WelcomeYou've made it to Newsvine! A place to read, write, and discuss the news. To get started:
1. Click around and get comfortable. You can find wire news here faster than any site on the web, as well as contributions from people all around the world.
2. Head over to the Help Section and read more about what you can do here.
3. Sign up for a free Newsvine account and begin commenting, chatting, and writing your own column. (And replace this big space with something useful).
Article Source: newshounds.us
I put this in the 'Odd News' category, because it's pure gossip so far.
*** Update *** : added 'Rumor' to the title at Calvin Tang's request.
"A Mayflower Hotel staffer has confirmed that First Lady Laura Bush spent at least one night this past week at the hotel, which is four blocks north of the White House. Mrs. Bush reportedly moved out of the White House after a confrontation with President Bush over his on-going affair with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice."
Code of Honor
Log In | Register
Comments:
It would be great if this turned out to be true, though. I want to see the "Restore Integrity to the White House" crowd squirm.
Actually, it would also make Bush's 'sanctity of marriage' crap hilariously ironic.
I'm so hoping this to be true, but I'm afraid I'm going to get disappointed.
Hoping that someone was unfaithful just so you can make it into a political win is sick. The politics of hate need to stop.
It's pretty outrageous that you are hoping a man's marriage is trouble.
What was that line about practicing the "politics of personal destruction"? Oh, that's right, it's supposed to be the Republicans who do that. So I wonder why it's the Democrats that actually do it!
Please take a humor pill. I heard they're on sale at RiteAid today.
Of course I don't hope his marriage is on the rocks for the persons involved (although I must say it is extremely funny if he who rails against gay marriage wouldn't be able to keep his own heterosexual marriage working).
I just secretly wish something like this happens just to see what his base thinks. Oh..and for the record, I'm not a Democrat.
I thought Newsvine was for news, not gossip and wishful thinking.
Who's speaking of a political win? This is not about hoping Bush's rating will slip even further down. Nor is it about this hopefully having a negative effect on the GOP. This is about certain people possibly seeing that erring is human, and that they may have to rethink their stance on "morals and values" and those who claim to bring them to us.
You know...you're probably right. I wonder though if your reaction has something to do with your political stance.
I know my reason for seeding this had to do with mine.
I refuse to believe there weren't any Republicans who weren't merely outraged at Clinton's antics in the late 90's. I bet a lot of them were secretly wringing their hands.
It's the way it goes. If this was about a Democratic president you may have not cared about the gossip and you may have joined in the wishful thinking.
While this would make for some interesting news, I'm glad that you started out by saying that "it's pure gossip so far." I don't know enough to say that this is complete farce, but I highly doubt that Bush is having an affair with Condi. If Mrs. Bush did spend the night, without the President, at such a nearby hotel, then there might seriously be some sort of problem going on, though. Or, perhaps she just wanted to get away without really going away (my wife and I have stayed at nearby hotels just to get that vacation feel without really taking a vacation).
Dude. Bush family on Dr. Phil. Priceless.
if only it was true. lol.
Odd news indeed.
LOLOLOL please
thanks for the laugh.
Condi is practically celebate and i just dont see bush as her type.
I am sorry i try to be open minded, but i will list this as satire in my brain until proven otherwise.
lol reminds me of the bush as jedi on robot chicken
"you arent tired, laura, you want to have a threesome..."
Don't act like I brought this as actual news that I believe.
I'll start thinking of believing it as soon as the major news media are picking it up.
unfortunately, major news media picking something up is definetely not a sign of accuracy either.
LaeF1: I've gotta agree with you 100%! Unfortunately, many people don't seem to understand this.
Agreed. But if they would pick it up AND Bill O'Reilly would invite a guest on this topic on his show only to tell the guest to "shut up!" then we might be getting on to something ;-)
v,
no you are right, i give you props for labeling it odd.. and do appreciate te post.. and wouldnt it be fun if it was true
it would definately be a subject changer..might be something bush should seriously concider, he may lose his religious base but a lot more people would see him as human.
i'd give my left mouse button for an edit function here.
