Comments on: delicious dish!

delicious dish!

amberglow — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 13:27:45 -0800

RumorFilter: The Family by Kitty Kelley, comes out on the 14th. It reveals how Dubya has had a very special friend in the mayor of a Tennessee city, who has has cohabited at the Texas ranch many times is just one of the rumors flying around about this book. Kitty's written about Sinatra, Nancy Reagan, Jackie O, and the Royals, so what's she got up her chiffon sleeves this time? Start dishing!

By: Pretty_Generic

Pretty_Generic — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 13:39:59 -0800

oblig But is Bush really resourceful enough to come up with the concept of anal sex? NO WAR FOR VASELINE

By: loquax

loquax — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 13:58:55 -0800

So the lies that Zell Miller told about Kerry's voting record are disgusting, and the Swift Boat Liars are the scum of the earth, but this is cute fun, right? Not to mention fair. Of course, maybe GWB really does have a crush on his mom. Not sure I want to see the proof of that though.

By: jfuller

jfuller — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:05:14 -0800

Oh, for goodness' sake, remember where you are and who you're talking to. Thou shalt not expect fairness on metafilter. Except maybe in science- or technical-topic threads (that don't involve Macintoshes.)

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:11:06 -0800

why play fair when the other side doesn't? get real. we've had the swift boat lies, the convention lies, etc...

By: Pretty_Generic

Pretty_Generic — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:11:43 -0800

This is a comedy blog post. Zell Miller and the Swift Boat Liars, while a fantastic blue-grass band, aren't so trivial.

By: dhoyt

dhoyt — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:11:51 -0800

Shallow, petty gossip-mongering is aw3s0me when it happens to defame someone you disagree with politically!

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:16:42 -0800

it is! it is! : >

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:17:30 -0800

(and seeing you guys get upset about it is 1/2 the fun!)

By: Armitage Shanks

Armitage Shanks — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:18:26 -0800

So the lies that Zell Miller told about Kerry's voting record are disgusting, and the Swift Boat Liars are the scum of the earth, but this is cute fun, right? No, it's just trash. If Kitty Kelley was giving the keynote speech at the Democratic Convention, or running political ads in collusion with John Kerry's buddies, it would be disgusting.

By: jpoulos

jpoulos — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:19:46 -0800

So the lies that Zell Miller told about Kerry's voting record are disgusting, and the Swift Boat Liars are the scum of the earth, but this is cute fun, right? Is Kitty Kelly being secretly funded by John Kerry or his cronies? Is she presenting this silly bullshit at the DNC on primetime television? It's total scumbag yellow journalism, but it isn't the same as the swifties or Zell.

By: David Dark

David Dark — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:21:02 -0800

The 11 point lead is getting under their skin. It's only going to get worse in the coming weeks, but it will be all over soon.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:24:09 -0800

Even the freepers and the Repubs at the RNC are afraid of this: Republican insiders have been huddling in small groups at the Republican Convention this week and talking about what worries them most. It is not John Kerry. It is not the unemployment numbers. It is not Iraq. It is Kitty Kelley. Kelley has a new book coming out in a few weeks titled "The Family: The Real Story of the Bush Dynasty” and it is rumored to be explosive. One source tells me there are “at least five bombshells” contained in it and another source says there is allegedly new material on President Bush’s service in the Air National Guard.

By: bashos_frog

bashos_frog — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:24:20 -0800

It's the "mutual" part of mutual assured destruction that makes it so fun. I would have denounced this book as complete trash, were it not for the Swift Boat Liars. Now, I just think - "hey, payback's a bitch." To all the wingnuts complaining about "fairness" - get off it. This is the fairest thing that could happen. What goes around comes around. Let's see how "self-inflicted wound" stands up to "incestuous cokehead baby-killer."

By: Armitage Shanks

Armitage Shanks — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:25:58 -0800

It's total scumbag yellow journalism, but it isn't the same as the swifties or Zell. It is sort of interesting that anyone would see it as that way, though. I mean, how low does a party have to sink when its keynote speech could even be compared to a Kitty Kelley book?

By: Nelson

Nelson — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:29:53 -0800

I want my country back.

By: adamrice

adamrice — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:31:50 -0800

That's nothin'. I read that Cheney can stop watches with a glance.

By: reklaw

reklaw — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:32:14 -0800

Is the election in the most powerful country in the world really going to be decided in a duel between attack ads and a trashy biography? This must all just be a bad dream.

By: inksyndicate

inksyndicate — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:36:09 -0800

But will it convince this nubile woman ... or this one? She's stick of these "protestors who don't know the facts."

By: transona5

transona5 — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:39:03 -0800

Unless there's some really solid evidence for this, it's not just trash journalism - it could end up helping Bush. The Swift Boat stuff worked because it played into an image of Kerry that his opponents have, rather successfully, been trying to promote all along. No one has an image of Bush as being gay. It's just going to look like desperation from Kerry. No, that's not fair - Kitty Kelley has no ties to the Kerry campaign. But I can't see this helping.

