Posted on 10/06/2012 8:01:21 AM PDT by 7thson
A week ago, I found BuzzFeed on FreeRepublic. The story was the Down Low club in Chicago. Since then, I have been reading some of the stuff on that blog. My questions to fellow Freepers - how much of that stuff should be believed? And what do Freepers think of that blog?
I think you are talking about HillBuzz. I’m not sure how accurate his stories are, so I read it for entertainment purposes only. And it is indeed very entertaining.
However, I have bookmarked his story about the Obama’s moving to Hawaii in January. That will tell how much he really knows.
I don’t know much about Buzzfeed or the Down Low Club, but it has been widely known for four or five years, among people paying attention, that Obama is gay, that he had Chicago bathhouse affairs, that there were several members of his so-called church’s choir who were gay, and that those gay members were conveniently murdered just as Obama was coming onto the national stage to run for POTUS.
So, in my eyes, none of this is proven, as in a court of law, but it is extremely likely. It fits what we already know about Obama, south-side Chicago bathhouses, and Rev. Wright’s black power “church.”
He is also observing Obama with fine-tuned gaydar, and first-hand knowledge of drug-use...that always makes for an interesting read.
Is what they are telling him credible? Who knows, but I believe he reports honestly what he's hearing on the street.
This will never see the light of day in the legacy media. Dream on.
I’ve been using Buzzfeed for years ... as a way to keep up with pop culture memes, funny videos, etc. Like College Humor, The Chive or The Awesomer.
At some point, Ben Smith from Politico realized that there was potential to reach younger / hipper audiences by adding politics in to their feed of LOLcats, Old Spice commercials and parodies of video game characters as painted by Renaissance masters, and jumped ship.
Buzzfeed now has a political wing that has great (?) credibility insofar as it has Ben Smith from Politico, plus several Daily Kos rejects who write inane, garbage blog posts and log them as articles. Their advantage is that they are very fast in getting information out, they have a large pre-built audience, and they don’t much care if they’re right or not so long as they’re early.
If you get a chance, it’s fun to follow BuzzFeedBen and AceOfSpadesHQ on Twitter. Ace regularly lights Ben up mercilessly for running a gutter operation (a sub-Kos leftist blog with a budget, etc).
Hillbuzz and Buzzfeed are two different entities. Hillbuzz is a political gossip site. Buzzfeed is mostly an internet comedy site, except for their political wing, which is nothing but a tragedy.
I’ll believe Kevin DeJuan over Barack Obama any day.
My personal view on that stuff? Having encountered folks who have been falsely accused of being homos or child molesters and such, and knowing of a certain human appetite for sensationalism to buttress pre-conceived notions, I tend to be extremely wary of these types of accusations. Especially in the realm of politics, where smearing and character-assassination are deemed handy tools.
So, for me to buy into something like this, I really need to see a “pattern” over time. Like Clinton, who had such a long history as a sleaze.
I love Kevin Dujan at Hill buzz.. Extremely funny and most likely right on the money. Most of us won’t ever really know the truth about the loser in the WH but I would bet Kevin’s tidbits are right on the money....
If you wrote that headline you must be drunk or smoking weed!
I know they are two different sites. I don’t think Buzzfed is writing stories about Obama visiting gay clubs. I know HillBuzz does.
I like HillBuzz. I take it with a grain of salt, as I do the National Enquirer (when I occasionally read it). Always fun, sometimes it is right on the money. Street talk is often right. Plus, what he says makes sense, totally fits what I am observing. Gay, O is likely gay. Does drugs, O most certainly does drugs. Some things definitely match up.
I apologize if my headline upset you. Yes, I should have been more careful and I got the name of the blog site wrong. Yes, I meant Hill Buzz vice Buzz Feed. My questions to you - do you respond to others on a face-to-face level the way you responded to me? Why the need for hostility? Why the in your face approach?
I have to admit to enjoying an occasional article over at Hillbuzz. I think that the comparison to The Enquirer is a good one.
As for their accuracy, remember that The Enquirer gave us the John Edwards story. I suspect that Hillbuzz has a simliar truth rating.
I can remember in 2008, they continually assured all of us that droves of Dem Pumas would push (or drag) John McCain over the line.
Maybe the misspelling had something to do with it.
I have to admit to enjoying an occasional article over at Hillbuzz. They are amusing, interesting, and I love their treatment of Obama. I think the comparison to The Enquirer is a good one.
As for their accuracy, The Enquirer gave us the John Edwards story. I think that the folks at Hillbuzz write with similar veracity.
I can remember the many stories in the 2008 run where they promised hoards of Pumas dragging John McCain over the line. None showed.
Absolutely!
I don't give a damn if it was wrong, it was totally incoherent!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.