Posted on 09/15/2004 9:25:23 AM PDT by hawaiian
Dan Rather To Bush: ‘Answer The Questions’
"With respect: answer the questions," said Dan Rather, the CBS News anchor. He was asking a direct question to President George W. Bush, his re-election campaign and his political allies in the press and on the Web. "We’ve heard what you have to say about the documents and what you’ve said and what your surrogates have said, but for the moment, answer the questions.
"I say that with respect," he added. "They’d be a lot stronger in their campaign if they did do that."
On Tuesday, Sept. 14, Mr. Rather remained steadfast despite a brutal onslaught of criticism from Bush defenders—including Laura Bush—critics and competing news organizations over the authenticity of memos reportedly typed by Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, Mr. Bush’s squadron commander in the early 1970’s, which suggested that Killian felt pressure from his superior to "sugarcoat" negative evaluations of the future President’s performance.
Since 60 Minutes reported on those documents on Wednesday, Sept. 8, their veracity has been assaulted by Web critics, politicians and document experts who put the burden of proof on Mr. Rather, his producers and on CBS News, and say that the reputation of the news organization is at stake. Full Article
What part of "honorable discharge" do you not understand, Dan?
Bush: OK, I will answer the question. I have no idea where Rather gets his phoney documents. Next.
Answer the question..Dan...answer the question
Fine then, lets all start making fake documents and charges on people in journalism. It's not if its true or not, but the seriousness of the charges.
And the president replied with a slight smile on his face: "You first Dan!"
We could say the same to you, Dan. And there are a lot of questions.
"I say that with respect," he added. "They’d be a lot stronger in their campaign if they did do that."
B.S. on both counts. You have nothing but deep seated contempt for the Bushes. You know and we know it.
Bush's campaign wouldn't be stronger by answering for your fabricated memos. It is utterly disingenuous for you to play stupid and suggest that you think so. What's the old saying in politics... You don't need to make a man admit to charges, just get him to deny it and the story sticks.
Arrogant little snot, isn't he? The President doesn't answer to him.
You moron.
If the documents are forged, the questions raised are without merit.
I've heard cranio-rectal insertionitis can be terminal.
Please look into treatment options.
CD
Yea what about that CBS... the Conger up Bush Stuff network..
Are even lying Liberals eligible for Presidential pardons?
OK, I'll answer the questions. No, 42, and Kevin Bacon.
Permission to slap the idiot, SIR?
______________
You are correct that Kerry originally executed a 3/2
agreement which would have ended his active commissioned
service in DEC69 and begun a 2 year drilling obligation
ending DEC71, but notice that the agreement says it
remains in effect unless superceded by other orders.
Kerry's silver bullet propelling him out of VietNam, BUPERS
msg dtg 202117ZMAR69, ordering him to COMSTSLANT
Broolyn New York for duty as an admiral's aide, extended
his active duty to 31APR71 as a condition of the transfer.
Between the receipt of these ofders and their execution,
Kerry was able to negotiate this down to an extention on
active duty to 31AUG70, giving him 4 years active
commissioned service and relieving him of the drilling
obligation.
See his Officer Order Memoranda, page 4 of 4: http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/Office_Order_Memos.pdf
Once at COMSTSLANT, Kerry successfully requested an
early out from this extension effective 3JAN70 without
incurring any other obligation. Slick.
He was released from active duty effective 2400 3JAN70
and transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR),
a non-drilling, non-payed status.
Mr. Rather said that the focus on questions over the veracity of the memos was a smoke screen perpetrated by right-wing allies of the Bush administration.
"I think the public, even decent people who may be well-disposed toward President Bush, understand that powerful and extremely well-financed forces are concentrating on questions about the documents because they can’t deny the fundamental truth of the story," he said. "If you can’t deny the information, then attack and seek to destroy the credibility of the messenger, the bearer of the information. And in this case, it’s change the subject from the truth of the information to the truth of the documents.
Dan has gone bye-bye.
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.