Full Version: Lying, Fraudulent CBS
And think how old Walter is reacting to all this news. He must be in "deny 'till you die" land too!
Here is the latest, No Disputing It, which gives a blow by blow account of how the Blogs uncovered the scam in breathtaking swiftness.
And the rest, as they say, is history. Of course the LA Times has to put it's spin on it at the end. But other than that, it is a good article.
QUOTE
It was a late-night blog posting by this mystery Netizen that first questioned the validity of documents Rather cited Wednesday as proof that George W. Bush did not fulfill his National Guard duty more than 30 years ago.
Buckhead refuses to further identify himself, other than dropping hints that he is a male who lives on the East Coast — preferring to proclaim that the scramble to verify the contentions in his posting marks an extraordinary achievement for a medium that has operated more as an underground world of ideological venting than a source of legitimate news.
But Buckhead is vehement about one thing: He acted alone when he posted, to the conservative website FreeRepublic.com, what was widely believed to be the first allegation that the CBS report relied on documents that could have been forged.
"Absolutely, positively, on my own, sitting at my computer in my bedroom just before midnight — but not in my pajamas," he wrote in an e-mail exchange with The Times. "But once I posted the comment to Free Republic I was no longer working alone, and that is the real point of the story about the story about the story."
That story began Wednesday, 19 minutes after the "60 Minutes II" broadcast began, when another FreeRepublic poster, TankerKC, noted that the documents were "not in the style that we used when I came into the USAF…. Can we get a copy of those memos?"
Buckhead refuses to further identify himself, other than dropping hints that he is a male who lives on the East Coast — preferring to proclaim that the scramble to verify the contentions in his posting marks an extraordinary achievement for a medium that has operated more as an underground world of ideological venting than a source of legitimate news.
But Buckhead is vehement about one thing: He acted alone when he posted, to the conservative website FreeRepublic.com, what was widely believed to be the first allegation that the CBS report relied on documents that could have been forged.
"Absolutely, positively, on my own, sitting at my computer in my bedroom just before midnight — but not in my pajamas," he wrote in an e-mail exchange with The Times. "But once I posted the comment to Free Republic I was no longer working alone, and that is the real point of the story about the story about the story."
That story began Wednesday, 19 minutes after the "60 Minutes II" broadcast began, when another FreeRepublic poster, TankerKC, noted that the documents were "not in the style that we used when I came into the USAF…. Can we get a copy of those memos?"
And the rest, as they say, is history. Of course the LA Times has to put it's spin on it at the end. But other than that, it is a good article.
Since reading and posting this article, there is more about it. Power Line's Hurricane Dan: Get Serious, is chock full of more up to date evidence with concern to the Rather/CBS/60 Minutes fiasco. There is simply too much to include here, so you must go there and digest this information.
Also read Bush Papers Forged.
But by far the most detailed, point by point, case against Rather/CBS is the essay by Hugh Hewitt located here. And he ticks off the many reasons as to why CBS in in the fix that it is today
The biggest consequence here is not the damage done to CBS alone, but also such willing accomplises as the Boston Globe, NY Times, and the rest of the MSM. And note that most are not even aware of what 'MSM' even means. Simply put, it means "Mainstream Media", and it is not used in a positive light either. And it is gaining acceptance quickly. This simply does not bode well for the MSM either.
And what is so damning for them is that the more they are scrutinized, the more they act true to form, and expose their bias to more of the public. It is self defeating, but they are simply unable to change their stripes, thus sealing their own downfall.
And here is a comparrison of the two scripts on Instapundit.com
What You Are Watching Here Is Deconstruction In Slow Motion!
Also read Bush Papers Forged.
But by far the most detailed, point by point, case against Rather/CBS is the essay by Hugh Hewitt located here. And he ticks off the many reasons as to why CBS in in the fix that it is today
QUOTE
Today's story suggests that an adult at the Globe has apparently figured out the applicability of Occam's razor to this situation. It is possible --remotely--that the docs are legit, but:
*Lt Col Killian didn't type;
*Lt Col Killian's family says he did not maintain such records;
*Guard regulations prohibited the maintenance of such records;
*General Bobby Hodges didn't vouch for the docs as CBS said he would;
*Colonel Buck Staudt --cited in the memos as pushing Killian to "sugarcoat" a Bush evaluation-- had retired more than a year before the meo was allegedly written;
*Bloggers have been overwhelmed with e-mails from active duty and retire dmilitary who scoff at the form of the memos;
*Typewriters with proportional spacing were rare in '72/3;
*Typewriters with superscripting capabilites were rare in '72/3;
*Typewriters with perfect centering ability were non-existent '72/3;
*Typewriters with the "kerning" function didn't exist in '72/3;
*Most experts, from Dr.Cartwright at Rice, the above-referenced Dr. Bouffard and Farrell Shiver, range from certain to almost certain in their conclusions that the docs are not legit;
*CBS doesn't have the "originals" and didn't reveal that fact until pressure mounted;
*The fake docs are easily and exactly reproduced on modern word-processing equipment, underscoring the ease with which the bad forgery could have been produced contrasted with the near impossibility of Lt Colonel Killian's producing them in 192/3;
*Lt Col Killian lacked motive to write and maintain such records;
*Despite intense media interest in the president's TANG career that extends back at least four years, someone sat on these docs until seven weeks before the 2004 election and after the RNC convention;
*CBS has a history of obtaining docs damaging to the Bush Adminsitration which in all likelihood came from Democratic partisans;
*CBS won't reveal its source;
*CBS has a history of blowing stories that involved fake documents; and
*Dan Rather has not appeared opposite a serious journalist to answer extended questions on camera, even though his reputation and the reputation of his network are being shredded and a confidant witness would demand a hearing with a Russert or a Hume.
*Lt Col Killian didn't type;
*Lt Col Killian's family says he did not maintain such records;
*Guard regulations prohibited the maintenance of such records;
*General Bobby Hodges didn't vouch for the docs as CBS said he would;
*Colonel Buck Staudt --cited in the memos as pushing Killian to "sugarcoat" a Bush evaluation-- had retired more than a year before the meo was allegedly written;
*Bloggers have been overwhelmed with e-mails from active duty and retire dmilitary who scoff at the form of the memos;
*Typewriters with proportional spacing were rare in '72/3;
*Typewriters with superscripting capabilites were rare in '72/3;
*Typewriters with perfect centering ability were non-existent '72/3;
*Typewriters with the "kerning" function didn't exist in '72/3;
*Most experts, from Dr.Cartwright at Rice, the above-referenced Dr. Bouffard and Farrell Shiver, range from certain to almost certain in their conclusions that the docs are not legit;
*CBS doesn't have the "originals" and didn't reveal that fact until pressure mounted;
*The fake docs are easily and exactly reproduced on modern word-processing equipment, underscoring the ease with which the bad forgery could have been produced contrasted with the near impossibility of Lt Colonel Killian's producing them in 192/3;
*Lt Col Killian lacked motive to write and maintain such records;
*Despite intense media interest in the president's TANG career that extends back at least four years, someone sat on these docs until seven weeks before the 2004 election and after the RNC convention;
*CBS has a history of obtaining docs damaging to the Bush Adminsitration which in all likelihood came from Democratic partisans;
*CBS won't reveal its source;
*CBS has a history of blowing stories that involved fake documents; and
*Dan Rather has not appeared opposite a serious journalist to answer extended questions on camera, even though his reputation and the reputation of his network are being shredded and a confidant witness would demand a hearing with a Russert or a Hume.
