…with the possible exception of frequent AM talk-radio listeners…
Sorry, but would you give the same time to defending a Republican if some lame allegations were thrown his way? I`m thinking there was a prominent Republican a while back that had some dirt thrown on him and the media (along with the Democrats) jumped all over it and fed till their bellies were full.
Would you have expent the energy to defend that person?
Just asking.
I think this is a political ploy as much as you do. I don`t agree with the tactics, or the legs the press has given the story.
I don’t know what Republican you’re referring to but if the Dems or the media pulled something this baseless and malicious against a PUB I would be equally as critical.
I think the intern rumor was planted by the Kerry campaign. Hell, it would be the best way I can imagine to give the old Treebeard lookalike some mystery and sex appeal, not to mention lots of extra media attention. Then, when it turns out not to be true, he can claim he was smeared by those nasty Bush people. 
My guess is that he’s referring to Bush and the National Guard flap (which even I’m beginning to think is being overblown - I’m scared, because this is the first time I’ve ever thought, “y’know, maybe the Republicans have somewhat of a point on the liberal media thing”…).
Overblown or not, at least the Bush ANG thing is substantiallytrue. There is compelling circumstancial evidence that he never showed up in Alabama.
The Kerry “intern” thing was a complete fabrication. It wasn’t even a real allegation, just an insinuation of a possible allegation.
Now how can you say that? What’s your evidence that it’s a complete fabrication?
I think there’s a lot of smoke right now, and the media has a lot of leads and angles they aren’t telling us about. I was watching “The Mclaughlin Group” on Friday, and one of the questions was, “Does this story have legs?” And the answer from the panel was unanimous that there was more to this story and that it was going to keep on going.
Then there’s [url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/02/15/wus15.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/02/15/ixportaltop.html]this* in the Telegraph:
That, coupled with the girl’s parents calling Kerry a ‘sleazeball’ doesn’t really jibe with the notion that this was an innocent thing.
But really, we have no idea what this is all about. If the media has uncorroborated stuff they are trying to dig up, they sure aren’t telling us about it. So we’ll just have to wait and see.
“nastier stuff” like what?
See what I mean. It’s awfyully easy to toss an utterly meaningless and unsubstantaited phrase into the air and then just let it fester.
Even this girl’s parents say he didn’t fuck her, so what the hell is the story? At most he may have hit on her.
Even if he did fuck her (and there’s no allegation that he did), who gives a shit? That’s not illegal.
Like I said, we really have no idea. I was just taking exception to your categorical claim that this whole thing was fabricated. Premature? Sure. Likely not much there? I’d agree. But “a complete fabrication”? We have no way of knowing at this point.
But if you’re a good Democrat, you should hope above all that this doesn’t get covered up, because the last thing you should want is a candidate who has a skeleton in the closet that Karl Rove can sink his teeth into. Far better to get this all out into the open now. If it’s not too damaging, great. But if there’s something truly bad in there, wouldn’t you rather dump Kerry now and go with, say, Edwards?
Now, if it IS true that he had a 2-year affair with this girl, it may be a private issue, and I couldn’t give a rat’s ass about the morality. For all I know, the guy has an open marriage. But the one thing that would bother me is this: What kind of guy decides to run for president knowing that this is in his closet? What kind of guy takes a risk sacrificing his whole career so that he can get laid? Doesn’t that say something about Kerry’s judgement, if not his morals?
That was always my big problem with the Lewinsky scandal (and I wasn’t one of the people going after Clinton about it - not a big deal to me). But what bothered me was that it was reckless, and showed a certain lack of control and a lot of bad judgement. That speaks to his judgement on other matter, in my opinion.
Exactly my feelings too.
If the guy has a problem being faithful to his wife…
Anyway, there are other candidates out there without the (alleged) baggage that I like better anyway. I personally like Edwards. I think his candor and honesty bring something to the table. Too bad that aint the way the guys are judged.
If I had known Bush would have created the crease that he has within the Republican party et al, then I would not have supported him so strongly. I admire character and honesty in the POTUS. Matters not the party.
There are things that Bush could do/say that could easily repair the riff, for whatever reasons he has chosen to be silent so far. I hope he brings it in the next year or so.
Now how can you say that? What’s your evidence that it’s a complete fabrication?
I think there’s a lot of smoke right now, and the media has a lot of leads and angles they aren’t telling us about. I was watching “The Mclaughlin Group” on Friday, and one of the questions was, “Does this story have legs?” And the answer from the panel was unanimous that there was more to this story and that it was going to keep on going.
Then there’s [url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/02/15/wus15.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/02/15/ixportaltop.html]this* in the Telegraph:
That, coupled with the girl’s parents calling Kerry a ‘sleazeball’ doesn’t really jibe with the notion that this was an innocent thing.
But really, we have no idea what this is all about. If the media has uncorroborated stuff they are trying to dig up, they sure aren’t telling us about it. So we’ll just have to wait and see.
If GWB like to molest cub scouts…
Please refrain from posting after indulging.
BTW, I said if. I realize that this is nothing at this point.
Posting is indulging.
of course. 
What’s *your * “evidence” that it’s anything at all? Just the “unanimous” statements of some talking heads who don’t know any more than you do, which is zero, but are still just as glad to ladle shit over our heads. Ah, the power to believe what one wishes to be true, facts be damned, shows up in a Sam post yet again.
Let 'em become the front runner, and see how much ‘baggage’ they suddenly have.
I have none. My comments so far have been restricted to speculating on what the result might be IF this turns out to be true. Or is that off-limits on this message board too? We’re not allowed to discuss possible ramifications of breaking news? My position is that it’s FAR too early to make any absolute statements about the veracity of this, one way or another.
Ah, the inevitable personal slam shows up in an ElvisL1ves message once again.
What a ridiculous statement. The veracity of what? There isn’t even a clearly defined allegation.
I heard a rumor that GWB once snorted coke off Dick Cheney’s ass. Is it too early to judge the veracity of my claim?
At least my question involves a clear accusation.