Have you printed a retraction for the lies you just posted?
So, your shameful party ran a story in the party press that libeled the opposition.
Pretty standard stuff for the demagogue party, can you say "scum?" Anyway, we know the story is a fake, as most of the smears your shameful party runs, are.
We know that the family has come out and stated that the DNC WaPo story was false, that the incident never happened and that Lauber wasn't even gay. The story is a fabrication to support Obama's gay marriage strategy.
But beyond this, it turns out that the Post didn't even use their "sources" in a reasonable or professional manner.
{After nearly 50 years, Stu White only heard of the Lauber incident a few weeks before the Post contacted him for his impressions of it. Yet “investigative journalist” Jason Horowitz does not ask the basic journalistic question of “who” told Stu White of the incident--and “why” suddenly now, after 50 years. Does WaPo just dismiss this as miraculous coincidence?
IsnÂ’t that perhaps the most crucial element to the Post story--the question of why ObamaÂ’s epic same-sex marriage announcement seemed to have been timed so precisely with someone tipping off Stu White after 50 years, and with the Post's publication of its gay-bullying hit piece on Romney? White's anonymous informant and the Post's piece seem hardly coincidental.}
Washington Post Romney 'Bullying' Profile Contradicted By... Automobile Magazine
Hey, you're demagogues. Decent people say what is true, regardless of political consequence. You say what supports the party, regardless of whether is happens to be true.