# Let's cheer the right-wing smear machine! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 12, 2005, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768 "2005-08-12T19:25:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/221 "2005-08-15T19:55:35Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > “She has thrown in – there is no question that she has thrown in with the most radical elements in this country…And, you know, there are some people who hate this government, hate their country right now, and blaming Bush for all the terrorism and all the horror in the world.” > –Bill O’Reilly > > So the question now is whether **Debaser** is an idiot, or simply illiterate. > > Then again, it’s not necessarily an either/or situation… I think you need to get a dictionary and look up the word “scorn”. O’Reilly was simply reporting what is factually correct. She (Sheehan) has indeed thrown in with the most radical elements in this country. Also, many of these radical elements hate their country right now, and blame Bush for everything. O’Reilly’s statements are: A.) True and correct. B.) Not scorn. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/222 "2005-08-15T20:03:34Z")
And the verdict is: … Idiot. All of you who picked Illiterate, thanks for playing. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/223 "2005-08-15T20:07:28Z")
BTW, apropos prior argument on this thread about cheerleding others to kill or die from the sidelines, the following article expresses my feelings much more lucidly than I could ever hope to accomplish – however, it’s got nothing on me when it comes to actually engaging the 101st Keyboarders in cyberwar. 😉 [**Moral logic of common sacrifice**](http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/08/08/sacrifice/index.html) > [@](#): > > Moral logic tells us that when the nation legally goes to war, it is everybody’s war and it must be everybody’s risk. But the elite of the country seeks to make war little more than a spectator sport. > > Citizens on the home front who do not have loved ones in the service are asked to pay no price, to bear no burden. The Bush administration does not even ask us to pick up the cost of the war, already in the hundreds of billions. That burden will be borne instead by our children. We, patriots, will keep our tax cuts. Do our leaders think so little of us that they are afraid to ask us to make any real sacrifice? > > That those who called most loudly for this war are not standing in line to volunteer at the recruiting offices is noted by the nation’s premier military sociologist (and ex-Army draftee) Charles Moskos. > > “Only when the privileged classes perform military service, only when elite youth are on the firing line, does the country define the cause as worth young peoples’ blood and do war losses become acceptable,” observes Moskos, adding that “ **the answer to what constitutes vital national interests is found not so much on the cause, itself, but in who is willing to die for that cause.** ” So, those of you that are willing to die for the “vital national interests” found in Iraq, you know _exactly_ what to do. After all, I’ve already shown just how ineffective firing bytes over the Internet really is. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/224 "2005-08-15T20:12:38Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > I think you need to get a dictionary and look up the word “scorn”. O’Reilly was simply reporting what is factually correct. She (Sheehan) has indeed thrown in with the most radical elements in this country. Also, many of these radical elements hate their country right now, and blame Bush for everything. > > O’Reilly’s statements are: A.) True and correct. B.) Not scorn. Wait a minute… Michael Moore and [MoveOn.Org](http://MoveOn.Org) are the _most_ radical elements in this country? _The most_? Maybe I just haven’t been paying attention, but I don’t recall [MoveOn.Org](http://MoveOn.Org) bombing any federal buildings lately, and I was not aware that Michael Moore had been definitively named as the Anthrax mailer. Are they outside the mainstream for this country? I wouldn’t argue otherwise. But they’re a far cry from the “most radical element” in this country, more’s the pity. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/225 "2005-08-15T20:16:07Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > So, those of you that are willing to die for the “vital national interests” found in Iraq, you know _exactly_ what to do. After all, I’ve already shown just how ineffective firing bytes over the Internet really is. Yep, your 1800 or so posts chock full of bytes have demonstrated that well. And I wonder if you’d say this kind of crap to me, sir, seeing as I am a veteran of a foreign war myself. This “chickenhawk” bullshit is a rhetorical cop-out. Heavens knows left-wingers will embrace someone who has shunned military service, so long as that person is spouting a line agreeable to them. I have a right to support this war, and it is not found in my own veteran status. It conveys to me as a citizen, a voter, and a concerned individual. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/226 "2005-08-15T20:26:08Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > This “chickenhawk” bullshit is a rhetorical cop-out. Heavens knows left-wingers will embrace someone who has shunned military service, so long as that person is spouting a line agreeable to them. “This ‘support the troops’ bullshit is a a rhetorical cop-out. Heavens knows right-wingers will destroy someone who’s made sacrifices for the war, so long as that person is spouting a line disagreeable to them.” ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/227 "2005-08-15T20:33:55Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > Yep, your 1800 or so posts chock full of bytes have demonstrated that well. Glad to see you’ve been paying attention. > [@](#): > > And I wonder if you’d say this kind of crap to me, sir, seeing as I am a veteran of a foreign war myself. Damn straight I would, sir. Past service in prior conflict, does not by itself absolve you from re-enlisting in a time of need – specially if you believe and support the “cause.” Once again, the bolded part of my cite makes the point quite clear: > [@](#): > > **the answer to what constitutes vital national interests is found not so much on the cause, itself, but in who is willing to die for that cause.** So, question is, are you? > [@](#): > > This “chickenhawk” bullshit is a rhetorical cop-out. No it isn’t. It is simply pointing out the obvious. > [@](#): > > Heavens knows left-wingers will embrace someone who has shunned military service, so long as that person is spouting a line agreeable to them. Strawman. I am not speaking of military service per-se – to me, that’s rather irrelevant as I hold no special admiration for the Armed Forces themselves. _However_, if push comes to shove, and my nation is involved in a conflict _which I find just and unavoidable_, you can bet your ass I’d be standing in line asking if my old, decrepit self could be of any use. Moral logic. Just like the article says. > [@](#): > > I have a right to support this war, and it is not found in my own veteran status. It conveys to me as a citizen, a voter, and a concerned individual. Sure you do. But by the same token, so do others to point out the inherent hypocresy found in said position. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/228 "2005-08-15T20:42:18Z")
I found a page that has the full [O’Reilly discussion](http://thepoliticalteen.net/2005/08/09/sheehan/) about Sheehan. This is the night before Sheehan was scheduled to go on the factor. O’Reilly is sympathetic to Sheehan, but does say that he believes she is being used by the far left elements that she is with now, and that her story has been inconsistent. Also, I noticed that O’Reilly is specifically talking about a Sam Hussani, the United for Peace and Justice Coalition, and Code Pink led by a Mrs Benjamin when he says that Sheehan has thrown in with “some of the most radical elements in this country.” He isn’t talking about Moveon or Moore. I’m not familiar enough with those groups to know if that is accurate. It’s possible that he’s being hyperbolic. In any case, I don’t think it’s fair to compare those groups to terrorists. I’d say he’s talking about the most radical _political_ elements in the country, which does seem accurate based on the little I’ve heard about Code Pink. Sheehan’s response to O’Reilly’s analysis was to cancel her appearance on his program and to call him an “Obscenity to Humanity” and also mentioned that The “mainstream media is a propaganda tool for the government,” she said, and without the Internet, “we would be a fascist state.” Also, Bill O’Reilly’s site has a new [talking points memo](http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,165401,00.html) up: > [@](#): > > The saga of Cindy Sheehan (search) deepens: that is the subject of this evening’s “Talking Points Memo.” > > As you may know, Ms. Sheehan told us she would appear on “The Factor” this evening, but she backed out a few hours ago, saying I lied about her. Since our reportage about Ms. Sheehan has been supported by multiple facts, we asked the people who are running her exactly what those facts were. We’re still awaiting an answer. > > There’s no question that far left ideologues are controlling access to Cindy Sheehan, who you may remember is camped outside of the president’s house in Crawford, Texas, wanting to meet with him. > > Sheehan is also using Michael Moore’s Web site to get her anti-Bush message out. Well, now we continue to support her right to say whatever she wants to say. After all, she did lose a son in Iraq. But certainly it is our responsibility to tell you exactly who Cindy Sheehan’s associating with. > > But other media don’t see it that way. In her column today, New York Times pundit Maureen Dowd glorified Mrs. Sheehan, but made no mention of Mr. Moore or other radicals involved with her. > > The Baltimore Sun also praised Ms. Sheehan and chastised President Bush. “A small first step — but only a first step — would be to sit down with Mrs. Sheehan and listen to her, really listen…Take time to talk with her. Have the courtesy.” > > Well, there’s one problem with that editorial. President Bush has already met with Cindy Sheehan and her husband, Pat. He took the time, he had the courtesy. But somehow The Baltimore Sun editorial neglected to mention that fact. Can you believe it? Sure you can. The Sun is an anti-Bush paper. > > And Cindy Sheehan is now an anti-Bush woman. So why would he meet with her again? If you were Mr. Bush, would you sit down with someone blogging on the Michael Moore Web site? Come on. > > Once again, “Talking Points” respects Cindy Sheehan’s right to dissent from the Iraq War and not like Mr. Bush. But let’s tell the entire story here. > > The whole thing’s ironic, since just last week, “The Factor” told you that things in Iraq are not going well. Our military analysts, Colonels Hunt and Cowan talked to commanders in the field and reported back that security is still dicey and corruption is growing. > > Most accepted the information we put forth, but some objected to it, saying any negative reporting on Iraq undermines the effort there. I disagree with that. > > In order to win the war, we need to know the truth about it. This is a performance issue, not an ideological one. > > Both liberal and conservative Americans need to stop putting ideology above the truth. To cut and run in Iraq would be a disaster for the USA. It’d be a tremendous victory for the terrorists. > > To accept chaos and corruption in Iraq would also mean failure. Once again, Americans need to come together and demand we win this conflict for the good of all of us. > > And that’s “The Memo.” His analysis is reasonable, and right on the money, IMO. ---
