There is an interesting article on NPR.com today regarding the recent David Wu scandal. If you are not a news junky, then you might not have heard this story. Wu allegedly had sexual relations with the teenage daughter of one of his donors.
If this was Cumberland County, you would never hear the story, as the party would sweep it under the carpet. In the wake of the Weiner scandal, national Democrats are swinging a bit far to the right, shall we say? They are demanding resignation based on accusations, sans proof. There is a middle ground.
The NPR article discusses the differences between scandals based on innuendo, and those based on publicized proof.
Corey Dade: Should House Democrats handle this differently so soon after the scandal involving Anthony Weiner?
Eric Dezenhall: Every case like this is different. There is a tendency to view them as a dogma, that there’s a right way and a wrong way to handle them. That’s just not true. It would be sort of like saying no matter what your illness is, use Calamine lotion.
I think the problem with the Weiner situation is there was proof. You handle a situation where there is unequivocal proof quite differently than a situation where there is not.
Good point. When there is proof, the actions taken should be reflected (sorry, I couldn’t resit the pun) by the evidence. The Cumberland County Democratic Party, however, is so entrenched in the Lou Magazzu way of doing things, they seem to be doing everything possible to protect their own.
Their silence, as I have said before, is deafening. Their silence speaks volumes, not only of their current course, but of the direction they will continue to lead this county if they are allowed to maintain control.