Posted on 01/11/2005 6:38:34 AM PST by conservativecorner
$10 says she lands at PBS.
The "contents", not the documents themselves.
And I give a FF what Rather believes -- just the facts, Dan.
Right. Just as a jury who finds someone innocent of murder has a responsibility to help us find out the truth of who, then, actually did it.
c-BS is just playing the CYA game.
And the beat goes on. We are supposed to believe all this self serving drivel that there was nothing political about the story. Remember, the story took place on the eve of the end of the ability to buy time as had been done in the past because of the new campaign laws. Remember, there would have been no way to stop the effect that the story tried to do if it had gone through unchallenged by bloggers, and talk radio. Now CBS tries to convince us that there was nothing amiss? They try to portray that 60 day period as if it was some regular timeperiod that was not the end of "regular" campaign spending time, as it was. Some of us have long enough memories to remember the Rather of the past. The Rather of Vietnam reporting who attempted to make our soldiers look to be losers and the war an illegal war.
Now, at the end of his career he goes out with the same infamy he conducted his beginning. He tried and so did Mapes to sink Bush, and they all got burned. YAHOOOOOO!!!
Not that it matters, who listens to them anyway. They did not get riled up because we would stop listening to them, they got riled up because other news folks spoke out against them.
Then go on the air with the FACTS you have, Ted Baxter- I mean Dan Rather
Who paid for the panel? They did the job for which they were hired.
If this is the extent of his involvement in his bylined special reports, why has he been drawing a full-time paycheck? What was he doing with all his spare time in August and September?
Mary Mapes would be perfect for UNICEF.
Where are the originals?
Numerous character witnesses for Bush were dismissed, because "they were Republicans."
But CBS then tried to tell us that one mentally disturbed Democrat with an an axe to grind is an "unimpeachable witness."
Bias? What bias? Thorneburgh is a dope....and a dupe.
Somewhere on Bill Burkett's hard drive in a Word document.
CBS didn't just rely on one mentally disturbed Democrat. They also had input from Lockhardt and the Kerry campaign.
Cbs also dismissed the denials of the family of the supposed writer of the memos.
You mean the Bill Burkett who refused to cooperate with the panel's investigation? That Bill Burkett?
"No sooner was Mapes' exit announced than the independent TV production community was abuzz with rumors that the PBS-funded documentary show "Frontline," which recently completed an anti-Bush screed on his religious faith and the formation of faith-based initiatives within federal agencies, was looking to bring Mapes on for special projects."
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=7608
Sadly, this wasn't hard to predict. My guess was that Mapes will get the Bill Moyers show 'Now' and a radio gig at Air America. Mary has proven credentials for the progressive media and no scruples. Exactly what they want.
From polipundit.com:
More Thoughts On Rathergate
My first thought on the Rathergate report, after listening to those on cable television repeat that the report found no political motivation on the part of CBS, and did not declare the memos forgeries, is that anyone who has any doubt that the documents were forged fakes that were accepted as authentic in an attempt to influence the election in Kerry’s favor, are either blinded by bias or as dumb as a brick.
There is another thing I keep hearing, however, that is driving me a bit mad. I have heard at least a dozen times on cable television that the question to ask to determine whether CBS was motivated by politics is “if there was a similar story about John Kerry, would they have reported it?” Hello, is anyone paying attention? There is no reason to ask such a “what if” question because it was answered last summer. There WAS a similar story. It was brought forward by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, and not only did CBS fail to run with that story, but most in the media ignored it completely, in spite of the fact that the book written by the Swifties was a huge bestseller. When stories were done on the Swifties, the focus of the stories most frequently was about how horrible it was that John Kerry’s patriotism and his purple heart winning military experience was being questioned by Bush campaign collaborators.
Monday night, Keith Olbermann compared the Swift Boat Vet ads to the CBS TANG story by saying the statements in those Swiftie ads were demonstrably false, yet Fox News ran with them. In other words, Fox News is as bad as CBS. (He proably got that bright idea from someone at the Democratic Underground). I would love to know what in the Swifties’ ads was false, and I am sure that John Kerry would have loved to have known last summer, too, because he had no idea how to answer the allegations. For those not paying close attention, or those who may have forgotten, let’s just do a quick rundown comparing and contrasting the two stories. The following is off the top of my head so it is short on specifics, but those can be found in the Polipundit archives from around June through November of last year for anyone interested.
1. Newsworthiness. The subject of the CBS story was alleged misbehavior of President Bush of over 30 years ago while in the Texas Air National Guard, which the Bush campaign did not mention, much less rely on, as a qualification for re-election. The subject of the Swiftie’s ads and book was the behavior of John Kerry both during his service in Vietnam and after returning as a war protestor. Senator Kerry made his Vietnam service the centerpiece of the Democratic convention and both he and John Edwards cited that experience as his main qualification to be commander in chief. The Bush TANG story had been explored in some depth several times over the past dozen years, while the allegations relating to John Kerry’s service in Vietnam were largely unreported and had never been investigated by the press.
2. Strength of Sources. The CBS story relied on memos, that were shown to be fakes within 24 hours of appearing on the CBS website, which were given to them by a partisan Democrat who had tried to pitch anti-Bush stories for years. The Swifties’ claims were based on testimony of over 60 veterans (Republicans, Democrats and Independents, many highly decorated, including several former POWs) which was documented in a heavily footnoted book and was signed on to by over 250 veterans.
3. Media Response to Allegations. The response of many in the media to the Rathergate story was to believe the allegations were true even when it became evident that the supporting documents were not only forged, but fake. The response of the majority of the media to the Swifties’ story was first to ignore it, then to attack the Swifties personally as lying partisans and to attempt to disprove the various claims in their ads and book.
4. Coordination With Campaigns. The CBS producers had contact with some in the Kerry campaign when working on the story and put the main source of the story in contact with those in the Kerry campaign, yet maintained their story was devoid of politics. The Swift Boat Vets were never shown to have any coordination with the Bush campaign and vowed to keep speaking out even over objections by the Bush campaign, yet they were frequently described by those in the media as working on behalf of the Bush campaign.
5. The Messengers. Bill Burkett was an outspoken Democrat partisan, but was considered a reliable source. John O’Neill was a registered Democrat who had voted for Perot twice and most recently voted for Al Gore, but was continually described as a Bush partisan working in cahoots with the White House.
6. Pattern of Reporting During Election Year. 60 Minutes ran the Bush TANG memos story after a year of running stories featuring opponents of President Bush attacking the administration and assisting them in selling their anti-Bush books. The Swift Boat Veterans were largely ignored by the mainstream media, including CBS and 60 Minutes in spite of a best selling book.
7. Facing the Facts. Even after the release of the report citing extensive evidence, CBS will not state that the memos they relied on are fake or forged. Even after many of the allegations made in the Swifties’ book have been either proved or admitted to (Christmas in Cambodia, etc.), many reporters in the media (and many liberal commentators including Chris Matthews, who didn’t read the book, and Keith Olbermann, who reads DU) refer to the Swifties’ allegations as scurrilous and untrue accusations.
I could go on like this for quite a while, but I am sure Polipundit readers will pick up on some comparisons and contrasts that I have not listed yet.
-- Lorie Byrd
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.