day’s pa­per there was a half-page ar­ti­cle on Don­ald Trump’s ado­les­cent sex ban­ter­ing with Billy Bush, but I looked and looked for any cov­er­age of Hil­lary Clin­ton’s two-faced pre­sen­ta­tion — one pub­lic, the other pri­vate — of who she is and what she stands for.

What a dou­ble stan­dard. Mr. Trump is un­fit to be pres­i­dent be­cause he is un­like for­mer pres­i­dents John F. Kennedy and Bill Clin­ton, who ac­tu­ally did the kind of things Mr. Trump merely talks about do­ing.

Mr. Kennedy’s daily swims with his lat­est fe­male con­quest and Mr. Clin­ton’s sex­ual abuse of a White House in­tern get no rise from The Sun, nor do Ms. Clin­ton’s ver­bal at­tacks on these women. Where’s the moral out­rage?

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t want Mr. Trump as our pres­i­dent. I wish he would re­sign and let his vice pres­i­den­tial run­ning mate, Gov. Mike Pence, take his place.

But I also want the media to not be­come po­lit­i­cal hacks. If it is their judg­ment that Mr. Trump is un­fit for of­fice, they should also be hon­est in their cov­er­age of Ms. Clin­ton’s con­tin­u­ous lies. To lie to the Amer­i­can peo­ple and play them like a vi­olin is as se­ri­ous a moral flaw as hav­ing the sex­ual morals of a so­ci­ety where pornog­ra­phy is fine, but say­ing God’s name in school is not.

If your moral out­rage were real, we would see more ar­ti­cles on the im­ma­ture sex­ual stan­dards of our so­ci­ety. Yet we do not. Your be­hav­ior makes me won­der If you are re­ally a news or­ga­ni­za­tion or merely a pro­pa­ganda or­gan.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.