The biggest consequence here is not the damage done to CBS alone, but also such willing accomplises as the Boston Globe, NY Times, and the rest of the MSM. And note that most are not even aware of what 'MSM' even means. Simply put, it means "Mainstream Media", and it is not used in a positive light either. And it is gaining acceptance quickly. This simply does not bode well for the MSM either.
And what is so damning for them is that the more they are scrutinized, the more they act true to form, and expose their bias to more of the public. It is self defeating, but they are simply unable to change their stripes, thus sealing their own downfall.
And here is a comparrison of the two scripts on Instapundit.com
What You Are Watching Here Is Deconstruction In Slow Motion!
Oh, and go to Image Shack, and watch the site show you exactly how the forgery was accomplished step by step.
When you get there, it appears that nothing is happening. But be patient and watch the images slowly change. You will come away more enlightened from it. Trust me!
When you get there, it appears that nothing is happening. But be patient and watch the images slowly change. You will come away more enlightened from it. Trust me!
Down From The Mountain
B-M, have you noticed that the number of Left posters have suddenly dropped off to zero on this page of the thread. Suddenly, all those willing to defend the seemingly indefensible, have disappeared.
And here is the question. Are all of them completely bypassing the posts; or are they indeed reading,but choosing to remain silent? I'm truly curious about this question. It is a shame that we are unable to get an accurate count.
The Deconstruction in slow motion continues!
And here is the question. Are all of them completely bypassing the posts; or are they indeed reading,but choosing to remain silent? I'm truly curious about this question. It is a shame that we are unable to get an accurate count.
The Deconstruction in slow motion continues!
I believe they've gone away to lick their wounds...poor fellas!
You might have seen this already, John but for TQ & Huey - open those peepers and take a gander at the image below and say Dan ain't lying.
This image, illustrating that point, is an animated file created by Charles Johnson, which alternates between the CBS version and what he typed straight into Microsoft Word using the defaults. The only differences appear to be the result of faxing and copying.
thanks... instapundit
You might have seen this already, John but for TQ & Huey - open those peepers and take a gander at the image below and say Dan ain't lying.
This image, illustrating that point, is an animated file created by Charles Johnson, which alternates between the CBS version and what he typed straight into Microsoft Word using the defaults. The only differences appear to be the result of faxing and copying.
thanks... instapundit
What touches on the bizzare is how the DNC will apparently launch "opperation priveledged son" as a follow up to capitalize on this horse radish.
From Presidential Candidate to Designated Lunatic
Gore was at it again last night...
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor.../gore_unleashed
Gore was at it again last night...
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor.../gore_unleashed
searing and blistering Al Gore. You might almost think he was hired by the RNC to make Kerry and the Dem's look bad.
I'm going to put this out here in complete form, since the American Spectator site is down more than not, as it's traffic is so huge.
--------------------------------------
Here We Go Some More
By The Prowler
Published 9/13/2004 12:08:06 AM
While CBS news anchor Dan Rather can say there is no internal investigation under way over the alleged forged documents used as the foundation for an investigation into President George W. Bush's National Guard service, you wouldn't have been able to tell from the 15 or so 60 Minutes and CBS News" staffers working away feverishly on Friday and Saturday to try to nail down their story.
On Friday, according to CBS News sources, Rather spent the day on the phone and dealing with CBS suits who were nervous about the fall out from the story. "All Dan could say was that this was an attack from the right-wing nuts, and that we should have expected this, given the stakes," says a CBS News producer. "He was terribly defensive and nervous. You could tell."
All day Friday, Rather, his producer on the story, Mary Mapes, and other 60 Minutes staffers were scrambling to shore up support from their sources on the story. That effort didn't go so well. By Saturday, one of their key sources, retired Maj. Gen. Bobby Hodges, had said that CBS misled him, and that he had never been shown the memos in question.
"We pulled the trick of only calling some sources at the last minute to reconfirm," says the CBS producer. "Someone called Hodges, I think, on Monday night and read him parts of the document. The late contacts are a standard practice so we don't tip off the competition or our sources."
Hodges is a critical loss for CBS News' credibility. He was the superior officer of the man CBS claims wrote the memo, Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, who died in 1984.
MEANWHILE, OVER THE WEEKEND journalists from around the country were attempting to track down the original source of the documents. "We're having a hard time tracking how we got the documents," says the CBS News producer. "There are at least two people in this building who have insisted we got copies of these memos from the Kerry campaign by way of an additional source. We do not have the originals, and our sources have indicated to us that we will not be getting the originals. How that is possible I don't know."
One individual several news outlets were looking at was Bill Burkett, a former Texas National Guard officer. Burkett in the past has cooperated with both press and Democratic Party opposition researchers in slinging mud at President Bush. Burkett gained some national attention earlier in the campaign when he claimed he was at National Guard headquarters in Austin 1997, when he overheard Guard officials and a representative of then Governor Bush discuss how to sanitize Bush's files. That story was fully discredited. Nonetheless, Burkett sat down for at least three different interviews with CBS News for the story now at the center of the controversy. One of those interviews was with Rather's producer, Ms. Mapes.
"There are rumors here that if there are any real documents, they are hand-written notes from Killian that someone like Burkett was holding, and that instead of using the hand-written notes, someone typed them up to look more official," says the CBS News producer. "They would look better on TV and posted on line if they were typed, but on a number of levels, that story just doesn't hold up. There are too many inconsistencies factually with what is in the memos."
THE MOST GLARING ISSUES now are the seemingly phony P.O. Box addresses used in the headers of at least one of the memorandums. Such post office box addresses were not used by the National Guard at that time, let alone a box with a number "34567," as in the memo.
Yet another issue: the 18-month gap between the retirement of Col. Walter "Buck" Staudt on March 1, 1972, and August 18, 1973, when the Killian of the disputed memos claimed that Staudt was putting pressure on him to sugarcoat an evaluation of Bush. Almost everyone involved in the National Guard in Texas says Staudt would have had virtually no influence in the active units nearly a year and a half after leaving the service.
PERHAPS MOST TROUBLING to the CBS News staff looking into how its story went off the rails is the timing of the memos' appearance. "Some 60 Minutes staffers have been working on this story for more than three years off and on," says the CBS News producer. "There have been rumors about these memos and what was in them for at least that long. No one had been able to find anything. Not a single piece of paper. But we know that a lot of people here interviewed a lot of people in Texas and elsewhere and asked very explicit questions about the existence of these memos. Then all of a sudden they show up? In one nice, neat package?"
