The Charlotte Observer‘s editorial page is doing its best to play the role of tough, independent watchdog in the Bob Etheridge melodrama. But the editorial comes off as nothing more than a defense of the seven-termer’s clearly inappripriate behavior.
Here are the telling paragraphs:
It’s tempting to excuse Etheridge for at least three reasons: 1) He obviously walked into a booby trap, set by a couple of punks; 2) It’s not like he punched them, or spilled millions of gallons of oil, or even cursed; and 3) He apologized unreservedly.
All that is true and we don’t want to make too much of this episode. (Like N.C. Republican Chairman Tom Fetzer is doing. He wants Capitol Hill police to investigate the incident. What’s to investigate? The whole thing played out on heavily-edited video. Perhaps Fetzer could investigate the main unanswered questions: Who were the young cameramen and who put them up to this stunt?)
A booby trap? A stunt? Punks? The unidentified “ambushers” asked Etheridge whether he supported the Obama administration’s agenda. It’s a simple question. How ? even in the demented world of liberal journalism ? could that be construed as a booby trap or a stunt?
More to the point, the Observer would no doubt be inflamed with righteous indignation were the tables turned and the cameramen the ones assaulting Etheridge. The newspaper would gleefully connect them to the Tea Party movement and declare the incident an example of anti-government zealotry.
But since Etheridge was the one doing the assaulting, the editorial page treats him with kid gloves. Pathetic doesn’t even begin to describe it.
