Replies

In the Arnold case, they waited until 5 days before the election (optimal time for maximum damage) to 'discover' news that was reported 3 years prior and to a large extent debunked 2 years prior... Anything like that on a Democrat is given the usual treatment:

1. Ignored (it's not news if we dont report it)
2. Dismissed as 'allegations'(duh, the truth can be called an 'allegation' if you dont bother fact-checking it).
2b. They try to spin it positively (wait for the DNC fax before making any news items).
3. called "old news, we heard it before" (it was in a right-wing newsletter with a circulation of 50 so we dont need to cover it)
4. "these are right-wing attacks" (we cant refute them but we can demonize anyone who dares mention them)
5. "let's move on" (please let's get back to who can socialize this country faster)

I was just remembering that when the LA Times were doing their smear job on Schwarzenegger how they would always be sure to mention that they were not being tools for the DNC.

Rather odd how they would go out of their way to do that???

Anyways if this were truly a Republican smear campaign wouldn't it make more sense to wait until after Kerry got the nomination?!?!?