By: Secret Life of Gravy

Secret Life of Gravy — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:51:04 -0800

Until I read this thread I was completely dismissive of her book-- just as I have been dismissive of all her previous books. But now as a flaming liberal femnazi I am actually bemused. When the bookshelves at Barnes & Noble are groaning under the weight of anti-bush tomes why are the Republicans getting their panties in a twist over this trash? Is it because Mr. & Mrs. Middle America are much more likely to read Kitty Kelley, rather than Molly Ivins? So I'm struck with the idea of having a fat cat Democrat buy up the Star and leave in all the lurid gossip and inane diet advice but lard the rag with small, anti-Republican stories. You know, "Bush Twins Give Head To The Entire UCLA Football Team." "Dick Cheney Runs Over Small, Cute Black Child But Buys Off Folks To Keep Mum." George Bush Secret Dog Hater." Just a thought.

By: sequential

sequential — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:53:11 -0800

this is cute fun, right? Not to mention fair

No, it's not cute fun. If they are rumors, it's disgusting. If they are substantiated truths, it's serious business. Was the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ad campaign cute fun? Was it fair?

Is the election in the most powerful country in the world really going to be decided in a duel between attack ads and a trashy biography? This must all just be a bad dream.

Well put, reklaw.

The 11 point lead is getting under their skin

The Time poll has been thoroughly trashed by supporters of both parties. The Newsweek poll is in the process of being completely destroyed. From their methodology section:

"In order that everyone in the household has an equal chance of being interviewed, we asked for the youngest male, 18 years or older. If no male is available was available, we asked for the oldest female, 18 years or older. Asking this question helps to increase the level of chance and make sure that we speak with a diverse population."

I don't doubt Bush has had a bounce, even a bigger bounce than Kerry. In fact, knowing how the national polls are conducted, Bush should poll with a 3% - 5% lead, even when he's not leading in the state by state polls. The double digit leads in national polls by Time and Newsweek are dishonest and unprofesional. By quoting them as a source of your pride or the source of your oppositions irritation, you look foolish.

By: quonsar

quonsar — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:54:09 -0800

No one has an image of Bush as being gay.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:54:12 -0800

...it could end up helping Bush. Too bad Republicans don't think so. They're really afraid of this. Everything she writes becomes news, and sometimes big news, and she sells millions of copies of each book. People do have the persistent idea of Bush benefiting from nepotism and family connections as opposed to his own intelligence and initiative, which this book surely will document and reinforce, among other things. We'll see how effectively the Repub slime machine battles this.

By: transona5

transona5 — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 15:03:57 -0800

People do have the persistent idea of Bush benefiting from nepotism and family connections as opposed to his own intelligence and initiative An accurate idea, and one that should have hurt him a lot more last time. I would just hate to see some wild sex rumors discredit it by association.

By: KevinSkomsvold

KevinSkomsvold — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 15:14:53 -0800

The 11 point lead is getting under their skin. It's only going to get worse in the coming weeks, but it will be all over soon. Like a boy whistling in the dark to keep up his spirits. Keep trying!

By: 2sheets

2sheets — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 15:25:05 -0800

I wouldn't be that surprised if there were a bombshell or two, but it they will quickly be overshadowed by some idiotic gay alien drug dealer rumor because Kittly Kelly is a hack. Anybody that's been paying attention knows that Bush very likely skipped out on his military obligation, did cocaine, paid for a girlfriend's abortion and cooked the books and engaged in insider trading at Harken. He was a spoiled little rich boy who would probably be selling used cars by now if his wife hadn't made him go sober. (mostly) And none of this apparently matters, so if anything I'm afraid this book will garner sympathy for him. And if any DNC people were behind this, they're bigger idiots than I thought and have pretty much fucked us and the rest of the civilized world.

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 15:25:11 -0800

The right's lack of care when quoting discredited statistics or facts is what makes them most dangerous. Having to remind certain posters every single time that the bush / hitler ad was a contest entry and not something that can be tied to moveon.org, despite the fact that they already know this, is a good example of how facts don't get in the way of a good polemic for them.

By: elwoodwiles

elwoodwiles — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 15:25:36 -0800

It warms my heart to see such a high level of political discourse on MeFi. Really, though, it's pretty sad watching people fight their way to the bottom. The rationalization that 'they lie, why can't we' is so undignified, I have no response other than roll my eyes and sigh.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 15:27:26 -0800

the DNC is not behind it at all--they're just as afraid she'll do it to them. (I'm betting we see a Hillary book by Kitty before the decade's out)

By: kgasmart

kgasmart — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 16:01:59 -0800

So the lies that Zell Miller told about Kerry's voting record are disgusting, and the Swift Boat Liars are the scum of the earth, but this is cute fun, right? Not to mention fair Fuck fair. Tell me, if the left plays fair, will Limbaugh, Coulter, et al back off? You hit below the belt, prepare for a shot in the nuts. That's where we're at right now. And that the right might whine about this state of affairs just astounds me. They created this state of affairs, or at the very least, permitted it to exist.