This CBS New producer went on to explain that the questions 60 Minutes folk were asking were specific enough that people would have been able to fabricate the memorandums to meet the exact specifications the investigative journalists were looking for. "People were asking questions of sources like, 'Have you ever seen or heard of a memo that suspended Bush for failing to appear for a physical?' and 'Have you heard about or know of someone who has any documentation from back in the 1970s that shows there was pressure to get Bush into the National Guard?' It was like they were placing an order for a ready-made product. That is the biggest problem I have with this. It's all too neat and perfect for what we needed. Without these exact pieces of paper, we don't have a story. Dan has as much as admitted that. Everyone knows it. We were at a standstill on this story until these memos showed up."
REPORTERS ARE ALSO LOOKING at staff and associates of Sen. Tom Harkin, who enthusiastically held a press conference on Thursday morning using the forged documents as the tent pole for attacks against President Bush. Harkin called Bush a "liar."
"Harkin has been pushing this story for a while," says the CBS producer. "Not this specific story, but the 'Bush is a liar about his record' story. His people seemed particularly interested in making sure they could keep their boss up to date on what was going on."
That Harkin was the individual selected to be the attack dog on this particular issue was an interesting one, give that Harkin himself has a checkered history about telling the truth about his involvement in the Vietnam War.
Here We Go Some More
--------------------------------------
Here We Go Some More
By The Prowler
Published 9/13/2004 12:08:06 AM
While CBS news anchor Dan Rather can say there is no internal investigation under way over the alleged forged documents used as the foundation for an investigation into President George W. Bush's National Guard service, you wouldn't have been able to tell from the 15 or so 60 Minutes and CBS News" staffers working away feverishly on Friday and Saturday to try to nail down their story.
On Friday, according to CBS News sources, Rather spent the day on the phone and dealing with CBS suits who were nervous about the fall out from the story. "All Dan could say was that this was an attack from the right-wing nuts, and that we should have expected this, given the stakes," says a CBS News producer. "He was terribly defensive and nervous. You could tell."
All day Friday, Rather, his producer on the story, Mary Mapes, and other 60 Minutes staffers were scrambling to shore up support from their sources on the story. That effort didn't go so well. By Saturday, one of their key sources, retired Maj. Gen. Bobby Hodges, had said that CBS misled him, and that he had never been shown the memos in question.
"We pulled the trick of only calling some sources at the last minute to reconfirm," says the CBS producer. "Someone called Hodges, I think, on Monday night and read him parts of the document. The late contacts are a standard practice so we don't tip off the competition or our sources."
Hodges is a critical loss for CBS News' credibility. He was the superior officer of the man CBS claims wrote the memo, Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, who died in 1984.
MEANWHILE, OVER THE WEEKEND journalists from around the country were attempting to track down the original source of the documents. "We're having a hard time tracking how we got the documents," says the CBS News producer. "There are at least two people in this building who have insisted we got copies of these memos from the Kerry campaign by way of an additional source. We do not have the originals, and our sources have indicated to us that we will not be getting the originals. How that is possible I don't know."
One individual several news outlets were looking at was Bill Burkett, a former Texas National Guard officer. Burkett in the past has cooperated with both press and Democratic Party opposition researchers in slinging mud at President Bush. Burkett gained some national attention earlier in the campaign when he claimed he was at National Guard headquarters in Austin 1997, when he overheard Guard officials and a representative of then Governor Bush discuss how to sanitize Bush's files. That story was fully discredited. Nonetheless, Burkett sat down for at least three different interviews with CBS News for the story now at the center of the controversy. One of those interviews was with Rather's producer, Ms. Mapes.
"There are rumors here that if there are any real documents, they are hand-written notes from Killian that someone like Burkett was holding, and that instead of using the hand-written notes, someone typed them up to look more official," says the CBS News producer. "They would look better on TV and posted on line if they were typed, but on a number of levels, that story just doesn't hold up. There are too many inconsistencies factually with what is in the memos."
THE MOST GLARING ISSUES now are the seemingly phony P.O. Box addresses used in the headers of at least one of the memorandums. Such post office box addresses were not used by the National Guard at that time, let alone a box with a number "34567," as in the memo.
Yet another issue: the 18-month gap between the retirement of Col. Walter "Buck" Staudt on March 1, 1972, and August 18, 1973, when the Killian of the disputed memos claimed that Staudt was putting pressure on him to sugarcoat an evaluation of Bush. Almost everyone involved in the National Guard in Texas says Staudt would have had virtually no influence in the active units nearly a year and a half after leaving the service.
PERHAPS MOST TROUBLING to the CBS News staff looking into how its story went off the rails is the timing of the memos' appearance. "Some 60 Minutes staffers have been working on this story for more than three years off and on," says the CBS News producer. "There have been rumors about these memos and what was in them for at least that long. No one had been able to find anything. Not a single piece of paper. But we know that a lot of people here interviewed a lot of people in Texas and elsewhere and asked very explicit questions about the existence of these memos. Then all of a sudden they show up? In one nice, neat package?"
This CBS New producer went on to explain that the questions 60 Minutes folk were asking were specific enough that people would have been able to fabricate the memorandums to meet the exact specifications the investigative journalists were looking for. "People were asking questions of sources like, 'Have you ever seen or heard of a memo that suspended Bush for failing to appear for a physical?' and 'Have you heard about or know of someone who has any documentation from back in the 1970s that shows there was pressure to get Bush into the National Guard?' It was like they were placing an order for a ready-made product. That is the biggest problem I have with this. It's all too neat and perfect for what we needed. Without these exact pieces of paper, we don't have a story. Dan has as much as admitted that. Everyone knows it. We were at a standstill on this story until these memos showed up."
REPORTERS ARE ALSO LOOKING at staff and associates of Sen. Tom Harkin, who enthusiastically held a press conference on Thursday morning using the forged documents as the tent pole for attacks against President Bush. Harkin called Bush a "liar."
"Harkin has been pushing this story for a while," says the CBS producer. "Not this specific story, but the 'Bush is a liar about his record' story. His people seemed particularly interested in making sure they could keep their boss up to date on what was going on."
That Harkin was the individual selected to be the attack dog on this particular issue was an interesting one, give that Harkin himself has a checkered history about telling the truth about his involvement in the Vietnam War.
Here We Go Some More
QUOTE
Republicans, however, say Gore's passion on the campaign path has reached an unhealthy fever pitch that could do Democrats more harm than good.
GOP strategist Keith Appell likens him to "some kind of cheerleader on acid."
"Some of the things he has said have been outrageous and he says them in this high-pitched scream," Appell said. "I really don't know what to call that."
GOP strategist Keith Appell likens him to "some kind of cheerleader on acid."
"Some of the things he has said have been outrageous and he says them in this high-pitched scream," Appell said. "I really don't know what to call that."