As much as I disagree with his politics, I've always seen him as human. I bet he's a very friendly guy...he just has a bad way of coming accross....especially when he leans over and gives us that horrible smile (as in..."you've got to understand this") when he's trying to convince us of whatever he's selling that day.
yeah...my friend Chris is a nice guy too, but I wouldn't let him be president.
Sometimes you don't want just a friendly dude in office (which makes Clinton a super paradox), you want a real leader.
Think like when your dad is supposed to act like your dad and not like your friend, during your childhood, ya know what I mean?
A friend of mine mention this to me on Friday. I thought it strange, but she mentioned collaborating sources. Whether or not its true, just the thought of it is icky. Bush is definitely one of those presidents I prefer to think of as sexless.
From the article:
I absolutely LOVE how it's not sourced to a name.
Seems like gossip to me without any corroboration.
*yawn*
Funny...that's what I thought, and that's why I prefaced the seed with it.
('seed' being an awkward word when it comes to the topic)
There's no need to defend Bush on this claim. So relax ;-)
Did you ever notice how the New York Times Republican shills quote "a government source". For a time I thought there was a member of the King Bush II crime family actually named "Government Source".
Randy Rhodes on her radio show said a woman would have to be crazy to sleep with Bush, then she left a big pregnant pause out there for her audience to think for a minute. OK, too much thinking, Stop that, it is not healthy, Culturally or otherwise.
If the rumor is true the Republican Party would simply meltdown and disappear onto the junk heap of history. If the rumor is not true, they may still get to the junk heap. A lot can be done with a rumor. Remember the WMD rumor?
"New York Times" and "Republican shills" in the same sentence, then you say "King Bush II crime family" as your usual rhetoric.
Thanks I needed a laugh.
That would be the most awkward sex ever.
The president better beware, she might have an extra set of teeth down there.
Remember when she accidently called him her "husband"? She's never been married! How do you make that mistake?
When did that happen? I vaguely remember it. Are there any sources or news reports for this?
My girlfriend has called me "pa" before.
Don't even go there.... :-)
I wish my girlfriend would call me Claus Jacobsen
Im sure she would if you just did your "shimmy."
Should be noted that the story's originator is the left-leaning investigative journalist Wayne Madsen. I wouldn't lend it too much credence unless it's corroborated, but it'd be interesting if someone in the White House press corp picks this up and tests the waters.
I wouldn't led any credence to this at all. It's likely lunacy.
As horrible as it may be however the first thing that jumped into my mind was Kanye West's "George Bush doesn't care about black people" rant at the "A Concert for Hurricane Relief" telethon. Interesting twist to that. :(
I almost feel dirty for having said it.
From a Cultural Health perspective, it is interesting that this is the first thing to jump into you mind.
King Bush II would not be the first European American that committed crimies against African Americans to be found in bed with an African American Woman. Remember Thomas Jefferson.
Yeah, I remember Thomas Jefferson.
...from 225 years ago.
Odd news...how about Sports?
Regardless of its truth factor (and I'm placing it at zero percent), the image of Bush and Condi doing the deed is just... FOUL. Curses to my vivid imagination. I need bleach and a q-tip.
*shudder* forget bleach and a q-tip... try a wire brush! ;-)
Their lovechild would be Manbearpig.
This is funny big time, LOL!
Hilarious.
This should get filed next to the duck that has the alien in it post under odd news :D
I'd hit it...... :O
Which one? Bush, or Condi? And what exactly do you mean by "hit"???
Let's face it......Condi is one *fiiiiiiiiine* lady. ;)
Wouldn't it be painful caressing her helmet-hair?
I have a bad image in my head right now :(
so that's why she has a gap in her teeth...
Boo.
I thought Condi was a lesbian...no?
I don't know, a lot of the recent reports on the Iran talks have mentioned that Condi was basically getting her way on dealing with Iran.
Classic New Girlfriend Syndom.
