| Author |
Message |
    
The Notorious S.L.K.
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1464
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 12:21 pm: | 
|
I am not confirming or denying the authenticity of this story, but curious where it is heading.
Could it be that the DNC was trying to keep one their own down, and why? Is it possible due to race?
BTW, Dean is doing a heack of the job as captain of the USS DNC...ahem...
XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX SUN MAY 21, 2006 20:00:02 ET XXXXX
SOURCES: DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE WORKED TO DEFEAT NAGIN
**Exclusive**
The Democratic National Committee (DNC) secretly placed political operatives in the city of New Orleans to work against the reelection efforts of incumbent Democrat Mayor Ray Nagin, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.
DNC Chairman Howard Dean made the decision himself to back mayoral candidate and sitting Lieutenant Governor Mitch Landrieu (D-LA), sources reveal.
Dean came to the decision to back the white challenger, over the African-American incumbent Nagin, despite concerns amongst senior black officials in the Party that the DNC should stay neutral.
The DNC teams actively worked to defeat Nagin under the auspice of the committee's voting rights program.
The party's field efforts also coincided with a national effort by Democrat contributors to support Landrieu.
Landrieu had outraised Nagin by a wide margin - $3.3 million to $541,980.
Preliminary campaign finance reports indicate many of Landrieu’s contributions came from out of state white Democrat leaders and financiers, including a $1,000 contribution from Sen. Ben Nelson's (D-NE) PAC.
The defeat of Mitch Landrieu is the latest setback for Dean's often criticized field operation.
In his victory speech late Saturday night, Nagin praised President Bush.
"You and I have probably been the most vilified politicians in the country. But I want to thank you for moving that promise that you made in Jackson Square forward," Nagin said.
Developing...
-SLK
|
Joe
Citizen
Username: Gonets
Post Number: 1238
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 1:14 pm: |
|
This is shocking. They're definitely keeping him down, and it's definitely because of his race. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3195
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 1:23 pm: |
|
Joe, can you share the information that you and SLK have that leads you to be certain he is "being kept down" because of his race?
(or is there some sarcasm in there that I'm missing?) |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4960
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 1:34 pm: |
|
Well there certainly was enough controversy around his actions pre-Katrina that a reasonable person might believe that another candidate would reflect better on the party. Not that I'm agreeing with the alleged actions of Dean, but there's enough out there without bringing race into it. |
Joe
Citizen
Username: Gonets
Post Number: 1239
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 1:36 pm: |
|
Rastro,
Maybe I should be more skeptical, but SLK has a way with words. His posts are typically pithy, persuasive and grounded in indisputable facts, so that I feel that even his innuendos could be taken as gospel.
|
Chris Prenovost
Citizen
Username: Chris_prenovost
Post Number: 957
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 1:39 pm: |
|
Are you people serious. . . ?
The drudge report is more well known for it's fanciful inventions and outright lies than anything else.
I would wait to see this in a slightly more respectable news outlet. Like, say, the national enquirer. |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3196
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 1:44 pm: |
|
Ah.. so it's the latter. Thanks, Joe. I thought insanity had set in. |
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 2115
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 1:46 pm: |
|
another non-story, whether true or not.
after his Katrina fiasco, did Nagin deserve the DNC's support, whatever his race? sheesh, somebody should have been held accountable. |
themp
Supporter
Username: Themp
Post Number: 2938
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 5:00 pm: |
|
Drudge retracts story on Howard Dean after receiving letter from DNC lawyer
John Byrne
Published: Monday May 22, 2006
Conservative heavyweight Matt Drudge has retracted a story about Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean after receiving a letter from the DNC's lawyers, RAW STORY can report.
Saying he took the DNC at their word -- and declining to mention the fact he had received a letter from a DNC lawyer asking him to take the story down -- Drudge posted an update to a story claiming that Chairman Dean had intervened in the New Orleans mayoral race. His update noted that the DNC had vehemently denied the report.
 |
dave23
Citizen
Username: Dave23
Post Number: 1793
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 5:10 pm: |
|
SLK,
Has your "curiosity" been appeased? |
The Notorious S.L.K.
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1467
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 5:36 pm: |
|
Update: Apparently Dean/DNC denies the accusations and takes Dean at his word that nothing seedy was going on...
ok...I am appeased, lets move on shall we?
-SLK
Chris-Drudge is not all BS, he did breakthe Clinton Lewinsky affair... |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3308
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 8:29 pm: |
|
And a good thing, too!! |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5638
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 9:54 pm: |
|
The DNC didn't work against Nagin. Maybe they just didn't help him. Call Carl McCall, or Kwesi Mfume. They'll tell you how it works. Or that black democrat candidate for president. What was his name? |
Foj
Citizen
Username: Foger
Post Number: 1424
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 10:01 pm: |
|
Linda Tripp went to DRUDGE first ! ! !! ! WOW COOL.
Laffin...............
Fooking rewrite history there, why don't ya?
DO you read your own message before you post? God help you. |
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 2116
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 10:25 pm: |
|
Drudge also posted a photo of the son that Bill Clinton allegedly had with a Little Rock hooker. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5639
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 10:37 pm: |
|
Courage, Matt. Courage. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4968
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 10:40 pm: |
|
It's very important work. |
Gregor Samsa
Citizen
Username: Oldsctls67
Post Number: 522
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 10:57 pm: |
|
Maybe FOj should start reading some of his messages before he posts too...He's probably too busy scanning grainy re-touched security photos of the Lusitania sinking... |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4969
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 11:17 pm: |
|
I see you've got the little audio icon, Gregor. Let me guess ... The Beatles? |
dave23
Citizen
Username: Dave23
Post Number: 1795
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 10:42 am: |
|
98.9% of Drudge's stuff is other people's work. Most of the remainder turns out to be wrong.
Courageous indeed. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5640
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 10:58 am: |
|
dave23 -- "Courage" -- that was an allusion to Dan Rather, accomplished reporter for the Left.
Michael Isikoff is an example of a very brave reporter. While at Newsweek he sat on the Lewinsky story that Drudge "broke," but he did go forward with the "Korans flushed down the toilet" story that turned out to be inaccurate and people died rioting over it in Afghanistan and Pakistan. |
dave23
Citizen
Username: Dave23
Post Number: 1796
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 11:25 am: |
|
cjc,
Ah. Missed that one. I was never a fan of Dan, though I occasionally tuned in to see if I'd be able to catch that moment when he finally lost his mind.
Sorry, but Isikoff didn't sit on it. The story was 90% written. That's not sitting on it. Sitting on it is knowing there's a story and then not doing any work on it. Isikoff is the one who broke it, Drudge simply reported that Newsweek had it. Drudge hyped it by saying they were "sitting" on it, which wasn't true. And, as we will recall, "the liberal media" completely ignored the Lewinsky story afterward. The shame of it all!
As far as the Koran goes, Newsweek screwed up by reporting an allegation as fact. A prisoner made the allegation, the FBI reports it, the Pentagon denies it. That's the story.
You need to freshen your talking points. Perhaps you can blame the media for the Taliban's resurgence and the ongoing occupation in Iraq? |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5641
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 11:53 am: |
|
Sitting on it is not publishing it, dave23.
Your misdirection is obvious here caught up as you are in an unsustainable argument defending a seriously flawed media with an integrity problem. The media comes late to stories, or when (or if) they do come late they bury it in the back pages is what I've been saying. They don't ignore things entirely. It's all about how it's presented and what bias is put on it. Bias is putting something on page A-21 in the NY Times so the Nightly News 'knows' it's not important along with the other Big 3 networks who take their line-up from the front pages of the Times or the DC Post.
Newsweek screwed up on an allegation? So did almost all the MSM as well as Oprah running with the "rapes in the SuperDome" story that wasn't true. If they could run with that and the Koran being flushed, they could have certainly broken Lewinsky earlier than they did but for some reason they sat on it. |
dave23
Citizen
Username: Dave23
Post Number: 1798
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 12:19 pm: |
|
Here's something you really need to recognize: You complain when the media get out in front of a story and you complain when they hold a story. You seem to think that there's a perfect time for every single story. Lewinsky was a bombshell so they had to double- and triple-source every allegation. That takes time. (Feel free to back up your allegation that they were "sitting" on it.)
