SARA KUGLER, Associated Press Writer, needs something to do

[frogcycle]

http://www.comcast.net/news/index.jsp?cat=GENERAL&fn=/2007/07/29/726415.html&cvqh=itn_bloomberg

NEW YORK - Mayor Michael Bloomberg speaks his mind and that is a big part of his cachet in anything-goes New York. But new details from a sexual harassment lawsuit he settled in 2000 and other racy comments over the years show how his blunt style could prove a liability if he runs for president as an independent.

It goes on to say that a suit for making "repeated raunchy sexual comments" was settled in 2000 with both sides not to comment and "The suit was a minor annoyance for Bloomberg during the mayoral race in 2001 and was not an issue in his 2005 re-election." It does not offer any so-called "new details."

The twit then goes on to say that if he runs as an independent this is "certain to be re-examined" and that Bloomberg's office had no comment for this story.

How in the name of Gaia is this "news" today? Why does AP bother to put it on the wire?

Why does this woman have a job? Does she fancy herself an "investigative reporter?" Will she next be assigned perhaps to probe the DoJ coverups, or the Tillman case?

I suppose that if he actually does run, and if this story is "re-examined" she'll get a fricking Pulitzer for 'breaking' it. I mean, after all, she is the one who googled "Bloomberg," called his office for comment, and scribbled the piece.

Well, anything to distract the masses. After all, Comcast picked it up and put it on their fricking homepage as "news" as the second item under "Stay on top of the news."

WOAH! BREAKING News!

I went back to look at the article while I was posting this, and the opening paragraph has changed! I was just pointing out that it offers no "new details," just speculates that the thing might be "re-examined" and implies that would bring out "new details" that would end up being a story. I was (gasp!) going back to fact-check before hitting "post message."

now it reads:

But a sexual harassment lawsuit he settled in 2000 and other racy comments over the years show how his blunt style could prove a liability if he runs for president as an independent.

With "new details from" omitted. I guarantee that both of the pp's in the grey boxes are pure cut-and-paste.

Evidently someone at AP or Comcast was looking at it as I was writing this and realized it went too far. But they did not pull it; they just tried to avoid reactions like mine.

Scum. Scum. They are (nearly) all scum.

Hey, maybe in addition to the Algae Awards I should also give "Pond Scum" awards!

[frogcycle]

1. note: posting this has nothing to do with Bloomberg's rumored possible candidacy

It is about the media, not about him or his lawsuit or his ambitions

[mmonk]

2. But it's right up their alley.

It's a way to sell their ad space. That's what I call newspapers now. Ad space.

[Lobster Martini]

3. Rant against lousy journalism number--sorry, lost count...

Wonder if the other potential embassassments are as newsworthy...Unidentified Source Claims Bloomberg's Necktie Has Been Dipped in Ketchup--Did Potential Candidate Have An Illicit Affair With Theresa Heinz? Now there's some real news...

Memo to journalists: try to include a few facts. Facts are good.

[frogcycle]

4. You're right

The Pond Scum awards would require a staff of thousands - I could'nt keep up

[warren pease]

5. Edwards' hair was already done to death...

...as was Kucinich's "gnome-like" appearance and height and scraggly hair, all of which make him unelectable in the eyes of those media slime who take it upon themselves to make these decisions for us.

I've seen coverage, as it were, discussing Hillary's legs and boobs, mostly couched in snide terms of amazement that she has any.

Obama is unelectable because he's brown, although that's not the reason usually given by the oh-so-polite-and-sophisticated character assassins in the liberal press.

Gravel is an out-of-control, border-line asylum inmate, but again that's spoken in code, as in, "maverick, renegade, out of the mainstream," and so forth.

And nowhere but the "internets" can you find discussion of the candidates' differences on foreign policy re Iraq, "free" trade and so forth, positions on key domestic issues such as health care and Constitutional restoration, comparative track records, their leading campaign contributors by individual and by industry, how they differ on social issues such as guns, abortion, separation of church and state, stem cell research, impeachment, immigration and right down the line.

They treat us like children whose attention spans are measured in seconds. Sadly, that's pretty accurate for a significant percentage of the population who have been trained by television to sit down, shut up, be passive consumers, and always expect a resolution to complex problems in under an hour.

Personally, I couldn't give less of a shit about Kucinich's hair, his babe wife, or his height. It just happens that, of the two dozen or so candidates now seeking attention and media exposure, Kucinich's views on most key issues are in nearly perfect sync with mine. But I wouldn't know this if I depended on dolts like Ms. Kugler for information.

In fact, if I depended on US mass media for information, I'd probably think Hillary was my best choice because she supports a strong economy and is seen as good for business, which I would have learned years ago is the only thing that matters anymore.


I used to be a reporter a long time ago in another life. I'm glad it's past tense; I'd hate to sit in on an editorial meeting in today's poisoned, celebrity worshiping culture. "OK. Who's covering the rich blonde bimbo beat today?" "Anybody heard anything lately on Brad or Jen or Tom or Nicole or..." "Check the wires for anything light; we've got enough hard news for one day."

Ugghh.


wp

[frogcycle]

6. ah, I see Huffington picked it up and then someone posted it on DU as "news"

sheesh

the Huffington piece lists some of the allegations from the suit. I guess that's exciting.

So this bimbo at AP farts and then the story becomes viral and the next thing you know he's raping women as we speak. Don't get me wrong, I disapprove highly of the things alleged.

But this is a reporter manipulating public opinion, pure and simple. It was "out there" in his last campaign in NY; if he decided to run it no doubt would be brought up by hundreds. She was bored and has an ax to grind, so just decided to make mischief.

Hey. let's start a rumor!