WP: The Reliable Source says Kelley counterattack is on

[Bozita]

from the Wednesday edition.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3790-2004Sep7.html

• Talk early, talk often: The Republican National Committee bared its claws yesterday as soon as Kitty Kelley's latest celebrity-slashing bio, "The Family: The Real Story of the Bush Dynasty," started generating Internet buzz. "New Kelley Book, Same Old Kelley Slime," announced a talking-points e-mail sent by the RNC to radio shows, summarizing 27 largely negative articles about Kelley's work dating to 1978. (Examples: "In 1992, Then-First Lady Barbara Bush Had Kelley's Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis And Nancy Reagan Books Removed From Smithsonian First Ladies Exhibit" and " George Will Blasted Kelley As 'Retailer Of Falsehoods' And 'Journalistic Sociopath.' ") "From what we know of it so far, there's nothing to indicate any factual basis for her unsubstantiated claims," Scott Hogenson of RNC Radio Services wrote. He told us yesterday that he has not seen the book, which is due out next week, and said the talking points "are not just for conservatives; they're for broadcasters hither and yon."

[Southsideirish]

1. I heard that she really checks her facts and has never been

successfully sued.

[JSJ]

2. bring it on, you rove-ing dog, you n/t

[Lydia Leftcoast]

3. Well, if she can back up her facts, she should very publicly say

"If you think you can win a libel suit against me, bring it on!"

[bluestateguy]

4. She better saddle up

This Administration comes after anybody who dares to criticize them. They will out CIA agents, fire generals who disagree with the neo-cons and go on full 24/7 smear operations against anyone who challenges the Fox News interpretation of events.

[aquart]

5. Kitty seem worried to any of you?

The more they yell, the better she'll sell.

[hlthe2b]

8. Given she has already weathered the Reagan worshippers, the Royal

Family, as a starter, I think she'll be prepared to take them on....Nice that we can just sit back and watch the fireworks.

[kaitykaity]

6. Oh, the hypocrisy.

They don't mind it when the SVFB tell lies about Kerry,
but they get outraged when Kitty tells stories about Bush?

Sometimes I JUST CAN'T STAND IT!!!!!!!!!!

[Sugarbleus]

10. Oh Gawd, GREAT POINT.

SuperSuperSuperSuperrrrrrrrrrrr Goooood Point Woohooooooo

Tit for tat

Bing badda boom

"FORMER BUSH RELATIVES AND FRIENDS FOR TRUTH"

[LunaC]

7. How can they slam something they've never even read?

Unless they know what she's likely to say is all true?

Lots of panties in a was in the WH tonight, methinks! Heh-heh!

SBV karma comin' right at 'ya!

[napi21]

9. As long as her book gets press coverage, the truth doesn't matter.

Not in the short term! All that's needed right now is the seeds of doubt! For Kitty, it matters so she wins against any law suits, but the seeds of doubt is exactly what RoveCo has been using in every campaign. They did it in Texas when shrub was running for Gov., they did it in many states during the 2000 primaries, and they're doing it now with the SVFT ads.

I read that Kitty is already booked for several TV interviews including Good Morning America, CNN morning show, and Hardball. This, coupled with the release of some of shrubs "missing" service records, could make quite an impact.

[Union Thug]

11. Got it!

Keep it in the public eye and something is going to stick. Smear the bushies for all they're worth, I say!

You get what you give. Time for paybacks! Kakoya Feeshka!

[Bernardo de La Paz]

12. Key point: They don't necessarily deny her claims

Key point: They don't necessarily deny her claims.

"From what we know of it so far, there's nothing to indicate any factual basis for her unsubstantiated claims," Scott Hogenson of RNC Radio Services wrote.

That is faint condemnation compared to providing specific refutations with evidence on a point to point basis. Not having seen the email, it is possible that such evidence is provided, but I doubt it.

[blm]

13. If there was ONE errant detail the Bushes would have succeeded in pulling

the book. That's how they keep books from even being published.

That means Kelley has the evidence of any charge they find uncomfortable and the Bushies know it.

Do the Bushes even HAVE any credibility left after stopping the scrutiny of the Saudis role in 9-11 and Bush's lies about the National Guard? What the hell does a Bush ever tell the truth about anyway?

[Plaid Adder]

14. Like the media ever cared how credible O'Neill and Corsi are.

Yeah, now all of a sudden they're squeamish about using reliable sources. Hey, whatever happened to good old "SOME people say" journalism? It was good enough for Kerry, it's friggin' good enough for Bush!

C ya,

The Plaid Adder