ROFLMAO.
but Grand Dragon Zig Zag Zell Miller's speech was calm and definetely had not an iota of "high-pitched screaming"
oh the hypocricy.
Miller's speech was a model of decorm compared to un-hinged Gore...
QUOTE
Here We Go Some More
By The Prowler
Published 9/13/2004 12:08:06 AM
By The Prowler
Published 9/13/2004 12:08:06 AM
oooh.. it's that comic book supervillain "The Prowler" again!
watchout Batman! "The Prowler" is on the loose, and he's threatening the good of mankind by writing anonymous stories in the most credible of journalistic sources, the Spectator!!!
Batman, Robin and Democrats are trembling in their boots!!!
Huey, as usual, you have raced by here, not taking the time to actually read the article above. You couldn't have possibly had the time to do so.
If you will only contact me, I can look up that good Remedial Reading Course for you still. You really need to take me up on this.
Of course, you may not even read this either. I can only feel compassion for you.
If you will only contact me, I can look up that good Remedial Reading Course for you still. You really need to take me up on this.
Of course, you may not even read this either. I can only feel compassion for you.
QUOTE (John L @ Sep 13 2004, 09:26 AM)
Huey, as usual, you have raced by here, not taking the time to actually read the article above. You couldn't have possibly had the time to do so.
If you will only contact me, I can look up that good Remedial Reading Course for you still. You really need to take me up on this.
Of course, you may not even read this either. I can only feel compassion for you.
If you will only contact me, I can look up that good Remedial Reading Course for you still. You really need to take me up on this.
Of course, you may not even read this either. I can only feel compassion for you.
...and I feel pity...
A devastating memo written more than 30 years ago by John Kerry has come to light! This memo will forever change the course of this year's election! Just take a look at it - Kerry is Whale Ca Ca!
It looks like this story will be growing some long legs.
It will be the end of the Kerry campaign and CBS as we know it.
If CBS execs are smart they should fire Rather immediately and start cutting thier losses.
Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of scum bags.
It will be the end of the Kerry campaign and CBS as we know it.
If CBS execs are smart they should fire Rather immediately and start cutting thier losses.
Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of scum bags.
Andrew Sullivan on RatherGate:
"Any journalist who starts mistaking himself for an oracle needs to be reminded who he is from time to time.
CBS News has failed on all these counts. It did shoddy reporting and then self-interestedly dug in against an avalanche of evidence against it. Rather can blather all he wants about the political motivation of some in the blogosphere--but what matters is not bias but accuracy. His attitude, moreover, has bordered on the contemptuous; and the blogosphere has chewed him up and spat him out. He has acted as if journalism is a privilege rather than a process; as if his long career makes his critics illegitimate; as if his good motives can make up for bad material. The original mistake was not a firable offense. But the digging in surely is. It seems to me that when a news anchor presents false information and then tries to cover up and deny his errors, he has ceased to be a journalist. I'd like to say that Dan Rather needs to resign from his profession. But, judging from the last few days, he already has."
What a jerk...
"Any journalist who starts mistaking himself for an oracle needs to be reminded who he is from time to time.
CBS News has failed on all these counts. It did shoddy reporting and then self-interestedly dug in against an avalanche of evidence against it. Rather can blather all he wants about the political motivation of some in the blogosphere--but what matters is not bias but accuracy. His attitude, moreover, has bordered on the contemptuous; and the blogosphere has chewed him up and spat him out. He has acted as if journalism is a privilege rather than a process; as if his long career makes his critics illegitimate; as if his good motives can make up for bad material. The original mistake was not a firable offense. But the digging in surely is. It seems to me that when a news anchor presents false information and then tries to cover up and deny his errors, he has ceased to be a journalist. I'd like to say that Dan Rather needs to resign from his profession. But, judging from the last few days, he already has."
What a jerk...
Is that Microsoft Word there? That's right! They had typewritters that did that in the early 70s, didn't they? 
QUOTE
Huey, as usual, you have raced by here, not taking the time to actually read the article above.
i didnt read the article for a number of reasons..
1) i know the details of the whole CBS story, and i dont really care.. because if they are fake, it still doesnt prove Bush actually showed up for duty.
but hey, isnt that the plan? obfuscate the issue by focusing on Dan Rather, who isnt running for president, rather than George Bush, who is?
im sure harping on an old news anchor is FAR more important than making sure we have an honest man in the white house.
2) being that i know the details and the facts, i dont need to read someone else's OPINION about them.. especially not someone named "The Prowler"
3) when someone cant take responsibility for his own words and hides behind an alias, his opinion means squat to me.
QUOTE
2) being that i know the details and the facts, i dont need to read someone else's OPINION about them.. especially not someone named "The Prowler"-Huey
What Huey really means is,
Don't Confuse Me With The Facts: I've Got My Mind Made Up!
This little essay pretty much says it all.
------------------
A revolution in news
By Tony Blankley
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published September 14, 2004
"The major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur." That observation by the British philosopher Alfred North Whitehead came to mind this past week as I watched Dan Rather struggle violently like a proud old marlin caught on a hook by the young Internet fishermen. Twisting and turning, the great fish only drives the hook deeper in. Plunging and rising, it only exhausts itself while the exuberant Internet fishermen carefully manage the line and grab for the powerful hand hook with which they will end the great fish's sea-life.
I like a good fish dinner, but I've never cared much for fishing, as I hate to see a noble creature in its death agony. Yet that is what we are observing. This week it is Dan Rather and CBS News, through their failed effort to prove the legitimacy of their forged Bush National Guard documents, who are being revealed as hapless, helpless victims of an anarchic, swarming, overwhelming Internet blog technology. Soon, other great news institutions inevitably will be revealed for their inadequate capacity to fully report the news.
As in all revolutions, first, the old order must be destroyed, then we will learn both the strengths and the shortcomings of the new order. We got a glimpse of the Internet blogger's strength this past week.
For three-quarters of a century until last week, when CBS News had entered a fight it had been an unfair mismatch for its adversary. The credibility, research capacity and gatekeeping monopoly of CBS would overwhelm its victim. But last week it was breathtaking to see, moment by moment, the Internet blogger's advantage.
CBS did what it always has done: It produced and broadcast a highly polished segment in which the argument was magisterially framed to its advantage, with the facts favorable to CBS cherry-picked for presentation while annoying contrary facts were ignored. Carefully edited prime-time-quality interviews of their supposedly authoritative expert witnesses were laid in. The whole package was opened, narrated and concluded with dignified contempt for their victim by their star asset, Uber-anchor Dan Rather. Enough said. Full stop. Next matter. Long live the King.
Then the bloggers went to work. From the four corners of humanity experts started deconstructing the "truth" that CBS had presented. Who knew that there are experts who specialize just in the history of IBM selectric typing balls, or the kerning capacity of computer printing (the carrying of the tail in the letter "y" under the space of the preceding letter, as in the word "my." Typewriters can't do it; computers can.)
