Can Bush categorically deny Kitty Kelly's allegations? If not, then

[Lex]

those allegations will just float around out there in blogland and the media for weeks, unchalleged.

And if Bush doesn't sue Kelly for libel, and doesn't deny the accusations, won't many asssume the allegations are TRUE?

I bet Rove is burning up the phone lines right now trying to get his flunkies at CNN and MSBNC, etc. to agree NOT to report the allegations Kelly makes in her book.

[cap]

1. the key is the follow up

and the reverb of the media echo chamber...it needs to get blasted 24x7

[nightperson]

3. Reverb, wah-wah, delay, fuzz, tremolo, and ...

flanger }( .

[Nite Owl]

2. What they might try is

changing the subject. OBL? sooner rather than later?

[Paradise]

4. If it's 'youthful indiscretions', it won't work! n/t

[jefferson_dem]

5. If the media do their job -- the same "job" they did on Kerry

he'll have no choice but to face up and at least say he will not answer such allegations, or fess up and admit to his personal malfeasants.

Or...we may just go from yellow to orange. :eyes:

[acmavm]

6. He'll deny it all, regardless of whether it's true. What's a few lies

about cocaine and booze when he's lied almost 1000 American service people into their graves? (I'm sure the number is higher personally.)

[mourningdove92]

7. Seems to me that Kerry was expected to "prove" his innocence

against the sw liars for bush. Smirk should also have to prove his innocence.

[elfin]

8. Nah - Nobody's going to believe them

On top of that - KERRY will be blamed for going negative and spreading baseless lies and HE will be called to account to prove he (and any campaign/DNC staff) had nothing to do with this book.

That's the climate now in our fearful press - watch the spin and scream.