South Dakota War College calls out the Argus Leader for applying a double standard by printing "rumors" about Republicans but spiking "rumors" about Democrats:
Here's the irony - the Sutton allegations were swirling around in the amosphere at the same time that the Sahr allegations came out, if not before. Every reporter had likely heard the sets of rumors on both, and (at the time) each had about as much substance. You had rumors of allegations, and rumors of supposed investigations.
So, given the same amount of information available for each, someone please explain why the Argus decided to tank one candidate over another? Why did they torpedo Bob Sahr's relection, and give Dan Sutton a bye? It certainly can't be because of an anonymous, unsigned letter?
Fast forward to today. Bob Sahr has been effectively driven from office and there's still no more information out there then when the Argus started it's hatchet job. For Sutton, there's a special session of the legslature pending, a paper trail regarding the senate inquiry, witnesses set to testify, and no lack of available information.
Clearly, one was picked over the other. It was the Republican who they decided to sacrifice over a few allegations.
It's not like the Argus doesn't have a long history of vendetta against Republicans. Their clashes with Bill Janklow are legendary. They've been on an a more that two year campaign against our current Governor.
Recent Comments