By: monju_bosatsu

monju_bosatsu — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 16:29:53 -0800

Quick, it's a race to the bottom! Last one there still has their dignity!

By: elwoodwiles

elwoodwiles — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 16:36:10 -0800

Fuck fair. Tell me, if the left plays fair, will Limbaugh, Coulter, et al back off? No, but if the left played fair perhaps people like Limbaugh and Coulter will be exposed as the hate-mongering, undignified ideologues that they are. Rise above it people, don't feed the trolls.

By: Eekacat

Eekacat — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 16:37:44 -0800

Well, there is always crap like this waiting in the wings.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 16:38:25 -0800

Since when is Kitty Kelley part of the Left? That's surprising news to me, and millions of her readers.

By: kgasmart

kgasmart — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 16:44:17 -0800

No, but if the left played fair perhaps people like Limbaugh and Coulter will be exposed as the hate-mongering, undignified ideologues that they are. Yeah. That's worked since Limbaugh came to prominence, what, 10 years ago? The Swift Boat ads were slimy. The Swift Boat ads worked. Willie Horton was slimy; Willie Horton worked. Given the American public's propensity to respond to crap like this, it gives the Democrats a choice: Retain your "dignity" and lose. Or get into the gutter and fight like a bastard with the idea that the end justifies the means - just like the Republicans. Nice and out of power; nasty and a leg up. To their credit, the Democrats are finally beginning to get it.

By: elwoodwiles

elwoodwiles — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 16:54:16 -0800

It's sad that political discourse is now about dirty tricks, lying and manipulation. It's sadder still that some people accept that. Perhaps, soon, a progressive movement will finally rise out of the ashes of the democratic party and bring issues and ideas to the political table. The democratic party has been wandering in the wilderness for many years now, but that doesn't mean they should go feral. amber, I don't think Kitty Kelley is part of the left, but you are. It's your use of Kelley to further your political stance that bothers me. I agree with you on many issues, but this form of political attack seems, to me at least, counter-productive.

By: kgasmart

kgasmart — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 17:03:57 -0800

The democratic party has been wandering in the wilderness for many years now, but that doesn't mean they should go feral. With all due respect, elwood, I get f*cking sick of people saying that it's the Democrats who ought to back off, it's the Democrats who need to take the high road, it's the fact that the Democrats have finally decided to hit back that is driving the discourse to the bottom. Why is the right never held to this standard? Where are all the fair-minded conservatives saying to the likes of Coulter, "Stop it"? Where is the repudiation of the right's most effective and slimiest propagandists? Tell you what, the right can impress me by taking the log out of its eye before worrying about the speck in the left's eye.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 17:09:26 -0800

amber, I don't think Kitty Kelley is part of the left, but you are. It's your use of Kelley to further your political stance that bothers me. I don't need to further my political stance--it's crystal-clear to all here, and i'm secure in it. Gossip is always fun, and when it's about the rich and powerful (and as a bonus--the rich and powerful i dislike), it's even more fun. This is not an attack--an attack would be far nastier than just gossip about a Kitty Kelley book. An attack would be more like that link Eekacat just posted.

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 17:12:40 -0800

Obligatory:

I have been thinking that I would make a proposition to my Republican friends.... That if they will top telling lies about the Democrats, we will stop telling the truth about them.

Adlai Stevenson

By: elwoodwiles

elwoodwiles — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 17:22:20 -0800

I do see your point, kgasmart, but I worry that going on the offensive is the last step of the republicization of the democratic party. The democrats stopped representing the left during the Clinton years and one of the few things that made them different from the right was they tried to act polite in public and based arugments on issues and policies. Now it seems the democratic party is moving to the right in form as well as policy. Gossip is always fun If you say so, but I don't think you posted this out of pure fun. Maybe, I'm wrong, maybe you did post it for giggles, but it does seem a cheap attack on Bush. Bush is so easily attackable I just don't understand why we are wasting are time discussing this trash.

By: kgasmart

kgasmart — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 17:31:06 -0800

The democrats stopped representing the left during the Clinton years and one of the few things that made them different from the right was they tried to act polite in public and based arguments on issues and policies. And in a perfect world, the American public would respond to arguments based on issues and policies. Maybe there was a time when they did; what a glorious, enlightened time that must have been. But when the right throws, say, this Swift Boat shit at Kerry and it begins to affect the electorate's view, you can come to but one conclusion. I tend to think that this is the death spiral of this republic. Because this sort of negative campaign shit works, the right will never abandon it and the left has finally wised up and adopted it. But in the long run it does create a country where the interaction between red and blue consists of snarling across the dividing line. Not the kind of country I really want to bring my kid up in. But for the left, the alternate is to sit down and shut up and watch the right drive the country over the cliff (to be fair, I'm sure this is exactly what the right thinks, as well). And ultimately, if we are going to step back from this brink, either the American public is going to have to get smarter - not likely - or the right is going to have to take the first step. Lord knows they took the first step onto the precipice.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 17:39:35 -0800

trash is fun, elwood--trashy gossip about Bush is even more fun. Granted, it's spiteful fun, but fun just the same. This doesn't deserve the analysis and hand-wringing--save it for important stuff, no? And, again, this is not a Democratic thing--it's an upcoming book. What kgasmart's been saying is absolutely right, too, but that's a more general thing--all attacks coming from the right must be met with counterattacks and not just defensive measures--they're playing for blood.