As each of these experts added their information to one blog, other bloggers would monitor it, pass it on, add a new fact, reorganize the analysis, synthesize new information. If new information proved wrong, it was corrected by yet another expert in the blogosphere. Mistakes were cheerfully admitted and instantly corrected. People who had filled out such forms thirty years ago added their analysis. Both technical and historic information constantly came in -- ever-increasing the fullness of understanding on the topic. It was like watching time-lapse photography of a cell dividing and growing. It was as if the very mechanism for establishing truth was a living, pulsating force.
CBS had one handwriting expert against the Internet blog's legions of subspecialists. It was pathetic. CBS couldn't possibly employ enough producers to identify each and every new specialist they needed, track them down, contact them and get their testimony -- at 11 p.m. or 2 a.m. The bloggers couldn't find them either. The blogger's advantage is that the experts find the bloggers. There are just millions of smart people all over the world sitting at their computers, ready to join the quest. The bloggers themselves often add powerful analytical capacity to the process. It is like a reporter having a team of high-powered lawyers helping construct the strongest possible line of reasoning to their reports -- paragraph by paragraph.
The Internet bloggers picked CBS's story as clean as a school of piranhas would pick clean some poor water buffalo that wandered into their river.
The bloggers have had this capacity for a few years now. We had a pre-taste of it in the Trent Lott affair. But what has made the bloggers now a strategic component of national politics is that their readership now includes many senior reporters, editors and producers in the old media.
There are enough self-respecting old media journalists who simply cannot see the cornucopia of valid information on the Internet and then ignore it in their reporting.
So, instead of the bloggers only reaching their few million readers, they are reaching the larger mass public through the old media. The old media is becoming complicit in its own demise, just as some French aristocrats supported the revolution against their own ancient regime.
Count me a supporter of the revolution. But revolutions are messy affairs, where much of value is lost as well as gained.
------------------
A revolution in news
By Tony Blankley
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published September 14, 2004
"The major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur." That observation by the British philosopher Alfred North Whitehead came to mind this past week as I watched Dan Rather struggle violently like a proud old marlin caught on a hook by the young Internet fishermen. Twisting and turning, the great fish only drives the hook deeper in. Plunging and rising, it only exhausts itself while the exuberant Internet fishermen carefully manage the line and grab for the powerful hand hook with which they will end the great fish's sea-life.
I like a good fish dinner, but I've never cared much for fishing, as I hate to see a noble creature in its death agony. Yet that is what we are observing. This week it is Dan Rather and CBS News, through their failed effort to prove the legitimacy of their forged Bush National Guard documents, who are being revealed as hapless, helpless victims of an anarchic, swarming, overwhelming Internet blog technology. Soon, other great news institutions inevitably will be revealed for their inadequate capacity to fully report the news.
As in all revolutions, first, the old order must be destroyed, then we will learn both the strengths and the shortcomings of the new order. We got a glimpse of the Internet blogger's strength this past week.
For three-quarters of a century until last week, when CBS News had entered a fight it had been an unfair mismatch for its adversary. The credibility, research capacity and gatekeeping monopoly of CBS would overwhelm its victim. But last week it was breathtaking to see, moment by moment, the Internet blogger's advantage.
CBS did what it always has done: It produced and broadcast a highly polished segment in which the argument was magisterially framed to its advantage, with the facts favorable to CBS cherry-picked for presentation while annoying contrary facts were ignored. Carefully edited prime-time-quality interviews of their supposedly authoritative expert witnesses were laid in. The whole package was opened, narrated and concluded with dignified contempt for their victim by their star asset, Uber-anchor Dan Rather. Enough said. Full stop. Next matter. Long live the King.
Then the bloggers went to work. From the four corners of humanity experts started deconstructing the "truth" that CBS had presented. Who knew that there are experts who specialize just in the history of IBM selectric typing balls, or the kerning capacity of computer printing (the carrying of the tail in the letter "y" under the space of the preceding letter, as in the word "my." Typewriters can't do it; computers can.)
As each of these experts added their information to one blog, other bloggers would monitor it, pass it on, add a new fact, reorganize the analysis, synthesize new information. If new information proved wrong, it was corrected by yet another expert in the blogosphere. Mistakes were cheerfully admitted and instantly corrected. People who had filled out such forms thirty years ago added their analysis. Both technical and historic information constantly came in -- ever-increasing the fullness of understanding on the topic. It was like watching time-lapse photography of a cell dividing and growing. It was as if the very mechanism for establishing truth was a living, pulsating force.
CBS had one handwriting expert against the Internet blog's legions of subspecialists. It was pathetic. CBS couldn't possibly employ enough producers to identify each and every new specialist they needed, track them down, contact them and get their testimony -- at 11 p.m. or 2 a.m. The bloggers couldn't find them either. The blogger's advantage is that the experts find the bloggers. There are just millions of smart people all over the world sitting at their computers, ready to join the quest. The bloggers themselves often add powerful analytical capacity to the process. It is like a reporter having a team of high-powered lawyers helping construct the strongest possible line of reasoning to their reports -- paragraph by paragraph.
The Internet bloggers picked CBS's story as clean as a school of piranhas would pick clean some poor water buffalo that wandered into their river.
The bloggers have had this capacity for a few years now. We had a pre-taste of it in the Trent Lott affair. But what has made the bloggers now a strategic component of national politics is that their readership now includes many senior reporters, editors and producers in the old media.
There are enough self-respecting old media journalists who simply cannot see the cornucopia of valid information on the Internet and then ignore it in their reporting.
So, instead of the bloggers only reaching their few million readers, they are reaching the larger mass public through the old media. The old media is becoming complicit in its own demise, just as some French aristocrats supported the revolution against their own ancient regime.
Count me a supporter of the revolution. But revolutions are messy affairs, where much of value is lost as well as gained.
Very good article John. It would seems that a Rather resignation will be forthcoming. It would be the only thing he could do to save tthe face of the Kerry campaign. If he doesn't resign right away this thing will not only take him down but the Kerry campaign as well. (as if it really wasn't already over when Zell Miller finished his speech at the RNC)
BTW I also subscribe to the Washinton times in print and have been thouroughly enjoying how well they have "fillet'd" Kerry lately.
BTW I also subscribe to the Washinton times in print and have been thouroughly enjoying how well they have "fillet'd" Kerry lately.
QUOTE
I also subscribe to the Washinton times in print
wow..
u actually put money in the pocket of Sun Yung Moon, and expect us to give credence to anything u say?
roflmao.
QUOTE
It would seems that a Rather resignation will be forthcoming.-Bob
Most Likely not. He will probably be marginalized to the point that when he finally leaves CBS, it will be anti-climatic. Anyway, the terrible damage is done, and there is nothing that CBS OR the MSM can do about it.
Things are changing, and they have been hard pressed to change with it. This is usually what happens when new technology passes others, older ones, by. Expect further intrenchment by the MSM, which will accelerate the process.
