Hawthorne mentioned this article in the comments below.
It’s the National Enquirer, I know, but the National Enquirer has done some good work in the past on stories that the mainstream media refused to cover. Remember, it was largely the Enquirer that did in John Edwards. Recall that the love child rumor was a wild conspiracy theory … well, until it wasn’t. Imagine if Edwards had been elected. Would we have then had a media scoffing at love childers like they now scoff at birthers? It’s easy to see.
There is really nothing new in this article, although the allegation of Hillary and Bill openly cavorting with others in plain sight of each other is salacious. L D Brown is an old name from the Arkansas Troopers American Spectator days, but as far as I know, no one has seriously questioned the credibility of those reports. The author, David Brock, became a liberal and questioned his journalistic methods and the motives of the people pushing the story, but as far as I know he did not say the troopers were lying. In fact we know they weren’t lying about the “Paula” incident, because “Paula” turned out to be Paula Jones. Also, recall that Brown testified under oath to Ken Starr.
Here is what I don’t get. Knowing what we know as facts about Bill Clinton, why would anyone ever believe his denials about much of anything? There are credibility problems with some of his accusers like Kathleen Willey and perhaps Juanita Broaddrick, but is anyone going to tell me with a straight face that Clinton is more credible than Broaddrick? So on what grounds would anyone reject out of hand Broaddrick’s allegation?
You don’t have to buy into the whole Clinton Body Count idea, for example, to believe a specific sexual assault allegation. Someone alleging sexual assault is not a conspiracy. It is a rather commonplace allegation that is either true, false or somewhere in between. But that is how the anti-conspiracy crowd works. Because there is a Clinton Body Count theory, then any allegation of inappropriate sexual behavior must be false. It’s the same way that allegations that Obama didn’t write his memoir are dismissed out of hand because of the existence of the birther conspiracy, but this is deliberately turning your brain off.
It’s easy to just blame the media for not doing their job, but the public is to blame as well. Many people seem like they would rather be willfully ignorant than be faced with unpleasant truths. Per Wikipedia, during the Juanita Broaddrick scandal, 66% of the public felt the media should stop covering it, and only 29% felt the media should carry on. This is a sad indictment of the American public, and one of the reasons I get a little exercised about this stuff. I just don’t get willful ignorance, and the attitude bugs the tar out of me.