GHWB and Adultery Smear in 1992.

[DKW 86 7,899]

FLASHBACK: MEDIA GRILLED BUSH OVER 'ADULTERY' CLAIMS

As main press players blast the DRUDGE REPORT and foreign outlets for revealing details of a behind-the-scenes campaign drama surrounding candidate Kerry and the nature of his relationship with a mystery woman -- just 12 years ago the same players peppered former President George Bush with questions surrounding an infidelity rumor!

In 1992 top reporters swiftly reacted to a footnote in a book quoting a long dead ambassador.

CNN rushed to get the rumor into the media stream as White House correspondent Mary Tillotson confronted President Bush as he hosted Israel Prime Minister Rabin in the Oval Office.

"There is an extensive series of reports in today's New York Post alleging that a former U.S. ambassador, a man now deceased, had told several persons that he arranged for a sexual tryst involving you and one of your female staffers in Geneva in 1984."

Asked NBC's Stone Phillips to the president's face at the height of the "rumor mongering":

"Have you ever had an affair?"

CBS' Harry Smith then confronted Bush spokesperson Mary Matalin over on-air morning coffee:

"Let me ask you about something else. There's a book out, or a book that's just about out that in a footnote names that then-Vice President Bush had an affair with an assistant when he was on a mission in Geneva. Well, that footnote has turned into frontpage news (holding up N.Y.POST), at least in New York, in the N.Y. POST. Albeit a tabloid, it is usually a conservative newspaper. Are you ready to say that accusation is a flat out lie?"

NEWSWEEK's Jonathan Alter defended the aggressive adultery rumor line-of-questioning of the first President Bush on ABC's NIGHTLINE on August 12, 1992, on a broadcast titled: "The Media Charges George Bush With Adultery."

"In this situation, the Oval Office isn't a temple," Alter explained. "The President is a candidate and he has to be asked tough, often distasteful, but nonetheless important kinds of questions."

UPI's Helen Thomas also defended the Bush affair reportage:

"Some people might have felt that it wasn't appropriate. But when you have the President there, I think it's very legitimate to ask him any question."

CUT TO 2004:

NEWSWEEK'S Alter blasted any and all coverage of the Kerry infidelity probe last week on a New York City talkradio outlet -- calling the investigation "sleazy."

The media outrage over an erupting story of possible infidelity of a presidential candidate -- 2004 -- peaked with Joe Conason's cover story in SALON late last week ["There he goes again! Matt Drudge and the GOP smear machine are back in the Democrats' pants"]

Conason lamented:

"But the kind of proof usually required by national news organizations isn't what Drudge needs in order to put innuendo into circulation."

But is this really the same Joe Conason who in the Summer of 1992 wrote a magazine cover story entitled "1,000 REASONS NOT TO VOTE FOR GEORGE BUSH?"

Consaon's reason #1:

"He cheats on his wife."

The rumor of President Bush having an affair was never proved by the media.

The developing Kerry drama may or may not join it on the shelf.

[CarolinaTiger 0]

i forget...whatever became of that rumor in 1992.

i definitely remember it coming out...but can't remember if H denied it, refused to address it or what.

ct

[Tiger Al 0]

GHWB and Adultery Smear in 1992., The Dems can dish it, cannot take it.

This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever seen you write. Were you on Mars between 1992 and 2000?

[DKW 86 7,899]

I was speaking to Mr. Kerry and his "Bush Adm. smear tactics quotes."

Al, in all honesty, this is just politics and we both know it. It is not good, but it is what happens.

[Tigermike 3,715]

But David it is only stupid when the republicans do it. When it is the democrats, it is seeking truth and promoting the well good of the country.

[Tiger Al 0]

I was speaking to Mr. Kerry and his "Bush Adm. smear tactics quotes."

Al, in all honesty, this is just politics and we both know it. It is not good, but it is what happens.

Then explain your comment that the Dems can't take it. We took it for eight straight years. More, really, if you count the year prior to the election in 92 and the three since Clinton left in 2000.

