Skip to comments.
Shocking Inside DC Scandal Rumor: A Media Ethics Dilemma
Ron Rosenbaum.com ^
| 10/29/07
| Ron Rosenbaum
Posted on 10/30/2007 6:09:13 PM PDT by jimboster
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 421-426 next last
To: jimboster
Bill Clinton had a baby with a black woman?
41
posted on
10/30/2007 6:23:20 PM PDT
by
woofie
To: PetroniusMaximus
I doubt it. Obama is sinking fast under his own power. There is no need for any help from others. Remember that the author said that this could sink the campaign of one of the candidates.
I'd guess either Rudy or Hillary would be the most logical possibilities here.
To: jimboster
“involving a leading Presidential candidate. “
Rudy or Clinton.
43
posted on
10/30/2007 6:23:40 PM PDT
by
TornadoAlley3
( An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping that it will eat him last..)
To: CatoRenasci
I think you may have it. Just cheating isn’t enough.
It’s gotta be homosexual cheating.
44
posted on
10/30/2007 6:24:00 PM PDT
by
jimboster
(fROM)
To: jimboster
Ron Paul’s alien abduction was sexual?
45
posted on
10/30/2007 6:24:50 PM PDT
by
Babsig
(www.genesysitsolutions.com)
To: jimboster
this rumor the LA Times is supposedly sitting on is one I never heard in this specific form before Interesting little clue, there.
46
posted on
10/30/2007 6:25:28 PM PDT
by
Izzy Dunne
(Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
To: jimboster
"I'm betting it's Obama"
That would seem to be the best bet - the article specifically says it's not the Edwards rumor (unless there's ANOTHER Edwards story and the author is just throwing people off the scent), and the chances are slim that the MSM would bother to publish if it's a 'lesser' candidate than Hillary-Obama-Edwards. Of course it goes without saying that it's not a Republican, else the LA Times would not be agonizing over any such dilemma. Without any real info to go on, I'd bet on Obama too, for why else would the LA Times agonize about it? Maybe they'd also agonize over a new Clinton scandal, but probably not as much.
47
posted on
10/30/2007 6:26:41 PM PDT
by
Enchante
(Democrat terror-fighting motto: "BLEAT - CHEAT - RETREAT - DEFEAT")
To: woofie
No...Bill Clinton had a baby with an alien. Not the illegal ones neither.
Gary
48
posted on
10/30/2007 6:26:48 PM PDT
by
GaryLee1990
(www.WatchingHillary.com)
To: woofie
Bill Clinton had a baby with a black woman?He's not running.
Give it up.
49
posted on
10/30/2007 6:26:54 PM PDT
by
Jim Noble
(Trails of trouble, roads of battle, paths of victory we shall walk.)
To: TornadoAlley3
Well we know two things about Rudy that are facts:
1. his former roomate was gay
2. he has dressed in drag
Think about it.
50
posted on
10/30/2007 6:26:59 PM PDT
by
Babsig
(www.genesysitsolutions.com)
To: jimboster
Since the LA Times is actually debating whether to release the story or not, I'm betting it's Obama The ethical dilemma for liberals could be trying to decide whether to run it now against a Republican hopeful, or sit on it in hopes of slaying the Republican Presidential Candidate. Sort of like CBS's ethical dilemma about when to release stories they had (or pretended they had) on Bush.
51
posted on
10/30/2007 6:26:59 PM PDT
by
SampleMan
(Islamic tolerance is practiced by killing you last.)
To: jimboster
Why are well wired media elite keeping silent about it? One answer: They're dishonest. It's not like the "well wired media elite" (sic) have been completely honest with us and many of us know it.
52
posted on
10/30/2007 6:27:14 PM PDT
by
sionnsar
(trad-anglican.faithweb.com |Iran Azadi| 5yst3m 0wn3d - it's N0t Y0ur5 (SONY) | UN: Useless Nations)
To: jimboster
everyone regularly writing about the Presidential campaign knows about it and doesnt know what to do with it Hard to believe that, withe all the reporters covering the campaigns, EVERYONE keeps their lips shut...
53
posted on
10/30/2007 6:27:30 PM PDT
by
Izzy Dunne
(Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
To: jimboster
It raises all sorts of ethical questions. What about private sexual behavior is relevant?
Anything concerning a Republican, nothing concerning a Democrat.
What about a marriage belongs in the coverage of a presidential campaign?
Anything that acts to the advantage of a Democrat or embarrassment of a Republican.
Does it go to the judgment of the candidate in question?
Trick question, right? Correct answer: it depends, class altogether, on whether said candidate is a Republican or a Democrat.
Didnt we all have a national nervous breakdown over these questions nearly a decade ago?
I don't know about you, but was fine. Clinton embarrassed himself so thoroughly that even the MSM couldn't cover up for him.
Just call me Professor of Journalistic Ethics. You can play along at home, kids.
54
posted on
10/30/2007 6:27:35 PM PDT
by
Lonesome in Massachussets
(NYT Headline: Protocols of the Learned Elders of CBS: Fake but Accurate, Experts Say)
To: jimboster
I feel a little uneasy reporting this He never reported anything. Just went on and on about a rumor and hearsay. Bunch of talk with no real subtance. Lots of inuendo, but no meat to anything said.
Nothing but teasers IMHO and the way I see it, he should either come out and say directly what it is he is talking about, or don't write about it at all.
55
posted on
10/30/2007 6:27:41 PM PDT
by
Jeff Head
(Freedom is not free...never has been, never will be. (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
To: wimpycat
To: Enchante
Bill Richardson has a lot going on in the sex department but who cares?
57
posted on
10/30/2007 6:28:05 PM PDT
by
woofie
To: Eagles6
Obviously fiction. Journalists dont encounter ethical or moral dilemmas.
Kind of like an ethics problem like this: A and B go into business and decide to split all the profit 50/50.
One day a client comes in and overpays his bill to A.
The ethics problem is: should A keep the overpayment for himself, or split it with his partner B. - Tom
58
posted on
10/30/2007 6:28:05 PM PDT
by
Capt. Tom
(Don't confuse the Bushies with the dumb Republicans - Capt. Tom)
To: jimboster
Not Obama. Its Hillary and 3 or the 4 woman on The View!
59
posted on
10/30/2007 6:28:12 PM PDT
by
Holicheese
(1-21-09 Hillary starts to destroy America!)
To: doorgunner69
LOL! You’re right.
This could be about a Republican, you know. Let’s see. Giuliani? Thompson? Romney? Huckabee? McCain?
If he says it’s “juicy” if true, then look at the squeaky-cleanest Republicans, which in this context would be Romney and Huckabee.
60
posted on
10/30/2007 6:28:21 PM PDT
by
wimpycat
(Hyperbole is the opiate of the activist wacko.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 421-426 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson