Time for some perspective on the trials and tribulations of New Jersey governor Chris Christie.
Now that the first flush of excitement has passed, some journalists are comparing the coverage of the Christie bridge scandal with that of the multiple scandals that have plagued the Obama administration.
And they have found that, yet again, as the Wall Street Journal points out this morning, there is a media double standard:
Republicans operate under a double media standard that holds them to a much lower scandal threshold. In that sense the pathetic New Jersey traffic-lane scandal may be, as Mr. Obama likes to say, a teachable moment.
Teachable for the governor, that is. Whatever caused the traffic jam on the George Washington bridge, Gov. Christie had already alienated many of his fellow Republicans by his fawning attitude toward President Obama. He has been much less apt to criticize fellow Republicans than to lead the charge against the president. Lest we forget, Christie was the keynote speaker at the 2012 Republican National Convention. His speech was tedious and boring; it failed to make the case against the Obama presidency.
All of which has made him a darling of the liberal media, the same liberal media that has been piling on him.
The Washington Examiner reports on the gross disparity between the coverage of Christie and the coverage of the Obama scandals:
The Big Three networks, in a frenzy over New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's traffic headache dubbed “Bridgegate,” have devoted a whopping 34 minutes and 28 seconds of coverage to the affair in just the last 24 hours.
By comparison, that's 17 times the two minutes, eight seconds devoted to President Obama's IRS scandal in the last six months, according to an analysis by the Media Research Center.
“While routinely burying new stories on the IRS scandal, the media practically fell over themselves to start taking shots at the potential 2016 Republican presidential nominee,” said the conservative media watchdog.
Will Christie learn a lesson from the scandal and take the fight to President Obama and the mainstream media? That is the real question.
The Journal also compares the Christie response to President Obama’s handling of the IRS scandal:
We mention the IRS because Mr. Christie's contrition contrasts so sharply with President Obama's handling of the tax agency's abuse of political opponents and his reluctance to fire anyone other than a military general for anything.
Naturally, the Justice Department is at the ready to ensure that the Christie scandal is not forgotten:
Which brings us to the Obama Administration, which quickly leaked to the media that the U.S. Attorney is investigating the lane closures as a criminal matter. Well, that sure was fast, and nice of Eric Holder's Justice Department to show its typical discretion when investigating political opponents.
This is the same Administration that won't tell Congress what resources it is devoting to the IRS probe, and appears to be slow-rolling it. It has also doubled down by expanding the political vetting of 501(c)(4) groups seeking tax-exempt status. Lois Lerner, who ran the IRS tax-exempt shop and took the Fifth before Congress, was allowed to "retire," presumably with a pension. Acting IRS commissioner Steven Miller resigned under pressure but no other heads have rolled. Yet compared to using the IRS against political opponents during an election campaign, closing traffic lanes for four days is jaywalking.
Keep in mind, this same Justice Department has put a department lawyer who was an Obama donor in charge of investigating the IRS scandal. How many media outlets have even mentioned this fact?