I see that Tom Bevan of Real Clear Politics thinks there's a double standard being applied to recent allegations by Michele Bachmann and Harry Reid. Yes, the percentage of prominent Republicans who have denounced what Bachmann said is somewhat higher than the percentage of Democrats who've denounced Reid.
But here's the difference: Bachmann is suggestion that a top aide to America's secretary of state is guilty of treason. She's hinting that someone high up in the government is guilty of a capital crime. I would hope that most Republicans would have a few shreds of honor left and would seek to rebut her scurrilous charges. By contrast, Reid is saying that Mitt Romney is a clever rich guy who found a way not to pay income taxes for a decade. He isn't even saying that Romney did anything illegal. (Do you think it would be particularly difficult for a person of Romney's wealth to dodge taxes for ten years and do so completely on the up-and-up? I think it would be a piece of cake.) There's a difference between the moral obligation to denounce unsubstantiated allegations of treason and the obligation to denounce allegations of behavior that's just politically embarrassing.
Bevan tells us this:
Only one prominent Republican, Newt Gingrich, defended Bachmann, arguing that she and her colleagues were asking legitimate questions of the U.S. government.Um, that's true if you don't consider Eric Cantor a "prominent Republican," or Rush Limbaugh, or John Bolton, who's a top adviser to Mitt Romney. That's true if you don't consider the signers of this letter, including former Director of Central Intelligence R. James Woolsey, to be "prominent Republicans." Sorry, Tom, get your facts straight before you get on your high horse.
