# Conservatives' Real Goal in the Fake Kerry Scandal **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 21, 2004, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418 "2004-02-21T21:27:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418/41 "2004-02-24T01:46:28Z")
In your haste, you neglected to outline what those “remaining items” might be. What, exactly, are they? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418/42 "2004-02-24T01:55:01Z")
> [@flickster](#): > > When was the last time truth got in the way of the mainsteam media reporting a story? :rolleyes: As for the reporting of Clinton’s peccadillos, if memory serves me correctly, Drudge was also the one to break that story. Drudge leaked a story that Newsweek was working on but Newsweek was _going to run_ the story. they weren’t supressing it or sitting on it and that had some of the most in depth coverage. Also, as soon as Drudge reported it, the mainstream media was swamped with it. > [@](#): > > Now whether the claims made regarding Kerry are true, I don’t know the answer to that yet. Thta’s funny because **I** know the answer to that. The answer is that the story was bullshit. Even Drudge has let it go. > [@](#): > > Kerry’s simple denial seems to have been sufficient for the mainstream media, but IMHO there are some remaining items that need to be addressed. Kerry’s denial _and_ the _woman’s_ denial _and_ her _parents’_ denial _and_ the fact that no one has even made an allegation of an affair _and_ the fact that she dated Kerry’s chief fundraiser and only met Kerry twice, both times in the presense of her boyfriend. Now, what the hell are these “remaining items” that you refer to? What exactly are you insinuating and what do you base it on? ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418/43 "2004-02-24T02:11:24Z")
> [@Hail Ants](#): > > But this story came about just like any other, the result of a lot of other people’s inuendo, statements, and, ultimately, some misunderstandings. Not some ‘vast right-wing conspiracy’. > > But it is also very appropriate that Drudge would _ **want** _ go with a story like this. Do you deny that Matt Drudge alone broke the Monica Lewinsky story? That both Time & Newsweek had the story and decided to sit on it. If not because of a left-wing slant amongst their editors then why? Most legitimate news organizations have a two-source rule. They sometimes bend it, but they try to keep to the straight and narrow, especially if the story is about someone as important as a president, whether he/she be conservative or liberal. Drudge has no such rule that I can find, much like the supermarket tabloids which have doctored photos and tell me weekly that Jesus is back. He merely wants to be there first with the gossip, whether it’s true or not. If it’s not true, he can simply delete it from his website. Voilla! It never happened. That’s the difference between a journalist and a gossip columnist. ---
**Author:** ![flickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7bcc69/32.png) [@flickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flickster)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418/44 "2004-02-24T02:18:02Z")
> [@](#): > > Drudge leaked a story that Newsweek was working on but Newsweek was going to run the story. they weren’t supressing it or sitting on it and that had some of the most in depth coverage. Also, as soon as Drudge reported it, the mainstream media was swamped with it. My, how convenient. > [@](#): > > Thta’s funny because I know the answer to that. The answer is that the story was bullshit. Even Drudge has let it go. Hmmm, is that the same Drudge who was still talking about this on his radio show last night? > [@](#): > > Kerry’s denial and the woman’s denial and her parents’ denial and the fact that no one has even made an allegation of an affair and the fact that she dated Kerry’s chief fundraiser and only met Kerry twice, both times in the presense of her boyfriend. So once a party denies something, there’s no need for further investigation? If my memory serves me correctly, didn’t Clinton & Lewinsky deny everything as well? > [@](#): > > Now, what the hell are these “remaining items” that you refer to? What exactly are you insinuating and what do you base it on? Personally, I’m still bothered by the father’s quote recorded by the UK newspaper on Friday in effect calling Kerry a scumbag and then his complete reversal by Monday. I’m also bothered by her sudden departure for Africa when the story ws breaking. There just seems to be some things that don’t add up right to let this go on simple denials. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418/45 "2004-02-24T02:20:14Z")
Errr, I was under the impression that Newsweek was used to break the Lewinsky story. Besides, the jump from there to " a left-wing slant" is a bit tenuous. After all, the ‘mainstream’ media has refused to report on zipper-related incidents involving leading Republicans for years. As just one recent example, they knew about Strom Thurmond’s illegitimate daughter for over ten years, but covered it up until after he was safely out of office and dead. Evidence of a right-wing slant? Or just awareness of the fact that such stuff isn’t news? ---
