Media Hipocrisy

[Blitz]

FLASHBACK: MEDIA GRILLED BUSH OVER 'ADULTERY' CLAIMS

As main press players blast the DRUDGE REPORT and foreign outlets for revealing details of a behind-the-scenes campaign drama surrounding candidate Kerry and the nature of his relationship with a mystery woman -- just 12 years ago the same players peppered former President George Bush with questions surrounding an infidelity rumor!

In 1992 top reporters swiftly reacted to a footnote in a book quoting a long dead ambassador.

CNN rushed to get the rumor into the media stream as White House correspondent Mary Tillotson confronted President Bush as he hosted Israel Prime Minister Rabin in the Oval Office.

"There is an extensive series of reports in today's New York Post alleging that a former U.S. ambassador, a man now deceased, had told several persons that he arranged for a sexual tryst involving you and one of your female staffers in Geneva in 1984."

Asked NBC's Stone Phillips to the president's face at the height of the "rumor mongering":

"Have you ever had an affair?"

CBS' Harry Smith then confronted Bush spokesperson Mary Matalin over on-air morning coffee:

"Let me ask you about something else. There's a book out, or a book that's just about out that in a footnote names that then-Vice President Bush had an affair with an assistant when he was on a mission in Geneva. Well, that footnote has turned into frontpage news (holding up N.Y.POST), at least in New York, in the N.Y. POST. Albeit a tabloid, it is usually a conservative newspaper. Are you ready to say that accusation is a flat out lie?"

NEWSWEEK's Jonathan Alter defended the aggressive adultery rumor line-of-questioning of the first President Bush on ABC's NIGHTLINE on August 12, 1992, on a broadcast titled: "The Media Charges George Bush With Adultery."

"In this situation, the Oval Office isn't a temple," Alter explained. "The President is a candidate and he has to be asked tough, often distasteful, but nonetheless important kinds of questions."

UPI's Helen Thomas also defended the Bush affair reportage:

"Some people might have felt that it wasn't appropriate. But when you have the President there, I think it's very legitimate to ask him any question."

CUT TO 2004:

NEWSWEEK'S Alter blasted any and all coverage of the Kerry infidelity probe last week on a New York City talkradio outlet -- calling the investigation "sleazy."

The media outrage over an erupting story of possible infidelity of a presidential candidate -- 2004 -- peaked with Joe Conason's cover story in SALON late last week ["There he goes again! Matt Drudge and the GOP smear machine are back in the Democrats' pants"]

Conason lamented:

"But the kind of proof usually required by national news organizations isn't what Drudge needs in order to put innuendo into circulation."

But is this really the same Joe Conason who in the Summer of 1992 wrote a magazine cover story entitled "1,000 REASONS NOT TO VOTE FOR GEORGE BUSH?"

Consaon's reason #1:

"He cheats on his wife."

The rumor of President Bush having an affair was never proved by the media.

The developing Kerry drama may or may not join it on the shelf.

 

[acehistr8]

Of course Blitz, couldnt agree more. Read my post this week on why is the media shunning the Kerry story COMPLETELY. Not one whiff of it on any major news outlet. True or not true, there is certainly enough circumstantial evidence to support a story, and CERTAINLY they have run with higher profile stories on less evidence before. Only now that it has gotten out are they starting to carry it, and moreso they are carrying the girls denial than reporting the actual story.

This is what I said a few days ago when the story first came out:

"Just realized places like CNN, Fox, Washington Post, USA Today, New York Times - not a hint of the potential Kerry intern scandal. Not even a whiff. Not having a 110% concrete story has NEVER stopped these outlets from running with stories. Is this a coincidence? They have had days and hundreds of pages of Bush's National Guard service and his rumored misdoings there - which I admit stinks to high hell. The New York Times has 3 articles today on it, most of which say the papers were released, we learned nothing new. Three articles on it. I think if Bush even whiffed of something like this it would be all over the front page. But the whole press-bias debate aside, doesnt anyone else find this odd?? Ive never, ever bought into that argument of the left leaning media even though I am right leaning myself, but not one front page byte that I can see on the Keary/intern thing? Certainly this story has legs to stand on right now, including Dean potentially backing out of his pledge to drop out of the race after Wisconsin because he knew this story might break. There are too many little pieces coming out and not one site is going to take a stab at this? Not even a mention of it and stating that its not true. Not many people thought the Monica Lewinsky story was true either at first.

Whats up with that?"

----------------

One reason I love reading foreign papers, which I recommend anyone does in a situation like this, is they tend to give a much more objective view of American politics, nothing tainted by our press, whether its CNN on the left or Fox on the right.

From the BBC : (good luck finding this in the Post or NYT)

"The Washington Post London correspondent Glenn Frankel, a Pulitzer Prize winner and former editor of the Post's Sunday magazine, defended his newspaper's editorial judgment.

"We've been down this road many, many times before. We are extremely reluctant to follow this kind of thing up unless there is a really, really compelling public interest. We don't feel there is any reason to until it reaches a threshold.

"All we have at the moment is that the woman's parents, who are republicans, don't like Senator Kerry.

"In any case, nobody would be too shocked if Kerry lied about an affair. Even if someone came to us with photographs we still wouldn't run it. Lying to Don Imus [the radio host to whom Kerry gave his initial denial] is not a federal offence."

-----------------------------

What a crock.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Was small mention of it on fox last night,the 1st I heard them speak of it. They said that the alleged lady said rumor was unfounded--but did not elaborate.

--a little on Kerry While Bush was invited to Nascar and was shown saying Gentlemen start your engines--it quickly went to Kerry taunting statement in retort saying-- Start the economy.
While he harps on economy he fails to have any answers or one what he would do to create jobs.--there is no way that I am aware of. Is increasing taxes going to do it. Name just one issue he has to create jobs. In fact name one issue he has to solve anything. He and Dean have campaigned basically on negative retorts on current adminstration and little on solving anything.
Once again I think the election will be swung by independents and they are above ave on issues and savvy for most part and are turned off by negative politics for most part.
While the elections weigh heavily on most here, I can imagine what is going thru minds of countries that joined in fight against terrorist. They have MUCH more riding on results then the U.S.

---and as I said prior the time is drawing near when shoe will be on other foot and we can see how Kerry handles it.
He says "bring it on" here is just the tip of iceberg on whats coming
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...ts_usatoday/howthebushteamwilltrytopaintkerry