For those who have not read this, The ReJefferisonization of America, I heartly recommend it. It is phrophetic, and fits neatly into my thesis about the changes coming down the pike within this country, AND the rest of the world.
If you only choose to read one of my links, make this the one, as it is perhaps my all time favorite.
Here is a teaser.
QUOTE
"So now, well into the 21st century we turn to the paradox of Jefferson's political vision. His ideas about how America would best be governed -- through decentralization of political power and widespread distribution of property -- are as valid now as they were two centuries ago. But the weakness in Jefferson's vision was its neglect of the 'techno' component of what we now familiarly call 'technopolitics.' That is, Jefferson had the right idea about governance, but Jeffersonianism was swamped in a torrent of industrialization and centralization in the century after his death. Indeed, through the middle of the 20th century, the march of science and technology -- and the ideologies that grew from those marchers -- caused an unmistakable loss of personal freedom; call it de-Jeffersonianization.
"But in the past few decades, the further march of science and technology has boomeranged the other way; America has re-Jeffersonized. Today, distributed and networked technology, having smashed or obsolesced the mainframes of the last century, has created the political and social space for a new birth of freedom. Thus the paradox: Jefferson's un-technological vision could only be fully realized through quantum increases in technology. And so we should sing the praises of those technologies -- the personal computer, the Internet, and VoIP -- even as we honor Jefferson, because together, the wisdom of a man born in 1743 and the genius of machines born in the 20th century have formed a swelling chorus of freedom that has carried America back to its rightful Jeffersonian roots.
"But in the past few decades, the further march of science and technology has boomeranged the other way; America has re-Jeffersonized. Today, distributed and networked technology, having smashed or obsolesced the mainframes of the last century, has created the political and social space for a new birth of freedom. Thus the paradox: Jefferson's un-technological vision could only be fully realized through quantum increases in technology. And so we should sing the praises of those technologies -- the personal computer, the Internet, and VoIP -- even as we honor Jefferson, because together, the wisdom of a man born in 1743 and the genius of machines born in the 20th century have formed a swelling chorus of freedom that has carried America back to its rightful Jeffersonian roots.
QUOTE (John L @ Sep 14 2004, 09:10 PM)
Most Likely not. He will probably be marginalized to the point that when he finally leaves CBS, it will be anti-climatic.
My god John. You just explained Andy Rooney to me.
Anyways, enough fun and games with you guys.
If I am good, you'll hear from me in a few weeks.
It just keeps piling up. In Casting Further Doubt, the entire fiasco is moving out of the absurd, into the comical.
-------------------------------------------------
Casting Further Doubt
Document Analysts: CBS News Ignored Concerns About Disputed Bush Military Records
By Brian Ross
ABCNEWS.com
Sept. 14, 2004— Two of the document experts hired by CBS News say the network ignored concerns they raised prior to the broadcast of a report citing documents that questioned George W. Bush's service in the National Guard during the Vietnam War.
The authenticity of the documents in the report by CBS News' 60 Minutes II has been widely questioned. The documents were allegedly written by Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, who died in 1984.
I Did Not Authenticate Anything’
A second document examiner hired by CBS News, Linda James of Plano, Texas, also told ABC News she had concerns about the documents and could not authenticate them. She said she expressed her concerns to CBS before the 60 Minutes II broadcast.
"I did not authenticate anything and I don't want it to be misunderstood that I did," James said. "And that's why I have come forth to talk about it because I don't want anybody to think I did authenticate these documents."
A third examiner hired by CBS for its story, Marcel Matley, appeared on CBS Evening News last Friday and was described as saying the document was real.
According to The Washington Post, Matley said he examined only the signature attributed to Killian and made no attempt to authenticate the documents themselves.
At the heart of the dispute is whether any typewriter existed in 1972 that could have produced the documents, with their distinct type style, even spacing, and the tiny raised "th" known as superscript.
Two experts told ABC News today there was no such machine, not even the IBM Selectric Composer, the most advanced typewriter available in 1972.
"This machine is not the culprit for these documents," said software engineer Gerry Kaplan.
Other new questions were raised today by National Guard officials who told ABC News that some of the language and abbreviations in the documents were not in use at the time.
CBS Stands by Its Report
CBS News says it still believes the documents are authentic.
"CBS News did not rely on either Emily Will or Linda James for a final assessment of the documents regarding George Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard. Ms. Will and Ms. James were among a group of experts we consulted to assess one of the four documents used in the report and they did not render definitive judgment on that document. Ultimately, they played a peripheral role and deferred to another expert who examined all four of the documents used," the network said in a statement.
"Most importantly, the content of the documents was backed up by our reporting and our sources who knew the thoughts and behavior of Lt. Col. Jerry Killian at the time," the statement said.
Killian's former secretary, Marian Carr Knox, told ABC News she believes the documents are fake, but that they do reflect some of what her former boss thought of then-Lt. George W. Bush.
"He did have complaints about Bush. Bush missed his physical and went off to Alabama with none of the paperwork, I remember Killian talking about that," Knox said. "But it wasn't in memo file."
Emily Will, a veteran document examiner from North Carolina, told ABC News she saw problems right away with the one document CBS hired her to check the weekend before the broadcast.
"I found five significant differences in the questioned handwriting, and I found problems with the printing itself as to whether it could have been produced by a typewriter," she said.
Will says she sent the CBS producer an e-mail message about her concerns and strongly urged the network the night before the broadcast not to use the documents.
"I told them that all the questions I was asking them on Tuesday night, they were going to be asked by hundreds of other document examiners on Thursday if they ran that story," Will said.
But the documents became a key part of the 60 Minutes II broadcast questioning President Bush's National Guard service in 1972. CBS made no mention that any expert disputed the authenticity.
"I did not feel that they wanted to investigate it very deeply," Will told ABC News.
------------------------------------
It appears that CBS has forgotten everything it learned about Watergate. It isn't the crime that is so bad: it is the coverup that drags you down. And they are being pulled down further with each passing day.
Welcome to the 'New Information World Order'!
-------------------------------------------------
Casting Further Doubt
Document Analysts: CBS News Ignored Concerns About Disputed Bush Military Records
By Brian Ross
ABCNEWS.com
Sept. 14, 2004— Two of the document experts hired by CBS News say the network ignored concerns they raised prior to the broadcast of a report citing documents that questioned George W. Bush's service in the National Guard during the Vietnam War.
The authenticity of the documents in the report by CBS News' 60 Minutes II has been widely questioned. The documents were allegedly written by Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, who died in 1984.
I Did Not Authenticate Anything’
A second document examiner hired by CBS News, Linda James of Plano, Texas, also told ABC News she had concerns about the documents and could not authenticate them. She said she expressed her concerns to CBS before the 60 Minutes II broadcast.
"I did not authenticate anything and I don't want it to be misunderstood that I did," James said. "And that's why I have come forth to talk about it because I don't want anybody to think I did authenticate these documents."
