Ok. So why the hell are liberals believing the National Enquirer?

[Beelzebud]

/rant on

Get the shit out of your brains. Any of you that think it does us ANY good to take seriously, a National Enquirer article, is brain-dead.

I listened to 3 talk shows today:

Hartmann
little of franken
Rhodes

All 3 were treating this article as if it came from a legitimate news source.

It's the National Enquirer for FUCK'S SAKE!

This is the tabloid trash paper that said a baby hatched out of a pumpkin one October...

Give me a break... I know there are plenty of rational people out there, but do you realize how fucking stupid this makes us look?

IT'S THE NATIONAL ENQUIRER..... God damn...

If this post doesn't apply to you, then please ignore it. But if you actually think the National Enquirer is now a source of journalism, you might as well be looking at newsmax or drudge report...

/rant off


EDIT--
Here is to the ones that talk of the NE's "new face"



http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/57227

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/22339

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/9959

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/62736

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/58218

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/62118

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/59211

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/mikewalker/61869

Is that journalism? Is that something you'd trust?

how gullible are you?

[charlyvi]

1. Because inquiring minds want to know. n/t

[nickinSTL]

2. uh...

HAHAHAHAHA! :rofl:

My thoughts, exactly.

I mean, sometimes the Enquirer gets it right...but I sure as hell wouldn't be quoting them as a serious news source.

[MnFats]

3. s'posed to be a legitimate news outfit chasing the story, too..

...no name, though.
Perhaps many WANT it to be true?
Personally I do NOT!
If true, we're in even deeper shit than we ever imagined.

[skooooo]

4. Sometimes they do get the scoop...

Sad but true.

[GreenPartyVoter]

5. NE isn't a source. However it is saying what many of us thought

all along. That ** is still a boozer. And a druggie.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

113. Exactly.

I don't believe the Enquirer.

I believe that Chimp is a drunk.

[Rosco T.]

6. Two reasons...

1) it makes the Freepers head explode since they believe it.

2) The Enquirer a good track record of defending itself agaist libel/slander in court.

[zoeb]

9. Number 1 is reason enough...lol

:popcorn:

[Systematic Chaos]

About #2, you're absolutely right.

They are very sensational in the stories that they cover, but sometimes they hit the nail square on the head. I remember reading a story about how many children get teeth knocked out and even concussions on the metal bars that used to go across the tops of school bus seats, many years ago. That article prompted me to say screw the bus and start walking to school, and not long after the bus manufacturers began padding the backs of the seats.

[Cats Against Frist]

49. Didn't Carol Burnett sue them over saying she was a drunk, too?

And she won, and they had to pay out -- so I don't know if they're ready to make the same mistake, again.

A public figure has to prove reckless disregard, which is hard to prove, but possible. I don't really trust the Enquirer, but, like I said, they know the bite of an alcoholism libel suit.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. there are other sources hinting at it

Bush is drkinking, has been drinking for his whole presidency

And the NE has actually broken some stories...

In this case this is innoculation... I suspect it is about to go mainstream

[Systematic Chaos]

8. Baby out of a pumpkin?

That sounds more like something the "Weekly World News" would print. Just saying. :shrug:

[NewJeffCT]

10. Didn't the Enquirer break the Limbaugh pill popping story?

edited to add: Weren't they the ones that broke the Limbaugh pill popping story?

[RageFist]

21. haha...you added your headline? ;) n/t

[NewJeffCT]

26. yes, i changed it

I originally said that i thought they had broken a few major stories in the past decade, much to the chagrin of 'mainstream' organizations like the NY Times.

[Quixote1818]

11. If it's not true then the Enquirer would be sued big time

They have to be carefully when they print stories about celebrities that are not true just like any news source. Sure they have been sued in the past but you can bet they thought they had their ducks in a row or they would not have risked the lawsuit.

Stories about Aliens is different because Aliens don't sue for slander but real people do.

[ocean girl]

12. OK, I'm gonna tell you the truth about the Enquirer

They have an entire staff of attorneys, who check EVERY SINGLE word before it is published to be sure there is no liability. And I mean EVERY SINGLE WORD!

They will not publish anything without proof. You may never know what the proof is, but believe me, it exists.

Just don't ask me how I know.

[NYCGirl]

14. LOL!!! And if you believe that, I have a nice bridge in Brooklyn you might

want to buy.

[Kelvin Mace]

24. It's been a while since NE was successfully sued.

[NYCGirl]

29. Most people don't try, because it's TRASH! NT

[Beelzebud]

37. Thank You! The president of the US isn't going to sue the NE....

WAKE UP FOLKS.

[Kelvin Mace]

53. No, he won't sue

he has other, more powerful weapons at his disposal. Again, they are taking on a big enemy. Not something they would do just to sell a few extra papers.

[Kelvin Mace]

48. A lot of celebrity gossip

but this a VERY specific allegation. The last time they were this specific was when they nailed Limbuagh as a drug addict.

I disagree that a lot of people don't sue because it is "trash". Celebrities have lots of money and a VERY specific asset to protect (their "image"). If NI prints something untrue, they are going to get sued.

I do not read NI, as I am not a gossip fan. However, they have to be sitting on good evidence to make this kind of claim against someone as powerful as Bush.

But, we'll see if it pans out.

