As a native of Philadelphia, I can attest that once-proud city can give Chicago and New Orleans a run for the (stolen) money when it comes to corrupt politicians.

What's impossible to ignore is how the media there, here at Slate, and a nationally sprain ankles trying to tip-toe around the obvious: THEY ARE ALL OVERWHELMINGLY DEMOCRAT. And have been, for DECADES.

I don’t think Democrats are fundamentally less principled than Republicans. Not at all. But something is up.

Maybe because Democrats for bigger government and more spending they naturally have more money to throw around, and therefore exchange? What is it? What's the fear in asking the question openly?

And why do journalists and other watchdog types find Democrat corruption kind of…charming? The Daley Machine, Edwin Edwards, the Long brothers….it’s all reported with a wink and a smile.

Even politicians who rise out of this sewer, like our next president, are never asked: It was all around you. What did you do to stop it? As far as I can tell, Obama made one phone call on behalf of an ethics bill. When he was campaigning for president.

Why are journalists at Slate, and most major outlets, so reluctant to state the obvious about the most corrupt political systems in the U.S.: that they are dominated by Democrats?