Calame defends the NYT article on the Clintons' marriage

The Times' public editor takes issue with a few parts of the article but, by and large, believes the story dealt with a legitimate news story and political issue. The problem is this: Certainly you can make an argument that the private lives of politicians are relevant for readers (and voters), but, setting the debate on that question aside, why is it that Republicans seem to get off the hook so easily? Where are the articles on McCain's multiple marriages, Giuliani's strange marital history, or Mitt Romney's family life and religious faith?