DEBUNKED: Jenna Bush Is Pregnant and Unmarried. Prepare For Spin Cycle!

Time for a shot-gun wedding! Let us make it a national event, a holiday if you will.

You know they're wringing their hands over what could be called... "The First Bastid."

Killfile - IF IF IF it is true that she is pregnant - she isn't having an abortion is she? A baby is a gift and she is giving this possible love child it's best possible start in life - in a family with a married mommy & a daddy.....pregnant or not, I say congratulations to you, Jenna on your coming nuptials! BTW, I question the accuracy of this report.....and until I see it confirmed from a legitimate White House source I'll continue to question it.

OML, lisa, imagine the "morale" of the critics now when nowadays women get pregnant and marry with their children being the ring boys and flower girls.

killfile - it is apparent to me whenever I see them all together that the Bush twins adore their father and that usually is for good reason (i.e., he's a good dad). Has it occurred to you that IF she is pregant - any attempt to hide it is simply to protect her from the glare of the media gouls????

if Jenna is pregnant that her father does her a disservice by attempting to hide it.

IF she is pregnant, they may be keeping it quiet at her request.

An "article" from some god knows what website? This is a new low for even you Killfile. Hell, even that wackjob Doug Thompson who runs CapitolHill Blew wouldn't stoop this low.

Haha, looks who's talking about lows!! The king of low-blows and insults and what not.

Good for you that it's Killfile who owns this thread and not Daweb. Otherwise your comment would have been deleted for not adding anything to the discussion and trying to take this thread off-topic.

So, what do you think about baby Bush and her new "figure"?

MH - well said.

And if true good for Jenna Bush. And if true again, it won't be hidden for long.

Though this sounds wrong to me. She just got engaged. Naahh.

An "article" from some god knows what website? This is a new low for even you Killfile. Hell, even that wackjob Doug Thompson who runs CapitolHill Blew wouldn't stoop this low.

I have to agree with you on the facts, Bill, Jenna's been a bit chunky from the git-go, I don't see any smoking gun.

But if there's a bun in the oven we're likely to know soon. Or then again, is the right to life only for the little people?

So, what do you think about baby Bush and her new "figure"?

For sure it will not be a double Honor Killing.

mubarak-hussein: Haha, looks who's talking about lows!! The king of low-blows and insults and what not.

You seem to be quite an expert yourself at hurling insults MM.

Time for a shot-gun wedding!

They can use Cheney's and fulfill the "something borrowed" prerequisite, too. I wonder if the specks of Harry Whittington's blood on the muzzle meet the "something old" criteria, as well?

Kill-

I enjoy your columns. However, this story is as low as it gets. First of all it is pure conjecture. Why post it? Second, let's say that it is true. Just because you do not like her father does not mean we need to turn newsvine into a weekly gossip column. I like to think I am independent and I will most likely vote Dem in 2008 and I find this so-called story disgusting.

Sorry, just my .02

publius

I agree... where is the proof that she's pregnant and that's why she's getting married? I agree too that just because someone dosen't like Bush is no reason to engage in baseless gossip. Now if the gossip is just because a person is bored, then have the good grace to admit to it. Nothing wrong with a little gossip to pass te time, but a little fact or two to sunstantiate it might lend a little more credibility to the story other than saying she's pregnant just because she was wearing a moo-moo. Maybe everything else was dirty... hey, it happens. ;-)

"Weddings, babies being born — they're good things" for a White House, says Myra Gutin, a professor at Rider University in Lawrenceville, N.J., who has just completed a biography of Jenna's grandmother, Barbara Bush."
Luci Baines Johnson's wedding in 1966 provided a bit of rare positive coverage of the Johnson White House during an era of Vietnam War protests.

if Jenna is pregnant that her father does her a disservice by attempting to hide it.

Errm, could it be that W is doing such a good job of < intercourse> ing himself that he doesn't need the idea that his daughter < intercourse > d with someone out of wedlock to further
< intercourse > his completely < intercourse >d administration?

I seeded this, mostly as an experiment. Yea - I didn't tell you that at the outset and I made cursory attempts to defend it; if I didn't it wouldn't be much of an experiment now would it?