I, for one, love the way Kerry has shown that you people won't intimidate him and he'll be more than happy to dish it right back, smiling all the way!

We've seen that when it comes to being a man of action, Kerry answered his country's call. We know what Bush did. Or didn't do. We also saw how, when our country was under attack on 9/11, Bush sat in a classroom reading with children instead of being the leader he claims to be.

[War Eagle 96 10]

Kerry answered his country's call.

What do you mean? Running up and down the river in one of those Navy speed-boats for three months, applying to leave early to protest his "brothers in arms" still "in-country", filling out his own applications for the silver star, getting purple hearts for injuries that did not require hospitalization, what do you mean? I'll take the guy that flew fighter-jets.

[Tiger Al 0]

I'll take the guy that flew fighter-jets.

And you can have him.

[War Eagle 96 10]

I'll take the guy that flew fighter-jets.

And you can have him.

But, no response to the rest of my post?

Do you concede those points? I ask, because I know we don't all have time to answer every part of every post. But, if you really believe in your guy, I am surprised you didn't answer to the other parts of my post.

[Tiger Al 0]

applying to leave early to protest his "brothers in arms" still "in-country", filling out his own applications for the silver star, getting purple hearts for injuries that did not require hospitalization

I have no idea what any of this is about. Do you have any links?

[DKW 86 7,899]

Al, settle down man. This is just for all of Kerry's screaming over the adultery issue now. Seems like most adults in the country know that Clark was the one starting this anyway. The Dems did the same thing with GHWB in 1992, but they cant handle getting it back in 2004.

And Al, we Reps do understand the character thing. Witness Gingrich and Landreaux? (Rep from LA). We understand it AND act on it. We dont just sweep it under the rug and hurl names at everyone else. Take our lumps and move on.

It is funny how the Dems can dish it, but cannot take it.

[AUloggerhead 2,516]

... filling out his own applications for the silver star, getting purple hearts for injuries that did not require hospitalization, what do you mean? ...

Whoa! Back up. Do you have links to these allegations? I'd like to see where this originated. Link(s) please.

[War Eagle 96 10]

Just a nasty rumor or two I've heard on conservative talk radio and such. The Vietnam Veterans Against Dean are saying it though. I don't have a link, I was just trying to get Al to respond to it.

Allow me to be more "Democratic." Do you have a link saying those things are not true?

[Tiger Al 0]

Just a nasty rumor or two I've heard on conservative talk radio and such.  The Vietnam Veterans Against Dean are saying it though.  I don't have a link, I was just trying to get Al to respond to it.

Allow me to be more "Democratic."  Do you have a link saying those things are not true?

That explains why I haven't heard of this before. So, you're saying you tried to bait me with a rumor but passing it off as fact?

[CCTAU 3,536]

Just a nasty rumor or two I've heard on conservative talk radio and such.  The Vietnam Veterans Against Dean are saying it though.   I don't have a link, I was just trying to get Al to respond to it.

Allow me to be more "Democratic."  Do you have a link saying those things are not true?

That explains why I haven't heard of this before. So, you're saying you tried to bait me with a rumor but passing it off as fact?

You are teaching us well, Obiwan!

[Jenny AU-92 0]

GHWB and Adultery Smear in 1992., The Dems can dish it, cannot take it.

This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever seen you write. Were you on Mars between 1992 and 2000?

His point is that the GHWB and the Kerry things were both based on rumor and inuendo and have nothing substantial to back them up - yet the GHWB thing was covered heavily by the media, whereas the media is not TOUCHING the Kerry thing - the Washington Post guy even said they would not print this story if someone brought them pictures.

Clinton DID have affairs, with multiple women, over and over, and there was so much proof and substantiation lying around that a blind man could have proved it to the satisfaction of the media - they had no choice BUT to report it.

Apples and oranges, Al.

[Tiger Al 0]

GHWB and Adultery Smear in 1992., The Dems can dish it, cannot take it.

This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever seen you write. Were you on Mars between 1992 and 2000?

