Gannon and "invasion of privacy"

[Plaid Adder]

You can rebut the "how can you justify violating the poor gay man's privacy" thing in one sentence, and I will give it to you right now:

With Bush in the White House, NO gay American has any privacy.

The most intimate, personal, basic aspects of our lives, relationships, families, and identities get dragged into public view and flogged through the media forum any time it suits them. We are exposed on a daily basis to increasingly unabashed public hatred and persecution because of the gay-baiting that this administration uses to keep itself in power and its supporters frothing. Sex, love, commitment, the decision to start a family--for us, *none* of these things are now truly private concerns. Our private lives are being used to make policy, sell papers, and prop up the most corrupt administration in American history. Nobody on the right has ever had a single shred of remorse about that.

Guckert actively supported an administration committed to making life hell for gay people. Well you know what, Jim, don't dish it out if you can't take it. You helped cook up this nauseating stew. Enjoy your heapin' helping.

@#$!,

The Plaid Adder

[ISUGRADIA]

1. Also he was not discrete about his life

multiple escort ads on the internet pretty much negates any "invasion of privacy" arguement. Anything you voluntarily place on the internet is open for scrutiny.

[EVDebs]

2. Gannon/Guckert's gayness isn't the issue. Operation Mockingbird-style

media 'payola' is. If Gannon was a pseudo journalist throwing softballs to Bush MSM now is faced with the real questions of 'how did he get there ?', 'who vetted him ?', 'is he part of Operation Mockingbird and the CIA ?'

If he is, then he may be a red herring or an inadvertent outing that sadly shows there are even more 'media' under WhiteHouse control.

All around sad situation. BTW, he may or may not even be gay. Not relevent even for blackmail purposes now.

[BR_Parkway]

3. But even more proof that Scottie lied about the guy

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3125761

[slay]

4. Great post. Republicans seem to fear the truth more and more... hrmm

eom

[tx_dem41]

5. If you haven't noticed....the story is dying on the vine.

I think the blogging of the pictures was a mistake as far as "bringing the story along". It is hypocritical of the press, but our side should have know that and pushed the story more subtlely IMO.

[EFerrari]

6. Um, no. And we should enlist some RW religious types to get

this cautionary tale out.

I don't know any. lol. Who would they be?

[tx_dem41]

11. Maybe you don't understand RW religious types....

they can be incredible hypocrites. They don't care about this story and are ignoring it.

[librechik]

7. no, it's not the way we pushed it

The MSM would resist any scandal story involving one of their own no matter what we did, so let's not be blaming the brave bloggers and newspeople who have continued to investigate. There's nothing wrong with unearthing items that are posted publically on the web.

Besides, what if they got pictures of Clinton, say hugging Monica at a rally. The media would NEVER have played those over and over until we were sick of them (HAH!)

(I think I've seen the Jeff pics once or twice on TV,not repeatedly, hourly like that Monica footage)

see? It doesn't matter what we do or don't do. They are out to destroy the left no matter what.

[tx_dem41]

12. I didn't say the investigation should stop. Not at all. But it needs to.

..be focused on connections between Guckert and the WH.

[Plaid Adder]

15. The sex angle is part of the question about the connections.

We know this guy was not hired because he's a talented writer and journalist. It's quite possible that he got into the WH press room through connections he made via the sex trade. If we're not 'allowed' to talk about that aspect of the story, then we're never going to find out what those connections really are.

The Plaid Adder

[tx_dem41]

18. I agree that there is some possibility your theory could be true.

I think its more possible that they just found a desperate, down-on-his-luck schmuk to pose as a journalist. Did the President know, that's the story. And, even if they find that to be true, I doubt it has much of an impact. Notice the Armstrong Williams story is dead.

[Plaid Adder]

23. Actually, that story is not dead.

By itself, it's no longer news; but it lives on in the reports of similar scandals. Every story about Gallagher and the other payola pundit mentioned Armstrong Williams. So do most of the stories about Guckert. These revelations are coming out close enough together that a pattern has been established, and there will be a cumulative effect.

I mean, sure, it's easy enough to be defeatist, with things as they are. But from my POV the gay hooker angle is the ONLY thing that could get this story to catch on. We know the media doesn't give a shit about anything else any more.

The Plaid Adder

[tx_dem41]

24. I'm not being defeatist at all. I want the investigation re-focused.

And, I do agree with you on the fact that their might be a cumulative effect here. Not resulting in an impeachment, but surely helping in '06 and '08.

[Chipper Chat]

8. The silence on the right is deafening.

Not a peep from the holier-than-thou christian fundies.

[tx_dem41]

9. Why do they have to respond? They're playing it right by ...

ignoring it. The story is dying. The only way it will start again is by finding concrete connections to the WH.

[Catherine Vincent]

17. It is connected to the White House.

Bush and his spokesmen took questions from a prostitute that should not have been cleared. How much more connected can that be?

[tx_dem41]

19. Under that scenario, they could have been ignorant of the fact that he..

..was a prostitute and not a "real" journalist. You have to find concrete evidence that they knew EVERYTHING about his background. Even better, that he was being funded on direct orders from the WH. Until then, the story is dead. Heck, the Armstrong Williams story died when the funding trail stopped at the Dept. of Education!

[DearAbby]

21. This is the same Administration that had baricades all over Washington DC

For his inaugation, had to have people sign loyalty oaths to hear him speak at rallies during his campaign...This is a Nation at war with constant threat of Terrorists...How can a person using an alias get within a few feet of the President?

Who is in the chain of command that is able to pull the strings to allow this person in under an alias?

BTW Armstrong story could tie into this somewhat...not dead.

[tx_dem41]

22. I agree with your suspicion. Now, someone needs to find concrete...

proof. Until then, the story is at least dormant.

[Jacobin]

10. How can there be an expectation of privacy

If you take spreadeagle nude shots of yourself, post them on the internet and ask men for money for sex?

:shrug:

I do not understand the argument being made by the RW.

[tx_dem41]

13. Your mistake is that you are trying to be logical. n/t

[Jacobin]

16. D'oh, I hate when I do that

:foreheadslap:

[Catherine Vincent]

14. Laughable isn't it?

These repuglicans are sweating bullets because they don't know how the democrats will blow this out of the water. That's why they are quiet.

[Toucano]

20. How about...

Solicitation for prostitution on the internets is the same as solicitation for prostitution on a street corner.

It's not a privacy matter at all. "Gannon" has no more privacy than a drug dealer or a mugger.

"Gannon" isn't a gay man. He's a gay parasite.

[goodhue]

25. privacy?!

He posted pictures of himself on escort website.