If there's an act on Earth less sordid than adoption, I'd like to know what it is. But the Times is sniffing around for dirt around the edges, and writes no story because no dirt was found.
I guess they're saying it's fair game to inquire about a candidate's abortion history ... and to write about it if it sheds new light on the candidate's moral views or judicial temperament?
I agree. What other sealed records does the NYT have a right to unseal?
There's no end....how about a candidate's parent's medical records so we can be enlightened to any premarital sex based on the candidate's birthdate? What about school records so we can verify if the candidate's parents were sufficiently active in PTA? Let's make his priest reveal what he has said in the confessional......