**Author:** ![laigle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ce7236/32.png) [@laigle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/laigle)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418/46 "2004-02-24T02:25:04Z")
Drudge doesn’t even really qualify as a gossip columnist IMHO. Look at the Lewinksy scandal. People give him credit for breaking the story, but he didn’t really. He said that Newsweek (IIRC) was going to report it. They did the legwork, they checked the sources, they put their necks on the line. Then some jackass sends Drudge an email, and all of a sudden he’s the journalist out in front of the story by just saying that someone else was going to say it. The guy is no more a journalist, mainstream or otherwise, than a Kazaa user is a musician. He’s running as much of a news publication as Slashdot (not to criticize Slashdot, who do a remarkably good job of providing a free place to gather news stories of interest to techies). ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418/47 "2004-02-24T03:04:49Z")
> [@flickster](#): > > Personally, I’m still bothered by the father’s quote recorded by the UK newspaper on Friday in effect calling Kerry a scumbag and then his complete reversal by Monday. I’m also bothered by her sudden departure for Africa when the story ws breaking. There just seems to be some things that don’t add up right to let this go on simple denials. You’re assuming that the UK paper actually was correct in their story. Big assumption. And probably incorrect. All you need is that second source. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418/48 "2004-02-24T03:31:33Z")
> [@flickster](#): > > My, how convenient. Convenient for who? It was pretty _in_convenient for Newsweek. They busted theirvass on the story then Drudge leaked it before they could go to print. > [@](#): > > Hmmm, is that the same Drudge who was still talking about this on his radio show last night? He backed off the story on his website. I don’t listen to his radio show. Is he still pretending there was anything to his insinuations? > [@](#): > > So once a party denies something, there’s no need for further investigation? Not just one party, _all_ parties, and there wan’t anything to investigate. No one has even made an allegation that Kerry had sex with that woman. Why on earth should there be any more investigation? It’s not like it would have been illegal even if Kerry _had_ porked this chick. > [@](#): > > If my memory serves me correctly, didn’t Clinton & Lewinsky deny everything as well? Stretch that memory a little more and remember that that there was also a civil deposition involved. There are no criminal allegations this time, no sworn testimony, no Ken Starr. No one is going to be subpoenaed, there aren’t any tapes, no back stabbing friend, no jizz on a dress. There’s not even an _allegation_. What part of that do you not understand? No one has said there was an affair except for Matt Drudge. > [@](#): > > Personally, I’m still bothered by the father’s quote recorded by the UK newspaper on Friday in effect calling Kerry a scumbag and then his complete reversal by Monday. Well let me ease your mind. The father now claims he never said that. Perhaps you’re unaware of this but the Sun is a _tabloid_, a rag, it has naked women and stories about aliens in it. It’s not a real newspaper, it’s the UK equivalent of the National Enquirer except without the integrity. Having said that, even the original Sun article clearly stated that the father did not believe there was an affair. > [@](#): > > I’m also bothered by her sudden departure for Africa when the story ws breaking. There just seems to be some things that don’t add up right to let this go on simple denials. What “sudden departure?” She was there with her fiance before the story ever broke. Her fiance grew up in Kenya and his parents lived there. there isn’t a shred of evidence that Kerry had anything to do with her being there. In fact, he barely even knew her, having only met her briefly on a couple of occasions. Now, do you actually have any real, substantive argument for any of the following: - that Kerry boinked this chick? - that anyone has _accused_ Kerry of boinking this chick? -that it’s any of your business if Kerry _did_ boink this chick? If not then I would ask you to quit sliming a war hero. ---
**Author:** ![flickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7bcc69/32.png) [@flickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flickster)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 3:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418/49 "2004-02-24T03:50:05Z")
> [@](#): > > If not then I would ask you to quit sliming a war hero. Refresh my memory on what exactly Kerry did to qualify himself as a war hero. > [@](#): > > -that it’s any of your business if Kerry did boink this chick? Well yes, I would like to know if the candidate is an adulterer prior to him taking office. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 3:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418/50 "2004-02-24T03:50:30Z")