His point is that the GHWB and the Kerry things were both based on rumor and inuendo and have nothing substantial to back them up - yet the GHWB thing was covered heavily by the media, whereas the media is not TOUCHING the Kerry thing - the Washington Post guy even said they would not print this story if someone brought them pictures.

Clinton DID have affairs, with multiple women, over and over, and there was so much proof and substantiation lying around that a blind man could have proved it to the satisfaction of the media - they had no choice BUT to report it.

Apples and oranges, Al.

And my point is that the Democrats have had plenty of practice "taking it." These attacks are nothing new. We had an eight year crick in the neck from looking high atop Mount Morality to see which republican Pharisee would emerge from the Sanhedrin to give the pseudo-sermon of the day.

Apples and oranges my eye! This junk with Kerry is the same apples and the same oranges we've grown accustomed to getting from the "moral majority party." Looks like Kerry will be in a position to make Dubya his personal be-yatch for a while.

[CCTAU 3,536]

GHWB and Adultery Smear in 1992., The Dems can dish it, cannot take it.

This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever seen you write. Were you on Mars between 1992 and 2000?

His point is that the GHWB and the Kerry things were both based on rumor and inuendo and have nothing substantial to back them up - yet the GHWB thing was covered heavily by the media, whereas the media is not TOUCHING the Kerry thing - the Washington Post guy even said they would not print this story if someone brought them pictures.

Clinton DID have affairs, with multiple women, over and over, and there was so much proof and substantiation lying around that a blind man could have proved it to the satisfaction of the media - they had no choice BUT to report it.

Apples and oranges, Al.

And my point is that the Democrats have had plenty of practice "taking it." These attacks are nothing new. We had an eight year crick in the neck from looking high atop Mount Morality to see which republican Pharisee would emerge from the Sanhedrin to give the pseudo-sermon of the day.

Apples and oranges my eye! This junk with Kerry is the same apples and the same oranges we've grown accustomed to getting from the "moral majority party." Looks like Kerry will be in a position to make Dubya his personal be-yatch for a while.

That's be-yotch. And I doubt it. A plane can shoot a boat. But a boat has a hard time shooting up.

[Tiger Al 0]

the Washington Post guy even said they would not print this story if someone brought them pictures.

Out of curiosity, where did you here this?

[Jenny AU-92 0]

the Washington Post guy even said they would not print this story if someone brought them pictures.

Out of curiosity, where did you here this?

Al, you forget that a DEMOCRAT (Clark's campaign guy!) is the one who STARTED THIS RUMOR! The Repubs had nothing to do with it! It was not Rove or anyone connected to the Bush Admin. All Drudge did was REPORT that there was a RUMOR - he never claimed it was true, just that it was breaking news that there was a rumor.

As for the Washington Post quote, I read it on Boortz, but I googled it and got this sourve as well - there were others.

Source

The Washington Post London correspondent Glenn Frankel, a Pulitzer Prize winner and former editor of the Post's Sunday magazine, defended his newspaper's editorial judgment.

"We've been down this road many, many times before. We are extremely reluctant to follow this kind of thing up unless there is a really, really compelling public interest. We don't feel there is any reason to until it reaches a threshold.

"All we have at the moment is that the woman's parents, who are republicans, don't like Senator Kerry.

"In any case, nobody would be too shocked if Kerry lied about an affair. Even if someone came to us with photographs we still wouldn't run it. Lying to Don Imus [the radio host to whom Kerry gave his initial denial] is not a federal offence."

The early jousting holds the promise of a campaign with few holds barred. It is a delicate game because it can backfire and allegations are often floated through the undergrowth of the internet to see how far they get. Both campaigns muster big teams to counter whatever might emerge.

[Tiger Al 0]

OK. I know about the rumor and the story. I meant only the part I quoted. I had seen one of CCT's links to a Boortz article where he said the same thing, but, Boortz' link didn't include the part about pictures.

Anyway, it looks as if the Washington Post had the best judgement of anyone.