Anti-Palin Author Likely Published Literary Hoax

[JohnRich 4]

News:

Explosive Email Shows Anti-Palin Author McGinniss, Random House Likely Published Literary Hoax

"The awful launch week for the over-hyped, expected bestseller The Rogue: Searching for the Real Sarah Palin, by controversial author Joe McGinniss, just got worse. Much worse.

"After a week of universally scathing pans from the reflexively anti-Palin establishment media, McGinniss now faces the fight of his literary life: the accusation that he seems to have knowingly submitted a book to his publisher, Crown/Random House, that was filled with unproved “tawdry gossip” and rumors that lacked “factual evidence.”

"In the email below, sent in January of 2011, McGinniss reveals that his manuscript, then under legal review at Crown/Random House, could not prove its most headline-grabbing allegations. And yet, many of these “salacious stories” that lacked “proof” (in McGinniss’s own words) ended up in the book, and on televisions everywhere during the author’s current media tour… without proper sourcing, and without any apparent new evidence to support them..."

Full story: Big Journalism

Why let a little thing like the truth get in the way of a good conservative bashing?

[Andy9o8 3]

Quote

Why let a little thing like the truth get in the way of a good conservative bashing?

The fact that it was done so ineptly shows how infrequently it's done.
Now back to the fascist pigs on Fox "News".

[kelpdiver 2]

did anyone really believe the headlines last week on this book? I think it's fair to fault those who represented it as a given, but it was pretty obvious what we were dealing with.

[NewGuy2005 53]

Quote

Why let a little thing like the truth get in the way of a good conservative bashing?

Especially a female conservative.

That being said, I'm not a big fan of Palin.

[airdvr 210]

Too bad for the left leaning. I slipped and almost fell last night walking into the bathroom. Their drool was all over the place.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[kallend 2,183]

Oh the humanity!

Next you'll be telling us that all those books full of gossip about the British Royal Family and about Hollywood celebrities are full of unproven allegations too.

Or even this or this.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[airdvr 210]

Nice try perfesser...but even you can tell the difference.

Quote

that she snorted cocaine while snowmobiling and smoked marijuana with a professor at an Alaskan college.

Then there are allegations of a sixth-month affair with the business partner of husband Todd that put pressure on their marriage.

The Tea Party politician, according to McGinniss, snorted cocaine off a 55-gallon drum on holiday with friends, with husband Todd also reportedly "on the end of the straw plenty".

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[Andy9o8 3]

Quote

Too bad for the left leaning. I slipped and almost fell last night walking into the bathroom. Their drool was all over the place.

I'm trying to understand why liberals were in your bathroom in the middle of the night.

[kallend 2,183]

Quote

Nice try perfesser...but even you can tell the difference.

Indeed I can. Obama, Prince Charles, William, Harry, Diana, QE2, Philip, Liz Taylor... are not icons to the Tea Party, so salacious gossip about them doesn't rile up conservative ire.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[airdvr 210]

Quote

Quote

Too bad for the left leaning. I slipped and almost fell last night walking into the bathroom. Their drool was all over the place.

I'm trying to understand why liberals were in your bathroom in the middle of the night.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Oh the humanity! Next you'll be telling us that all those books full of gossip about the British Royal Family and about Hollywood celebrities are full of unproven allegations too.

So you approve of authors inventing fictitious salacious and derogatory stories about famous people in order to make headlines and sell books?

Are you okay with it if we start spreading some false rumors about you, here on dropzone.com?

[Andy9o8 3]

Quote

Quote

Oh the humanity! Next you'll be telling us that all those books full of gossip about the British Royal Family and about Hollywood celebrities are full of unproven allegations too.

So you approve of authors inventing fictitious salacious and derogatory stories about famous people in order to make headlines and sell books?

Yes; it's obvious to the rest of us that that's precisely what he meant. Go get 'em.

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

Yes; it's obvious to the rest of us that that's precisely what he meant. Go get 'em.

Don't you come across as mean spirited and divisive, sir. Isn't that, according to you, my job?

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[kallend 2,183]

Quote

Quote

Oh the humanity! Next you'll be telling us that all those books full of gossip about the British Royal Family and about Hollywood celebrities are full of unproven allegations too.

So you approve of authors inventing fictitious salacious and derogatory stories about famous people in order to make headlines and sell books?

Are you okay with it if we start spreading some false rumors about you, here on dropzone.com?

You have such an impressive ability to invent fiction about others, it's amazing that you criticize gossip-mongering books. You could make a fortune writing them.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[JohnRich 4]

It was a question, not fiction. And oh so typical of you to imply something, and then refuse to clarify yourself.

By the way, I hear you keep a pet gerbil in your bedroom - is that true?

[kallend 2,183]

Quote

By the way, I hear you keep a pet gerbil in your bedroom - is that true?

No, but I have a tank of guppies in my laundry room.