[Atman]

45. Oceangirl is correct

NE has been under a massive re-branding effort for quite some time. After being repeatedly sued for their infamous "tabloid trash" reporting, the shareholders and attorneys really took action and demanded some accountability.

The FACT is, NE broke the Monica story, and the Limbaugh story. I'd bet money that those of you who poo-poo the NE haven't read a copy in many years, if ever. It is full of diet stories and inspirational pablum, but it is NOT the home of Bat-Boy or the Space Alien. That is Weekly World News.

NE deliberately has been trying to distance themselves from that rep. It clearly hasn't worked with many of you.

And OP made the best point...they've been sued by Cher, for christ's sake. Why on earth would they publish a story like this about the most powerful man in the world, who has been known to do terrible, terrible things to those who cross him? It makes no sense. They couldn't possible sell enough magazines to make it profitable. It not only doesn't make sense, it makes even LESS business sense. These people are in business to make money, not bring down W.

If they can make money and bring him down in the process, fine. But they won't foresake their very existence just to make a headline. Those of you who think they would just have no business sense.

[rinsd]

63. So this Clinton Brain Damage story is right?

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/62632

Or how about this one?

Chelsea pregnancy scare

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/57227

Or this one?

Hillary at war with Wild Child Chelsea

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/59211

Bill's secret trysts

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/mikewalker/61869

You get the picture.

I am not saying that Bush isn't on the sauce.

I am saying suddenly treating the Enquirer as a valid news source now because we like what it says is damn foolish.

[Atman]

98. Are you ready? Nothing untrue about those stories.

Clinton's brain damage; Where does it say Clinton has brain damage? It is a story about Bill's heart surgery, and how there is the possibility of blood infections. This is 100% true. Also 100% true is that there is the possibility that the infection could spread to his brain. Period. That is all it says. It is 100% factual.

Chelsea's Pregnancy Scare; I simply don't understand why this is so unbelievable to you. Have you ever had unprotected sex? Every missed a period? Ever been a parent of a girl? There is NOTHING about that story that is so bizarre. A young, unmarried girl thinks she might have gotten preggers, and it scared the shit out of her. Ooooh. Must be a lie.:eyes:

Wild Child Chelsea; Again, I don't get what is so unbelievable about this. Ever had a kid in college? Ever had a kid not want to come home for a family event? Hillary was stunned and outraged when she saw photos showing bikini-clad Chelsea in a sexy clinch with Ian in a pool in Marbella, Spain, during what friends are calling the young couple's secret honeymoon. During what friends are calling a secret honeymoon. So what? Who cares what friends call it. NE never claims it is true, just that friends called it a secret honeymoon. You may not like that writing style, but that doesn't mean there are any untruths there.

Bill's secret love trysts: Did you even read this one? Do you know who the "secret" trysts are purportedly with? Who Bill keeps ditching his SS detail to tryst with? Hillary! Read the damn story! It is about Bill and Hillary gettin' hot and heavy in love again now that they're in the burbs and out of the White House limelight. HORRORS!

---

There. I think I've sufficiently proven that, while some may not like the headlines they read, those some seem to have forgotten the old "judge a book by it's cover" adage. NE is guilty of sensational headlines that sell magazine. Those four stories you posted as "proof" that they make shit up do just the opposite. In fact, they only prove that you never read the Enquirer.

Good for you! But get YOUR facts straight before you accuse others of not having theirs straight.

[ocean girl]

66. For those of you who don't think I know what I'm talking about...

I might mention that I live in Boca Raton, Florida.

OK, got it?

[titoresque]

77. Sorry Im slow

:) ok, I DO think it's a true story, and I do believe they
fact check and recheck.....but you've got my curiosity now......please tell me, I have to know! You're being too cryptic.

[NYCGirl]

67. What are you talking about "foresake their very existence"?

All this melodrama — they're not risking anything. They'll make a lot of money, and NO ONE WILL SUE THEM, because they have to prove either malice or loss of livelihood or reputation leading to loss of livelihood.

[Atman]

99. BushCo doesn't sue; they mail anthrax or legislate you out of existence

You are being very, very naive here. You are approaching this as one who follows rules and respects laws. But we're not talking about you. We're talking about the BFEE. It is an entirely different paradigm.

[rinsd]

131. Okay....

Assuming you are correct, than why would the NE publish the story true or not if they were that fearful?

Someone who sent anthrax to your building and killed a colleague of yours isn't going to care about whether you got the fact straight.

It doesn't make sense logically, that AMI is so scared of retribution they nailed the story down.

[rinsd]

59. Really...so all the Clinton stories were true? (nt)

[Beelzebud]

60. Another rational mind. Thank you.

[rinsd]

69. If you want to prove your point....

...which is I assume the same as mine.

Just go to the Enquirer's website and type Clinton into the search engines. Post the links back here.

If you're going to give NE valid status, be wary what you wish for.

I think Bush is drinking. I KNOW the Enquirer sucks as a source.

[Atman]

101. Yes. Read post #98

I'm sorry guys. I used to be a magazine editor, and I also used to write sales and marketing copy for a major US retailer. I know how to manipulate words to achieve a desired result. NE does, too. They're selling you stories you would not otherwise pay money for. They're appealing to your prurient interests and general curiousity re: those in positions of power. But if they were lying, they'd have to do it very, very obviously, like Weekly World News.

Did you ever see "The People vs. Larry Flynt?" The episode with Falwell, wherein Falwell tried to sue for a cartoon implying he'd had sex with his mother? The defense was that the cartoon was so absurd that only an idiot would believe it was true. Falwell was asked if he was an idiot, or if his followers were idiots. Of course not, he said. Then what's the problem?

That is why WWNews runs Bat Boy stories, and Pregnant Clinton Aliens. It is entertainment, and you'd have to be an idiot to believe it. That is how they keep from getting sued to death. NE doesn't do that. They must rely on copious fact-checking or else they'd be toast faster than you could say "Hey, what's that funny white powder in my morning mail?"

[calimary]

110. I'll add to that a little, if you can suffer me...

Not only are they extremely aware of the risk of liability (because as I recall, Carol Burnett won), and not only do they have the deep pockets for the sharpest knives in the attorney drawer, but there's something else besides.

When I worked at the AP, there was, and I assume still is, an across-the-board policy of never paying for news. We didn't pay when some hot or controversial subject demanded a fee for an interview. We didn't pay for tips called in, or slipped to us in the field. Just wasn't done. The Enquirer does. Of course they advertise their "got a hot tip" info for anyone to use. But also, their staffers in L.A., NY, Santa Barbara, Miami, the Hamptons and other major places where you are apt to find lots of celebrities don't hesitate to offer gratuities to those in a position to see stuff: restaurant servers and maitre d's, bouncers, cocktail servers and bartenders at clubs, housekeeping people, hotel door attendants and concierges, hospital orderlies, ambulance drivers, bail bondsmen, delivery people, caterers, party rental people, hair-dressers, manicurists, spa people, trainers, maybe some counter people or personal shoppers at elegant, high-end stores and boutiques - the list is endless. I know one grocery store in the neighborhood where any box boy could give you some pretty nice news tidbits sometimes about sightings of famous people. In fact, when I was still working, I had a chance to interview the late John Candy, and at one point during the conversation he complained about a nosey reporter snooping around at the grocery store, taking careful note of everything he was putting into his shopping cart. Later, he said, there came a story about how much food he packs in and exactly what he eats to reach the size he reached. At the hotels, you can get tipped off about who's checking in to tryst with whom. At the hospital, you find people willing to keep an eye out and an ear open for who's checked in with what health problem or sickness or overdose, and who's with 'em. Bla-bla-bla. A fellow reporter who was very industrious and scrappy about ways to make a little extra money here and a little extra money there once advised me, quite seriously: "feed the Enquirer." She certainly did.

While I was still with the AP, every week the Enquirer would come in - the newsroom had complimentary subscriptions - and people would pour over each issue. Mainly they'd be looking for celebrity stories or whatever was brand new and provocative in whatever celebrity story was hot - like Michael Jackson or Julia Roberts or OJ or Christian Brando or whoever was the scoop du jour. We'd always check what the Enquirer said because it was frequently worth making a separate call to source out if it was true. It usually was. And they were indeed far ahead of the pack sometimes.

There were also several paparazzi people who fed everybody tips, and these were guys who literally would stop at nothing to get the shot. These were the guys who hired the helicopters to hover over Elizabeth Taylor's wedding to Larry Fortensky or Madonna's to Sean Penn. One of them stowed away aboard a luxury cruise ship to get shots of Princess Caroline of Monaco when she wasn't talking to reporters. I'm sure he probably did that while Princess Di was still alive, too. I've known reporters to dress as caterers or gofers to sneak in backstage at the Oscars to get scoops and stuff when they weren't credentialed or on any approved lists. So that's how the Enquirer can scoop people. They don't mind paying, and they have LOTS of staffers to write and research and yes, fact-check. And did I say they have a lot of lawyers.

I am not trying to hype the Enquirer. But it's not as tabloidy as some of 'em, and they really did scoop a lot of news.

I suspect, and other DUers have also posted, that MAYBE, just MAYBE, somebody in the general White House arena has a conscience that's beginning to bother him or her. So he or she is slipping this tidbit out as maybe a red flag to alert at least a few others to start watching bush, and thinking objectively about him and his fitness for high office. Or, it could even be rove and/or bartlett, nervous that this might get out, so they're trying a preemptive strike to get it out THEIR way. Hence all the rhapsodic crap about how emotionally wrecked bush is about the deaths of our soldiers, and how he heard about Katrina early on and it just overwhelmed him, and it's hard work, and all the stress, dontcha know? Maybe they're trying to grease the skids on this to manipulate public opinion into feeling sorry for bush. In such case that renders them not mad at him anymore, they forget all his fuckups because they wanna root for the poor guy and see him get help so he can be all that he can be, so to speak. It may be an effort to cast him in a more sympathetic light to bring his poll numbers up a little.

And one other thing that may be the most significant of all - the very fact that it's IN the Enquirer is key. The NE was scared silent after that photo editor who shot the photos of the Boobsey Twins in mid-slosh at some bar, then shortly thereafter received an anthrax letter, contracted the disease and died. But that was then and this is now. bush's numbers are down and don't seem to want to come back up no matter what he tries to do. Now he's even got people on his own side pissed at him, and most of his opponents know better than to trust that he might be reforming and changing his spots. He doesn't look like such a big, bad Mr. Invincible anymore, and they know he can no longer bully and intimidate and threaten them. Meantime, there are lots of people whom he and rove and cheney and the rest of 'em stepped on, and stabbed in the back, and insulted, which means you have at least a few of those people increasingly interested in payback. Especially now that THEY, TOO feel emboldened to tell tales out of school.