By: jonp72

jonp72 — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 17:45:22 -0800

So I'm struck with the idea of having a fat cat Democrat buy up the Star and leave in all the lurid gossip and inane diet advice but lard the rag with small, anti-Republican stories. When you consider that Rupert Murdoch got his start as a conservative propagandist as a titan of the British tabloids, this idea is not as crazy as it sounds.

By: substrate

substrate — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 17:54:31 -0800

There's a huge difference between Swift Vote Veterans for Truth and Kitty Kelley. Kitty is a gossip columnist, she has zero credibility. She isn't affiliated with any party that I know of and I highly doubt she'll appointed to any panels in the Department of Veteran Affairs. The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth deserve zero credibility but they get some. People don't like to call a veteran a liar, even when the veterans are calling another group of veterans liars. I don't think it's funny and I won't be reading it, I won't be purchasing it and I'll do my best to avoid even reading about it. What I would love is a t-shirt though. Swift Boat Veterans for Truth on top with a bunch of puppets on the front with long Pinnochio like noses. On the back of the shirt the puppets pants should be on fire.

By: David Dark

David Dark — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 19:46:02 -0800

You know, if you take the time to skim through amberglow's article and subsequent freeper comments, it's clear how badly the queen has misrepresented it. No one is expressing the least bit of concern or worry over this. Take this, for example, from the article: “Ms. Kelley asserts that Mrs. Reagan will go down in history as the cold and glittering icon for a morally vacuous era. The author says the former First Lady reinvented herself with a tissue of fabrications about her background, age and family, just as her free-spirited mother did before her; that she had her nose fixed and her eyes lifted; that both the Reagans had extramarital affairs, and that Mrs. Reagan had a long-term affair with Frank Sinatra.” Wow, the power of Kitty Kelley. She changed the entire legacy of the Reagans, didn't she? There really might be something to fret about here other than the state of amberglow's moral character.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 19:55:24 -0800

Wow, the need to disparage me. You really are worried about this book.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 20:02:08 -0800

Go on, David--when it's on top of the bestseller list, like her other books, i'll still be laughing. Millions of people all walking around with it, quoting especially salacious parts to their friends....lol!

By: substrate

substrate — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 20:03:10 -0800

I think David Dark likes you likes you amberglow, if you know what I mean.

By: mdeatherage

mdeatherage — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 20:05:52 -0800

The fallacy in all this "death of the republic" hand-wringing is the notion the the republic is healthy if one of the two major political parties spends all day every day playing dirty, but it's instantly fatal if both parties do it. Try these principles:

Troll-prophylactic: it's unacceptable to hit a man in the nuts with a baseball bat.
If someone is hitting you in the nuts with a baseball bat, every minute of every day, politely asking him to stop and telling him that his behavior is unacceptable is not going to help you, especially after ten or fifteen years of him getting away with it.
If you want to stop the bastard, you have to grab the bat and hit him back in the nuts with it, over and over again, until he stops forever.

The war will either destroy both parties (in which case new ones will arise), or it will stop the attacking party (the GOP smear machine) from doing it again. There is absolutely no scenario where ignoring a vicious dirty attack will make it go away. This has been proven over the past fifteen years of American politics. The Democrats can either attack back harder, or they can stand there and get hit in the figurative testicles all day, every day, and wonder why the bystanders don't make the GOP stop. If they were going to make it stop, it would have happened by now. Counterattack or die. (I also think it shows something about the GOP mentality that anyone who says anything bad about the Bush family is immediately assumed to be working for the DNC. Whether the book is trash or not, every criticism of a US President is not partisan politics. Some of it's just deliciously trashy gossip.)

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 20:11:44 -0800

This one's just for you, David: SHARON Bush, the estranged wife of George Bush’s younger brother, Neil, is looking for a publisher for a tell-all book about her two decades with the Bush family. ... In addition, she had a long lunch with the biographer Kitty Kelley, famous for her deeply unflattering 1991 portrait of Nancy Reagan, and who is researching her own book on the Bush family. Ms Bush is considering serving as a source for Ms Kelley’s book, as well as writing her own, her agent, Wayne Kabak, told the Observer. substrate: ewwww

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 20:50:30 -0800

ooh, just a little more: Cindy Adams: Vetting of Kitty Kelley's book on the Bush dynasty has cost $1 million; drugs, mistresses, and Sharon Bush included. . . ; >

By: eriko

eriko — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 21:08:04 -0800

You all are forgetting the standard rule. IOKIFYAR. Publishing complete lies about a democrat? That's ok. Publish any detrimental news about a republican? That's wrong, just wrong, why do you hate America? Note that Zell Miller's speech is getting much play as being wrong. Note that Zell Miller is a democrat. IOKIFYAR. Hint, so called liberals. You either fight, right now, or you die. My guess, after watching for the last decade? You'll die. Which sucks. Bush Uber Alles is not a land I want to live in. But I can't count on you to fight -- you've rolled over every time. Which means I'll lose. I'm not certain who to hate more.

