Rather's career put in harsh light

Baltimore Sun ^ | March 5, 2005 | David Zurawik, Sun Television Critic

[Straight Vermonter]

Now see what you've done!

[Diogenesis]

[hershey]

Rather deserves each and every word of condemnation he gets and continues to make a fool of himself in public. The latest being his absurd performance on Letterman.

[hershey]

Thanks for reminding us of Rather's suckup performance with Saddam. He deserves far worse than he's getting.

[G.Mason]

CBS News White House correspondent John Roberts:"And I think as people get further and further away from this, the really important stuff that happened in Dan's career will come into greater focus. ... Here is a man who's had one of the most important careers in the history of television news."

The idiotic excuses made in this article, by the dying and deceased, for a dead man, leave me gasping for air.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

1. Rather's MSM media colleagues are furious with him because they see the MSM in a terrible crisis, losing market and prestige, and blame Rather for accelerating the decline. The problem goes way beyond Rather, but he is a convenient target for their anxiety and rage.

2. The most despicable remarks were those of John Roberts, unctuously praising Rather. Rememember, Roberts is hoping that the bosses at CBS will choose him as Rather's replacement. So, in his best Uriah Heep imitation, Roberts sucks up to the CBS powers-that-be, praising their discredited anchor as others condemn him.

[jec41]

He was a small petty man, lacking in thinking skills, with the demeanor and traits of a dictator. His trade was lies ,deception, indoctrination, and propaganda. Now he no more than a broken tool of the left

[Caipirabob]

A man like "ratherbiased" makes loads of enemies on both sides of the political aile. Now that's he's disgraced himself publicly and is "a power, no more" he's going to find out just how many there are.

And he won't be the one writing the history on this episode. Suffice to say that history will not be kind to rather.

[SkyPilot]

Nice post Dio.

[billorites]

[bill1952]

Yes, that is a great question.

How does one "taint" a forgery, anyway?

[Cincinatus' Wife]

He outed them and that is his intolerable sin.

[Straight Vermonter]

In reality, their credibility was lost long, long ago. They just refused to see it.

True I think for those that really pay attention to such things. Now when I hear someone like my sister-in-law, who rarely watches the news, describe the alphabet channels as "crooks" I know they are done.

[ken5050]

THht show will be a black hole in the ratings..

[N. Beaujon]

The article is scathing.

Scathing? This was a puff piece! The guy single-handedly drove the final stake into the heart of the MSM and brought down all of CBS news and the worst thing they can say about him is that he was a little arrogant and biased??

For decades this jerk terrorized conservatives, Republicans and drove public opinion. The only reason he LOST his throne is because people got smart and other news outlets gave them options (Fox, the Internet, etc, etc.)

THIS GUY TRIED TO BRING DOWN A PRESIDENT WITH A FORGED, BOGUS STORY, AND HE FACES NOTHING BUT A TEARY EYED WALK DOWN MEMORY LANE, He still wont even admit those docs were forged!! All that was said was that he got a bum rap, history will redeem him and the worst that could be said was that his newscast was boring (Cronkite.)

What a disgrace. These people should have been jailed for trying to rig a national election, for slandering our commander in chief, for outright malicous fraud.

This article wasn't scathing, it was a teary obit. You can be sure Columbia Journalism School and academicians are busy rewriting history as we speak, excising the whole ugly business as just a footnote, and explaining how the document was a "plant" by Andrew Card.

[OldFriend]

Rather's cohorts know they are tarred by the same brush of bias and would prefer not to be closely aligned with the man.

[carlr]

"I think it's tragic that a guy who worked as hard as he did would have his career capped like this, because the Bush report is going to be what he's remembered for," Fenton said. "He'll carry this with him to his obituary. ... Tragic - that's the only word for it."

Spare me the pathetic whining.They did`nt have one ounce of concern when it came to President Bush.They were trying to destroy a man personally,they were trying,to in a sense,overthrow the US government through false accusations and yet they plead for sympathy when they got caught.

Rather was like a man blinded by love who walks into a crowded restaurant and proposes to a woman that views him as something she would scrape off the bottom of her shoe.In Rathers case it was hatred,not love, for the President and the Bush family as well as all Republicans in general.
Either way the result is the same,a fool.He deserves whatever scorn and ridicule he receives.

[N. Beaujon]

I thought it was a powder puff softball. The article referred to "the flawed story on Bush". Flawed my tush. A blemish on a cabinet is a "flaw". Inability to use proper grammar is a "flaw". OTOH, the felonious, arrogant, careless, forging of government documents, followed by a week of refusing to admit the falsehood is not a "flaw". This is what we call a "sever criminal sociopathic character disorder".

Thank you. I couldnt agree more. "Scathing"? What Rather, Mapes and Burkett did was scathing. This article was revisionist crud. ("People are just afraid for their jobs". Pul-eeze.)

[Cincinatus' Wife]

As seen through the prism of a LIBERAL publication, quoting far left personalities, yes I do say it is scathing. It's rats distancing (sinking their teeth into the wounded) themselves from the sinking ship of "professional journalism" ie lockstep, socialist propaganda.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Post 39 was to N. Beaujon