The news media gladly destroys average men with even far-fetched rape accusations; why was the claim against Al Gore covered up for years?

Al Gore was accused of sexual assault in late 2006, but none of us heard about it.

The woman refused to be interviewed by detectives and didn't want the investigation to continue, so the police closed the case, citing insufficient evidence. "This case is exceptionally cleared as [the woman] refuses to cooperate with the investigation or even report a crime," the report states. 

But then in 2009, the woman contacted the police again and gave another statement regarding the alleged incident.  Detectives again determined that her statement lacked sufficient evidence to pursue the claim. 

But earlier this month, the woman requested a copy of her statement, and a police spokeswoman said the woman said she planned to take her case to the media.  Only then did this claim become public. 

"It's already been documented that the media have, at least initially, ignored the allegation that global warming alarmist-in-chief and former Vice President Al Gore faced a sexual assault charge in 2006. But why? . . .. MSNBC 'Morning Joe' host Joe Scarborough, . . .explained their decision to ignore it was based on insufficient evidence' despite the police report documenting the allegation." See here.

While there is nothing to be gained from reporting an unfounded allegation about a three or four year-old non-rape, this case presents a stark and frightening contrast between the way the news outlets usually cover rape claims and the way it covered this claim.

Remember when three University of Arkansas players were accused of rape?  A local television station actually cut into the station's regular programming to provide a four-plus minute breaking news report on the fact that a mere allegation was made -- the way a reporter might cut in to tell us about a plane crash or that an important politician has died. Note, the three young men hadn't been charged, they were merely being investigated. See here.

Remember how the Hofstra false rape claim was originally reported?  The sole evidence was the word of the woman with whom the young men had consensual sex. See here.  Can anyone look me in the eye and tell me there was more substance to that claim than the one against Al Gore? Yet the Hofstra claim received sensational coverage.

Where was the supposedly impartial news media -- so quick to destroy a bunch of teenagers at Hofstra, and a working class nobody like John Bobbitt, and an "entitled" athlete like Ben Roethlisberger, and tens of thousands of other men accused of rape solely on the basis of one woman's word -- when it came time to cover the same sort of allegation against Al Gore?

Not newsworthy, you say?  This man is a former US Vice President, the most revered icon of the left, the man who got more popular votes in the 2000 election than George W. Bush, winner of the Nobel Prize and the Academy Award -- but a rape claim against him isn't even worth mentioning?

Where is the feminist outrage that the claim against Al Gore was brushed under the rug? Why, you can hear a pin drop, can't you?

Here's the reality: the way the news media covered the claim against Gore is the way the news media should cover all rape claims. But they don't do it that way, because the entire rape milieu is infested with an ugly gender-politicization that skews reality to the point that it seems we're looking at it through a funhouse mirror.

Rape is not just a crime, it's a "women's issue," the ultimate manifestation of male oppression of females, and that dictates how it is covered in the news.  Let us be frank: Al Gore did not fit the preferred narrative, so he was given a free pass.  If it were Dick Cheney, this would have been front page news the day after it happened.  Let's at least tell the truth about this one, so we can highlight how terribly, and how unfairly, the average man is treated when a similar allegation is made against him.