**Author:** ![Spiny\_Norman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9de0a6/32.png) [@Spiny\_Norman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spiny_Norman)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/229 "2005-08-15T20:45:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*\*Scylla about Scylla not going to war:\*\*I don’t want to go to combat. > [@](#): > > \*\*Scylla about Spain not staying in the war:\*\*Total fucking cowardice. At least have the courage of your convictions. Whatever works for you, dude. Oh, and by the way, just to spare you some research: I’m a Dane (as in Denmark) - go have some fun digging for historical slurs regarding my nationality. Actually, and all silliness aside, it seems to me that Spain has the right idea: Elected officials who decide to join (or start) needless wars and spin terror attacks to further their own political goals do not deserve to be reelected, they deserve to be thrown on the scrapheap of history. Would that a few more US voters had gotten that message a little earlier. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/230 "2005-08-15T20:58:30Z")
> [@Spiny Norman](#): > > Whatever works for you, dude. Oh, and by the way, just to spare you some research: I’m a Dane (as in Denmark) - go have some fun digging for historical slurs regarding my nationality. [Helmer] O Swedish watchtowers! With plutonium we will force the Danes to their knees. Here, Denmark. That out of chalk and water. There, Sweden. Hewn out of granite. Danish Scum _Danish scum!_ [/Helmer] 😛😉😃 I kid! I kid **Spiny Norman**! ---
**Author:** ![Spiny\_Norman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9de0a6/32.png) [@Spiny\_Norman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spiny_Norman)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/231 "2005-08-15T21:04:20Z")
OK, granted: As a nation, we have to take responsibility for releasing Lars von Trier on an unsuspecting world. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/232 "2005-08-15T21:10:21Z")
> [@Spiny Norman](#): > > OK, granted: As a nation, we have to take responsibility for releasing Lars von Trier on an unsuspecting world. Responsibility? You mean _credit!_🙂 I agree with **Spiny** ’s post. If Mrs. Sheehan’s activities change people’s minds and people vote those into office who will get us out of this ill-conceived quagmire, then that’s the way it’s supposed to work. Grieving mother, or political activist? It doesn’t matter. She’s entitled to her opinion, and she’s entitled to promote it. It’s people like Mrs. Sheehan who are forces of change in this country, and that’s how it should be. ---
**Author:** ![light\_strand](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a6a055/32.png) [@light\_strand](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/light_strand)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/233 "2005-08-15T22:34:29Z")
> [@This Year's Model](#): > > Holy cow. You really are the scum of the earth, aren’t you? If you think that is disgusting, you should take a look at the people posting on the Hannity board. One of them even suggested that her son may have “put himself in harms way” because he was embarrassed by his mother. ---
**Author:** ![bizzwire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/958977/32.png) [@bizzwire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bizzwire)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/234 "2005-08-15T22:58:22Z")
> [@Revtim](#): > > It’s almost funny, really. These people have drunk so deep of the Kool-Aid that even a woman who’s son died in the war has to be “snared and brainwashed” to be against the war. To be critical of the man that started the war that **claimed the life of her son** , the war in which the primary motivation for it turned out to be false. Yeah, she must have been brainwashed by Michael Moore, there’s no other reasonable explanation for her stance. :rolleyes: Don’t forget, according to **Stephe** her husband’s also thinking of a divorce; also, as he has pointed out, she doesn’t appear to have a job. It’s hard to ignore these hard-hitting facts. In fact, she’s probably not even sorry her son died. **Scylla** and **Shodan** : I know you people on the right-ish side don’t all march in lock-step; I respect your opinion, but I’m curious- do you think **Stephe** ’s attempted character assasination helps? ---
**Author:** ![THespos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8c91f0/32.png) [@THespos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/THespos)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/235 "2005-08-15T23:11:49Z")
> [@](#): > > This thread has gone on for four pages now, and still rjung hasn’t bothered to actually back up his specific claims about O’Reilly and Drudge smearing Sheehan. > > On page two, John Mace correctly points out that the two of them have done no such thing. rjung responds with a bunch of unrelated cites to blogs and simply repeats his false assertion stating “And that’s not even counting the stuff from Drudge and O’Reilly et al from earlier this week.” > > Now, on page four of the thread: rjung. Would you care to actually back up your (false) claims that O’Reilly and Drudge have been smearing Cindy Sheehan? This thread has gone on for five pages now, and no