Pretty tiny fig leaf, Killfile. You knew what you were doing.

killfile @ 1.18

Still not quite clear on your point.

So, are you saying it's ok to write a false and malicious headline so that you can make it into the top seeds?

Are you saying that it's good for Newsvine to have a false headline showing on its front page for more than 24 hours?

Or, is your real point that killfille doesn't have to abide by the rules that apply to the rest of us?

So kill,

You put us to the test, and we failed, miserably!

killfile:

I guess the problem isn't the seeding alogorithm but the report alogorithm.

jfx @ 1.24

You are a caution . . . and 100% accurate in your observation.

epiphany-- I don't think Killfile broke any rules. There's nothing in the COH about what sources are good to seed, and so he didn't break a rule by seeding the article. There is something about sensationalist headlines; however, Killfile's headline is a mild one, considering the article. He didn't write "Jenna Bush is Pregnant and Unmarried: Bush is a Total Hypocrite." That would be sensationalism. What rule, then, did he break?

Killfile, while I don't know the exact reasons for your experiment, I don't think people attacking you over it is right.

killfile:

I helped collapse it, and let me tell you why.

No, your change wasn't "fairly tame," it changed "engaged" to "unmarried" and added a controversial statement predicting a political response.

Nevertheless, on the personal level, I did exactly what you requested earlier and wrote to you privately about changing the headline and gutlessly didn't even acknowledge my communication.

I suspect also for many others it was because they felt manipulated and exploited. And I bet you got more lib/lefty reports than righty: Look at the string of comments defending your seed and your headline based on your, as you say, "cursory" defense. You made them all look like jerks once you changed the context of the discourse.

That's why I helped collapse comment 1.18. And that doesn't even begin to address the sheer classlessness of making Jenna Bush's sex life the subject of a top seed.

I'll let one of the Righties carry that argument. Not that I disagree with it, it's just not fair for me to have all the fun.

Oh you didn't have all the fun, I'm sure there were others, angry at Killfiles experiment. Some may have felt as you say manipulated and exploited there might be others like yourself who felt jilted "gutlessly didn't even acknowledge my communication." Angry and hurt yes?

And what do we do when we feel angry and powerless? We lash out, yes we do, we're only human.
But taking that anger and hurt and disappointment and transforming it into smug 'fun' and collapsing a comment [obviously collectively] not because that comment was of 'no value', not because that comment was 'inflammatory', not because this comment was 'advertising' but simply because you could. Makes you smug like a child, transparent wounded 'fun'. You amplify perceived transgressions {which are matters entirely interpretative]while starkly ignoring your own undeniably unmistakable flouting of procedure to affect a result you thought deserved irrespective of the method required to effect it. In this case collective deceit.

So jfxgillis,in this instance you are not a pompous hypocrate because....

1.26

The headline is a violation of CoH #4:

4. Keep your headlines accurate and free of sensationalistic language. For instance, if you're writing a satirical piece, please follow the form: "Satire: [Headline]"; if you're seeding a story about a rumor, "Rumor: Yahoo to Buy ___" is appropriate whereas "Yahoo Buys ___" or "WTF! Oh my God!" are not.

winsome:

You don't seem to understand the dynamic, which doesn't surprise since me you seem to evinced little insight into normal human behavior and human psychology within the range regarded as reasonably well-adjusted. I suppose I could speculate on the reason for your lack of experience with a healthy psychological state, but perhaps on another thread.

All the Right-wingers would've been pissed off based on the substance of the seed and clicked the ol' red exclamation point on killfile every chance they got in defense Of President Bush and his family.

The left-wingers would have been pissed off because after defending killfile and this seed all up and down the thread, he then revealed that he regarded them merely as shallow cretins who preferred to "embrace rumor, innuendo, and tawdry mud slinging" rather than to endorse hard news.

That pretty much covers the spectrum, but for killfile himself and you. "Collectively?" you speculoate? You betcha. When you piss everyone off, that's collective.

so your diagnosis of my disturbed psychological state in your own defense against gaming the system for your own ends comes down to "everybody's doing it"
Truly impressive.

winsome:

LAUGH.