Given the media are made up of humans, yes there are flaws. Many, many flaws. But your implication of a conspiracy is downright creepy. Secret messages from the Times to the Big 3. Do they bury Morse Code in the commas, periods and elipses?
Yep, Oprah the only one who discussed "rapes in the Superdome". Shame on her. No one else blew that story. Newsmax and Fox didn't report it. Right. Uh huh.
|
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4971
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 12:56 pm: |
|
It's easy: the time to publish a story is when it discredits Democrats. The time to sit on it is when it discredits Republicans.
Got it? |
The Notorious S.L.K.
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1478
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 1:29 pm: |
|
Foj-
FYI...
Matt Drudge
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Matt Drudge with ever-present fedoraMatthew Drudge (born October 27, 1966) is an American Internet personality and talk radio host. He is best known as the proprietor of the Drudge Report website, which made national waves when it was the first to break the news of a relationship between "a White House intern" and President Bill Clinton (the Monica Lewinsky scandal) in 1998.
read more:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Drudge
Is this what you would define as "fooking rewriting history?"
And guess what? I even read this post before,well, posting it...
-SLK
|
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4972
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 1:55 pm: |
|
Even a broken clock is right twice every day. |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5429
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 2:03 pm: |
|
See, the great thing about using Wikipedia to prove a point, is that it is, itself, a rewrite.
An earlier version of that Drudge article read as follows -
Quote:Drudge first received national attention in 1996 when he broke the news that Jack Kemp would be Republican Bob Dole's running mate in the 1996 presidential election. In 1998, Drudge again made national waves when he broke the news that Newsweek magazine had information on an inappropriate relationship between "a White House intern" and President Bill Clinton (the Monica Lewinsky scandal), but was withholding publication. After Drudge's report, Newsweek published the story.
Some critics note that Drudge's contribution to journalism is questionable, saying that the only stories he actually breaks are completely conceived, researched, funded, and written by other reporters. A federal judge noted in a judgment on a slander lawsuit, which ended in Drudge's favor, that Drudge is not a "reporter, news gatherer or journalist". Drudge's most famous achievement, the breaking of the Monica Lewinsky story, offended editors because by publishing details of the story, Drudge essentially made an editorial decision that overrode Newsweek's. Drudge's politics are unabashedly conservative, and he often selects as the lead story of his website articles that promote the anti-abortion stance, praise prominent conservatives, or criticize prominent liberals; this has led some critics to call him a mouthpiece of the conservative establishment in the United States.
Link - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Matt_Drudge&oldid=3771604
As I said, that's an earlier version. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5643
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 3:40 pm: |
|
dave23 -- maybe I should have taken the cue of when you wrote "you always..." as an indicator that any discussion with you on this would be worthless as the premise on which you base your charges isn't worth the time of day.
I don't regularly bash the media, much less have I ever -- ever -- claimed there was a conspiracy in the classic sense of the word. Decisions aren't made in collusion between the NY Times and the Big 3. The Big 3 are lazy, they're friends with the same people and of a similar mindset, and it just happens. There are no meetings or codes. You can extend this to other newspapers who selectively rip and read/print some AP or Reuters story rather than put any resources into reporting things on their own. The feeling is "it's got to be true. All my friends agree."
Lewinsky needed to be triple checked. Yes, if you're going against a president you voted for. The National Guard Forgeries didn't have to be vetted -- and when they were and questions were raised -- they still went with it because they wanted the story to be true because it was against a president they despised.
And we're all human. And we make mistakes. Yes. Beautiful.
Your last paragraph is totally without merit as I said "Oprah and almost all the MSM media" blew Katrina coverage. And you come back sarcastically with "Yup. Oprah the only one to discuss" it and ask about Fox? Sure -- Fox probably blew it if they reported it, and I'll bet they did (I don't watch Fox, but I guess they are MSM as they're bigger than CNN). I blast a lazy media that is also biased on Katrina and you come back with that?
|
dave23
Citizen
Username: Dave23
Post Number: 1800
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 4:26 pm: |
|
cjc,
"Bias is putting something on page A-21 in the NY Times so the Nightly News 'knows' it's not important..."