So it goes.

The fact that the National Enquirer would choose to go with this, now, means they sense these people can't do too much to them anymore because these people are now as vulnerable as hell, and as kkkarl himself would say - "fair game." Further, if the AP got several copies of any given issue, you know there were other complimentary issues sent to EVERY OTHER BIG NEWSROOM in town. So EVERYBODY has seen this. Believe it. What they do with it or whether they pursue it on their own remains to be seen. But if they didn't know about rumors that bush is still drinking, they do now. And since many folks in the red states and the Bible belt eagerly gobble up the Enquirer every week, along with their heavy helpings of bill o'reilly and "a current affair" and Pox "news" and limbaugh, the idea that the Enquirer would put this kind of story out is JUST DELICIOUS. For years, how much have you seen of bush anything in the tabloids? None. There's almost always something on one or other of the Clintons. But the bushes? Untouchables. Taboo. Verboten. Until now. Evidently their protective shielding is gone. Or turned to swiss cheese. Stuff like this is what the raunchy morning zoo shows might pick up, also. And as it seeps out into lowest-common-denominator consumption, it becomes the all-desirable water cooler talk. And then bush really is toast.

Frankly, I couldn't be MORE delighted! :evilgrin:

As I said, I'm not here to defend the National Enquirer nor do a commercial for it, but I do know what I saw when I was still working.

Oh CRABS. I just looked at the length here... man... sorry...

[FlaGranny]

132. I remember when a certain famous person

was admitted to a certain hospital here in National Enquirer home territory. A certain hospital employee was fired for spilling the beans to the NE. The story was completely true. The NE printed the story. I don't know if the hospital employee was sued.

[LostinVA]

117. No, Ocean Girl is right

They vet things far better than the MSM does. No reason to eb insulting, she's dead-on right.

[marmar]

13. The Enquirer might be a tabloid trash can...which they are...

But I don't think their publisher is suicidal. I honestly can't believe that even they would publish a story about the president being a drunk unless they had some evidence to cover their asses with.

[Quixote1818]

22. My thoughts exactly! And since other major news organizations

are working on the story it's probably true. I know Capitol Hill Blue is suspect here but he supposedly has some contacts on the inside that have been reporting the drinking as well.

[MN ChimpH8R]

114. Bingo

A higher up with the NE was on with the guy sitting in for Ed Schultz today. He said that the story had two sources, had been gone over in detail by their lawyers and that the NE would stand behind it 150%. He basically dared Bush to sue the NE. You don't bet like that unless you have four aces up your sleeve.

[Kelvin Mace]

15. NE is actually more credible these days

than the MSM. They actually VETTE their stories to keep from getting sued.

Is it true, time will tell, but my money says yes. Only drinking explains Bush's behaviour.

[RageFist]

16. Ya, where are the libel allegations??

[tlsmith1963]

17. I Don't Usually Believe the NE, Either...

...but didn't they break the Clinton/Lewinsky thing? Unfortunately, that "rag" is sometimes right. Not that I'm happy about it...

Tammy

[John Q. Citizen]

18. Because they are in business and if it's not true and they publish

it could cost them millions.

Actually the National Enquirer has broken a lot of stories that were later picked up by reputible newspapers like the New York (curveball) Times, and the LA (who's Freeway Ricky?) Times.

I agree that they (the "National Enquirer") are certainly sensational, but my guess is they have this sourced by someone in a position to know.

[rinsd]

80. Are you aware of how hard it is to prove libel in this country?

In addition to the cost of suing some0one who has a legal dept?

"Well nobody sued" is not the standard for truth.

[CascadeTide]

19. NE is actually pretty accurate most of the time

I wouldn't use one of their stories as evidence but it's enough to raise an eyebrow. I used to work with a former NE employee and he said almost all of the stories they reported were true and they were very aggressive in checking sources.

Go look back through their stories, you'd be surprised how many of them were later verified. Most of the rest are word against word which falls into the category of "we'll never know".

[NYCGirl]

32. We'll never know...

[Mitt Chovick]

20. Because we want to believe.

[Beelzebud]

52. Exactly....

[hardrainfallin]

23. Fuck the National Enquirer! Believe your lying fucking EYES!

A lot of people, myself included, have a lot of experience with alcoholics and have been noticing for a long time, the tell tale signs of a drunk gone wild. It is entirely disconcerting. The fool's dangerous enough without being drunk!

Mothers Against Drunk Dictators!

[Beelzebud]

31. I don't doubt that. I'm just not taking my cues from a tabloid.

They offer NOTHING in the way of evidence... This is just heresay, and it makes us all look bad for swallowing the bait so damn fast...

[Bouncy Ball]

35. Stop worrying about "all of us."

You are only responsible for you.

[Beelzebud]

41. When Hartmann, Rhodes, and Franken all treat it as fact, it does affect

"all of us"........

I dont' even doubt the story. I just want some FACTS.