I remember several years ago, I think when Clinton was in the White House, that the AC broke down and apparently it took 2 or 3 days to fix. Perhaps Mrs. Bush isn't the die-hard workaholic that President Bush is and decided to stay over in a hotel while he stayed on in no AC so he'd be there for the morning meetings?
Of course that line of speculation doesn't try and smear anybody so it's not nearly so fun eh?
It isn't that its not fun, its more that the Bush White House doesn't use air conditioning.
Rather than AC, the President is a big backer of Intelligent Cooling.
he is related to neil ;)
Please modify your headline to read "Rumor: Text of Headline". Or, you can replace 'Rumor' with 'Speculation' if you so desire. Thank you.
Out of curiosity: why exactly is w8in asked to change the headline? The exact title of the article he seeded is Developing Story - Bush Marriage In Trouble Over Affair With Condi?, so the way I see it, which apparently is wrong, is that, if anything, he would be asked to post the complete title. Also, doesn't the question mark in the title already indicate this isn't a fact?
I will do so, but isn't that kind of a double standard?
I see many seeds on this site that do not refer to a news link, but merely to a website (i.e. a Web2.0 website). Shouldn't those headlines indicate it's not a news story as well?
Again, I'm willing to comply, but I'm just wondering why this has to be classified and other non-news stories don't.
Great...after renaming it this seed has disappeared from all pages but my column. Can't find it in "Odd News" anymore either.
Hopefully it's a glitch :-)
There are two basic reasons:
1. On a news site, it could be defamation.
2. Look at the text of the headline: "Bush Marriage in Trouble Over Affair With Condi?" The headline can be read one of two ways. The first, being "did Bush have an affair, and is he in trouble for it?" The second, being "is Bush in trouble for that affair he had?" You see? Despite the fact that I don't think it's true, my read of the headline was the second. Without the tag of "rumor," the phrasing of the headline can be used to imply that Bush's affair is already known, and the "trouble" he's in is the questionable part.
Honestly, stop whining about Calvin's request. He said "please" and was nothing but polite. The man's never shown an iota of political bias on the site despite how inflammatory this place often becomes, and is simply trying to keep things legal and factual.
I was preparing for a lengthy response, then I read Steve's comment here and he said it all. Thank you Steve, you must've come across a prior case like this one.
All I have to add is that we ask people to make their headlines clear and concise so that others who may just be skimming the headlines don't go off with the belief that something is true when it is thus far a rumor. If this does turn out to be a true story in development, you'll have no shortage of future opportunities to seed links w/o the "Rumor:" designation.
W8in, please don't take this to mean that I am trying to burden you unfairly. I am simply trying to make it easier for other folks around the Vine to get information properly and accurately. If I had a greater knowledge of web 2.0 sites I might be able to more effectively cultivate that body of content, but for now I have to rely on abuse reports from our diligent community. Thank you for understanding and for editing your headline.
Steve: I don't think the author was whining when he asked why Calvin requested he change the title. While I certainly doubt the veracity of the report and I have found Calvin to be exceedingly fair in his interventions, I can't recall him asking someone to modify the title like that before. The author has "rumor" and "gossip" as tags for the article, and it is in the "odd-news" section where there is much that is not to be believed, so why must he add a category to the title?
Your suggestion that a suit over "defamation" might be the determining factor is a non-starter. In New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), the Supreme Court ruled that public figures -- celebrities, politicians, and even people enjoying their 15 minutes of fame have a much higher standard of proof for defamation suits. Not only must they prove that the allegation is untrue, but they have to show that it was published with "malicious intent" or "reckless disregard for the truth." A President's sex-life is now a recognized area of public concern -- thanks to Congress' obsessions during the last Administration, so this kind of speculation is "fair game" for the press, as Bush's closest adviser, Karl Rove, has claimed the wife of one of the Administration's "enemies" was fair game. Defamation should not be the reason.
So, the question remains: why this article and what are the criteria?
evano, as always you bring your A-game. I probably should have cited some examples of others being asked to modify headlines. Here are two classic examples of others being asked to modify their postings, and a couple others who did so voluntarily. Pay special attention to the thread in McDade's article.
