The importance of this story is not the story, itself, although going by the Enquirer's track record it's likely true. What's significant is that the Enquirer is a "red state" publication... and as one poster on democraticunderground.com says "You know when you lose the National Enquirer - you've lost your base." http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/63426 The Associated Press ran this headline yesterday: "Bush's Words on Iraq Echo LBJ in 1967". Again, as with the National Enquirer story about Bush's boozing, the importance here is not in the actual story. There's no real news here except that the Associated Press is suddenly feeling some predilection to equate Bush's policy to that of the negatively-viewed Johnson. I guess that's what happens when polls show only 32% of Americans approve of Bush's handling of the war. Looks like Bush's 5 year free pass with the media might be coming to an end.
I heard something about it on Walton & Johnson this morning, but they didn't spend a lot of time substantiating it. But The National Enquirer is a tabloid, plain and simple. I'd believe something I hear on Fox before I believe something from TNE.:hihi:
Well, you shouldn't. The Enquirer scrupulously protects itself from libel lawsuits, and has dropped many bombshells in the past that proved accurate: In defense of the National Enquirer
you cant trust the media, because bush owns them. haliburton runs most tv and newspapers. the one shining beacon of truth is the enquirer and to a lesser extent the weekly world news.
