But did nothing because of the (D) after is name. This is a good editorial on Filner and all the other losers like Weiner, Obama and Clinton who get protected at the expense of the public.

The Link:
http://scoopsandiego.com/columnists/doug_curlee/opinion-san-diego-media-faile...

The article:
Regardless of how the Bob Filner mess eventually ends—and it will end, somehow—there are questions that need to be asked and answered.

They are questions that should have been asked long ago, and should have been asked by those whose job it is to ask such questions: us.

Who are “us”?

“Us” are the San Diego news media reporters, editors, producers and writers who pretty much knew who and what Bob Filner is and has been.

Yes, I’m including myself in that group. I’ve covered Bob Filner off and on since he was elected to the San Diego Unified School District Board in 1979. From the beginning, most of us saw how arrogant Filner was and is, how abusive he could be to his own staff members, how he felt elective office entitled him to be all those things and more.

We all saw that in Filner, and yet we did nothing about it. Filner was often a topic of conversation among us when we gathered at news conferences or when we would gather at the various watering holes many of us frequented together when off work.

The near universal opinion among us was, “Can you believe this guy? Why does he get away with acting like that?” Then another round of drinks would appear, and talk went on to other things.

But we never asked those questions on air or in print. We never really tried to find out what was behind the near-incessant rumors that always floated around Filner. We never tried to confirm any of those rumors, or, if we did, we quickly gave up when presented with the denials, or refusals to talk about it.

We didn’t do our jobs. We didn’t try to work our way to the truth or what appeared to be the truth.

We didn’t uphold the tenets of our profession—to find the truth, whatever it may be, and present it to you for your information and judgment.

Why didn’t we? Probably several reasons, although they are reasons that shouldn’t have been good enough to stop us.

Was it because Filner had established himself as a Democratic power here—for a long time, the only Democratic power here?

Was it because he had built his electoral power base generally south of Interstate 8, among the “minority” communities of African-Americans, Latinos and Filipinos?

Was it because Filner totally controlled the votes and campaign funds of large and ever-growing organized labor groups, the unions?

Was it because economic pressure was brought to bear on TV station ownerships or newspaper ownerships, all of whom depend on advertising dollars as their prime source of revenue?

Was it because we were just lazy?

I honestly don’t know, but there may have elements of all of the above involved.

All I know for sure is that we had the chance—many chances over the years—to dig into the Filner story and find much of this out.

We didn’t do it, and it now appears that’s all coming home to roost.

We watch ever more highly credible women coming forward to tell their stories of encounters with Filner, and we should all be thinking, “I should have done that story. I should have asked, or demanded, the support to go after that story.”

We can, I suppose, take some hollow comfort in watching all the TV stations and newspapers covering this story like a blanket with basically unending, round-the-clock coverage.

But I can’t help but wonder, “Could we have stopped this in its tracks, years ago? Could we have pursued the story back then? Could he have gotten that story—gotten victims to talk back then?”

Who knows? The point is, we didn’t try, or try hard enough.

Those of us in the business at that time, knowing what we did, should be a little ashamed of that.

I am.