56 Comments

1. Allah:

Meanwhile, Drudge is in the tank. What’s the nonsense he’s got at the top of his page about “the key questions” being answered?

Sep 10, 2004 - 6:19 pm 2. Sandy P:

OT:

I was going to post the 9/11 tribute I usually watch, but it’s been removed from the site.

So,

http://www.cfpeople.org/military/911_Tribute.swf

If anyone has the link to the 7 meg w/Anya’s song that plays 3x w/the pics of the people on the flights, could you please link?

Thank you.

Sep 10, 2004 - 6:26 pm 3. the_epistoler:

Here’s what we ought to be looking at in these memo’s and every other attack on Bush in the next two months

Sep 10, 2004 - 6:35 pm 4. sammy small:

The use of documentation as a reliable source is coming to an end in the age of Photoshop and word processors. I think that this plays right into the hands of Leftists who asses the truth from a viewpoint of their beliefs, not from the facts.

The use of obviously fraudulent documents to smear Bush is also an attempt to polute the political atmosphere with ” information chaff” to make the case that all documentation is unreliable. Hence the Swift Boat documents must be just as unreliable in a retrospective analysis.

I thought the national political scene reached all time lows with the Clinton-Lewinsky circus. This attempted coup-by-propaganda may overtake that in the end.

Sep 10, 2004 - 6:37 pm 5. Terrye:

sammy:

I think you are right, it is a round about way to discredit the swifties.

One thing I have noticed however, Bush is staying away from this. He just maintains the same position, he got an honorable discharge. End of story.

So far as I know the WH has never said whether they think the docs are forgeries or not.

Sep 10, 2004 - 7:04 pm 6. Plinypere:

Tonight on Bill O’Reilly Jona(th)on Klein pontificated that bloggers have no credibility because (th)ey have no checks and balances. (Th)at arrogant, elitist aside was clearly from someone who doesn’t value ANY input from (th)e customers…while Roger Simon gets immediate and helpful feedback from (th)e populace of the populous blogospher.

Sep 10, 2004 - 7:07 pm 7. P3Pilot:

Hey, did Micheal Moore get hired by 60 minutes II?? Document manipulation is right up his alley right? Hmmm, I think Mikey is behind this!!

Sep 10, 2004 - 7:16 pm 8. BigFire:

Re: Terrye

It’s call taking the moral high ground. Bush’s position on both his own service and John Kerry’s service have been the same since day one. He did his own duty in TANG, and got an honorable discharge. John Kerry served in the Navy in Vietnam and served with honor. He has yet to deviate from this position regardless of what Michael Moore, MoveOn or DNC had said.

There is no reason for him to defend himself against an obivious fraud. It pretty much speak for itself. Besides, the blood is in the water, and Dan Rather and CBS’s competitors will skewer this story quite nicely without White House’s input.

Sep 10, 2004 - 7:20 pm 9. Terrye:

Big Fire:

I see your point.

Edwards can demand that the president answer questions all he wants, he can’t force him to do it. And when you demand that someone do something and lack the power to make them respond, you look kinda weak.

McAuliffe came out and called Bush a liar. A flat our liar. I am not sure that is a good tactic.

Sep 10, 2004 - 7:41 pm 10. Fausta:

I don’t know if anyone posted this link before, but here it is: Baghdad Dan.

Sep 10, 2004 - 7:47 pm 11. Pilgrim:

Sandy P

Here is the link you are looking for.

http://attacked911.tripod.com/

Sep 10, 2004 - 8:20 pm 12. John©:

Hugh Hewitt experts just put the nail in the Rather coffin on his show/blog. Irrefutable. End of story. Now how it will be spun may be the real story.

