Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is It Nepotism? [Reason for Dan Rather's Stonewall]
PascalFervor.com ^ | 09/17/04 | Respecta

Posted on 09/17/2004 11:15:33 AM PDT by Avoiding_Sulla

Guest Editorial by contributor "Respecta" asks us to press the investigation into WHY Dan Rather is protecting the source of his nearly-impossible-not-to-be forgeries. She thinks the circumstances point to paternal nepotism.

If it is, then that may be the guilty reason nobody within the MSM dares speak its name. Dan would surely not be the first to defend a loved-one advanced to a position where they could inflict damage on the parent and all that the parent represents. Perhaps others within the Establishment are thinking "There, but for the grace of God, go I." Hence the silence.

(Excerpt) Read more at pascalfervor.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: billburkett; cbs; cbsnews; corruption; danrather; documents; forgeries; killian; meritocracyitisnot; msm; napalminthemorning; nepotism; rather
I don't know if neptotism is accurate here, unless Dan is a power within Democratic circles and his daughter rose to a position of power there.

But I do understand fatherly indulgence if his daughter is the source and he was expecting her to be sending him real documents. And can sympathize with his fatherly woory if what she did could be called criminal.

Dan Rather's behavior certainly seems extra odd. Or have Democrats so lost confidence that even their mainstream progressives are becoming virtually indistinguishable from their wingnuts?

And I agree that it isn't surprising that Establishment media wouldn't question Rather on his daughter's possible involvement. The bigger the wig, the higher up they've probably promoted their mediocre offspring.

1 posted on 09/17/2004 11:15:37 AM PDT by Avoiding_Sulla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla
I suggested this theory a while back, based on wondering why Dan Rather was so adamant that his source was "unimpeachable". No source is "unimpeachable" without evidence. Likely not true but an interesting theory.
2 posted on 09/17/2004 11:18:36 AM PDT by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Question_Assumptions
his source was "unimpeachable"

His source was Bill Clinton?

3 posted on 09/17/2004 11:31:21 AM PDT by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Question_Assumptions

How long ago did you suggest it? Link? I'm interested if other FReepers argued for or against your theory.

Doesn't it make sense that he hasn't been questioned here because so many others fear exposure? Just more prrof of corruption, no? As the dream of meritocracy has becomes more of a joke, it makes sense that parents who might otherwise be good at their jobs, but were forced to work with less than the best affirmative action help, would be more inclined to create their own "parental action" program.

Also, is it possible that the Burkitt connection is being advanced to help Dan protect Robin?


4 posted on 09/17/2004 11:33:44 AM PDT by Avoiding_Sulla (You can't see where we're going when you don't look where we've been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla
How long ago did you suggest it? Link? I'm interested if other FReepers argued for or against your theory.

I through this out there a while ago as well. I will try to dig up the thread.

5 posted on 09/17/2004 11:39:29 AM PDT by Pete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Pete

Yeah, yeah...through = threw


6 posted on 09/17/2004 11:39:55 AM PDT by Pete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla
I think this is the first time I suggested the possibility that Dan was protecting Robin. This was on Friday 09/10/2004 3:46:05 PM EDT. So at least a week ago, FR was tossing this idea around.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1212398/posts?page=2#2

7 posted on 09/17/2004 11:50:27 AM PDT by Pete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla
How long ago did you suggest it? Link? I'm interested if other FReepers argued for or against your theory.

I suggested it on 9/13 here. Not much of a response.

Also, is it possible that the Burkitt connection is being advanced to help Dan protect Robin?

I think it's entirely possible that Burkett was working along, too. It was a guess. The main thing that made me think of Dan's daughter was the whole idea of an "unimpeachable source". Short of family, I can' think of any source that a reporter would consider "unimpeachable".

8 posted on 09/17/2004 1:04:45 PM PDT by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Pete
Well, you beat me by three days. I don't think I mentioned it before the 13th.
9 posted on 09/17/2004 1:05:38 PM PDT by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Izzy Dunne
Very funny...
10 posted on 09/17/2004 1:06:10 PM PDT by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson