Remember the extramarital affair that Nevada's governor (the nation's worst) is definitely not having and so it isn't news?
For the nonce, and by way of answering some email from more than a couple correspondents, a thought or three if we may...
It has been well-established for years that if a high-ranking public official (a category presumably including a governor of a state) is having an extramarital affair, that is, for better or worse, and for now, news. The public may care. Or they may not care. Or they may care selectively — Republicans tend to think it's nobody's bidness when one of their own has an extramarital affair (JulieAnnie, Gingrich, McCain), while they think if a Democrat does it it's an impeachable offense. But however the public might react to such news, be it with forgiveness or condemnation or apathy or somewhere in between, the public has a right to know.
That right to know seems particularly pronounced in the case of James Arthur Gibbons.
Plagiarism. Communists under the bed. Chrissy Mazzeo. Bribery allegations. A lie as his first official act as governor. A shady legal defense fund. Overpaying his estranged wife from his campaign payroll. His influence in nabbing her a lucrative consultant salary for arranging press conferences that no press ever attended. His blatant and routine cronyism (potentially an especially intriguing flaw in the context of secret relationships, no?). And on and on and on, ad fucking nauseam. The central and constant characteristic of the Gibbons administration, right up there with the raging incompetence, has been the governor's integrity, honesty and credibility, or more accurately, the lack thereof.
The governor's — this governor's — affair is common knowledge (and if reporters feel icky about reporting "common knowledge," well, hence the Gleaner's call for a stakeout). By not reporting it, the Nevada media looks silly.
Thanks for asking.
Recent Comments