By: t r a c y

t r a c y — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 21:15:10 -0800

I get f*cking sick of people saying that it's the Democrats who ought to back off, it's the Democrats who need to take the high road, etc., ect... as an uninvolved bystander this has always mystified me... the republicans get away with all their unethical behaviour and are in fact supported in it by those that vote for them, but the democrats aren't even allowed to stand up for themselves and squeak out a tame rebuttal, let alone go blow for blow with their adversaries. I think David Dark likes you likes you amberglow, if you know what I mean. yep. there's something going on there. fear, unspoken tingly feelings... who knows, but it's palpable. IOKIFYAR eriko, please translate...

By: soyjoy

soyjoy — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 21:17:18 -0800

You know, if you take the time to skim through amberglow's article and subsequent freeper comments, it's clear how badly the queen has misrepresented it. Like many of you, my jaw dropped open when I read this gratuitously bigoted last phrase, and in the millisecond that I wondered, who in the fuck would be such a complete idiot as to say such a thing? my answer formed just an instant before I read the username... Of course. Ooooooooooooh, how "Dark"... Also: kgasmart has been taking a lot of heat without a lot of "huzzah"s. Well, Huzzah. Listen, fellow sensitive-new-age-homolefties: It's gone beyond the traditional stick-to-your-underlying-noble-principles-and-claim-the-higher-moral-ground dynamic and moved, through the sacrificing of a thousand young Americans, into the realm of do-we-allow-complet-fucking-shitheads-to-stoop-to-the-lowest-possible-violent-cynical-asshole-denominator-and-dance-to-their-jingo-tune-for-another-four-years dynaimc now, and although my phrasing of it is undoubtedly clumsy, kgasmart has said it better, and repeatedly, on this thread already. So, Huzzah.

By: PrinceValium

PrinceValium — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 21:36:56 -0800

It's OK If You Are A Republican.

By: cell divide

cell divide — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 21:42:07 -0800

I believe that the Bush family is corrupt (like most political dynasties), and has many problems (as most families do). They are not a net positive influence on the country, and have taken more then they've given in their record of public 'service'. HOWEVER, Kitty Kelly is the lowest of the low, a trash hound who tries to ruin people's lives with allegations that cannot be "disproven" because they are based on misdirection, grey areas, and anonymous sources. I have personal experience of her trashing a family member in print, printing things that basically took the circumstances of one event and grafted it onto another, which completely altered the meaning of the events and (briefly) ruined lives. Just because she's printing lies again about people you may not agree with politically or morally, doesn't mean you should celebrate her. She's an entertainer, not a journalist, and you sully yourself by wallowing in her filth.

By: solistrato

solistrato — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 22:07:52 -0800

You sully yourself by delving into electoral politics. I mean, come on -- America has a rich and varied history of negative campaigning. Why should this election be any different? When did it become some sort of rule that dignity has to be attached to a political campaign?

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 23:03:57 -0800

Hint, so called liberals. You either fight, right now, or you die. If only that were true. Then we'd be havin' some fun, I tells ya.

By: semmi

semmi — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 23:04:26 -0800

No, but if the left played fair perhaps people like Limbaugh and Coulter will be exposed as the hate-mongering, undignified ideologues that they are. The left hasn't played fair?

By: mwhybark

mwhybark — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 23:06:26 -0800

The war will either destroy both parties (in which case new ones will arise), or it will stop the attacking party (the GOP smear machine) from doing it again. So, everybody wins, both ways! Let's get down in the mud! Seriously, this is the only way the Dems can retain viability as a party. Fighting dirty can revitalize democracy by returning stakes to the act of voting. And, for the love of the country, this is how it was done for pretty near two hundred years, until media consolidation created an artificial consensus about what was and was not cricket, or kosher, or whatever. George Soros, it's your patriotic duty to buy the Post and fire up some libel-suit stories! Everybody, get to work! Democracy itself is at stake!

By: mwhybark

mwhybark — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 23:09:12 -0800

Oh, sorry, I forgot: establishing an effective opposition might actually threaten to dismantle corporate oligarchy. Never mind! Gloves off, everybody.