Sep 10, 2004 - 8:32 pm 13. labar:

I’m not surprised that Blitzer is misreading what’s going on. The MSM did a great job of misreading what would happen in the war in Afghanistan. I, believe Newsweek was saying in the middle of Nov ‘01 that we had underestimated the Talibans will to fight and we’d be stuck in a guerilla type war for years with no end in site. The Taliban feel within’ 5 days. The MSM made all these outrageous predidctons about Iraq that didn’t happen, and they’re still misreporting the truth about Iraq and what’s happening to the people of Iraq to this day. It’s not all a misunderstanding. The MSM has been undermining the war from the outset because they don’t like the President. I guarantee you if Clinton would’ve had the balls to go into Iraq the MSM would be cheerleading just as they did in Bosnia and Kosovo. Amanpour bragged about the media doing a good job of selling the Kosovo war to the public, but the were disapointed Clinton didn’t have the courage to send in gound troops. They only support liberation and humanrights of people in the world when a democrat is president.

The Swiftvets didn’t produce any documents to prove their case. They’re using Kerrys books, diary, and interviews as proof. If Kerry would release the 100 pages that the Navy still has in his file, everything would be explained, but Kerry would be exposed factually with what we already know is true anyway. He is a fraud.

Sep 10, 2004 - 8:40 pm 14. RogerA:

Sammie: you are on to something–given the gullibility of the MSM (which approaches Freeper/DU country) a skilled photoshop or graphic designer could have the luddites of the MSM eating out of their hands. Astute post.

Now: what do we do about it?

Sep 10, 2004 - 8:42 pm 15. holdfast:

labar – you’re only half right. For the MSM to back a “war” there are (minimum) 2 requirements:

1) A Democrat in the White House; and

2) There must be no vital or even important American interests involved (ie the war must be entirely altruistic on America’s part).

It also helps if there are presecuted Muslims.

All that said, I think that American intervention in Bosnia was the right thing to do (Kosovo far less so). The Bosnian intervention was a humanitarian “war” of choice, but one that did more good than it caused harm. At that time, America could afford to help solve other people’s messes and did so. These days America is engaged in far more important work, with no time, money or forces to spare on such optional actions (and no, Ralph, Iraq was not optional – it was simply a choice of pay me now or PAY me later).

Sep 10, 2004 - 8:57 pm 16. Barry Dauphin:

It’s possible that Wolf & Co aren’t exactly misreading the situation. Sad to say, but he & others may think that no one actively listens to what they say but merely have the TV on while they are doing a bunch of things. The Wolfies of the world talk in a way which suggests that they regard the viewing public as tuning in and out of attention during the program. Thus, they can phrase their comments according to their predilections, utter them in a pontifical style and “educate us”, sort of like an electronic form of hypnotic induction. Of course lots of people do emulate zombies while the TV is on, but not everyone.

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:03 pm 17. WichitaBoy:

RogerA

My heart is with you and I will take your advice.

There is a brand new statistical technique for analyzing imagery which can determine whether an image has been photoshopped or not. This will be improved with time. Eventually, it will even be available to CBS. Still, there’s no excuse for not using your noggin when somebody shows you a picture: great skepticism is called for in all cases.

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:06 pm 18. Jonathan:

The Blogasphere needs to get a little more savvy dealing with MSM. Not an expert or have answers but it is an obvious need.

PR Newswire declares: “Key Challenges to National Guard Documents Answered” and includes a transcript of the news item.

The Agendaized MSM (AMSM) handled this just like they did the Swifties. Which is, you (the blogasphere) put x points of discussion on the table:

Point A

Point B

Point C

And the AMSM countners:

“Point C does not stand up. Case closed, you’ve lost, go home bloggers.”

That’s one example I mean of having to think of ways to be more savvy.

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:07 pm 19. Pearl:

All of this has made me appreciate what David must have felt like facing Goliath.

We, the great unwashed masses, are waking up from our torpor, shaking off the chains of media bondage and are fighting back against the media elitists who have been telling us how we should think for too long.

Let the revolution begin.