[Bouncy Ball]

51. I shouldn't have even posted on this thread.

Somehow with a hurricane bearing down, this concern seems rather superficial to me.

[hardrainfallin]

72. the only way you're going to get at the "facts" is with a

piss test or blood test.

Maybe if enough people start talking about it, the issue can be forced and we can start demanding medical records or investigations.

[hardrainfallin]

40. Neither am I. Could be that the NE is taking its cue from US, actually. nt

[Occulus]

130. Well, ok... provide us with "evidence of alcoholism." n/t

[greenman3610]

25. I don't think you are familiar with the Enquirer

You may be thinking of the Weekly World News
or the Star. ( ie babies in pumpkins stories
do not appear in the Enquirer)

Anyone who has observed how distorted the news
has been from "mainstream" sources like
the New York Times and WPost the last few years
has to understand that the cardinal rule in
ANY media consumption is that you have to
keep asking and keep checking your information
against other sources.

The Enquirer was right on about Limbaugh's
drug issue, and everything they've written
about him has been right on.
Read, check the sources, recheck, and keep your
eyes peeled.

[Beelzebud]

27. Some of you are living in a fantasy land...

What a fucking shame.

IT IS THE NATIONAL ENQUIRER. FUCK..

Drudge got it right a few times too. Does that mean he's legit?

Would I love it if a real news source published something like this? Yes.

Am I going to throw my logic out the window because a tabloid printed some BS about the president? NO.

And to those saying they wouldn't print it because they would get sued... WAKE UP. The president of the US is not going to sue the national enquirer. Not going to happen. And they know this.

[Mr_Spock]

36. Guest on Ed Shultz show said a major paper was coming out with a story

corroborating the Enquirer story. And the enquirer claims to have TWO sources AND someone who posts here knows someone personally involved with a WH official who also corroborates the story! It may be true.

[Beelzebud]

42. If this "major newspaper" publishes, I'll post an apology.

Until then, it's bathroom tabloid dreck.

Reminds me of a capitolhillblue.com story...

[hardrainfallin]

44. Some of us are in fantasyland? Might I remind you that this is an

anonymous internet message board and you are screaming at AVATARS!?

[Beelzebud]

47. I'm screaming at people I don't like to see act so gullible...

[hardrainfallin]

56. like the ones gullible enough to believe that the NYT prints all the

news that's fit to print?

[Beelzebud]

58. Not saying that at all. But what evidence do they offer?

This is just he-said, she-said garbage, with a bunch of anonymous sources.

[hardrainfallin]

71. as I said, I am not relying on the NE--in fact, I haven't even read the

damn article.

I am relying on 40 yrs' first-hand experience around alcoholics in my immediate family.

I have been screaming it for months: the fucker is DRUNK.

And THAT really, really pisses me off because I do not have any patience for DRUNKS.

Not in my own family, and most certainly not at the head of the government, spending MY money, killing MY fellow citizens, destroying OUR environment, our infrastructure, our reputation--EVERYTHING.

This business of waiting for some "source" to confirm what you can SEE with your own eyes, to confirm LOGICAL conclusions based on what is there before your very eyes....I dunno.

I don't need ANYONE to tell me that this fucker is DRUNK.

ANd I don't care who goes out there and gets people talking about it. If the NE has done that much, it's gotten the topic on the table--and that's where it should be . It is a serious matter. Very serious.

[Garbo 2004]

121. Yeah, like Judy Miller and the NYT. And the WaPo,Time, Newsweek...n/t

[Mr_Spock]

28. Because you should have listened to Shultz

A guy who's name escapes me called and said that a major newspaper was also coming out with an article saying the same thing.

[Beelzebud]

34. Until that "major newspaper" publishes it's all just rumor!

If a major newspaper publishes a fact-based story on this, I'll post an apology to all of you.

[hardrainfallin]

54. since we know that the MSM is no longer any more reliable than

the NE (remember how they decried serious PhDd researchers as "internet conspiracy theorists", serious PhDd scholars who put their reputations and livelihoods on the line when the MSM refused to print anything remotely related to the truth about the fraudulent election practices in this country), NONE of these sources is reliable.

What is reliable are your own EYES, and the eyes, ears and experiences of people who are familiar with the disease in question (alcoholism) and are saying, in increasing numbers, that there is good reason to suspect that the patient is experiencing sever recidivism.

He's drunk.

The ONLY reliable way to substantiate or debunk the hypothesis is through a blood or urine analysis.

You'd think that Katrina might have taught people in this country to believe their eyes--and the scientists.

[John Q. Citizen]

76. I'm not sure that will be good enough. I think perhaps an apology

and you will have to buy yourself a years subscription to the NE :)

[Bouncy Ball]

30. Who cares?

I've been saying for years that the man is a drunk and has wet brain.

Hey the way I see it, MOST of the media has turned into a National Enquirer circus. So who cares? Why does it bother you so much?

And what if a regular newspaper reports it? Is it "ok" then?

[Kurovski]

39. A regular newspaper is working on the story...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4852737

A "highly respected" one.

[TankLV]

127. EXACTLY!! Why does it bother him so much!

I would be more concerned with the truth contained in the article.

He's spending a lot of energy on the "concern" for "we" again!

Just sayin.

[Kurovski]

33. Well, there is this interview with an editor...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4852737

I was skeptical too, but I no longer am. (As much.)