By: David Dark

David Dark — Sat, 04 Sep 2004 23:19:17 -0800

Jesus, people. That's not the first time I've called amberglow a queen, and it won't be the last. I can assure you, I'm no fag and no bigot, I'm hetero and happily married, but my weekly poker table last weekend was inhabited by no less than three homos who I unabashedly call my friends. Relax.

By: coelecanth

coelecanth — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 06:03:02 -0800

all attacks coming from the right must be met with counterattacks and not just defensive measures--they're playing for blood. the war will either destroy both parties [...] Counterattack or die. Hint, so called liberals. You either fight, right now, or you die. I'm amazed at the hysteria in this thread.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 06:04:02 -0800

What kind of poker did you use?

By: eriko

eriko — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 06:19:13 -0800

I'm amazed at the hysteria in this thread. Well, I'm not the one bombing clinics, or shooting doctors, or rioting outside of poll precincts, or smashing democratic election offices, or dragging gays to their death behind a truck, or mailing anthrax out to democratic leaders in congress, or, or, or. I'm not the one with the radio show, or who's columns are syndicated nationally, advocating that liberals be treated as traitors, and bemoaning the fact that terrorists didn't hit a "liberal" newspaper instead. Hysteria? I passed that a long time ago. Now, I just know this: The right-wing has been on a decade long campaign advocating that violence against "liberals" is not only acceptable, it's a good thing to do.

By: Witty

Witty — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 06:41:38 -0800

David Dark - amberglow is just a little bitch... knows it and loves it. She's just a proud dangling member of the liberal hypocritical machine (in denial) that is Metafilter. As long as the gossip and trash is fun, it's good enough for them. No thanks.

By: jpoulos

jpoulos — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 06:51:19 -0800

psmeasly wins!

By: jpoulos

jpoulos — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 07:07:57 -0800

David Dark: Did you seriously just say Some of my best friends are gay? And Witty, WTF? Fuck you both.

By: bashos_frog

bashos_frog — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 07:09:03 -0800

poor widdle wingnuts. Always pitching, never catching. Now it's your turn. Bend over and relax, Ms. Kitty won't hurt you - much.

By: coelecanth

coelecanth — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 07:09:49 -0800

Hysteria? I passed that a long time ago. Evidently you did pass hysteria a long time ago. Look, if you've connected mainstream, right-wing political rhetoric with these horrible, criminal acts, then you must surely connect the extremism of the statements here with whatever violence may follow, from both the left and right. I have to imagine that you consider yourself morally superior to your opponents in the political process. If the times are as perilous as you say they are, then I wonder if this isn't a good moment for you to give us the benefits of that moral superiority by actually rising above the murderers, racists and lunatics you perceive to be on the other side. Please do not answer that you can lay your principles aside in a crisis and pick them up again later. And please remember that this is a thread about a Kitty Kelley book.

By: bashos_frog

bashos_frog — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 07:15:27 -0800

Yeah, you can hold on to those principles and be buried with them. If you believe in a last judgement, that may be of some comfort. Also: There's a mainstream right-wing? Who is it?

By: t r a c y

t r a c y — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 07:25:18 -0800

dd & witty, nosi te se u tri picke materine.

By: coelecanth

coelecanth — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 07:35:37 -0800

bashos_frog -- Ultimately, we're all buried with our principles. That's what they are. And there's as much of a mainstream on the right as there is on the left -- obviously, because the definition of "left" and "right" assumes symmetry. Thanks for convincing me that there's no point in talking to you, though.

By: Onanist

Onanist — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 07:36:28 -0800

Carry yourself into your mothers pussy? I think it must lose something in the translation.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 07:37:21 -0800

Also: There's a mainstream right-wing? Who is it? It's people like my boss (a Rockefeller Repub), who are going to be sitting home this Election Day out of disgust, and haven't given money this time. They don't like it when you try to amend the constitution to shut out a whole group of Americans they know and like. They don't like it when a surplus is turned into a deficit. They don't like it when things are horribly mismanaged--from Iraq, to getting Osama, to the Economy... They really don't like it when the people in power act like they don't know what they're doing. This thread really proves the point about the fear surrounding this book--if it really was worthless trash, would the reactions be so strong? And i'll just throw in something i saw on the Daily Show about the RNC: This is what people look like when they won't let gay people do their hair. ; >

By: stonerose

stonerose — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 08:08:21 -0800

my weekly poker table last weekend was inhabited by no less than three homos who I unabashedly call my friends. Roy Cohn, J. Edgar Hoover, and Ed Schrock?

By: t r a c y

t r a c y — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 08:16:34 -0800

I think it must lose something in the translation. yes, it totally does, heh. it's a multi-layered insult that's pretty much the ugliest thing you could say in serb or croat... but it's also one of the funniest because it's so old timey & melodramatic.

By: Witty

Witty — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 08:32:11 -0800

This thread really proves the point about the fear surrounding this book--if it really was worthless trash, would the reactions be so strong? There isn't a person in this thread that "fears" this book (show me one). The initial reaction to this was about the thread itself. No one gives a rat's ass about Kitty's book. The fact that you post this CRAP to the front page because you think gossip and trash talking is fun is ridiculous. You continue to get away with it because your views are shared by the majority... plus, you're arguably MetaFilter's favorite little gay guy. Your thread gets a few positive/supporting comments along the way, so you finally pipe up at the end with a "see... I told you the post was worth it" kind of attitude. I ain't buyin' it. It's bullshit. It wasn't a republican that posted the Swift Boat stories to the blue. If you think that stuff was bunk, fine... but why come back and post more bunk? Because "fair is fair"? Because gossip is fun? You're just adding more shit to the pile. Keep bringing the trash to the front page and I'll shit in it every time... more shit for the shit. You do it all the time and no one else calls you on it because they're afraid of not being nice to the queer boy. bashos_frog - you're obviously to dense to see the point. But ok. tracey and jpoulos - right... and uhh, fuck you too. Wheeeee!

By: yerfatma

yerfatma — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 08:34:16 -0800

Ultimately, we're all buried with our principles. Thank you. I would prefer such a fate to sinking to lowest common denominator behavior because I think my "enemies" and "opponents" are unfair. In the end, we all live in this country and whatever side you claim to be on, it's meaningless if your neighbor's house is on fire. Single issue voters and the need to be Right/ the need to Win regardless of the prize (or however Phyrric the victory) are damaging this country. I have no idea if it's a speedbump in a fairly even road or if it's Armageddeon, but it doesn't feel like it's going to end well. So I guess we can all sit here and fiddle about what's going to happen or we can try to do something about it. I know there's the whole Bowling Alone syndrome in this country and I've never operated under the illusion the 50s were some idyllic time (at least not for anyone who wasn't white, straight, non-Communist and decently-off), but it bothers the hell out of me I have no idea what my neighbors would do if my house were on fire. I'd hope for a call to the fire department but I wouldn't count on it. Just as likely they'd peek around the curtain saying, "I knew there was soemthing wrong about that place." So this all fell apart and I apologize for any spelling errors because I was free-associating a little too much to stop and look, but I hope I can end with a point here: you can laugh and say it doesn't matter about what you do here at MetaFilter, you can tell yourself any action is ok because "the other side" is doing it too (not that you know anyone from this mysterious side personally), but do so realizing you will lose something. Never mind a country or a fight or an argument; you're going to lose a bit of yourself and good luck getting it back. It's not impossible, but it's hard as hell. It's a lesson I'd prefer to have never learned.

By: gesamtkunstwerk

gesamtkunstwerk — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 08:39:58 -0800

Re:my weekly poker table last weekend was inhabited by no less than three homos who I unabashedly call my friends.. I wonder what they call you-- deep-pockets? easy money? I do have friends who call me fag and homo affectionately, but I think they realize that this does not translate well to the outside world. Getting back to the post, my question is not whether or not assholes like Kitty Kat Kelley are morally justified (it seems pretty clear to me that they are not), but rather, will we listen to anyone who isn't an asshole along the lines of KKK and Rush Limbaugh? BTW, does anyone find it funny that Daryn Kagan is literally in bed with Rush Limbaugh? The figurative meets the literal in our nation of celebrity trolls.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 08:49:11 -0800

but rather, will we listen to anyone who isn't an asshole along the lines of KKK and Rush Limbaugh? The answer to that is in their ratings and sales. and Witty, you're just proving my point.

By: lescour

lescour — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 09:02:34 -0800

The Democrats can either attack back harder, or they can stand there and get hit in the figurative testicles all day, every day, and wonder why the bystanders don't make the GOP stop. case in point: during the dem convention, every speech was followed on tv by a gop talking head contesting it. they flooded the zone completely. during the gop convention, it was difficult to find the dem response anywhere. whether that was because of conservative media bias, poor dem campaign planning and/or other factors is irrelevant. the gop keeps kicking and the dems don't respond.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 09:45:41 -0800

Lies move Democrats to dig up dirt Or could it be George Bush's Former Female Friends for Truth. A forthcoming book by Kitty Kelley raises questions about whether the president has practiced what he preaches on abortion. As Larry Flynt discovered, a million dollars loosens lips. Are there others to be loosened?

By: David Dark

David Dark — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 10:48:03 -0800

David Dark: Did you seriously just say Some of my best friends are gay? No, I answered unwarranted charges of homophobia and bigotry. If you'll be my best friend, then maybe I'll say that. But didn't you used to contribute more than curse words and sewage? Lately I only see attacks from you. Are you taking out your election anger on me?

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 10:55:00 -0800

here's the White House callboy stuff. I wonder if Dubya ever went to all those parties at Spence's house...wasn't he in DC working for his dad?