I hear that the number of guns owned is inversely related to penis size. Is that true?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 3,132]

>So you approve of authors inventing fictitious salacious and derogatory
>stories about famous people in order to make headlines and sell books?

Funny how you supported Ann Coulter when she was doing that. What's good for the goose is good for the gander and all that.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

I hear that the number of guns owned is inversely related to penis size. Is that true?

No, but I hear that the size of a man's toy rocket is inversely proportional to his penis size. True?

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

>So you approve of authors inventing fictitious salacious and derogatory
>stories about famous people in order to make headlines and sell books?

Funny how you supported Ann Coulter when she was doing that. What's good for the goose is good for the gander and all that.

I don't recall ever doing that - do you have a reference to prove your allegation?

Do you believe that intentionally publishing false and derogatory information about people is proper?
Do two wrongs make a right?
Do you keep a gerbil in your bedroom?

[billvon 3,132]

>I don't recall ever doing that - do you have a reference to prove your
>allegation?

Sure. In a post a while back you touted her book on John Kerry, which was every bit as slanderous as this book on Palin. Even titled your post "Hanoi John" to get a little dig in. Why is it OK to do that to John Kerry but not to Sarah Palin? Why is it evil to slander a career politician, but perfectly OK to smear a Vietnam vet?

>Do two wrongs make a right?

Not to me - but then again, I'm not a republican.

>Do you keep a gerbil in your bedroom?

Nope. Just a bunch of flying monkeys. Far more useful than gerbils.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I don't recall ever doing that - do you have a reference to prove your allegation?

LOL - I knew BV had a reference when you put up this defense.

Quote

Do you believe that intentionally publishing false and derogatory information about people is proper?

Depends - how much money will I make with it?

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

>I don't recall ever doing that - do you have a reference to prove your
>allegation?

Sure. In a post a while back you touted her book on John Kerry, which was every bit as slanderous as this book on Palin. Even titled your post "Hanoi John" to get a little dig in. Why is it OK to do that to John Kerry but not to Sarah Palin? Why is it evil to slander a career politician, but perfectly OK to smear a Vietnam vet?

Wow, you had to go back seven years to find that - obviously I'm a very frequent abuser of this practice.

Link: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1235265

It was a commentary by Ann Coulter, not a book, as far as I can tell. The original link no longer works. And the "Swift Boat Veterans" controversy was a big thing when Kerry was running for President, with lots of people coming forward saying that Kerry was lying about his Vietnam experiences. Simply bringing that issue up for discussion does not constitute "support for lies" as you allege. You get points for remembering something I posted that far back, but unfortunately, that memory has deteriorated with time, as it doesn't fit what I actually did. And on the other hand with Sarah Palin, I don't hear anyone supporting the nut who wrote the lies about her. If you can find scores of people who will say they witnessed her snorting cocaine, then maybe you'll have something. But so far, nope. So there's no analogy here with the Swift Boat Veterans.

Quote

>Do two wrongs make a right?

Not to me - but then again, I'm not a republican.

Right, because only republicans think like that, never democrats. Uh-huh. Further deterioration, this time to your credibility.

It's ironic how many people here simply can't bring themselves to say that publishing lies about people is wrong. That should be very easy to do, because it's the right thing to say. But some are so tied up in political gamesmanship, that they actually think anything is okay, no matter how deceitful, no matter how hateful, as long as it scores them political points. And this is what is wrong with politics today.

[jakee 1,611]

Quote

And oh so typical of you to imply something, and then refuse to clarify yourself.

Perfection.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

It's ironic how many people here simply can't bring themselves to say that publishing lies about people is wrong. That should be very easy to do, because it's the right thing to say. But some are so tied up in political gamesmanship, that they actually think anything is okay, no matter how deceitful, no matter how hateful, as long as it scores them political points. And this is what is wrong with politics today.

has anyone here actually defended the book? seems like you're beating up your own strawman again.

Some have pointed out the irony in your feign anger over the travesty it represents.

[billvon 3,132]

>And the "Swift Boat Veterans" controversy was a big thing when Kerry was
>running for President, with lots of people coming forward saying that Kerry
>was lying about his Vietnam experiences.

Yep. And it's OK to tout authors who write about that because you hate Kerry. But no one better smear Palin because you like her, even though people are coming forward saying bad things about her, too. Why not just admit "it was wrong to smear Kerry" instead of making up some bullshit justification for your actions? Why can't you apply the same standards to both people?

(And yes, it is wrong whether it's Kerry _or_ Palin.)

>But some are so tied up in political gamesmanship, that they actually think
>anything is okay, no matter how deceitful, no matter how hateful, as long as it
>scores them political points.

You seem to be the only person in this thread doing that. I'd be most impressed if you could admit you were wrong on the Kerry thing - but I have a strong feeling you can't even see in yourself that which you attack others for.