> [@samclem](#): > > You’re assuming that the UK paper actually was correct in their story. Big assumption. And probably incorrect. All you need is that second source. The father has quite specifically said that the quote initially attributed to him was total hogwash. In other words, there was no “reversal” whatsoever. Murdoch’s goons were simply at their usual business of fabricating pure bullcrap. The only reversal would be if Murdoch’s tabloids actually decided to admit lying for the first time in their miserable existence. And yes, I, too, would love to hear an explanation for why the fact that everybody says the exact same thing about this ridiculous rumor adds up to not “adding up right”. I’m planning to “flee the country” in two weeks. Is that proof that I’m having an affair with a presidential candidate. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418/51 "2004-02-24T04:01:31Z")
> [@flickster](#): > > Refresh my memory on what exactly Kerry did to qualify himself as a war hero. Well, for starters, he enlisted and served in Vietnam in heavy combat. He also won three Purple Hearts, a Silver Star and a Bronze Star. Does that qualify? > [@](#): > > Well yes, I would like to know if the candidate is an adulterer prior to him taking office. Since when does the fact that you would “like to know” something make it your business? ---
**Author:** ![flickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7bcc69/32.png) [@flickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flickster)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418/52 "2004-02-24T17:26:51Z")
> [@](#): > > Well, for starters, he enlisted and served in Vietnam in heavy combat. Be that the case, we are a nation of hundreds of thousands heros. > [@](#): > > He also won three Purple Hearts, a Silver Star and a Bronze Star. 1st off, I don’t think those are won - they are awarded for outstanding service. Kerry obviously has an outstanding service record, but I still don’t know what happened to elevate him to hero status. > [@](#): > > Since when does the fact that you would “like to know” something make it your business? If it was average citizen, then I couldn’t care less, but when the person makes himself a candidate for President of the United States. The answer says a lot about his character. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418/53 "2004-02-24T17:39:22Z")
> [@flickster](#): > > Be that the case, we are a nation of hundreds of thousands heros. Yes, we are. So what? > [@](#): > > 1st off, I don’t think those are won - they are awarded for outstanding service. Kerry obviously has an outstanding service record, but I still don’t know what happened to elevate him to hero status. “won,” “awarded,” who gives a shit? What kind of picayune quibble is that? I’ll stick with “won.” I think it sounds cooler. You obviously have a personal definition of “hero” which will contort itsef in whatever manner is necessary to avoid ever attributing such status to someone who does not share your political views. I would say that anyone who shows courage and valor in combat is heroic and I am comfortable with that definition. > [@](#): > > If it was average citizen, then I couldn’t care less, but when the person makes himself a candidate for President of the United States. The answer says a lot about his character. The fact that a person is running for political office does not mean that his sex life becomes your personal business. ---
**Author:** ![flickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7bcc69/32.png) [@flickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flickster)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2004, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418/54 "2004-02-24T19:00:23Z")
> [@](#): > > Yes, we are. So what? Just waters down or lowers the bar on heorism. I have many friends and family members who were there as well, but I don’t know any that considers themselves to be heros. They are all honorable, respectable and patriotic and deserve our gratitude for serving their country. True heros are a rare breed. > [@](#): > > “won,” “awarded,” who gives a shit? What kind of picayune quibble is that? I’ll stick with “won.” I think it sounds cooler. There’s a big difference between won and awarded. You can win something in a lottery or card game. > [@](#): > > The fact that a person is running for political office does not mean that his sex life becomes your personal business. The sex life between a candidate and his/her spouse is none of my business. However if the candidate is cheating on her/her spouse, then it shows bad judgement and a lack of character. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2004, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418/55 "2004-02-25T03:57:20Z")
> [@flickster](#): > > If it was average citizen, then I couldn’t care less, but when the person makes himself a candidate for President of the United States. The answer says a lot about his character. I see. So now that we know the answer, we know that Kerry is a man of good character. Whew, it’s good to have that question settled once and for all. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-real-goal-in-the-fake-kerry-scandal/230418.md?page=2)