Sorry, that's pure conspiracy bunk. You speak in the lazy "they" as if this group of individuals are all of one mind. As an honorary member of the Jewish Cabal, I know for a fact it isn't true. They don't come to our meetings.
You didn't blast the "lazy media" at all. You didn't use the word "lazy" until this last post. But I do agree that too many reporters are lazy. However, when they aren't being lazy you accuse them of "sitting" on their stories. You can't have it both ways. They ran every accusation the right could throw against Clinton. They had a field day with Whitewater even though the Clintons did nothing wrong (as even Ken Starr conceded). Sorry, but as Karl Rove pointed out, the media aren't liberal, but they are anti-whoever's in power. In general, that's a good thing. I know you have deep faith in the government, but I don't. I'd rather have a flawed fourth estate trying to keep government in check than the opposite. (I know that this goes against your big-government, right-wing radio talking point "conservative" principles, but so be it.)
(Side question: Why isn't the Federal government--or the "liberal media"--investigating who created those National Guard forgeries? It was a major crime against a sitting president.) |
Alleygater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 2106
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 5:47 pm: |
|
Please educate me, seriously. Did Bush ACTUALLY serve his time? I was under the impression he barely served and that daddy put in a few calls to cover up the fact that he barely attended. Is this wrong? |
3ringale
Citizen
Username: Threeringale
Post Number: 212
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 6:50 pm: |
|
 |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5644
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 8:56 pm: |
|
Bias = conspiracy now, and now I have a big faith in government, huh dave23? You're absolutely hopeless and this discussion with you is officially a complete waste of time. |
Foj
Citizen
Username: Foger
Post Number: 1429
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 9:54 pm: |
|
What appears to be the first Mention on Monica in the NYT:
Jan. 22nd, 1998.
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F70F14FE3D5F0C718EDDA80894D0494D 81 |
Foj
Citizen
Username: Foger
Post Number: 1430
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 9:59 pm: |
|
Using Drudge search engine:
Feb 19, 1998
MONICA LEWINSKY'S DAD SPEAKS TO BARBARA WALTERS; SAYS INVESTIGATION REMINISCENT OF HITLER ERA; FBI WARNED OF 20-YEAR JAIL SENTENCE ^
http://www.drudgereportarchives.com/dsp/search.htm?maxrows_old=&startrow=1&maxro ws=2&maxrows=12&searchFor=monica%20lewinsky
whats next? |
Foj
Citizen
Username: Foger
Post Number: 1439
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 10:51 pm: |
|
SLK... seems the NYT scooped Drudge by nearly a month. Another SLK Drudge related claim run over in the prime of its life. Why do you keep posting up Drudge crap? This is not the first time you've been called on some outrageous Drudge claim, if you keep doing it, people will think your nuts, do you expect a different result when repeating the same mistakes? |
The Notorious S.L.K.
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1490
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, May 25, 2006 - 4:25 pm: |
|
FOJ-
Ummmmmm, the last post I made is from wikipedia, not Drudge.
It has been a common belief (as confirmed even by wikipedia) that Drudge broke the story first on Monica and Bubba...
Don't blame me if the info is wrong...
BTW, I notice no metion on the NYTs in your Linda Trip post....
-SLK |
themp
Supporter
Username: Themp
Post Number: 2949
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, May 25, 2006 - 4:42 pm: |
|
Referring to Clinton as Bubba always sounded very forced to me. NY Post does it to this day.
Drudge kind of did break Monica. Drudge was an important outlet for the GOP for a while. Since they are trying to keep the bad news IN these days and away from the public, they give him a lot less to work with, hence the updates on Susan Sarandon and links to erroneous items on Iran and Al Gore in recent days. He has a certain flair, but he is less relevent. If something big happens in one of the many investigations now ongoing, he is not he site to visit anymore, since he only reluctantly dishes on republicans. But should Clinton have a sneezing fit or drop his reading glasses, Drudge will be quick with unflattering photos and big fonts. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page