Donate to Swift Boat Vets for the Truth HERE.
Sign Petition against CBS & Dan Rather HERE.
My Campaign Button Page
and My Toons Page [Updated 9-15 / 10:45PM CST] 
Posted on 09/16/2004 3:18:55 AM PDT by gunnygail
This may come as a shock to some of you, but I grew up idolizing Dan Rather.
In 1973, he stood up to Richard Nixon and asked tough questions in a press conference when the Watergate scandal was unfolding. Nixon tried to deflect the query by saying: "Are you running for something?"
Rather's brilliant retort: "No, Mr. President, are you?"
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Either way this is what he'll be remembered for. He'll be viewed as a guy who ended up a partisan hack trying to unseat a US president, all the while clinging Norma Desmond like to his claims that he's in the political center and objective.
At this point though I think his biggest concern should really be about managing to avoid criminal charges.
I know you are but what am I?
"The producer is probably going to be asked to take the fall"
At this pont, anyone at CBS who hasn't resigned in disgust should be fired.
I'd love to see the lot of the bums up on charges. Seeing Blather behind bars would make my century!
Donate to Swift Boat Vets for the Truth HERE.
Sign Petition against CBS & Dan Rather HERE.
My Campaign Button Page
and My Toons Page [Updated 9-15 / 10:45PM CST]
Isn't Rather the "Managing Editor" of his "news" broadcast?
That would suggest that he's reponsible for its content.
Dan Rather is over. He spouts things that are simply fed to him and that sound right to him, without knowing what the hell he is talking about. Like when he likened Bill Clinton's autobiography to the greats of history, like the memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant.
Forgot about that. Definate signs of creeping senility.
I think you're throwing the dirt in the grave a little prematurely if you think Rather's gone. At least, he's not going without a fight.
Says it all.
Nuance is in:
Not in this lifetime.
Frankly, I just don't like Dan. I was forced to watch him as I trained to go to Vietnam, I didn't regard him as a friend of the soldier or the war, and that was 1968. Our relationship has not improved, but at least I am not forced to watch his brand of "news" anymore, and as of the eighties and satellite tv, the divorce was final. His bias is I suppose, his business, but he should never have been in a position to spread that bias via a mainstream media outlet.
Grant wrote brilliant prose, and started his great book with "My family is American, and has been for generations, in all its branches direct and collateral."
I have never understood what was so witty about this exchange. It is a media myth that somehow this was a cutting and insightful exchange. actually it was a lame and insiped comeback from a mediocre reporter.
I worked in a news organization for 5+ years, and I can't imagine any of the reporters or writers I worked with trying to make this case. They would have been laughed at by their peers and fired by managing editors.
In the real news world (or should I say the reputable news world), managing editors would say "Look, you've been working this story and we know you believe it, but the docs are no good. You can't base our reporting on them."
Case closed.
That's the reason news organizations are piling up on Rather. Not mere blood in the water syndrome, but also because he's flouting basic newsroom standards. Believe it or not, most reporters and editors try to follow the guidelines they've been taught.
So when you hear the "reporters" out there arguing that the "AWOL story" is far more important than the docs upon which it is based, know that you're listening to someone who is completely unethical.
Rather reported that serious questions were raised about the memos. He did not "concede" that they were "suspect."
Were the "originals" more invective? Or is trying to recall adverbatim a document from 32 years a bit of a stretch for any mind on this planet? Did Rove Inc replace the original with a censured less castigating memo?
CBS should've said. Go f*ck yourselves!
F*ck You GOP. You did Clinton, We'll do George. Even if this precious idiot wins, We'll get him Impeached. So don't worry - one way or an other, he is TOAST. Deal with it.
The documents may have been pulled out of a chimp's butt, but that don't change the truth: he was an awol ahole.
A thought. What if the memos WERE forged...by the GOP? It would make a perfect "poison plum" for Rove to insert into the discourse, causing all future talk of Bush's miserable service to be discounted as "unverifiable" and "oh, you know that's fake, right?" This would fit in with Rove's modus operandi quite well.
Does it really matter if the memo is 'real' or 'fake'?
Bravo Dan Rather DAN Thanks for having guts DAN You're A True American DAN You're A Great Patriot DAN I Could Kiss You DAN GREAT WORK
Ok how can they be fake and accuarte all at the same time? Alice please do join me in going through the looking glass And if they are fake... can we all say KARL ROVE?
You know what I mean by "Rather-gate." It's the story of how an aging network news anchor ended his multi-generational career with a bang – by claiming to have in his hands smoking-gun documents that prove President George Bush didn't fulfill his National Guard duty more than 30 years ago.This was no doubt going to be the capstone of Rather's tenure heading CBS News. Instead, it turned out to be one more giant black eye for him and his network. It may prove to be Rather's undoing.
... Rather's a fraud. He's always been a fraud. He has no integrity. He's a partisan shill. And I'll prove it to you.
I expect to receive a royalty for that.
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.