Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
I find myself sort of in agreement with this, just as I wonder exactly what it is that led Bush to be so slow in releasing what documentation he had. I guess it's either all fair game (in which case, both sides need to stop bitching that something shouldn't become "news" until there is acceptably precise evidence available), or the press should just go for it all the time, and let the chips fall where they may (i.e., the papers that consistently report too early and too wrong will eventually get that reputation, and become Enquirers. I would feel better about this second course if the Enquirer wasn't one of the most profitable newspapers in the world.
|
The "urban legends" site has any number of persistent rumors that are not true on it. Mere repetition does not result in a rumor being true.
You do know, don't you, that there have been persistent rumors about a Bush senior affair before and while in the White House, and that the name of the women is well-known inside the beltway? It has received a few mentions in the press over the years but is generally ignored. I have no idea if it is true, but it is a persistent rumor. And it is one the press has ignored because they both never had evidence and it never seemed relevant.
The Bush AWOL rumor, on the other hand, seems to have legs in part because of the documentation -- he clearly was discharged before serving his full time, and he clearly got preferential treatment in getting into the Guard. Those are the big issues; then in looking at those issues the press finds that he can't even show he did the service he was supposed to, asks a few questions, and gets nothing but more questions when they do.
