Posted on 09/26/2004 9:30:59 AM PDT by mrustow
Dan Rather wasnt snookered, his arrogance made him think he could get away with it.
Too bad FR can't retire Post Numbers like the Pros do with uniforms.
I love you.
Go Nick Stix!!!
Pretty good summary I have to say.
Buckhead...you are the GREATEST
RATHER, i believe that cBS & HANOI-John's campaign staff CONSPIRED to try & destroy a sitting POTUS with INTENTIONAL LIES & DISTORTIONS.
for that reason, not only dan blather, but every other person involved, clear up to and including the CEO/COO of cBS MUST BE FIRED in a VERY public way, for ANY of the major networks to "regain their lost credability".
free dixie,sw
Not a satisfactory article. 1) Let's stop maligning Gunga Din; 2)what, pray, is the "Republican" media as differentiated from "Conservative" media? Hegel & McCain & Lugar? 3)we need a bit of expansion on Bush's reaction to documents he'd have absolutely NO way of disproving (they were personal, never part of HIS file, and they were opinions--even if they WEREN'T forgeries); 4)absolutely no hint of CBS "expert-shopping"; 5) it isn't as though CBS were ignorant of Burkett's attempts to smear Bush with "documents;" 6) no, the font used in the forgeries was NOT available in 1973 (never mind 72) even on the horrendously expensive IBM Selectric Composer which used Times Roman, not Times NEW Roman; and in ANY case would not have been available to TANG; 7) no mention of the use of an "unimpeachable source," one of the most damning of Rather's defenses. There are probably more . . .
Look what I found at msnbc.com
Which campaign is using the Internet better? (Joe Trippi)
Hardball “The Horserace” is tonight, and I am going to be talking with Chris about who is using the Net and the Blogosphere better— Kerry or Bush?
What’s pretty clear to me is that activists and the grassroots of both parties understand the power they have gained through the Internet far better then either campaign has come to understand that power. But on the whole I give the grassroots/netroots advantage to Democrats and the Kerry campaign. There simply is much more energy and creativity going on at the grassroots level on the Net and Blogs on the side of Democrats.
Moveon.org (a grassroots site that supports Kerry) and Freerepublic.com (a site that is geared towards support of Bush) are two examples of Internet grassroots flexing power in this election cycle. Moveon.org has raised millions of dollars, ran ads, and has gotten its netroots base to hold coffees and organizational activities off-line and into communities across the country. Posters on Freerepublic.com’s bulletin board made their mark when they successfully launched a challenge to CBS New’s 60 Minutes report questioning President Bush’s National Guard duty.
The point here is that there is activity at the grassroots level on both sides— but activity spurred by Moveon.org and blogs that lean towards Kerry and the Democrats have waged a much more multi-dimensional campaign than the Freerepublic.com and other like minded sites and blogs on the Right.
The campaigns themselves have clearly learned that the Internet can be used to raise money but frankly both campaigns have failed to fully grasp the power of the Netroots beyond money. When it comes to the two campaign’s blogs Kerry wins hands down. The Bush camp seems to distain true input from its netroots supporters.
But when it comes to understanding the power of the 'Net and how it is changing everything (including influencing stories that make it into the mainstream press) I have to give the edge to the Bush campaign. They seem to be monitoring everything online and understand that there is a "canary in the coalmine" quality to the 'Net— a kind of early warning system that that lets you smell trouble brewing and ready your response to it before that trouble boils over into the mainstream press.
Had the Kerry campaign been paying attention they would have noticed that the Swift Boat attacks were being waged on the Net long before they made it on to the pages of our newspapers or out of the mouths of network anchors. They could have heeded those warning signs and responded a lot quicker then they did. Had CBS truly understood the changing power of individuals to use their expertise or knowledge of the Net to challenge a mainstream media story— they too would have pulled back and faced the fact that they had gotten it wrong – long before they did.
Back in October of 2003, I had this eerie feeling that from a strategic standpoint the Dean campaign was analogous to the Japanese at Pearl Harbor– we had awakened the sleeping giant Republicans to a new medium that they could use to press their agenda. While Democrats were doing everything they could to kill the netroots-driven Dean campaign, and were in denial that the Internet was changing everything.
Thankfully the netroots didn’t listen to any of it. Today it’s the grassroots on the Net that has kept the Kerry campaign competitive in terms of resources and activity.
I hope you’ll tune in to 'The Horserace' tonight at 7 p.m. ET to watch the discussion and catch up on the latest developments in the race for the Presidency. And let me know what you think!
Thanks
Joe
E-mail: JTrippi@MSNBC.com
• September 24, 2004 | 3:16 p.m
Why not? Free Republic could reconfigure a jump from 46 to 48, couldn't it? Can't imagine that anyone would object.
Buckhead was the first Freeper to give indesputable technical evidence that the documents were forgeries in Post 47.
However, looking over the thread, it was Texasforever that first noticed that the memos did not look quite right and stated "I don't believe these are legit documents" :
***************************
To: Howlin
Did you notice that NO ONE was CC'd on those memos?
27 posted on 09/08/2004 8:29:02 PM PDT by Texasforever
***************************
To: Texasforever
And what does that mean?
32 posted on 09/08/2004 8:37:12 PM PDT by Howlin
***************************
To: Howlin
It means he , if he actually wrote them, didn't see fit to send the memos to anyone else. So why write them in the first place?
38 posted on 09/08/2004 8:41:36 PM PDT by Texasforever
***************************
To: Texasforever
I think they were his private papers?
44 posted on 09/08/2004 8:53:07 PM PDT by Howlin
***************************
To: Howlin
"I think they were his private papers?"
So why write them? If he was REALLY trying to CYA then he would have sent his concerns up the chain otherwise he would be in deep Sh%T if he had to explain later why he didn't let someone else know about a supposed violation of a direct order. Nope I don't believe these are legit documents since CBS will not say who they got them from so the originals can be examined.
For the record, here is the compilation post I did regarding exactly how this happened:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1220090/posts?page=2#2
As you can all see, many, many Freepers were involved from the second Dan Rather held up those papers.
Hiya, Howlin.
Everything going OK for ya so far now that you're famous?
**drooling with envy**
What the media does not realize is that FR has been breaking stories for years, usually just getting our lines borrowed for their stories and never giving FR credit. When I was doing the reporting on Jarbidge, Klamath Falls many of my words were put in their stories word for word. And I say...Whatever it takes!
Eagles up!
I don't doubt it. Many a time, I have seen something discussed in a FReeper post that became the heart of a "professional journalist's" article a week or so later. Many scribes lurk here.
I think he was "snookered," but only because he wanted to be, like with a seduction.
Too bad FR can't retire Post Numbers like the Pros do with uniforms.
That's a nice thought.
save
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.