By: Secret Life of Gravy

Secret Life of Gravy — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 11:02:32 -0800

Good thing that I wrote that I was Bemused by the situation-- obviously it wouldn't do to be Amused by the fact that the shit-slingers are now having some dirt lobbed their way. The truth is Kitty Kelley is neither a Democrat nor a credible journalist. I, for one will not be interested in the contents of her book, just as I have not been interested in the content of any of her previous books. But please allow me a little innocent pleasure in watching the Republicans scramble to answer her charges. It will be a nice change from watching the Democrats scramble to answer charges from the Republicans. And I have no wish to see my party, the Democratic party, wallow in the mud. I think that there is more than sufficient ammunition in the truth. Democratic leaders just need to get a bit more aggressive with the truth. The deficit is how big? We'll be spending how many years in Iraq at X billion dollars a year?

By: soyjoy

soyjoy — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 11:28:24 -0800

More delicious "dish"...

the Bush administration and FBI blocked a congressional investigation into that relationship,

on Feb. 19, 2002,

These sleazy tabloid authors and their crazy stories...

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 11:30:25 -0800

There's the Graham and Sy Hersh books, and the Kelley book...any more coming out soon?

By: jonmc

jonmc — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 12:43:44 -0800

but my weekly poker table last weekend was inhabited by no less than three homos who I unabashedly call my friends. Wouldn't that make it a "poke-him" table, then?

By: crasspastor

crasspastor — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 13:17:28 -0800

Wow, whoever just linked to moveonforamerica.org just severely bummed me out. Politics, governance, democracy(?) -- Every last bit of it is broken now, isn't it? Well at least I was able to get in 29 years of living in a modern, mature and more or less enlightened nationstate.

By: sonofsamiam

sonofsamiam — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 13:25:43 -0800

A forthcoming book by Kitty Kelley raises questions about whether the president has practiced what he preaches on abortion. If this were proved to be true, Bush would lose every single Republican voter I personally know. Every one. It's basically their only issue.

By: billsaysthis

billsaysthis — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 13:27:39 -0800

sonofsamiam, now these people need proof?

By: sonofsamiam

sonofsamiam — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 13:28:39 -0800

They need proof when the point at issue doesn't already fit their preconceived notions.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 13:58:50 -0800

here's some abortion stuff from 2000--Flynt was supposed to tell all, but i'm not sure he ever did.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 14:02:37 -0800

and more here

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 14:44:26 -0800

and now atrios is bringing the coke stuff back

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Sun, 05 Sep 2004 19:59:47 -0800

That Bush abortion stuff oughta be a fpp - undoubtedly.

By: raysmj

raysmj — Mon, 06 Sep 2004 09:33:47 -0800

For some reason, the idea that going negative is best brings to mind Bob Roberts, in which Sen. Brickley Paiste (a name I took to be hilarious) goes negative in a race with Bob (who is much more with-it as far as media presentation goes, despite pushing a backwards-looking politics) out of desperation. He ends up losing whatever dignity he had, and the viewer's sympathy.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Mon, 06 Sep 2004 13:00:05 -0800

and it's a big drudge headline today to a mirror link: BUSH TOOK COCAINE AT CAMP DAVID ...he quotes his former sister-in-law Sharon Bush who claims: "Bush did coke at Camp David when his father was President, and not just once either." Other acquaintances allege that as a 26-year-old National Guard, Bush "liked to sneak out back for a joint or into the bathroom for a line of cocaine". Bush has admitted being an alcoholic but, asked during the 1999 election if he did drugs, he said: "I've told the American people that years ago I made some mistakes. "I've learned from my mistakes and should I be fortunate enough to become president I will bring dignity and honour to the office." Later an aide clarified his remarks saying Bush hadn't taken illegal drugs in the past 25 years. ...

By: amberglow

amberglow — Mon, 06 Sep 2004 17:27:02 -0800

lol! The Elvis White Panty Parties that the teenage Bush twins would reenact for the sordid entertainment of Prince Bandhar on "Saudi Night" at the Crawford ranch. .... And then there is the chapter devoted to George Bush's lost years in the National Guard, and his special bunkmate, who knew the ingredients of a great rubdown.--from here

By: Witty

Witty — Tue, 07 Sep 2004 08:45:26 -0800

and Witty, you're just proving my point. and you, mine.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Tue, 07 Sep 2004 10:26:34 -0800

LAST month I reported biographer Kitty Kelley's coming Bush family vivisection has, what she considers, "five major revelations," one of which is a supposedly documented inch-by-inch on Dubya's so-called missing-year service record. I now report a big-time TV magazine show is on that case. Wrapping up footage even as we speak. --(Cindy Adams, NYP) 60 Minutes?

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sat, 18 Sep 2004 20:32:38 -0800

For instance, I got a copy of the Bush family tree from the Bush presidential library. And at first we just thought a couple things were left off, but it was a number of things. Mentally retarded children from one branch of the family erased. Too many divorces in one family - that doesn't fit with the family-values image, so some ex-wives simply disappear. You could say that's just an oversight or mistake here and there. But when you see a pattern as I've seen over the past years of files redacted, too many mysterious fires that destroy records, state department files simply missing, gone, National Guard files. --Kitty, in The Guardian