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:12 pm 20. Barry Dauphin:

Oh, this is going to hurt: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/NotedNow/Noted_Now.html

ABC News

“HODGES SAID HE WAS MISLED BY CBS: Retired Maj. General Hodges, Killian’s supervisor at the Grd, tells ABC News that he feels CBS misled him about the documents they uncovered. According to Hodges, CBS told him the documents were “handwritten” and after CBS read him excerpts he said, “well if he wrote them that’s what he felt.”

Hodges also said he did not see the documents in the 70’s and he cannot authenticate the documents or the contents. His personal belief is that the documents have been “computer generated” and are a “fraud”. ”

(hat tip to the invaluable Intsapundit:http://instapundit.com/archives/017736.php

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:12 pm 21. Jonathan:

In the meantime, I have a question.

CBS claims the memo came “from the personal records of” or some such.

Why would a Memo, written by someone AND then placed into “their personal records” appear to be faxed/xeroxed multiple times?

Did he fax it to himself at home, run home and fax it to the base and then fax it back home, etc.?

What purpose would that serve? or making xerox copies of copies for his own “personal records” where these, as claimed by CBS, came from?

Also, if CBS had any brains, they’d monitor these blogs and have rallied a better and fuller defense today. Just goes to show…

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:13 pm 22. Barry Dauphin:

” Klein says that “Bloggers have no checks and balances . . . [it's] a guy sitting in his living room in his pajamas.”

So, Roger, does a Fedora really go with pajamas?

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:20 pm 23. David [.net]:

For these forgeries, it would have made more sense to just go to the pawn shop or Ebay and buy a damn typewriter. If they had done that we would not be having this converation. Next time they’ll get away with it, like they no doubt have in the past. All we have to go on then is Rather’s comfort in the truth of their story.

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:20 pm 24. Beldar:

Brutal, deft, succinct, and spot-on, Roger. Bravo!

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:23 pm 25. George Purcell:

Hodges statement to ABC kills CBS and Rather dead. They had one shot to answer this and they flubbed it.

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:24 pm 26. richardM:

Why haven’t we compared these documents with others that Killian must have create? Are we to believe that the only memos he created were about GWB?

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:25 pm 27. sammy small:

Jonathan

Good point. I was in the Air Force in 1972. All of our admin folks used carbon paper when copies were needed. I still have many carbon copies of orders and other docs generated back then. Xerox machines weren’t commonly used in normal government offices until several years later.

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:27 pm 28. ambisinistral:

Photoshopped? You mean to say pictures can be faked!?

Oh darn. I was looking forward to getting this toy for the young’ns on my Christmas list.

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:32 pm 29. Rick Ballard:

Barry,

With Hodges gone Rather only has the personnel specialist left. The mother and son both claim to have been interviewed by Mapes (a Rather assistant) prior to the show and they both claim that they told her then what they’re telling everyone now. Mapes was also the one who interviewed Hodges and led him to believe that the docs were handwritten. CBS acknowledges that the docs they have are copies not originals. Now they are saying that the docs can’t really be authenticated because they are copies.

So Rather has perpetuated a fraud supported by forged documents and abetted by misconduct on the part of his assistant Mapes. How does CBS retain any credibility after tonight? Will burning the source save Rather’s job? This is as serious as Watergate ever was.

Can you think of anything comparable that has occurred in electoral politics?

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:34 pm 30. Sandy P:

Thank you, Pilgrim.

I had found it using a different search engine, but it’s not exactly the same.

I didn’t have to hear the talking heads — including Rather’s — commentary.

Mine was just music.

That site keeps moving around on me.

I watched part of it again, no tears. Just determination.

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:38 pm 31. Barry Dauphin:

Rick,

I guess it would be too much to ask for that the personnel specialist’s name be Kenneth. Well, maybe that’s getting greedy.

And yes to the point about the fraud. I wrote CBS a bit earlier to that point. Geez, maybe I’m naive, but I would think that Viacom stockholders should care that one of its media outlets is glibly defending a fraud and appears to be attempting not to cover a story but to influence voters. I can’t think of anything like this. Not only is it serious, but it’s even getting weird.

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:43 pm 32. Jonathan:

sammy small

Darned Great Point – carbon! I forgot about that nasty stuff out of survival instincts I guess. But it worked.

Has anyone considered how carbon paper may fit into this equation? Since these appear to be copies of copies and carbon paper was the mainstay of the era, do these look carboned or xeroxed or can one tell? Or does it not make any difference?

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:49 pm 33. richard mcenroe:

We’re supposed to be wearing pajamas? You mean, right here in our own basement?

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:50 pm 34. Rick Ballard:

CBS needs to fire Rather or change its logo to a donkey and make every CBS employee wear a donkey pin. They’ve returned journalism to 1800 penny tabloid status.

Alternatively, perhaps Kerry had the documents in that secret compartment in his briefcase with his magic hat? Certainly the story has all the verisimilitude of Christmas in Cambodia.

Welcome to the Watergate, Mr. Kerry, hope you enjoy your stay.

Sep 10, 2004 - 9:58 pm 35. Sandy P:

–given the gullibility of the MSM (which approaches Freeper/DU country)–

Hey, it was a freeper who started this ball rolling, IIRC.

Sep 10, 2004 - 10:10 pm 36. Jonathan:

Dan is a Rather overpaid talking head, not a journalist. That’s all he is, a self-motivated hack. It is difficult to experience reality from a limo and penthouse view, he can’t be blamed.

He didn’t need to ask if these memos were copies of the originals of if they were the genuine typewriter or carbon typewriter impacted originals. No questions.

He arrived at work in his limo, picked up the script for the show, saw it nicely fit his personal agenda and went on the air and announced these were direct “from the files of the Lt. Colonel himself”.

Someone. Please prove me wrong on these assumptions and restore my faith in Unbiased Non-Agendaized US Journalism.

OK, I didn’t think you could.

Sep 10, 2004 - 10:27 pm 37. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

CBS may look at it as a minor loss. How many people will know that CBS did this? How many will change their viewing habits as a result.

CBS News is not a journalism operation, it’s a ratings machine.

In other words, there may be no real cost.

Sep 10, 2004 - 10:36 pm 38. mrp:

Byron York’s 8:16PM post at the NRO’s The Corner spells out some of the problems facing CBS because of its admission that CBS based the anti-Bush accusations on photocopies.

It’s also telling that the latest CBS statement on the matter (CBSNews.com) eliminates the photocopy admission from the text.

Sep 10, 2004 - 10:47 pm 39. Samuel:

Terrye and all

I actually was going to comment differently but I must address this…

So far as I know the WH has never said whether they think the docs are forgeries or not.

I have thought about this and like actions from Bush over the last year since I became a Dubya supporter. I have always thought my ability to discern things politically as pretty realistic and above average, however I must add that Bush puzzles me more than any other politician who has been as successful as he has. I am always amazed at his ability to weather some of the most difficult political storms and in the end with such apparent ease. I mean Clinton pulled all the stops, and I mean all the stops. He fought at a Richard Nixon level in the game of personal destruction and things he personally approved of, this President has not. No doubt one might attribute Bush’s political success to him waiting and/or baiting fellow players at the poker table of politics with ingenious instincts of knowing the combination of winning hands and well timed large bets on his part coupled with the losing large bets of his opponents, and with that add the rare ability to “beat the house” (a very rigged house I might add Mr. Dan Rather).

I could sit hear and speculate all day and night and perhaps not come up with the answer, but I will tell you I am convinced of at least one thing, it is no accident. But I am also sure many people improperly feel that he is fortunate, lucky, or that his opposition is weak is why, yet that just leaves too much unanswered. Now concerning weak competition, who might be the one who could beat him?

My brother said yesterday that he wished Clinton could run again because Bush wouldn’t stand a chance against him. I thought about this all day and really believe Bush would defeat Clinton today as well (though not in 2000). But before you Clintonistas get cocky, in 1996 be sure that Clinton would have lost to Dubya’s father had he sought re-election, all the polls were clear on that, it was something we on the inside greatly feared.

