September 08, 2004

Kitty Kelley's book says Bush took cocaine at Camp David Allegations of values and true moral leadership.

I know it's Kitty Kelley (and the Mirror), and my apologies for the Cheney-like name-calling, but whenever a Bush supporter is interviewed, they unfailingly support Bush for his "values" and "moral stance", seemingly completely clueless to his hard-partying past. That plus the difference between Bush and Kerry during those early adult years is staggering. One served in the Navy, one consistently got shitface drunk and battled the parents. More fit to lead?

posted by pete_best 19 years ago
  • howard kurtz explains why the media is viewing kelley's book with caution (washpost, registration required, try login: xpunx@xpunx.mil, password xpunx)
  • Wow, nothing from bugmenot is working at washpost, not slashdot, not anything.
  • * the White House communications director yesterday dismissed the book * and a Republican National Committee spokeswoman said * White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett said * White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan added * Fox News Vice President Bill Shine said (okay just kidding on that last one. sort of.)
  • oh no, mid, i guess washpost has caught on to bugmenot. bah.
  • 'S'okay. I'm supposed to be proofreading a paper anyway. Stupid AI class, stupid career plans, cutting into my interweb time...
  • Bush is toast. All the middle america swing voter types who would never read anything by molly ivins and co. will eat this shit up.
  • Friends, this is the same Kitty Kelley who claimed that Nancy Reagan and Frank Sinatra had hot geriatric sex in the White House while Ronnie was napping. Also, to the folks in Bush's fundamentalist base having a wild past followed by a conversion experience is just further proof of God's grace. Becoming born again erases everything that went before. True or not, this is not going to get much traction.
  • Yes, except that their line is that Bush hasn't done coke in 25 years, but this says he did it while Bush the Elder was in charge. Pretty big lie to get caught in, if it's true. And yeah, Kitty Kelley's generally full of shit and low class, but this kind of thing sells. There are people who will eat it up.
  • And to pete_best's point in the post, I'd say that anyone who goes on at length about how "moral" Bush is and what a "good Christian" he is means two things and two things only: --He's pro-life. --He's against gay marriage, and homosexuals in general (though he won't come right out and admit that last part). End of list.
  • If there was no geriatric sex, why is Frank Sinatra's daughter named Nancy, hmm?! The puzzle is falling into place...
  • It's just that Bush isn't really running on anything *but* character, and his past is a BIG identifier of his character, born again or no. The man has serious problems, and not just with alcohol - he's in need of therapy and a literal interpretation of the Bible isn't going to do it. Either way, I don't want him in charge of the football.
  • although he does have good taste in music (shamefully lifted off the blue)
  • Well, LarryC's right about the born-again thing. I was originally baptized into the Southern Baptist Church, and I can tell you that your "come to Jesus" moment erases anything short of pedophilia, murder, or rape in the eyes of the congregation. In fact, there are those who are drawn to the sordidness and drama of such conversion stories -- the imagination runs wild with images of pretty young things fumbling with your zipper in the backseats of cars, tender breasts rudely shown the light of day by rough, callused hands, &c., and you get to think and talk about it in church!
  • Want to appear more attractive to women? Try booze: "Hhhnnyyggyyyaahhh... Hiii, I'm gjdg BORGEEe and I Think YOUSE H-hooott." Clearly, this is what anyone wants. If that fails, the jittery cocaine addict look is always adorable. middleclasstool: Apparently also being a good christian involves going off the handle at your aids and shouting "fuck" alot.
  • i don't really understand why people have to resort to rumors and the past to try to discredit the current administration. If the Democrats simply publicized the repercussions of the actions that the administration have taken since 2000, I would think that would have a better chance at success than muck raking. There are so many things that the government has done wrong in the past few years it frustrates me to no end that we keep talking about things that happened decades ago. Crappy things are going on right now!
  • Yeah, maybe if the NYT should run one of those pieces on deplenished nuclear weapons being used in Afghanistan, and the birth defects resulting therefrom, we could see what happens. ;o
  • See, this is the difference between the left and the right. If a similar allegation had surfaced about Kerry, do you think any right-leaning website would have gone out of its way to show that it was probably not true, as the ultra-left Alternet has here? I think not. This is why the Right are kicking our ass. It's that messy intellectual integrity thing. The achilles heel of the left. (And btw, I agree the left doesn't need to resort to swiftboat-esque rumor-mongering of this sort. The record should speak for itself. Emphasis on "should"...)
  • I agree jccalhoun, but specifically regarding the Bush supporters who cite his "values" I think it's interesting that he was such the opposite of who they think he is now.
  • If he'd taken cocaine with camp David, then I'd respect him.
  • more inside...
  • For those not registered: fucktardo@washingtonpost.com pass: brazil. Both lickmy@ass.com and lickmy@ss.com were already taken. Which just goes to show how reliable all this registration info is.
  • although he does have good taste in music (shamefully lifted off the blue) I love the motherfucking internet.