Mickey Kaus says people like JR, and the Edwards sycophants over at Cone's reasons for their "no coverage" lattitude regarding the Edwards scandal don't hold up under scrutiny.
"The only legitimate reason not to cover this scandal, it seems to me, is simple sympathy for Elizabeth Edwards--and I've gotten enough emails from anguished and angry members of the MSM to conclude, with Estrich, that it's the prime reason for the MSM blackout. True, I also suspect that if Mrs. Edwards were a conservative Republican, or even an unbeloved Democrat, the MSM might somehow find a way to overcome this compassionate sentiment."
However, it's pretty clear that the legitimate reasons FOR covering this story outweigh the sole weak legitimate reason for NOT covering the whole thing.
In JR's case, his reasoning that he "didn't have anything from a credible source" on the story is just not true.
We won't even begin to discuss the N&R's editorial stance on this subject, will we?