Next week: White House staffer tips Drudge: “Kerry’s gay-- and Canadian!” :rolleyes:
Wow, I hadn’t heard that. How fucked up.
At least it gives me a chance to dredge up my favorite Rush Limbaugh moment ever (not that I have a long list, mind you):
Daniel
Oh, come on. It’s ludicrous. Absurd. Stupid. Lame.
I remember when Drudge did an “exposé” on the Janet Jackson “wardrobe malfunction” tit thing, where he showed close-ups of the exposed breast, feigning outrage in an obvious tongue-in-cheek manner. That was a joke too.
I don’t know much about Drudge, but judging from the Jackson/tit thing, he’s capable of being full of shit and doing something that is supposed to be “funny” (whether or not he succeeds is a judgment call).
If you are determined to be offended, knock yourself out. But I think it’s misplaced. I’m sure there’s plenty of genuine muck-raking that you can focus on. But I don’t think this is an example of it.
Daniel: Thanks for the link. Limbaugh got a good come-uppance from Letterman, eh?
I remember that people were making comments about Barbara Bush being a (gasp!) size 14. Horrors! And then there were Hillary’s thick ankles. Horrors! And now Mrs. Edwards, a lovely woman who looks to be about size 12-14 or something. But for some reason this matters somehow? What bullshit.
“Joke” doesn’t equal “innocent joke.” Just because he was presenting it snarkily doesn’t mean he wasn’t expecting it to rake some muck.
HA HA HA! ROFLMAO! Lookit the funny homos! OMG LOL!!!
Sorry, but it bugs me. It bugs me when SNL does the same thing with Bush & Cheney (and Ashcroft, and whoever else) too. It bugs me when people use implying that somebody’s gay as a slam. It bugs me when people think that the implication is “hitting a new low.”
What muck was he trying to rake? Was he trying to seriously convince people that both Kerry and Edwards are cheating on their wives with each other? Do you really think anyone would buy that? Do you really think that he’d do that?
You don’t seriously need me to explain it to you, do you? Seriously?
You have to admit, the picture on the bottom right looks like they are at a gay wedding and the preacher has just said “You may now kiss”. 
You mean you seriously think that people will believe that Kerry and Edwards are cheating on their wives with each other? Yes or no?
Someone didn’t get the memo, I see.
Eh. Happens around here all the time. Just a bit 'o humor, you know…
It’s sort of sad to say, but the reality is, it does represent a pretty significant portion of the right, and I hope the right that is disgusted by it won’t put up with it forever. When the Richard Clarke thing was going strong, the very next step in the smear campaign against him was “Dick’s a fag!” He went off the radar screen before it was necessary, lucky for him. But I’ve already heard this “John and John, buttbuddies for a fag America” thing snickered among national Pubs: big in-joke. A lot of this sort of thing lives under the radar, because they know it might alienate moderates if it got press, but it’s a definate subtext.
And, of course, for right wing talk show hosts, this is par for the course (along with suddenly realizing that trial lawyers are the number 1 threat to America, unless Gephardt was picked, in which case unions are the number 1 threat). I expect Doors to walk in calling THEM propagandists akin to the Nazis any day now. Any day now.
It’s quite possible to think it’s a new low BECAUSE it’s using “gay” as if it were a slam.
Why wouldn’t he? It wasn’t that long ago that he completely fabricated a charge that Kerry was having an affair with an intern. He was also sued for falsely accusing Sidney Blumethal of being a wife beater. Not much is beneath this guy.
Having said that, I doubt that Drudge intends any serious insinuation of man on man love between John Kerry and John Edwards, not because of any ethical constraints but simply because it’s so wildly implausible. I think what he is doing is just engaging in a little mean-spirited snickering for the benefit of those trogyldites in his party who find such insinuations to be the height of wit. It basically amounts to “look at 'em. They look like a couple of homos! haw haw haw!”
It’s roughly the equivalent of saying a guy with long hair looks like a girl. It’s not said with any literal intent it’s just a completely witless attempt at humor.
Funny story. When the Bush campaign was pushing the “Kerry looks French, the French suck” angle, they bought some ad time with this theme in a certain area: fairly high Republican percentage, not a bad strategy for them. Well, this certain area also happened to have a high percentage of French Canadians living there. And fucks sake were they PISSED about it. There was an en masse move to unregister as Republicans and register Democrats.
Moral of the story: being ignorant, hateful fucktards can come back to bite you in the ass.
That’s my point too. Nobody is going to seriously believe it. It’s a dumb joke.
How “funny” it is depends on the individual. I don’t think much of it either way, other than it’s a rather lame joke. Not something I’d pick as being terribly funny myself. But I suppose some people might be tittering at the “scandal” of it all. Bleah.
I can buy that.
It is wildly implausable so I don’t believe he’s seriously trying to get people to believe it. I don’t know much about Drudge, don’t visit his site, but I’ll take your word on the fact that he’s tried to pin false claims on Kerry in the past.
Another note: when Kerry announced Edwards, Drudge posted a story saying something like “Kerry picks Edwards… ethics charges already begin.” But the linked story was about an ethics charge against Mass governor Rowland for apparently illegally using his taxpayer funded offices to launch a partisan attack on Kerry and Edwards.
That’s drudge in a nutshell: he leans right, but he’s also a joker. He’s not trying to do straight journalism, but also have a bit o fun.
So now we get “petting Johns”. Before that we had “kissing Al”. Before that - “bimbo Bill”. I must admit, Dems dig “Sex & Politics” hilarity.
But can they defend “this Nation”?
Ah, see what happened was I moved. I guess I forgot to ask them to update my customer record.
Defend it against what?
All I know is that only one guy on either ticket has ever defended his country against anything. Edwards was too young for Nam, Cheney had “other priorities” and Bush…well we know about Bush.
[cue “Cocaine” riff on the soundtrack]
There are plenty of people who think “where there’s smoke, there’s fire.”
In the first place.
In the second place, a veiled accusation of homosexuality is meant to imply an accusation of effeminacy, or whatever: it’s an attempt to make them seem, to a certain segment of Drudge’s more retarded audience, less manly, and hold them up against Bush’s hips-forward cowboy diplomacy. It’s a thin layer of spin, but it’s spin nonetheless.
The top-left and top-center pictures look like something out of a SNL skit. Damn, but Edwards has the most precious pouty-face in the top-left picture!
And lissener, lighten up. Look at the pictures, and tell me comedy does not reside within.