Glad you flagged this. I confess I think this is an excessively charitable view of this piece, and that the object of it is to raise innuendos about Scott's sexuality while at the same time attributing the prurient interest to imaginary Republicans. It reminds me of efforts by left wing interest groups, abetted by some Democrats, to suggest without saying so that Southern whites might be troubled by Clarence Thomas's being married to a white woman. Seems pretty despicable.
Why at this point after all we have seen would you believe that "tabloid stuff" doesn't belong in the Post. After all we have seen we can conclude that the newspaper has no standards if the purpose is serving Democratic propaganda. See e.g. Kavanaugh Brett.
Glad you flagged this. I confess I think this is an excessively charitable view of this piece, and that the object of it is to raise innuendos about Scott's sexuality while at the same time attributing the prurient interest to imaginary Republicans. It reminds me of efforts by left wing interest groups, abetted by some Democrats, to suggest without saying so that Southern whites might be troubled by Clarence Thomas's being married to a white woman. Seems pretty despicable.
Why at this point after all we have seen would you believe that "tabloid stuff" doesn't belong in the Post. After all we have seen we can conclude that the newspaper has no standards if the purpose is serving Democratic propaganda. See e.g. Kavanaugh Brett.
Yet Terri sure seems quiet about Susanna Gibson.
A pretty married Democrat selling sex tapes is more boring than a single Republican male?
If I was cynical, I might come to the conclusion it is about the party and not what is the better story.