Edit:their/there

[mitchum]

38. I think you are confusing your tabloids...The National Enquirer is NOW...

as legitimate as any of the mainstream news sources. Sure, they cover a lot of celebrity fluff and puffery, fad diets, health "scares", etc... but so does the mainstream media. The National Enquirer actually has very deep pockets and can pay sources $$$$$ for information that some would prefer to remain buried.
The "baby in the pumpkin" story sounds more like The Weekly World News. WWN is tied with "The Onion" for the title of America's best humor magazine. The vast majority of the WWN's readership realizes that its content is absurd (as do all of its very gifted writers)

[Bouncy Ball]

43. In a world where people turn to FUX for news, this worries you?

The NE isn't reporting ANYTHING that a lot of people haven't known/suspected all along anyway.

[im10ashus]

108. You tell it like it is.

I think it's great to see them being beat at their own game. Rove would sell his child to beat a Democrat in an election year. And they have a track record for spreading lies and half-truths in order to bolster their poll numbers. My only regret, and I was the one who posted the NE story in the first place, is this wasn't bigger news in 2000/2004. They hid his alcoholism in order to mislead the American people. Which, by the way, apparently misleading the American people is not such a difficult thing.

I NEVER read the NE. It just happened to be sent to me because we were having a good laugh. Now it's opened up a lot old stories that were long ago buried.

* never stopped drinking. That's the only part of their story they got wrong. Well, that and the fact that he was drowning his sorrows over the loss of soldiers in Iraq. They had me up until then.

:hi:

[WinkyDink]

46. Two words:

Bruno Magli.

[npincus]

50. DON'T LOOK A GIFT HORSE IN THE MOUTH

you doubters and naysayers at DU are annoying me. This one is a GIFT, and it's not even Christmas!

This headline will be read by MILLIONS as they wait on checkout lines in supermarkets across America. It will diminsih any of the good will that B*sh might get back if he handles himself like a real president during the Rita crisis.

STOP the frigging debate already! Enjoy! Enjoy! Enjoy! The shit is finally hitting the fan for the son-of-a-bitch so don't get too self-righteous about the sources. Enquirer... NY Times... who gives a shit, the Chimp is going DOWN!

[Bouncy Ball]

55. Thanks, you put it very well.

I know a lot of....well, feeble-minded people who wouldn't glance twice at the cover of TIME, but if something's in the Enquirer, they can practically quote it. And except for the alien stories, they believe it.

[npincus]

65. thanks, and best of luck weathering the storm...

I wish you well!

[Kelvin Mace]

57. Agreed. Even if a complete fabrication,

finally the Right is getting a taste of their own medicine.

[goclark]

118. Yea! It's a Gift Chimp ~ let's enjoy the moment

I agree!

We didn't write the story, the NE wrote it.

Why the hell should we care?!

If the NY Times cracked the story then would we believe it?

If Colin Powell appeared before the UN with the bottle of Jim Beam in his hand and told us that it had the DNA of GW on the bottle, would we believe it!

Enjoy the hell out of this, please!!

ROVE must really be desperate if he is planting a story about the Chimp that even hints at drinking.

Let the popcorn begin!

[TankLV]

128. Well said. Thankyou.

[Q]

61. You're painting liberals with a very broad brush...

...but beyond that...

Bush was a drunken sod for the MAJORITY of his life and he HAS been caught drinking after he claimed that he quit.

And considering that the 'free press' has been replaced with a corporate media not interested in the truth...Americans have a tendency to get 'news' from sources other than the 'mainstream' media.

[mirror wall]

62. The Enquirer has cleaned up its act in recent years.

It's not the NYT, of course, but just because a story was broken in the Enquirer doesn't mean it's false. Read the Wiki entry on it.


It's actually a fairly long tradition that the more sensational stories will first break in the less respected tabloid realm before being picked up on by the mainstream media. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out over the next few weeks.

A few of the more salient excerpts from that entry (emphasis mine):

It is often regarded, not always accurately, as being sensationalist and carrying many esoteric stories.

Despite the sensationalistic perception, the Enquirer is also well-regarded for its very thorough research; their stories are often proven correct in many of their facts.

Subsequent celebrity stories broken in the Enquirer have generally been proven true; for example, it was the Enquirer that uncovered in 2001 that the Rev. Jesse Jackson had an illegitimate child. Details of the Monica Lewinsky affair would normally have been untouched by the mainstream press, had the details not been already made public knowledge by the Enquirer.

They also did have a hand in breaking the Rush Limbaugh story, and I'm sure a few others. It's not like that shows any real partisanship either, they went after Clinton just as gleefully as they went after Rush or Bush. Here's another article from Slate that helps to dispel the myth that EVERYTHING THAT THE ENQUIRER EVER PRINTS EVER IS AUTOMATICALLY FALSE, FARRRRRRRRRRT.

[calimary]

129. Welcome to DU!

This just might be some of the most fun I've had here on DU in donkeys' years!

:party:

[Der Blaue Engel]

64. Because it's FUN n/t

[Beelzebud]

74. Honesty! How refreshing!

:D

[Halliburton]

68. they were right about Rush being a fatass drug-addict

[ruggerson]

70. National Enquirer has gotten very legit with its gossip

in the past few years, due to lawsuits. They legally vet everything before they print it.