A third examiner hired by CBS for its story, Marcel Matley, appeared on CBS Evening News last Friday and was described as saying the document was real.
According to The Washington Post, Matley said he examined only the signature attributed to Killian and made no attempt to authenticate the documents themselves.
At the heart of the dispute is whether any typewriter existed in 1972 that could have produced the documents, with their distinct type style, even spacing, and the tiny raised "th" known as superscript.
Two experts told ABC News today there was no such machine, not even the IBM Selectric Composer, the most advanced typewriter available in 1972.
"This machine is not the culprit for these documents," said software engineer Gerry Kaplan.
Other new questions were raised today by National Guard officials who told ABC News that some of the language and abbreviations in the documents were not in use at the time.
CBS Stands by Its Report
CBS News says it still believes the documents are authentic.
"CBS News did not rely on either Emily Will or Linda James for a final assessment of the documents regarding George Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard. Ms. Will and Ms. James were among a group of experts we consulted to assess one of the four documents used in the report and they did not render definitive judgment on that document. Ultimately, they played a peripheral role and deferred to another expert who examined all four of the documents used," the network said in a statement.
"Most importantly, the content of the documents was backed up by our reporting and our sources who knew the thoughts and behavior of Lt. Col. Jerry Killian at the time," the statement said.
Killian's former secretary, Marian Carr Knox, told ABC News she believes the documents are fake, but that they do reflect some of what her former boss thought of then-Lt. George W. Bush.
"He did have complaints about Bush. Bush missed his physical and went off to Alabama with none of the paperwork, I remember Killian talking about that," Knox said. "But it wasn't in memo file."
Emily Will, a veteran document examiner from North Carolina, told ABC News she saw problems right away with the one document CBS hired her to check the weekend before the broadcast.
"I found five significant differences in the questioned handwriting, and I found problems with the printing itself as to whether it could have been produced by a typewriter," she said.
Will says she sent the CBS producer an e-mail message about her concerns and strongly urged the network the night before the broadcast not to use the documents.
"I told them that all the questions I was asking them on Tuesday night, they were going to be asked by hundreds of other document examiners on Thursday if they ran that story," Will said.
But the documents became a key part of the 60 Minutes II broadcast questioning President Bush's National Guard service in 1972. CBS made no mention that any expert disputed the authenticity.
"I did not feel that they wanted to investigate it very deeply," Will told ABC News.
------------------------------------
It appears that CBS has forgotten everything it learned about Watergate. It isn't the crime that is so bad: it is the coverup that drags you down. And they are being pulled down further with each passing day.
Welcome to the 'New Information World Order'!
I've been a big fan of Blogs way back when we were still using DOS! Never had the time or creative juice to start one myself but have been reading LGF & Instapundit almost from the beginning. The other "new" one that's attracted my attention is "Powerline". Although I don't have a lot for Lawyers, the atty. who does "Powerline" has some cutting-edge material out there.
Isn't it a crime to deliberately attempt to manipulate a presidential election with such fraudulent information?
Shouldn't some indictments be materializing
Shouldn't some indictments be materializing
QUOTE (bob @ Sep 15 2004, 01:34 PM)
Isn't it a crime to deliberately attempt to manipulate a presidential election with such fraudulent information?
Shouldn't some indictments be materializing
Shouldn't some indictments be materializing
Is it erroneous ?
It seems that the lying SwiftVets were run from the Bush re-election commitee. Is that a crime ?
Getting the goods on Bush seems to be the crime you're refering to
QUOTE (lamphun @ Sep 15 2004, 07:40 AM)
QUOTE (bob @ Sep 15 2004, 01:34 PM)
Isn't it a crime to deliberately attempt to manipulate a presidential election with such fraudulent information?
Shouldn't some indictments be materializing
Shouldn't some indictments be materializing
Is it erroneous ?
It seems that the lying SwiftVets were run from the Bush re-election commitee. Is that a crime ?
Getting the goods on Bush seems to be the crime you're refering to
Wrong again, lamphun. The Swiftvets were simply recounting their experiences w/Waffles. Nice try though...
The swift boat stories hold water allot better than the so called national guard documents.
I also seems to remember that Dan Rather was far nicer to Saddam Hussein than he was to John O'Neil.
While all this is going on the real clincher that will unequivocally eviscerate the Kerry campaign will be the disclosure of his meetings in Paris with NVA officials immediately upon his return from Vietnam.
I also seems to remember that Dan Rather was far nicer to Saddam Hussein than he was to John O'Neil.
While all this is going on the real clincher that will unequivocally eviscerate the Kerry campaign will be the disclosure of his meetings in Paris with NVA officials immediately upon his return from Vietnam.
QUOTE (bob @ Sep 15 2004, 02:05 PM)
The swift boat stories hold water allot better than the so called national guard documents.
I also seems to remember that Dan Rather was far nicer to Saddam Hussein than he was to John O'Neil.
While all this is going on the real clincher that will unequivocally eviscerate the Kerry campaign will be the disclosure of his meetings in Paris with NVA officials immediately upon his return from Vietnam.
I also seems to remember that Dan Rather was far nicer to Saddam Hussein than he was to John O'Neil.
While all this is going on the real clincher that will unequivocally eviscerate the Kerry campaign will be the disclosure of his meetings in Paris with NVA officials immediately upon his return from Vietnam.
You mean 30 years ago ? Traitor, hang him high and that other traitor who met the NVA, what was his name ? Henry ? Henry Kiss...
Get a grip or get a life.
Not really the same. Kissenger was there for the peace talks.
Kerry was having secret meetings to strategize his activities with the VVAW. That probably where he got the NVA flags his group marched behind in DC.
Lamp maybe you need a new reostat your light seems to be growing dim!
Kerry was having secret meetings to strategize his activities with the VVAW. That probably where he got the NVA flags his group marched behind in DC.
Lamp maybe you need a new reostat your light seems to be growing dim!
QUOTE
Lamp maybe you need a new reostat your light seems to be growing dim!-Bpb
Undergarments will do him fine. Help thaw out his brain.
James Lileks writes...
In any case, the whole “fake but accurate” line shows how tone-deaf these people are; it’s like saying a body in a pine box is “dead but lifelike.” It boggles, it really does: the story is true, the evidence is faked, but the evidence reflects the evidence we have not yet presented that proves our conclusion – ergo, we’re telling the truth. They just can’t give it up; they just can’t say the memos were typed by the guy in the “Dude, you’re getting a Dell!” commercial and leave it be, because that that puts the knife in the story regardless of what happened. So they keep going.
The lifelike corpse is CBS's reputation. And it's not looking all that lifelike anymore. . . .
Accurate but who with any weight can claim they're fake. Lt Col Killian's secretery says the content of the memoes is acccurate. Basically that Bush was a shirker who was too dumb to learn to fly. She says she never wrote the memoes. They are supposed to be from Lt. Col. Killian himself. The Bush lovers are disrespecting the integrity of a dead officer. Sleazy stuff.
QUOTE (lamphun @ Sep 16 2004, 11:50 AM)
Accurate but who with any weight can claim they're fake. Lt Col Killian's secretery says the content of the memoes is acccurate. Basically that Bush was a shirker who was too dumb to learn to fly. She says she never wrote the memoes. They are supposed to be from Lt. Col. Killian himself. The Bush lovers are disrespecting the integrity of a dead officer. Sleazy stuff.
Sure dim bulb, just like Killians wife and son are. WE and the whole country are questioning a partisan sleazeball named Dan Blather who is trying to affect the outcome of a Presidential Election, a felony i might add.
QUOTE (politiphile @ Sep 16 2004, 05:07 PM)
QUOTE (lamphun @ Sep 16 2004, 11:50 AM)
Accurate but who with any weight can claim they're fake. Lt Col Killian's secretery says the content of the memoes is acccurate. Basically that Bush was a shirker who was too dumb to learn to fly. She says she never wrote the memoes. They are supposed to be from Lt. Col. Killian himself. The Bush lovers are disrespecting the integrity of a dead officer. Sleazy stuff.
Sure dim bulb, just like Killians wife and son are. WE and the whole country are questioning a partisan sleazeball named Dan Blather who is trying to affect the outcome of a Presidential Election, a felony i might add.
Refer to the "Satirical" posting "Stupid people love Bush". You are sadly proving a point. Seems nobody is allowed to say anything critical of Bush, especially when it's true.
Here is an interesting E-Mail on Andrew Sullivan's "Daily Dish". Enjoy.
Sums up my basic thinking quite well, although I had already made up my mind on Bush at an earlier time, like mayor Koch.
QUOTE
EMAIL OF THE DAY: "Overall, I have many of the same lamentations about Big-Government-Bush as you, and as my views are generally libertarian I find much of the social conservatism distasteful as well. But while I was struggling with how to approach this election for those reasons, I must say that this unspeakably disgusting behavior by CBS has now made my decision easy. I always thought the clear liberal bias at CBS (and others) was just a natural consequence of the way the liberal journalists dominating MSM see the world rather than a concerted effort to push a liberal agenda (the fish don’t feel the water theory, as others have put it). I now see how wrong I was. If CBS is willing to not only shred even the pretense of journalistic ethics, but to actually conspire to commit fraud (as I think the evidence of ignoring experts and standing behind such obvious forgeries shows) in a desperate attempt to throw a presidential election and install their candidate, then I must do everything I can to oppose them. This means becoming an active supporter of President Bush. I would never have imagined that would happen, but all I can say is thanks, CBS, for exposing yourself and clearing things up."
Sums up my basic thinking quite well, although I had already made up my mind on Bush at an earlier time, like mayor Koch.
QUOTE (lamphun @ Sep 16 2004, 11:13 AM)
QUOTE (politiphile @ Sep 16 2004, 05:07 PM)
QUOTE (lamphun @ Sep 16 2004, 11:50 AM)
Accurate but who with any weight can claim they're fake. Lt Col Killian's secretery says the content of the memoes is acccurate. Basically that Bush was a shirker who was too dumb to learn to fly. She says she never wrote the memoes. They are supposed to be from Lt. Col. Killian himself. The Bush lovers are disrespecting the integrity of a dead officer. Sleazy stuff.
Sure dim bulb, just like Killians wife and son are. WE and the whole country are questioning a partisan sleazeball named Dan Blather who is trying to affect the outcome of a Presidential Election, a felony i might add.
Refer to the "Satirical" posting "Stupid people love Bush". You are sadly proving a point. Seems nobody is allowed to say anything critical of Bush, especially when it's true.
Anybody ever notice that when these Barking Left-Wing Moonbats run out of any solid argument they inevidibly resort to: "You just made my point for me" or "Sadly, you're just proving a point" or some other such nonsense.
How about a substantive rebuttle for a change?
Excellent, John!
What a Dionsaur - Dan Blather.
What a Dionsaur - Dan Blather.
QUOTE (lamphun @ Sep 16 2004, 12:13 PM)
QUOTE (politiphile @ Sep 16 2004, 05:07 PM)
QUOTE (lamphun @ Sep 16 2004, 11:50 AM)
Accurate but who with any weight can claim they're fake. Lt Col Killian's secretery says the content of the memoes is acccurate. Basically that Bush was a shirker who was too dumb to learn to fly. She says she never wrote the memoes. They are supposed to be from Lt. Col. Killian himself. The Bush lovers are disrespecting the integrity of a dead officer. Sleazy stuff.
Sure dim bulb, just like Killians wife and son are. WE and the whole country are questioning a partisan sleazeball named Dan Blather who is trying to affect the outcome of a Presidential Election, a felony i might add.
Refer to the "Satirical" posting "Stupid people love Bush". You are sadly proving a point. Seems nobody is allowed to say anything critical of Bush, especially when it's true.
I mock you because your implication is based on a lie. And just so there is no mistaking me, i will take an IQ test with you anytime. In fact if your IQ is greater than 160 i will concede to you. So there you go, i've told you the # to beat.
Sorry to jump in here politphile but wanted to put up the following little gem re. Dan Blather!
"You might consider it ironic that liberals, who think of themselves as the party of fiery youth, have grown up to be out-of-touch old peaceniks who read the New York Times and are set in their ways.
In CBS's comfortable little TV world catering to liberals in their living rooms, a felony has been committed: falsifying government documents. Dan Rather, or someone who works for him, probably knows who committed the forgery. Anyone who impedes the investigation, even after the fact, also becomes an accessory, and could go to jail."
thanks - NR
First Martha Stewert - next Dan Blather!
"You might consider it ironic that liberals, who think of themselves as the party of fiery youth, have grown up to be out-of-touch old peaceniks who read the New York Times and are set in their ways.
In CBS's comfortable little TV world catering to liberals in their living rooms, a felony has been committed: falsifying government documents. Dan Rather, or someone who works for him, probably knows who committed the forgery. Anyone who impedes the investigation, even after the fact, also becomes an accessory, and could go to jail."
thanks - NR
First Martha Stewert - next Dan Blather!
Here is what Rush has to say today about the Rahter business. Window's Media link to program. Interesting and recommended for those on the left who hate him, claim to never want to listen to him, yet have never heard him. That's an interesting paradox, don't you think?
Go listen to the master of talk radio.
Go listen to the master of talk radio.
QUOTE (lamphun @ Sep 16 2004, 04:50 PM)
Accurate but who with any weight can claim they're fake. Lt Col Killian's secretery says the content of the memoes is acccurate. Basically that Bush was a shirker who was too dumb to learn to fly. She says she never wrote the memoes. They are supposed to be from Lt. Col. Killian himself. The Bush lovers are disrespecting the integrity of a dead officer. Sleazy stuff.
Lamp you missed the part right after that where we she went off on an anti-bush diatribe. She seems like a very objective source! Yes! ROTFLMAO
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.