one has bothered to explain to me what I asked on page one - How is Sheehan a puppet for Michael Moore? To address the question from the quote above, how is it that these things aren’t smears? - Elevating Sheehan’s divorce to the national agenda, even though Sheehan and her husband had filed for divorce before the controversy erupted. - Attempting to discredit Sheehan as a “flip-flopper” when the facts support that she was never happy with how Bush treated her. - Characterizing her family as divided when her immediate family supports her, and the “family” members who disagree with her are people she hasn’t spoken to in years. While many of the details regarding these stories might be factually accurate, I think most people would agree that discrediting someone is as much about what does and does not get reported as it is about getting the facts right. Why else would O’Reilly, Drudge, etc. believe that these were legit news stories if they didn’t have an agenda? The Republican noise machine understands this quite well, and they know that with every non-story they can promote to discredit Sheehan, that sows more seeds of doubt in the minds of the American people. Pretty soon, people will get tired of hearing about Cindy Sheehan. And when they do, the things that will stick in their minds the most will be that there was some sort of controversy over whether her family really supported what she was doing, and that she had changed her mind about her opinion of the President somewhere along the way. It’s a smear. Or, rather, a series of them. ---
**Author:** ![Stephe96](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Stephe96](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stephe96)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/236 "2005-08-15T23:14:41Z")
[QUOTE=bizzwire] Don’t forget, according to **Stephe** her husband’s also thinking of a divorce; also, as he has pointed out, she doesn’t appear to have a job. It’s hard to ignore these hard-hitting facts. In fact, she’s probably not even sorry her son died. [QUOTE] “Thinking of a divorce?” Nope. According to The Smoking Gun, he’s filed for divorce already. I’d say he’s well beyond the “thinking about it” stage. And, yes…I’d like to know how she’s supporting herself these days. Who’s feeding her? What’s wrong with wanting to know who her supporters are? If it’s Michael Moore, just say so. What’s the big deal? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/237 "2005-08-15T23:30:51Z")
> [@](#): > > This thread has gone on for four pages now, and still rjung hasn’t bothered to actually back up his specific claims about O’Reilly and Drudge smearing Sheehan. > > On page two, John Mace correctly points out that the two of them have done no such thing. Just to be clear, I wasn’t talking about Drudge, only O’Reilly. I watched the Sheehan segment on O’Reilly, but I never read Drudge. I couldn’t tell you what Drudge did or didn’t say. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/238 "2005-08-15T23:36:36Z")
> [@THespos](#): > > To address the question from the quote above, how is it that these things aren’t smears? > > - Elevating Sheehan’s divorce to the national agenda, even though Sheehan and her husband had filed for divorce before the controversy erupted. > - Attempting to discredit Sheehan as a “flip-flopper” when the facts support that she was never happy with how Bush treated her. > - Characterizing her family as divided when her immediate family supports her, and the “family” members who disagree with her are people she hasn’t spoken to in years. > > While many of the details regarding these stories might be factually accurate, I think most people would agree that discrediting someone is as much about what does and does not get reported as it is about getting the facts right. Why else would O’Reilly, Drudge, etc. believe that these were legit news stories if they didn’t have an agenda? The Republican noise machine understands this quite well, and they know that with every non-story they can promote to discredit Sheehan… Well, I just got finished watching Headball, and Chris Matthews brought up those exact same items while interviewing her live. So, Chris is now part of the “Republican noise machine”? That would be news to him, and a lot of folks. Chris actually went a bit farther, and asked if she’d be doing this if her son had died in Afghanistan\*. Now that’s a brutal question to ask a grieving mom, but his show is called Hardball. He also asked if she planned to run for political office. You really need to look at what the whole of the media are doing before you jump on O’Reilly on this one. I don’t see his reporting as being out of the mainstream at all. \*She said “yes”, btw. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/239 "2005-08-15T23:37:39Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > Well, I just got finished watching Headball… HARDBALL. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![light\_strand](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a6a055/32.png) [@light\_strand](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/light_strand)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2005, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768/240 "2005-08-15T23:41:42Z")
> [@Stephe96](#): > > And, yes…I’d like to know how she’s supporting herself these days. Who’s feeding her? What’s wrong with wanting to know who her supporters are? If it’s Michael Moore, just say so. What’s the big deal? Well she may have received as much as $500,000 in death benefits. Out of tax payer dollars. You may be paying for her visit to Crawford. Hehe. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-cheer-the-right-wing-smear-machine/316768.md?page=13)