It was always evident that Hillary Clinton's presidential candidacy, for better and (mostly) worse, was going to receive a great deal more scrutiny on the grocery-store-checkout racks than those of her competitors. But I didn't expect The Washington Post editorial page to follow suit. The lead editorial in the paper today is titled "Sen. Clinton's Bundles: Who are the big-money fundraisers underwriting her campaign?" It begins by describing a recent large-donor event and asking "What are the candidate's plans to release the names of her big bundlers? ... So far--though we've been putting this question to the Clinton campaign since last Friday by telephone and by email--we haven't gotten an answer." A fair enough question. The editorial then proceeds to note that both Barack Obama and John McCain have promised to release the names of their big bundlers, before continuing, "Mr. Edwards won't say anything except that he'll abide by the law"--which presumably means he won't release the names of his bundlers--and "former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani haven't responded to our inquiries." So let's get this straight: According to the editorial, of the six candidates they've asked about bundlers, three have declined to respond and one has basically said that he's not planning to release the names. Yet the headline, subhed, and entire first half of the editorial focus exclusively on Clinton, conjuring images of the nefarious, big-money puppeteers secretly underwriting her campaign. By contrast, her co-malefactors--Romney, Giuliani, and Edwards--between them get a couple of sentences farther down. Classy. --Christopher Orr