[rinsd]

73. Go to their website....type Clinton into the search engine....

and then think about what you posted.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

78. Yes, they got burned after Carol Burnett successfully sued them for

saying that she was drunk and made a scene in public.

Burnett sued them because this is a sensitive subject for her. Both her parents died from the effects of alcoholism, and out of fear of ending up like them, she doesn't drink at all.

Remember--it's the Enquirer that published the pictures of Jenna falling down drunk at a party and the Enquirer whose employee was killed by the Anthrax Killer.

[Beelzebud]

85. Are these articles legit?

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/57227

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/22339

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/9959

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/62736

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/58218

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/62118

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/59211

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/mikewalker/61869

So are thes fact-checked, legit articles, or are they bathroom, tabloid trash?

Trusted news source? Yeah... ok... sure...

[izzybeans]

75. Come on everybody knows that batboy and the bearded lady

drink Cabo Wabo with the President. I mean shit, didn't the Enquirer break that big story about the alien baby from the planet Zultron.


:sarcasm:

They make loads off of half-truths. Such as Half baby/half bat stories. Everyone knows bush is a drunk, but is he yet tipping it back? I could give a rats ass as much as I could give a fuck about clinton getting polished off by a transvestite hooker-it's NOMB.

Whenever this reputible msm outlet breaks the story I'll eat crow, happily. Until then simmer down, I tell ya. I tells ya whats I mean to.

[Beelzebud]

79. Ok. Are these examples of the National Enquirers integrity?

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/55221

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/57227

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/22339

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/9959

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/62736

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/58218

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/62118

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/59211

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/mikewalker/61869

Is this the "new face" i'm hearing so much about? If so, i'm not impressed. Do you need more? Because their site is full of lame shit like that.

Let's get this straight: I AM A LIBERAL

I think GWB is a dry drunk, and it is totally possible he is drinking again.

But forgive me if I don't trust every piece of shit rumor that floats out of the NE's poop shoot.

There is a "major newspaper" working on this story? Fine. Let's see it. Until then, this "article" is in the same league as the ones I posted above.

[rinsd]

81. The brain damage one REALLY pisses me off (nt)

[Beelzebud]

82. Funny how they won't respond to the posts that have these links in them...

[mirror wall]

102. No one's saying that EVERYTHING that they publish is legit.

It's just that they have developed a track record of breaking SOME of the stories that were too hot for the msm at first and later turned out to be true.

JUST BECAUSE A STORY IS IN THE NE DOESN'T MEAN IT'S AUTOMATICALLY FALSE. DUH.

[Atman]

106. It shouldn't. It only states facts.

You're pissed off about the headline. You must not have read the story. It never says Bill has brain damage. It says he was in danger of suffering brain damage should a blood infection occur after his heart surgery, and that infection spread to his brain.

That is 100% accurate. It does NOT say Bill had brain damage.

[npincus]

86. Read my post #50.

Do you ever find Republicans debating the veracity of the sources for their smear campaigns (such as the Swiftboat smear)? DO they worry about the caliber of the publications that denigrate our leaders?

PUHLEAAAAAAAAAAAZE... if Dems have to debate the source of every peice of ammo we have to fight against those scumbags it's NO WONDER we are struggling to win elections.

[Beelzebud]

88. Do you honestly think that a National Enquirer story will win us elections

Maybe THAT is part of the reason we haven't been winning any.

I don't rely on the National Enquirer to "smear" poltical opponents.

Oh but hell. Let's just sit back and let the National Enquirer take the republicans down. That will really work. Everyone knows they are a respected source of information.

Like this stuff:

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/57227

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/22339

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/9959

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/62736

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/58218

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/62118

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/59211

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/mikewalker/61869

[npincus]

91. would you prefer that the story disappear?

[Beelzebud]

92. What story? Anon source says president drank.

To the average american that will garner a collective yawn and fart.

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/57227

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/22339

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/9959

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/62736

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/58218

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/62118

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/59211

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/mikewalker/61869

I'd prefer the National Enquirer disappear. No matter who they are making shit up about...

[meisje]

83. You mean "Bat Boy: is'nt real?

[Kelvin Mace]

84. There is certainly a LOT of circumstantioal evidence out there

that Bush has been drinking for some time.

Did he choke on a pretzel or pass out and hit his face on a table?

Is he just clumsy, of is he drunk when he falls of bikes, Segways, and trips over his own feet?

What about the deterioration of his mental faculties and inability to speak clearly?

Sounds like alcohol to me.

[Beelzebud]

87. I don't doubt any of that.

I'm no fan of Bush.

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/57227

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/22339

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/9959

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/62736

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/58218

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/62118

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/59211

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/mikewalker/61869

How much are you willing to cover for the N.E.?

[Kelvin Mace]

95. As I said, the evidence fits

his behaviour. It will be interesting to see if the MSM picks up on it tomorrow.

Picking on a viciously vindictive person like Bush is not something I would do without a LOT of cover.

I am not claiming the NE isn't scum, they are. But this is an interesting fight to pick and lots of downsides for them given how rabid BushBots are.

[rinsd]

93. I definitely think he's drinking..I just think the NE sucks as source (nt)

[Beelzebud]

94. Thank you! That is my point.

I'm not bush apologist. I think the man is scum. Worst president ever.

