Pardon Me Madam ....

.... but I am a bit confused:

NEW YORK As the so-called "D.C. Madam" case unfolds in the nation's capital, with alleged prostitution ringleader Jeane Palfrey claiming a list of thousands of prominent clients, Washington-area editors say they are following the story, but remain reluctant to print such a list, were it available, without serious scrutiny.

"You would have to evaluate it to the extent humanly possible and verify it," said Michael Tackett, Washington bureau chief for the Chicago Tribune. "If one of the names is wrong and you print it, how do you unring that bell for that person?" He said reprinting a list from another news outlet is not an excuse for getting it wrong. "You've got to verify it yourself," he said.

From what I've heard, there are some pretty prominent government officials on this list. Lots of them. Likely from both parties. But I suspect it's skewed toward Republicans. That's the only reason I can think of that would justify the reluctance of the Washington press corpse to pursue this story like dogs in heat. Wasn't it just a few short years ago that they pursued stained dresses, stories of cigars and murder conspiracies against Clinton with great abandon?