Posted on 07/13/2006 8:00:54 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
Declaring he “absolutely” believes “the truth” of his discredited story based on forged memos, about President Bush's National Guard record, on Wednesday's Larry King Live on CNN Dan Rather contended that “we had a lot, a lot of corroboration, of what we broadcast about President Bush's military record. It wasn't just the documents.” Rather then attacked those who dared to expose his misdeeds: “It's a very old technique used, that when those who don't like what you're reporting believe it can be hurtful, then they look for the weakest spot and attack it, which is fair enough. It's a diversionary technique."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
<< Man, I want some of the drugs 'delusional Dan' is on. They must be amazing./sarc >>
Ain't necessarily so.
The real story about the drive-by media's brightest is that every single one of the poor bastards is a thick as two planks.
They're just dumber than dirt and, 'cept maybe anti-psychotics, -- for their epidemic Bush Derangement Syndrome -- don't need drugs.
Mrs Rather's little darling, Dan: delusional dirt-digging's most deliriously-dangerous dullard.
"It's a very old technique used, that when those who don't like what you're reporting believe it can be hurtful, then they look for the weakest spot and attack it, which is fair enough. It's a diversionary technique."
Actually, that's not a diversionary technique at all. A diversionary technique would be to feint an attack from one side and actually attack from another. What Danmation is describing, looking for the weakest spot and attacking there, is simply good tactics. Unfortunately for him, the weakest spot also happened to be the central theme of his 'fake but accurate news story.'
Leave it to the self-styled word-lover Gunga Dan to show his ignorance and idiocy even in defending it.
Meadows...I mean, Courage...I mean, the frequency is Rock 104, don't hit me again, I'm a reporter!
The arrogance astounds me.
Dan Rather and his team was looking for evidence to back up a story they believed, but could not be proven true. Suddenly, years later, some "documents" appear out of the blue - in the barnyard of a Democrat party partisan, no less.
He quickly went to air, not even thinking that the documents could be forgeries. He got snookered because he wanted to believe they were real, and glossed over scrutiny.
Then he says it is fair to attack the weakest part of his argument - a part without which he had no story! - but claims such attacks are a diversionary tactic from the story, which was just a rumor before these fake documents appeared and remains just a rumor without them.
It is rather clear that his claim is the diversionary tactic. He says "forget about the forgered evidence I put on the air, look at the rumors".
He seems almost narcissitic and certainly obsessive about the whole thing. Poor guy can't even see how defensive he is acting. His mea culpa was obviously insincere.
You really think so? . . . I think he just wants to save face.
Imagine a paraplegic with great athletic ability.
A good reporter never reveals that his sources are a badly forged memo and a nut with a grudge.
Oh, that's rich! Berlin. 1945.
Al Gore still must be kicking himself for creating it.
That is one sad looking clown.
It's no surprise that the washed-up has-been Dan Rather doesn't have the class that Nixon had when he resigned in disgrace. Nixon disappeared and generally kept a fairly low profile, mostly writing books. He certainly didn't keep popping up out of the woodwork proclaiming his innocence. Dan Rather, on the other hand, keeps intruding on decent America like a recurring cancer.
bttt
More Rather stuff here...
http://nbcumv.com/release_detail.nbc/news-20060713000000-ratheron039chri.html
Thanks- looking now...
Go away Dan your over. Amen.
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.