I think he is a former coke-head and alcoholic. I think it is totally possible he is still an active drunk.

But you won't see me telling any of my friends to check out the new N.E. to get some dirt on Bush. They laugh in my face...

[Kelvin Mace]

96. I will mention it with amusement

NE is a bible to many Red-staters. I would guess that a hundred million people will read the front page while in the checkout line of the supermarket.

[Beelzebud]

97. Trust me. I do find that aspect highly amusing.

I just don't like seeing liberals being so gullible. I expect it from the knuckle-draggers, but I hate seeing liberals just believing a N.E. story because they hate Bush.

I hate Bush.

But I also want to retain my critical thinking skills...

[Kelvin Mace]

112. I beleived he was drinking before the story.

It will be very ironic if the NE turns out to be the only news source doing its job, for whatever reason.

[im10ashus]

116. I believe I qualified the original posting by saying as much.

It was so laughable so why not share it? I didn't think it would generate such a response.

If nothing else, it's fighting them back at their own game. They are the masters of using the media, whatever the source (and let's not even bring in Faux news to this equation), to spread lies about our democratic candidates. I wouldn't give the NE any more credence than I would any other weekly rag. And I wouldn't take it all so seriously. Lighten up. It's too much energy to get worked up over such a non-issue. Could you imagine "their" response if it were Gore/Kerry/Kennedy instead of *?

:hi:

[ptolle]

120. critical thinking skills

Your critical thinking skills ought to tell you that in an infinite universe many(almost all) things are possible- such as the possibility that this is perfectly legit. I don't even hate the twit, though my disrespect is very intense, hate is way too much of an emotional expenditure and injurious to me for someone fated to slide back into deep obscurity in another 3+ years. I only hope the damage he's done so far is not irreparable.In the meantime, and in the interest of trying to minimize that damage whatever damage can be wrought upon the chimperor is alright with me.

[lateo]

89. Because they are more reliable than CNN?

Just a guess...

[Beelzebud]

90. Really?

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/57227

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/22339

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/9959

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/62736

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/58218

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/politics/62118

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/59211

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/mikewalker/61869

When did CNN run with any of that bullshit?

[CascadeTide]

100. which one of those are implausible?

It's no secret Bill is a womanizer and mother/daughter spats are hardly uncommon, nor is a pregnancy scare for a 20-something.

You're acting like it's a bat-boy story or something.

[Atman]

105. READ POST #98

or read the stories you scoff at. They say nothing implausible at all. The story about Bill's trysts is actually about Bill and Hillary ditching their SS detail to suck face.

STOP FALLING FOR SENSATIONAL HEADLINES. Read the stories. They are about unsensational as they come.

[CascadeTide]

109. un-newsworthy and sensationalist doesn't make something untrue

I don't really care one way or the other but the people absolutely dismissing it are being just as silly as the ones putting 100% faith in the NE

[Atman]

111. I guess that's my point...NE is guilty of sensationalism and poor taste

Neither of which were in short supply in the United States.

But they are a multi-million dollar company and must answer to shareholders. They may be trash, but they aren't stupid.

[lateo]

104. Lack of humor alert!

I was joking...

[Garbo 2004]

123. You're right. CNN, MSNBC etc. just gave us the Swift Boat vets instead.n/t

[LittleClarkie]

103. I prefer the World News myself

and we'd be a damned site better off if Batboy had won the presidency, let me tell you!

[Fox Mulder]

107. I usually don't believe stuff that comes out of that magazine...but...

I never put aside the possibility of it being truth either.

[union_maid]

115. This is different

This is the BFEE. This is the Rove machine. The NE has to have real sources. Whether the sources are lying, I don't know, but they've got them and they can prove that they do. That seems like a sure thing.

Now, if you accept that for argument's sake, why did the sources decide to talk now?

[flaminbats]

119. and what does liberty have to do with the National Enquirer?

the only link I can find is freedom of the press.

The National-Enquirer isn't built for credible details or professional journalism, it does reveal allegations for more credible sources to look into and report on. Nobody believed the Enquirer about Jennifer Flowers, except for some rabid, radical Republicans. But over time some truth was revealed from this political bait by the mainstream media during Clinton's second term.

But freedom of speech is essential for judging our political leaders..from rumors, to tabloid trash, to credible journalism, and ultimately a detailed view of the truth. Whether we like it or not, rumors and tabloids are often just a small part of the larger view of reality.

Interesting subject :thumbsup:

[nonconformist]

122. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Besides, it's not so much that I believe the NE, it's that I believe Bush is a raving drunk.

Plus, it's fun.

[TankLV]

124. I'd be more concerned about publicizing the TRUTH no matter where it comes

from.

My, but there are an awful lot of people with "concern" all of a sudden with "how "we" will look" lately.

I'm more concerned with the fact that this news is finally getting OUT!

[OnionPatch]

125. I'd never email it to anyone or anything

as proof that Bush is off the wagon, but it sure is good to finally see his face in its rightful place; in the grocery store aisle, on the front of the tabloids, right next to the pumpkin baby from Mars.

[October]

126. I did...because

I emailed it because I can't believe anyone -- even the National Enquirer -- would print anything like this about GWB*. That was the shocking part.