esmaspäev, mai 31, 2004


Alex Polier traces a lie that ripped her life apart. Fascinating stuff about everything that's wrong with the modern media. And with Liz Bumiller picking up an unconfirmed, off-the-record Kerry quote from Drudge in her column today, I don't expect things to change much. The scenes where Polier confronts the lying scum that fed this story are fantastic. As is this:

More alarmingly, my Hotmail account had been broken into, and I couldn’t access my e-mail. Random people in my in-box whom I hadn’t spoken to in months suddenly started getting calls from reporters. My father called to tell me someone had tried the same thing with his account, but that his security software had intercepted them and tracked them back to a rogue computer address in Washington, D.C. When I finally got back into my account, assuming the hacker was a Republican, I changed my password to “Bushsucksdick.”

At least she had a sense of humor about it.

God, Drudge is truly slime. He may be the single worst thing that ever happened to political journalism. And yet, people take this dick seriously. This is his "defense":

“In retrospect, I should have had a sentence saying, ‘There is no evidence to tie Alex to John Kerry.’ I should have put that,” he told me. Then he added, “If Clark had not gone out there and said, ‘Kerry is going to bomb,’ I never, ever, would have gone anywhere near this.” Once he’d posted his initial story, he was then encouraged and gratified by the prompt coverage in the UK press. “When the London Times made it a banner headline, like we’re going to war, I realized this must be true. Murdoch is going all the way with this! For me to do media coverage was one thing, for them to jump from media coverage to say this is actually an affair between her and him and all the rest was something else!”


And he blames it on Clark for allegedly saying something he might have said that vaguely hinted at something that might possibly be an affair with an intern for somebody. Yeah, that's a real credible source. And his confidence in the British press is just bizarre. Well, unless you realize he's lying. "I realized this must be true." Because Rupert Murdoch's a real bastion of credibility. For the last time, Matt, a newspaper running a story that cites you as its only source does not validate your story. Your allegation cannot be used to prove itself. Just like the Washington Times running a story citing you as the only source for an off-the-record comment by Kerry does not lend any credibility to your original baseless allegation. It just makes both of you bad journalists at best and liars at worst.

I despise this creep so deeply.

(link via Atrios)

UPDATE: In response to the actual substance of the Eschaton post, I'd normally say that a staffer or even a candidate's sexual orientation is none of my business and should be kept out of the race. But in Bush's case, I say live by the bigot, die by the bigot. If he's going to run on an anti gay rights platform, then he has an obligation to inform right wing gay bashers if he's comfortable working with one of them homos. That's going to be relevant to their vote in their ignorant, hateful little minds, and if he wants them on his side, it's fair game in my book.

I'd also like to see him explain exactly what it is about his gay staffer that he feels makes him unfit for marriage and/or fatherhood. But that's probably asking too much. It would probably involve a lot of big words.

Cheap shot, I know, but it's late, I'm tired, and I really don't like the guy.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?