Also, we ask that this practice be adhered to both in the CoH and my article to users about Seeding Newsvine. Obviously, we can't ensure that this will be done 100% of the time, but when it's brought to my attention I ask the author to oblige us and most of the time it's rather painless. I'd go into it more here, but I have quite a large stack of abuse reports to get to right now ;)
At the risk of being considered a 'negative element' that just 'goes on and on':
I don't consider asking for an explanation to be equal to whining.
That being said, in my opinion, there is an important difference between this seeded article, and the examples given by Calvin. The examples Calvin gave were not seeded articles. They were not linked to an article, whereas this is. Therefor readers are not able to check the source of the rumour and decide whether the source is trustworthy or not. I was, obviously wrongly, under the impression that seeding is like pointing to items that may or may not be interesting, and that the interpretation should take place in the comments, but then again, I'm in favour of letting people make up their own minds and under the impression that pointing to potentially interesting items would be accommodating enough.
But fair is fair, I'm not the one defining the policies over here, so I will just have to make sure I'll never seed anything that is just a rumour.
Disclaimer: I tend to pick the same title as the original article, which doesn't mean my views would reflect the view that might or might not be communicated by that particular title.
True and I often seed things I don't even agree with, simply because the ideas being stated are informative. It's seldom that I seed Odd News, but I understand what the category means... that it's "odd" and not necessarily even factual. I usually assume that most newsvine readers are capable of critical thinking and able to determine if a seed is rumor, satire, quirky, or whatever.
Thanks, Calvin -- for the compliment and the explanation. :) From this and your previous examples, it seems like rumors (or rumours) should have the "Rumor: " prefix or something similar, and stories that may be mistaken for the real thing -- like an Onion-type article -- should also state its purpose clearly and immediately in the title with a "Satire:" prefix. Rules noted. Maybe we need an FAQ? (Would the preceding question be an FAQ in itself? A meta-FAQ.)
When I asked about the double standard, I wasn't thinking you were treating me unfairly on purpose. Like I said (and as you saw when I changed the title), it's not that big of a deal for me to comply.
I was just wondering.
It's tough for you to moderate and you can't catch them all.
For example, I saw a seed that just points to a blog article and I couldn't find anything on the "news item" on, let's say Google News. I thought last night of how easy it is to put something on your own blog and then seed it here as news and get away with it.
As said by others, I thought it's common sense what is factual news and what isn't. Especially since I tagged it with rumor and gossip and referred to the gossip factor at the start of my message.
Even if I would've seen this headline with a question mark as a bystander, I would've thought "Oh...gossip...probably not true, but interesting enough to open and see what the source is".
I guess not everyone works like that though.
I didn't see anyone whine. Questions were asked. I hope that's tolerable and acceptable in a friendly community like this.
i know you are semi-kidding, and i understand the need to have the little exclamation point in the corner, and why someone might be asked to rename an article title, and I know that some articles and comments can naturally get pretty heated. ... but LaeF1 is circa january (december ?), and I have never flagged anyone, and I probably never will as long as their comments are well thought out and genuine, and not advertising. But heck, I remember reading about if comments should be editable/deletable. Even though they already were, sort of.anyways, Odd News is where you're at right now. Politician gossip can be odd, i think this article could go in entertainment too. Article title was changed. ok, no problem.... wait, what was the problem again :?
Oh hot fudge! First Clinton then Bush!
I wanted Condi! Darn you Bush! Darn you!!!
Condi's mine!
She is my secret sugar-snap.
I want to have a pistol duel with bush at 10 paces.
Not a wise move, the pistol duel. The president held the last pistol duel over Condi at Gitmo, and by the time the challenger was at 9 paces away, they were on opposite sides of the perimiter fence. That Bush, he's crazy like a fox.
What would you here both, from a Tightrope walker, and from some getting head from Codi
Don't Look Down!
...if this is true..you lib`s have at it...but if its just trash..I`m very disappointed..and will take my leave..
Looks pretty reasonable of an assumption to me.
Pretty scary (for them) that those are the first pics to come up. :)