Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rather to Be Honored at Nov. 10 Gala for "Commitment to Fair and Accurate" Reporting
Hollywood Reporter ^

Posted on 10/17/2003 11:58:48 AM PDT by RatherBiased.com

LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - CBS News' Dan Rather and "Friends" executive producers Kevin Bright, David Crane and Marta Kauffman will honored Nov. 10 during the Museum of Television & Radio's annual gala at the Beverly Hills Hotel.

Rather will be feted for his "steadfast commitment to fair and accurate news reporting," while the "Friends" producers' work "has revolutionized quality primetime entertainment," museum officials said Wednesday.

Past gala honorees include Barbara Walters, Jack Paar (news), Jerry Seinfeld (news), Garry Shandling (news), Martin Sheen (news), Mary Tyler Moore (news), Dick Wolf, David E. Kelley, Alan Alda (news), David Brinkley, Carol Burnett (news), James Burrows and Sid Caesar (news).

If any of you haven't seen the cartoon up on our site:



TOPICS: Activism/Chapters
KEYWORDS: ccrm; presstitutes; ratherbiased
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-87 next last
To: RonDog
This is just too funny, too tempting, to filled with irony to miss. I'll be there!
61 posted on 10/18/2003 8:48:42 AM PDT by absalom01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
O’Reilly: "Well, I didn’t lie to anybody’s face on national television. I don’t think you have, have you?"
Rather: "I don’t think I ever have. I hope I never have. But, look, it’s one thing-"

This response says volumes. He's an admitted liar. Two words come to mind--Dealy Plaza.

RD
62 posted on 10/18/2003 8:59:46 AM PDT by reagandemocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
Freep Rather on November 10th!

Looking forward to more info, thanks!

63 posted on 10/18/2003 10:00:36 AM PDT by Joy Angela
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: sarasota
I doubt he has rosacea. It is a classic case of an alcoholic's ravaged face. It has to do with severely damaged facial capillaries. His liver must be a sight, but I would prefer not to see it.
64 posted on 10/18/2003 10:04:44 AM PDT by Paulus Invictus (RATs are scum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Bob J; diotima; RonDog; Saundra Duffy
Can you guys run point on this? Time to FReep this bozo good!
65 posted on 10/18/2003 11:52:31 AM PDT by sauropod (Fry Mumia!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
Rather to O'Reilly: "I think you can be an honest person and lie about any number of things."

I'd love to have continued this conversation.

Me to Rather: "So, even though you think Bush 'lied' about the War in Iraq, he could still be an honest person?"

Rather to Me: "No. Bush is not an honest man."

Me to Rather: "But you said someone could lie and still be honest."

Rather to Me: "Yes, but that is not the case with Bush."

Me to Rather: "So what's the difference between Bush and Clinton lying?"

Rather to Me: "Well, it's obvious. Clinton was lying to defend himself against an outrageous political attack, whereas Bush lied in order to take our country into war."

Me to Rather: "So you think it's honest for Clinton to lie to save his own hide from "political" accusations that turned out to be true in every last respect, but it's not honest for Bush to "lie" in order to get enough support to prosecute Saddam Hussein for crimes against humanity that he very much did commit, and liberate the people of Iraq?"

Rather to Me: "..."

Me to Rather: "I thought so Dan. Oh, and by the way, Bush never lied in the first place."

Qwinn
66 posted on 10/18/2003 12:23:42 PM PDT by Qwinn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com
This is the type of self-congratulatory, incestous event that libruls LOVE organizing to give the false impression that their twisted views are part of the mainstream. Of course, they have to throw this event in Beverly Hills to keep away the great unwashed masses whom they purport to speak for but secretly despise!
67 posted on 10/18/2003 1:27:22 PM PDT by 4MORE-YEARS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com; RonDog
ALSO...


Michael Moore to be honored for his steadfast commitment to daily exercise and a low fat diet.

68 posted on 10/19/2003 7:28:15 PM PDT by Cinnamon Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnnaZ; diotima; Bob J; feinswinesuksass; DoughtyOne; Cinnamon Girl; Tony in Hawaii; gc4nra; ...
Here is an e-mail announcement that I just sent:
We intend to protest the Museum of Television & Radio's decision to honor Dan Rather on Monday 11/10 at the Beverly Hills Hotel.

Our current plans are for several local activists from the conservative news forum Free Republic to peacefully assemble on the public sidewalk in front of the hotel dressed in Halloween masks of Saddam Hussein, Fidel Castro, Bill Clinton - and Dan Rather.

We intend to perform some "street theater" called "Softballs for Saddam" to parody the fawning questions that Rather often asks of people that he likes. We intend to hold a media opportunity at 6 pm - with a GIANT plastic baseball bat, and some over-sized foam rubber "softballs" - plus some smaller "Softball with Saddam" softballs to hand out to news reporters.

Any OTHER ideas will be gratefully accepted.

I have confirmed with the hotel that there will be a reception at 6:30 pm, and a dinner at 7:30 pm on MONDAY, November 10, 2003.
The Museum of Television and Radio says that this event is "by invitation only" - and that the public is NOT invited.

Can YOU be there?
Please call or e-mail me.


69 posted on 10/28/2003 6:18:40 AM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
Rather to Be Honored at Nov. 10 Gala for "Commitment to Fair and Accurate" Reporting


This is really from "The Onion" right?
70 posted on 10/28/2003 6:31:37 AM PST by Valin (A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Cinnamon Girl
LOL!!!
You're a bad evil wicked person!
71 posted on 10/28/2003 6:36:40 AM PST by Valin (A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Valin
The original link to the Hollywood Reporter article no longer works, but HERE is the same story, still available from Yahoo! NEWS:
Entertainment - Reuters TV

Dan Rather, 'Friends' Producers in Spotlight

Thu Oct 2, 5:34 AM ET

LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - CBS News' Dan Rather and "Friends" executive producers Kevin Bright, David Crane and Marta Kauffman will honored Nov. 10 during the Museum of Television & Radio's annual gala at the Beverly Hills Hotel.

Rather will be feted for his "steadfast commitment to fair and accurate news reporting," while the "Friends" producers' work "has revolutionized quality primetime entertainment," museum officials said Wednesday.

Past gala honorees include Barbara Walters, Jack Paar (news), Jerry Seinfeld (news), Garry Shandling (news), Martin Sheen (news), Mary Tyler Moore (news), Dick Wolf, David E. Kelley, Alan Alda (news), David Brinkley, Carol Burnett (news), James Burrows and Sid Caesar (news).


72 posted on 10/28/2003 6:48:58 AM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: RonDog; yall
I'll be there in spirit ! ...

We intend to perform some "street theater" called "Softballs for Saddam" to parody the fawning questions that Rather often asks of people that he likes.

Here is Rather with his good buddy ...



[doin' my best natalie maines impersonation] ...

Just so you'll know, we're ashamed that
Dan Rather is from Texas !!

73 posted on 10/28/2003 7:50:30 AM PST by MeekOneGOP (Check out the Texas Chicken D 'RATS!: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/keyword/Redistricting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing; PJ-Comix
"Softballs for Saddam"
I stole that idea from THESE guys:

Dan Rather’s Soft Serve: He’s easier on dictators than democratically elected Americans
National Review ^ | February 27, 2003 | Tim Graham
Posted on 03/03/2003 8:15 AM PST by PJ-Comix

Dan Rather's big interview with Saddam Hussein Wednesday night was not an exercise in social responsibility. It was a commercial opportunity, no more dignified than Martin Bashir exploiting Michael Jackson. It didn't put the American people first. It put Dan Rather first. On last night's shows alone, Rather was softer than ABC's Barbara Walters was with Robert Blake and CBS's Troy Roberts was with "preppy killer" Robert Chambers. These men were at worst small-time killers. Saddam Hussein is a mass murderer, a man who has children killed in front of their parents as a torture tactic. Rather called him "President Hussein" and "Mr. President," and sat cooperatively as he declared that he had won 100 percent of the last election. "100 percent," Rather repeated, with a tone that sounded like "you don't say."

In the days leading up to the Dan's big "get," the liberal media seemed to rally around the anchorman, refusing to acknowledge a potentially damaging first impression: The interview was providing aid and comfort to the enemy, as if Edward R. Murrow would have jumped at interviewing Hitler; it would also provide aid and comfort to the antiwar rabble here and abroad, a political boost to the forces arrayed against Saddam's disarmament.

The objections to Rather's interview shouldn't be restricted to that simple formula. Yes, Saddam did use it to project his ridiculous claims on the American people — he loves Allah, freedom, and humanity. Yes, it did probably embolden that strange minority who feels Saddam is a put-upon fall guy for American imperialism. Yes, it could be seen as a contributing factor if President Bush's push for war takes a punch in the polls. But this interview actually reflects a trend in American journalism at least as old as the Vietnam War: solicitous, respectful treatment of despotic regimes opposing America.

It's not just the dictators themselves, but their mouthpieces as well. They're not spin artists for savage regimes. They're diplomats with gravitas. As with the oily Vladimir Pozners and Alejandro Bendanas before him, Saddam's stooge/spokesman Tariq Aziz has been quite ubiquitous on American television. Catch him on Good Morning America between the celebrity movie plugs. On February 11, Diane Sawyer interviewed Aziz in a very sympathetic tone, asking if he had a gun in his home to protect his family and sounding relieved when he said "yes, of course." (All the better to shoot American invaders.) She added this poor-thing question: "Just before you go to sleep at night, how afraid are you?"

The liberal media may suggest this is balance against the gung-ho patriots singing "God Bless America" in D.C., but it's not balance. It's a sick imbalance against democratic institutions, the only institutions under which full-throated freedom of journalistic expression thrives. Instead of demonstrating any respect for that notion, the media elite pound and punish the democratically elected, and politely call dictators like Saddam "Mr. President."

So Dan Rather was merely the lucky one, the one who got the historic two-shot and left the toughness in New York. Rather was right when he insisted that almost any reporter would take that interview offer. But wasn't softening it a condition for getting it? It should be said that Rather was not selected because he was tough. Obtaining the second interview ought to prove the first interview was a failure, if toughness was the goal.

Reporters love cynically breaking down the way legislation moves or doesn't move through Congress, and love questioning the sincerity and coherence of White House military-diplomatic moves. Few will make an issue of the sausage making at CBS. Media "reporters" like the Washington Post's Howard Kurtz left out nagging details like Rather's help from Ramsey Clark. (Credit AP's David Bauder for reporting Clark put in a "good word" with Saddam even as he leads a campaign to have George W. Bush impeached.) CBS tried to explain, with the embarrassment it deserved, that it had to submit to Iraqi cameras, Iraqi translators, and wait patiently for Iraqi minders to review their tape and send it along. More comical was Rather's story that Saddam's men drove him around Baghdad for two and a half hours before taking him to the interview site. These are clearly not conditions CBS would accept from the president or any other democratically elected leader. Dictators get more respect just because they're dictators, and it's the end of sweeps.

When NBC's Tom Brokaw secured special access to the Bush White House for a primetime special next to its fictional West Wing, it drew the usual hoots from reporters who slammed it as a softball platform for Team Bush. But no one in the media establishment is throwing those brickbats at CBS. They all avoid the obvious contrast: whether Dan is too soft on this lie-a-minute despot, compared to Dan roughing up the pols at home. He took pride in sticking it to Nixon as a White House correspondent. How can we forget anchorman Rather roughing up Bush 41 in 1988, angrily sniping about Iran-Contra: "You've made us hypocrites in the face of the world!"

By contrast, Rather gave Saddam five minutes or more devoted to his bizarre proposal for a debate with President Bush. Rather called it "surprising" and "new," and CBS plugged it relentlessly. But the tape from August 29, 1990 quickly revealed that CBS reported then that Saddam Hussein was offering to debate George Bush or Margaret Thatcher. This interview wasn't about journalistic integrity, it was about showmanship and self-promotion.

In this show, Rather came up short on any moral showboating, a common tactic in American interviews. He asked dispassionately if Saddam agreed with the September 11 attacks. He also asked if Osama bin Laden has made him irrelevant on the "Arab street." Nice career move, killing 3,000 Americans? This, from the man who suggested he had found true evil as he welcomed the Republican Congress in 1995 with sentences like "The new Republican majority in Congress took a big step today on its legislative agenda to demolish or damage government aid programs, many of them designed to help children and the poor." Last night, Newt Gingrich must have sputtered as Saddam just spoke his piece about how he loves peace and humanity without any disobedient rebuttal from Dan.

The media elite ought to come out of this interview at least asking themselves if they would have been as soft a touch as Rather. Not every question was to Saddam's liking. But a journalist who pictured himself as a toughie would not ask "What's the most important thing you want the American people to understand at this juncture of history?" That's a platform, not a question. I would hope another journalist might care more than Rather did about the reaction of his countrymen, especially the parents who lost sons and daughters to this tyrant twelve years ago. I would hope another journalist would vow to hold Saddam accountable before the free press at every broken phony line he gave me as the war proceeds. Rather couldn't even remember the phony debate line he swallowed last time.

Tim Graham is director of media analysis at the Media Research Center.

CLICK HERE for the rest of that thread

74 posted on 10/28/2003 8:12:17 AM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
See also this WONDERFUL Rather-Saddam parody, from JohnHuang2:

The Rather-Saddam Interview Iraqi 
"Minders" Didn't Want You To See
by JohnHuang2
February 27, 2003

Folks, I'd never thought I'd see the day.

In my wildest dreams, I'd never imagine defending (drum roll, please?) CBS's Dan Rather, of all people. You're undoubtedly aware the veteran "Evening News" anchorman has come under some heavy criticism after his interview of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein (excerpts of which were aired Wednesday night on "60 Minutes II.")

Even I joined in on the fun this week, blasting Danny boy at every opportunity.

In light of some new evidence I've just come across, I now regret having done so. The criticism was, I think, not only unfair, but wholly unwarranted. I think you'll agree once you read the following transcript.

What's this transcript about? Recall that a condition of the interview was that Iraqi officials would get to run the cameras and review the tape afterwards. Much of the interview, according to sources, ended up on the cutting room floor. What you saw on "60 Minutes II" this week was, unfortunately, a highly skewed, extremely sanitized version of what was, in fact, a pretty tough interview.

I can't disclose how I came across this transcript without compromising sources and methods, so I'll refrain.

Here, without further ado, is the part of the interview Iraqi "minders" didn't want you to see (or read):

DAN RATHER: Mr. President, thank you for being with us tonight. Dawud "Donald Gregg" Gohar still serves as your trusted advisor. He was deeply involved in running Weapons of Mass Destruction to al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups, and he didn't inform you. Now, in our country, when a trusted advisor fails to inform the president, the president fires him. Why is Mr. Gohar still inside presidential palaces, is still a trusted advisor?

PRESIDENT SADDAM HUSSEIN: Because I have confidence in him and because this matter, Dan, as you well know, and your editors know, has been looked at by the $10 million study by U.N. weapons inspectors, it's been looked into again and again. The Hamza testimony that you put on here, I just think it's outrageous because he was totally discredited. And even he swore under oath that he never talked to me about weapons going to terrorists...Dawud "Donald Gregg" Gohar works for me because I don't think he's done anything wrong. And so I find this to be a rehash and a little bit, if you'll excuse me, a misrepresentation on the part of CBS, who said you're doing political profiles of leaders, and then you come up with something that has been exhaustively looked into.

RATHER: Mr. President, what we agreed to or didn't agree to, I think you will agree for the moment, can be dealt with in another way. Let's talk about the record. You say that we've misrepresented your...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Let's talk about the full record.

RATHER: ....record. Let's talk about the record.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Yeah.

RATHER: If we've misrepresented your record in any way, here's a chance to set it straight. Now, for ex...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Right. Can I just set it straight on one count, because you implied from that little thing...that I didn't tell the truth (CBS had a six-minute piece about Saddam and *Iran-contra-al-Qaeda* before the interview). Now this has all been looked into. It's just a rehash.

RATHER: Where did we imply that, Mr. President?

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Well, just here, on this board, where you have the idea that Saddam says that he didn't tell, didn't tell about al-Qaeda's supply from Khidhir "Felix Rodriguez" Hamza.

RATHER: Mr. Pres...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Hamza testified under oath, he has been public, and you could have at least run a little picture of him saying that he never told me about al-Qaeda. I'm asking for fair play, and I thought I was here to talk about my views on the war or my compliance with U.N. resolutions...

RATHER: Well, Mr. President, we want to talk about the record on this...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Well, let's...

RATHER: ...because it...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Well, let's talk about the full record. That's what I want to talk about, Dan.

RATHER: The framework here is that two-thirds of the American people in this poll...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Yeah.

RATHER: Two-thirds of the American public say they believe you're hiding something. Now if you are [hiding something], here's a....

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: I am not hiding something...

RATHER: Here's a chance to get it out.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: If you have any question, what is it?

RATHER: I do have one.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Please, please fire away.

RATHER: You have said that if you had known this was an arms-to-al-Qaeda operation...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Yes.

RATHER: ....that you would have opposed it. You also said that...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Exactly. Now, let me, let me ask...

RATHER: ....you also said that you did not know that you...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: May I answer that....directly?

RATHER: That wasn't a question, it was a statement.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Yes, it was a statement and I'll answer it.

RATHER: Let me ask the question, if I may, first.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Tariq Aziz created this program, has testified or stated publicly he did not think it was an arms-to-al-Qaeda operation, and it was only later that...

RATHER: That's the deputy Prime Minister, Mr. President..

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: ...and that's me, because I went along with it -- because you know why, Dan? Because I...

RATHER: That wasn't the question, Mr. President.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: ...worried when I saw...

RATHER: Mr. President, you set the rules for this talk here. I didn't mean to step on your line there, but you insisted on this format, and you know we have a limited amount of time.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Exactly, and that's why I want to get my share in here on something other than what you want to talk about.

RATHER: Tariq Aziz has spoken for himself. I'm asking you...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Please.

RATHER: ...to speak for yourself, which you have not been willing to do in the past, and if I may suggest that this is what leads people to say, "Either Saddam was irrelevant or he was ineffective. He said himself he was out of the loop." Now, let me give you an example....

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Uh, may I explain "out of the loop?"

RATHER: You said, "Ask a question."

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: May I explain "out of the loop?" No operational role. Go ahead.

RATHER: Now, you've said that if you'd known it was an arms-for-al-Qaeda operation you would have opposed it. You said the first you knew it was an arms-for-al-Qaeda operation was in December of 2002, correct?

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: When the whole thing was briefed to me by Helen Thomas...

RATHER: Exactly.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: ...and the proximity of arms-to-al-Qaeda was a lot closer than we had thought...

RATHER: Mr. President, but your henchmen went to Afghanistan in '98. And a member of your own staff, Chohan "Craig Fuller" Farouk, has verified, and so did the only other man there, Mr. whatcha-ma-call-it, who's al-Qaeda's top anti-infidel man...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Yes.

RATHER: ...those two men were in a meeting with you and Mr. Whatcha-ma-call-it not once, but three times, three times, underscored with you, that this was a straight-out arms-to-al-Qaeda operation.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: What they were doing...

RATHER: Now how do you....

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Read the memo, read the mem...

RATHER: I have, sir.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: What were they doing...

RATHER: How can you reconcile that you were there? Mr. what-cha-ma-call-it underscored on three separate occasions that it was an arms-to-al-Qaeda caper and told you you were dealing with the most radical elements of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. You were dealing straightaway with bin Laden.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: I was told what they were doing and what we were doing, and that's a big difference; and, Dan, I expressed my concerns and reservations about that. That has been testified to under oath. And it's been confirmed that I had reservations and spoke up about it...

RATHER: ...Mr. President, Mr. President....

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Yes.

RATHER: Tariq Aziz has said he wants all the facts out. He gave up such things as even his own diary. Every principle, including...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: He did not give up his diary.

RATHER: He gave up some of it.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: His diary, his brief. Well, Dan, let's be careful here because you're explaining a political profile.

RATHER: I want YOU to be careful, Mr. President....

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: I will be careful.

RATHER: ....because the problem here...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: But I want to get my side of this out.

RATHER: ...is that you repeatedly sat in the meetings. You sat in a meeting in which Tariq Aziz, in the most forceful way, raised his objections...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: I wasn't there, for the most forceful way. If it was the most forceful way -- I've heard Tariq be very, very forceful; and, if I were there and he was very, very forceful at that meeting, I would have remembered that. I don't remember that. And that is what I'm saying.

RATHER: Then how do you explain that you can't remember it and the other people at the meeting say he was apoplectic?

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Maybe I wasn't there at that point.

RATHER: You weren't in the meeting?

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: I'm not suggesting. I'm just saying I don't remember it.

RATHER: I don't want to be argumentative, Mr. President...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: You do, Dan.

RATHER: No...no, sir, I don't.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: This is not a great night, because I want to talk about the war, why those peace protesters out there are supporting me. And I don't think it's fair...

RATHER: And Mr. President, if these questions are --

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: ....to judge my whole career by a rehash of Iran-contra-al-Qaeda. How would you like it if I judged your career by those seven minutes when you walked off the set in New York?

[Note: Rather was actually in Miami and, besides, he walked off the set in New York for only six minutes and he can't recall anything beyond that.]

RATHER: Well, Mister...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: ...Would you like that?

RATHER: Mr. President...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: I have respect for you, but I don't have respect for what you're doing here tonight...

RATHER: Mr. President, I think you'll agree that your qualification for President and what kind of leadership you're bringing to Iraq, what kind of government you have, what kind of people you have around you....

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Exactly.

RATHER: ....is much more important [than] what you just referred to [about the peace demonstrators]. I'd be happy to....

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Well, I want to be judged on the whole record, and you're not giving an opportunity.

RATHER: And I'm trying to set the record straight, Mr. President.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: You invited me to come here and talk about -- I thought -- the whole record.

RATHER: I want you to talk about the record. You sat in a meeting with Tariq Aziz...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Yes, and I've given you an answer.

RATHER: And he got apoplectic when he found out that you were...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: He didn't get apoplectic. You have to ask...

RATHER: ....you and Tariq Aziz were being party to sending arms to bin Laden...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Ask...

RATHER (screaming): ...bin Laden of Afghanistan. Can you explain how -- you were supposed to be the -- you are -- you're the President. Afghanistan was officially a terrorist state.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: I've already explained that, Dan.

RATHER (screaming louder): You went around telling -- you -- you ...but you made us hypocrites in the face of the world! How could you... how could you sign on to such policy?! And the question is...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Well, had the same reason Tariq signed on to it.

RATHER (screaming even louder): ...what does that tell us about your record?!

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: The same reason Tariq signed on to it. I've made mistakes. And you want to dwell on them, and I want to talk about the war and the support I'm getting from peace demonstrators and you're...there's nothing new here. I thought this was a news program. What is new?

RATHER: Well, I had hoped, Mr. President, that you would tell us to whom you expressed your reservations...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Yes, I did.

RATHER: ...when you expressed them and what were the reservations?

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Tariq testfied under oath.

RATHER: What were the reservations?

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: His reservation about getting the control of an operation in the hands of a foreign power. Tariq stated that the other day, and I never heard a word of it on CBS, that, I, the President, in the presense of Aziz, spoke up about his concern about the whole cover of an operation being blown and secret -- and people that you're dealing with putting their lives in jeopardy.

RATHER: And you weren't concerned about sending arms to bin Laden?

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: And I felt that always on every covert -- every covert operation.

RATHER: You weren't...

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Tariq has explained that. The U.N. looked at that, and so there's nothing new on this.

RATHER: Mr. President, I appreciate you joining us tonight. I appreciate this straightforward way in which you engaged in this exchange. Clearly, some unanswered questions remain.

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: Fire another one.

RATHER: Are you willing to go to a news conference before the Iowa caucuses, answer questions from all ---

PRESIDENT HUSSEIN: I've been to 86 news conferences since March. Eighty-six of them since March.

RATHER: I gather that the answer is "No." Thank you for being with us, Mr Vice President....

Wait a minute...something doesn't sound quite right about the last exchanges...."Mr Vice President"? "Iowa caucuses"? "Eighty-six news conferences" by Saddam Hussein "since March"? Huh? How could I miss then?

I hate to do this, but I need to do another one of my infamous fact-checks...be right back....

Back....

Oh, no! Oh, no! I can't believe this...I just can't believe this! What a major-league boo-boo!

What you just read was a transcript of Rather's interview of then Vice President Bush during the '88 campaign! Apparently, mistakes were made transcribing the words!

What was I thinking?

I know, I know -- I promised the last time this happened to be more careful next time...

Sheesh! I'm so embarrassed by this, please forgive me, FReepers, I beg you...;^)

Anyway, that's....

My two cents...
"JohnHuang2" 

Incidentally, here's a transcript of the original '88 Rather-Bush interview.
Copyright Enrique N. ©2003


75 posted on 10/28/2003 8:35:03 AM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com
"You may not like him...but he's still our President"

Dan Rather when speaking about President Bush, while attempting to lead viewers to believe that the President was "in hiding" after the September 11th attacks.

Yep...just another example of his stellar fair and balanced reporting.
76 posted on 10/28/2003 8:42:45 AM PST by grumple (I'm too old to worry about whether or not I'm a pain in your ass...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonDog; *CCRM; *Presstitutes
Dan Rather is a real slimeball, imho. Thanks for that post.

You've probably seen this already, but I'll post it for those who may not have.

There is a website dedicated to Dan Rather and his history of Bias. It's called RatherBiased.com ...

CBS: Gunga Dan Rather's Home Site
http://www.RatherBiased.com/


*** YOUNG RATHER:
I'M A DEMOCRAT ***
http://www.ratherbiased.com/photos/rather-frown2.jpg


77 posted on 10/28/2003 8:47:48 AM PST by MeekOneGOP (Check out the Texas Chicken D 'RATS!: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/keyword/Redistricting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: w_over_w

Source of pic


Senator Teddy, wearing his controversial neck brace, leaves St. Vincent's
Church with his wife, Joan, after the funeral Mass for Mary Jo Kopechne.


78 posted on 10/28/2003 8:53:50 AM PST by MeekOneGOP (Check out the Texas Chicken D 'RATS!: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/keyword/Redistricting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com
What a yoke.
79 posted on 10/28/2003 8:56:11 AM PST by ampat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RatherBiased.com
Is Michael Moore presenting the award, or Ed Asner?
80 posted on 10/28/2003 8:56:13 AM PST by Richard Kimball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-87 next last

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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