I have to say, I hardly ever agree with Buchanan, but he states the cause for dismissal of Dan Rather from the news, "rather" well here.
It's amazing to me that he chose to go out like this. I mean, we know there is no evidence that Bush did get favorable treatment, but let's say for a second that he did. Would anybody, other than the hate Bush crowd, really be that bothered about it? I don't think it would have cost him the election, or even many votes for that matter. Rather destroyed whatever credibility he and his network had over something that were it true, would hardly be considered scandalous.
lets see if a year from now if this statement is wishful thinking
That's the irony of Buchanan...he has been (in the past) a brilliant journalist and commentator, but he's always been a horrible politician.