"Gaming the system"? killfile just confessed to that. That's why his comment got collapsed.

Since you seem to have a little trouble understanding normal psychology, let me explain something. When you @!$%# with people's heads, they get pissed off.

killfile admitted @!$%#ing with people's heads.

People got pissed off.

Now you, you like people @!$%#ing with your head. That's because you're highly neurotic, as you explain on your bio:

I am prepared to admit in this public forum that my entire existance is a pale disfunctional sham and merely ask that you all spare me none of the scorn or insult or vitriol I so richly deserve.

Unlike weirdos like you, normal people don't beg for humiliation. Normal people don't enjoy being humilated with the verve and vigor you describe. Normal people respond with hostility when they've been made fools of publiclly.

Really grasping aren't we. You read my bio with a straight face believing it was non fiction? I don't believe you did,you may be sloppy but your not that stupid. Do you believe I'm actually a small child also? Sloppy to believe attacking me defends you and sloppy to believe that that's not transparent.
Now your astutely rendered and exhaustively researched psychological profiling aside.

Killfile is relevant only in that in creating this situation he has provided a stage in which you admit that your justification for clicking on a button and selecting either inflammatory, no value or advertising was done not because the specific post was inflammatory no value, or advertising but for political reasons [everybodies doing it] and because you were pissed off [ How do you plead...pissed off or not guilty whichever's easiest]

Killfile made a point at your and others expense. His point was that puff piece politically binary flypaper catches flys and flys are more influential now than they were before regarding front page placement.

I was also a fly but in killfiles explaination I saw the unavoidable point he had illustrated . I had been part of it. I don't know call me emotionally well defended but my reaction was not one of anger and believing my head had been @!$%#ed with a corresponding impulse to inflict some small fraudulent countermeasure as recompense.
You did. Firstly justifying it with everybodies doing it and then moving onto,that's what happens when you piss people off. Hardly a wellgrounded foundation for holding the high moral ground .
Hense my charge of hypocrisy. [as an aside I too consider myself a pompous hypocrite I just know for a fact I'm more careful than you,]

You haven't countered it with anything other than your hastily generated synopsis of my psychological degradation.

Which is amusing in it's desperation. I don't think there's much dignity to be salvaged here but by all means keep plugging away.

I'm done.

winsome:

I gave two reasons for my reporting the seed, 1) because in my judgement it violated the CoH by sensationalizing the headline, and 2) because in accord with his request on an earlier seed where a similar controversy erupted, I contacted him privately. I made my case for changing the headline and he chicken@!$%#tedly didn't even acknowledge my request. Those were my justifications.

The third reason, the mind-@!$%#ing, was an explanation for other people's conduct. Since I myself am neither a right-winger nor one the lib/lefties who engaged in defense of this seed, the "everyone did it" argument you attribute to me doesn't apply to me.

I was also a fly but in killfiles explaination I saw the unavoidable point he had illustrated

See. Now that's interesting. I wasn't caught in killfile's web. Which means I'm either smarter than you or I agree with killfile about which news events deserve attention and which don't, or, most likely, I actually have a stronger moral center than you in that I did NOT "embrace rumor, innuendo, and tawdry mud slinging" although you did.

My head wasn't @!$%#ed either, but it also wasn't sucked into killfile's juvenile "experiment." He made no point at my expense, he made it at yours.

. I don't think there's much dignity to be salvaged here ....

Dignity? This seed was bereft of it the instant killfile put it in the seed cycle, and moved rapidly to the realm of degradation when peurile commenters like you joined in.

killfile:

I'm just recognizing at this point that it's also salacious and that it runs counter to what I think we as a community should value.

That's the hard nut to crack.

when peurile commenters like you joined in.

jfxgillis,

When you have to resort to making comments like that, you know you've been thoroughly defeated, as Comment 1.35 so clinically did. Playing semantics (like you do in Comment 1.36) at this point ain't gonna git you nowhere.

They say sometimes it's better to shut up and let others think you are a fool rather than opening your mouth and removing any doubt.

m-h:

Your beef is with killfile, not me.

He's the one who accused you of "embrac[ing] rumor, innuendo, and tawdry mud slinging."