Yesterday I suggested that Tim Eyman’s reputation as a lying, thieving, blowhard actually works to his advantage, as the media seems to treat his lack of credibility as an unspoken assumption. I suppose they think it a waste of time to research his claims, when nobody believes him anyway.
This is part of a larger double standard, where the “good guys” are expected to be good, and the “bad guys” are expected to be bad. And if the two sides ever stray from their assigned roles, it results in shock and dismay, or unwarranted praise.
An example of this has stuck in my craw the past few days, so I thought I’d better spit it out: