JMS Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 The National Enquirer played a big role in the Clinton Lewinsky affair and broke the John Edwards affair, now they're turning their investigative powers against the Republicans... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/03/mccain-camp-battles-natio_n_123696.html McCain Camp Battles National Enquirer Over Alleged Palin Affair John McCain's presidential campaign is threatening a lawsuit against the National Enquirer over a print edition story the tabloid ran today alleging that Gov. Sarah Palin has had an extramarital affair with her husband's business partner. The allegation would normally be dismissed by political observers as the random musings of a supermarket tabloid -- indeed, the McCain campaign said as much in its statements on Wednesday -- except that the paper has built up a reservoir of legitimacy following its earlier reporting on the John Edwards affair. In a statement to the Huffington Post, a spokesman for the paper, who promised a larger report next week, tapped into that pool of quasi-respect. "The National Enquirer's coverage of a vicious war within Sarah Palin's extended family includes several newsworthy revelations, including the resulting incredible charge of an affair plus details of family strife when the Governor's daughter revealed her pregnancy. Following our John Edwards' exclusives, our political reporting has obviously proven to be more detail-oriented than the McCain campaign's vetting process. Despite the McCain camp's attempts to control press coverage they find unfavorable, The Enquirer will continue to pursue news on both sides of the political spectrum." Clearly, this is a touchy matter. Already, rumors that Palin's youngest son was actually the son of her daughter were batted down. And the McCain campaign has strenuously insisted that the current crop of insinuations is not only false but also potentially libelous. "The smearing of the Palin family must end. The allegations contained on the cover of the National Enquirer insinuating that Gov. Palin had an extramarital affair are categorically false. It is a vicious lie," said McCain senior adviser Steve Schmidt. "The efforts of the media and tabloids to destroy this fine and accomplished public servant are a disgrace. The American people will reject it." But the Edwards reporting complicates matters. Just one month ago, conservatives were bemoaning the fact that no major media outlets had the temerity to follow the politically and personally sensitive rumors about the former North Carolina senator's infidelities. Jonah Goldberg, for example, wrote on the National Review's the Corner in later July that: "Whatever the merits of the whole Edwards love child story, are we really supposed to believe that one of America's most famous trial lawyers wouldn't sue a publication that printed defamatory and slanderous lies about him? Also, it's worth pointing out that while the Enquirer may or may not be scrupulous in its choice of stories -- that's in the eye of the beholder -- it is pretty scrupulous about its facts. They win lawsuits. They've broken a host of stories the MSM guys couldn't." Does the MSM now have an obligation to pursue this rumor, however touchy, or at least ask questions? "The "success" with Edwards no doubt will give them some more credibility, although we should remember that some of the allegations in their "lovechild" stories have been far from proven (although also far from disproven)," wrote Greg Mitchell, editor of Editor and Publisher Magazine. "Some of their Palin revelations may be quickly firmed up, prove bogus or more likely rest somewhere in-between for awhile. But what will be interesting is whether the Republicans and conservatives and MSM critics who jumped on the MSM and liberals for not quickly embracing the Enquirer's Edwards work will now pooh-pooh the Enquirer when it comes to THIS candidate....:" And yet, at the same time, the Enquirer's story may be something of a break for the McCain campaign, which has come under siege for the Palin pick. If the Arizona Senator and his aides are able to effectively portray attacks on the Palin as the product of smear, sleaze and innuendo, it clouds those that are more legitimate. And with new attack lines opening up against Palin seemingly every hour, Democrats may be even more hesitant about straying into the tawdry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 it will only bring it more attention Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 The real title is McCain Camp Battles National Enquirer Over Alleged Palin Affair curious, why did you black it out? nm, saw you fixed it, well kind of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted September 8, 2008 Author Share Posted September 8, 2008 The real title isMcCain Camp Battles National Enquirer Over Alleged Palin Affair curious, why did you black it out? nm, saw you fixed it It just posted that way(blacked out)... I fixed it.. I wonder if this could be true..... Seems to me McCain's campagne would know as Liberty pointed out, that a lawsuit would only magnify the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 They are getting traction with the US vs the media angle, so I expect this kind of stuff to continue for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 I hate this crap. It has nothing to do with how candidates can govern. I wish we'd get out of our politicians bedrooms be they Gary Hart, Edwards, Clinton, or Palin... the only time I think it's an issue is off they are soliciting for prostitutes (b/c) they're breaking the law or chasing down underage interns (because it's breaking the law). Otherwise, I don't care who has an affair with whom. Mind you, I realize we can never close Pandora's box... but I wish we could. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsD Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 I doubt it, I may not agree with her but she seems to be a stand-up woman. Regarding the Edwards' credibility, well even a broken clock is right twice a day. If the allegations are unsubstantiated I hope McCain sues the snot out of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted September 8, 2008 Author Share Posted September 8, 2008 I hate this crap. It has nothing to do with how candidates can govern. I wish we'd get out of our politicians bedrooms be they Gary Hart, Edwards, Clinton, or Palin... the only time I think it's an issue is off they are soliciting for prostitutes (b/c) they're breaking the law or chasing down underage interns (because it's breaking the law). Otherwise, I don't care who has an affair with whom.Mind you, I realize we can never close Pandora's box... but I wish we could. I kind of disagree with that. Bill Clinton was conductiong national business on the teliphone while he was fooling with his cigar and Lewinskey in the Oval Office. I think a candidates morals are fair game and always have been, the only thing that's changed is we are getting more information on those morals from the press. Having said that I think it's evenly split, Presidents since FDR who have had alledged affairs. Alledged Affairs. FDR Eisenhower Kennedy Clinton Bush Sr. No alligations of an affair. Truman Nixon Ford Carter Bush Jr. To support your point, All things being equal... I think Presidents who alledgely had the affairs were more consistantly better Presidents... But maybe that's a case for us to evaluate the information differently, not to cover up the information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACW Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 I hate this crap. It has nothing to do with how candidates can govern. I wish we'd get out of our politicians bedrooms be they Gary Hart, Edwards, Clinton, or Palin... the only time I think it's an issue is off they are soliciting for prostitutes (b/c) they're breaking the law or chasing down underage interns (because it's breaking the law). Otherwise, I don't care who has an affair with whom.Mind you, I realize we can never close Pandora's box... but I wish we could. Or when it's legal but hypocritical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panel Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 it will only bring it more attention They want that, sypathy for the Girl that keeps on getting picked on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Having said that I think the majority of our Presidents since FDR have had alledged affairs. No alligations of an affair. Nixon Are you kidding me? How do you think he got the nickname tricky dick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 I kind of disagree with that. Bill Clinton was conductiong national business on the teliphone while he was fooling with his cigar and Lewinskey in the Oval Office.I think a candidates morals are fair game for the press. I also think the reality we live in shouldn't be tailor bent, because of the latest scandal. Having said that I think the majority of our Presidents since FDR have had alledged affairs. Alledged Affairs. FDR Eisenhower Kennedy Clinton Bush Sr. No alligations of an affair. Truman Nixon Carter Bush Jr. All things being equal... I think folks who alledgely had the affairs were more consistantly better Presidents... Truman was better than all of the top list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 ... and where do you think that McCain first earned the reputation of being a flip flopper. Cindy McCain, duh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted September 8, 2008 Author Share Posted September 8, 2008 Are you kidding me? How do you think he got the nickname tricky dick? I could be wrong, but I've never heard any alligations of an affair by Nixon. Never. Tricky dick Coined by Democratic politician Helen Gahagan Douglas during the 1950 U.S. Senate race in California, in reference to Nixon's alleged use of dirty tricks during the campaign. Occasionally this name is also applied to current Vice President Dick Cheney. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Presidential_names#Richard_.28Milhous.29_Nixon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted September 8, 2008 Author Share Posted September 8, 2008 Truman was better than all of the top list. Kilmer, you had a nice thing to say about a liberal democrat? I didn't think you had it in you. One historical poll I saw put truman just outside of our greatest presidents. In the catagory of Great Presidents along with Regan. Those ranked above Truman were, in chronological order... Washington Jefferson Lincoln TR FDR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Dammit burgold use the sarcastic smile, your confusing people. :laugh: Are you kidding me? How do you think he got the nickname tricky dick? I could be wrong, but I've never heard any alligations of an affair by Nixon. Never.Tricky dick Coined by Democratic politician Helen Gahagan Douglas during the 1950 U.S. Senate race in California, in reference to Nixon's alleged use of dirty tricks during the campaign. Occasionally this name is also applied to current Vice PresidentDick Cheney. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Presidential_names#Richard_.28Milhous.29_Nixon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Truman would be a Republican in todays arena. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Much like, let's say, the President getting a blowjob from someone who isn't their wife, if she cheated on her husband, it's their business, not mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 I could be wrong, but I've never heard any alligations of an affair by Nixon. Never. My joke failed miserably Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Judges Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Despite the Enquirer getting the Edwards story correct, they still have zero credibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted September 8, 2008 Author Share Posted September 8, 2008 Truman would be a Republican in todays arena. Truman was a self described New Deal LIBERAL... He carried water and was in partnership with the most hated icon of the modern conservative movement. Franklin Delinor Roosevelt.. who oddly enough the godfather of the modern conservative momvement Ronald Regan supported throughout his four terms in office. How about this. Conservatives get to claim their icons.. Ronald Regan.. Likely the best president of my adult lifetime. And George Bush Jr., likely the worst. And liberals will claim their icons... those who called themselves liberals/progressives when they lived and fought against knee jerk, dogmatic conservatives in their day. Including Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt Harry Truman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted September 8, 2008 Author Share Posted September 8, 2008 Despite the Enquirer getting the Edwards story correct, they still have zero credibility. I believe they were among the leading papers in breaking the Clinton bimbo erruptions of the 1990's. They have a lot more than zero credibility. Just a lot less than the Washington Post or New York Times... The east coast liberal elitest papers which chose not to run with this story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 I disagree. He'd still be a Liberal. Just not a democrat. And you're right about Lincoln, he was a huge fed govt loving states rights hating liberal. Teddy would hate everyone even more today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 I hate this crap. It has nothing to do with how candidates can govern. I wish we'd get out of our politicians bedrooms be they Gary Hart, Edwards, Clinton, or Palin... the only time I think it's an issue is off they are soliciting for prostitutes (b/c) they're breaking the law or chasing down underage interns (because it's breaking the law). Otherwise, I don't care who has an affair with whom. Or if they're campaigning on a platform of "I'm more moral than you are" (which covers pretty much all of them, it you want it to) or "vote for me to protect the sanctity of Marriage"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted September 8, 2008 Author Share Posted September 8, 2008 Much like, let's say, the President getting a blowjob from someone who isn't their wife, if she cheated on her husband, it's their business, not mine. I'll bet you that the record sales for the Monday Sept 8th National Enquirer will give testiment that many many Americans are interested. Unclear if that will effect their votes yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.