Does The Media Have A Taste For Prositution Scandals When The John Is Republican?

Eliot Spitzer. Democrat. Former New York Governor. Forced to resign due to blah, blah, blah.

Thank god this media favorite, public distracting story has died down. Sure, for two straight weeks, we just couldn't get enough. Clearly this country, in the midst of a war, presidential election, failing economy, dying housing market, etc., just couldn't get enough of sex scandals, especially when it involved a politician.

Right?

Anyone?

Right?

Well, maybe not so much. If it's a sitting New York governor, then, yeah, news of an admitted association with prostitution will fill enough newspapers to cover the earth ten times over.

But if it's just a no name U.S. Senator from Louisiana (or a State Department official) then there's nothing to see, nothing to read, nothing to print, everyone just needs to keep moving along.

Will such coverage change given the upcoming trial of Deborah Jean Palfrey (a.k.a., D.C. Madam)? Sure, the media has pretty much ignored this case and the fact that Louisiana Republican Senator David Vitter was implicated in the "D.C. Madam" prostitution ring as was Randall Tobias, former director of U.S. Foreign Assistance and administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development who has since resigne. Vitter's phone number was found amongst Palfrey's client list. Vitter, in reference to this indiscretion, admitted that he had committed a very serious sin.

But, wait, Vitter's still a sitting senator. He admitted to committing a sin. Why no investigation there? Why no resignation? He's legislating full on, taking his cue from Idahoian Larry Craig who, despite his guilty plea to soliciting sex in a men's bathroom, has refused to step down.

Anyway, I'm really digressing. The whole point of this post is to draw attention to an article on law.com about the pending trial of the D.C. Madam and the surprising fact that it mentions Vitter.

In the wake of (and compared to the) Spitzer fireworks and media blitz into this earth-shattering story, I'm curious to see if the media will pay any attention to Vitter's part in this trial as an alleged customer and reluctant witness and whether any admission on his part of illegal wrongdoing will garner the same pundit-driven, media outcry for his head (no, the other one).

My prediction is we won't hear a peep.

Vitter will get a pass. And who says the media doesn't have it's own favorites on the right?