Drudge running the Aristide story

[Renew Deal]

He links to democracy now and all. One thing to note on Drudge. He likes big stories more than his loyalty.

http://www.drudgereport.com/

Disclaimer: Drudge is a right wing lying a-hole.

[Bluzmann57]

1. Your disclaimer was right on

So who the hell will believe it if Drudge says it's true?

[bigendian]

2. A few people here.

The beauty of the information age. Only believe the facts that support your views.

[el_gato]

3. If Drudge is involved you can be sure

that there is a campaign to get the disinformation out there in a hurry

otherwise he would ignore it

The spin is fed through him

[bigendian]

4. What bothers me.

The kidnapping angle is clouding the issue of the coup. Are we helping the French or are they helping us? Righteous indignation aside, this stuff is common in history. Why Haiti? Why now?

[KharmaTrain]

5. Diversion? Up Is Down?

Try this one on...

After the beating Drudge took on the Kerry story is his putting this one out to discredit it's legitimacy?

Let's dig a little deeper. Now Drudge is viewed in the media as unreliable, yet again, yet relevant since he makes lots of noise. Again, Drudge covered his ass on the Kerry thing by citing it he was tipped by "credible sources"...insulated himself. Here it looks like he's doing the same thing, but in another direction.

By putting out this story...or others down the road at his/Rove's choosing it can divert the immediate news cycle away from a story and slow up any coverage for the Democrats.

I'm certain the tactic from the bunker is to control as much of the news as it can, in as many ways at is can...this looks like another, covert, front.

[DrBB]

6. In Dredge's support

I'll say one thing for him, when he runs anti-leftwing sludge, chances are it's bs (as witness the Kerry Intern story), but when he does run something unflattering to the right--and he does, from time to time--it's usually reliable.

Here's an example: You remember back in early 2001 when three major newspapers did their own study of the Florida recount? All the headlines read "Bush would have won!" You had to read down in the story to find out what that meant: "would have won if only the county Gore asked to have recounted had been done," whereas they also found that, if the whole state had been recounted--which was the GOP alternative--Gore would have won by a wide margin. But that wasn't the headline.

Who DID run the headline "Gore would have won"? That's right: Drudge.