Well Bush is a simplistic guy (or is he?), at least he chooses to whittle decisions down to non-nuanced black and white. So I will use two ways to describe what is behind every strategy he may or may not use…

1) George Bush is a man with a clear conscience and acts with the clarity that a clear conscience allows.

2) George Bush concerning himself is very secure and feels no need to “defend his honor” from every charge that is levied against him that he knows is untrue. He has a simple belief that if he is worthy, truth will prevail.

Democrats are going crazy accusing Bush and Republicans of doing what the Democrats have surely been doing themselves all along. Democrats say turnabout is fair play and as Juan Williams said the substance of accusations is more important than how it is delivered, yet this is a right reserved for the MSM and Democrats exclusively.

It is obvious to me that Bush did not call out the Swift Boat Veterans on Kerry (I mean O’Neil supported Edwards in the Primaries for God’s sake and would have supported the Democrats had they nominated Edwards). In my description of Bush this falls in the category of truth taking care of itself in. The Democrats finally got themselves into a positon to out do Republicans in fund raising with the 527’s and promptly showed the way to abuse it and prove unworthy of the process, yet they don’t see the irony that it is their own games and tactics coming home to roost on their heads. But what is even more ironic is that these challenges are coming from where they thought not. Kerry tried to trump his critics and Senate record by cynically “Reporting to Duty” at the Democratic Convention. In retrospect with all we now know concerning Kerry’s history concerning Vietnam and his post-War (or more properly during the War) activities, wasn’t this to the Swifties tantamount to his “Bring it on” taunt to Bush? Kerry was blindsided by the blowback of his own Chutzpah!

It almost reminds me of the movie Gladiator where the Emperor’s son seeks the throne through fraud and treachery. Yet this Emperor’s son now has made deep enemies through this process, and must take care. Also all friendships made this way are shallow and they will in the end abandon him when he has nothing else left to offer.

Now every time the Emperor’s son feels he has the Gladiator at his mercy, combinations of the events turn against him. Now he feels this is unfair because he feels entitled to begin with and his sociopatic thought processes is too centered on himself to have any chance of proper perspective. Well we are at the parts of the story where first, the Public gave the “Thumbs Up” much to the disdain of the Democrats and MSM after the Republican Convention and Bush’s brilliant defense of his Presidency. With this they went in for the kill and as they moved to finish Bush off, a majority of the nation has just erupted with “Live!”, “Live!”, Live!

The Democrats are dirty but the MSM is even filthier and the real villains for in truth they were supposed to be guardians of the process, yet they shirked their duties. In their personal desires and wicked arrogance they could not help themselves as they are trapped between the tainted consciences of the damned and their desire to cleanse themeselves of such by endeavoring to be the do-gooders of society. One problem is they no longer have the ability to properly discern between good and evil as they are jaded. They are the “unwashed” seeking to do the work of the “washed”

It is funny, they treat this President as if he where the “Emperor Without Clothes” when in truth it is Democrats and the MSM who have became NUDISTS long ago, but that’s not the real problem. The real problem is for them being a Nudist is OK because this President is NAKED and that is different. YEAH RIGHT! Well it doesn’t matter to me because either way I see yur nakedness and you can’t hide your shame and I don’t think I am the only one taking notice.

Dan please go put some clothes for God’s sake, and quit tryng to hide that hard-on you have for Kerry behind some damn document that was just too much like some damn magazine foldout you couldn’t to resist. You’re like some kid caught masturbating and too shamed to admit it. Admit it and move on. (Sorry for the analogy but it applies the the whole damn circle-jerking MSM as well)

Sep 10, 2004 - 10:50 pm 40. John Lynch:

I know this is no sort of proof. It is not intended to be, as there are so many other more cogent points.

However, something is bugging me about the ‘CYA’ part of this.

The military acronyms (FUBAR, CYA, …) were largely crude shorthand used between enlisted men. It was their somewhat cynical mocking of the rigid military system and its acronyms for everything from bases, weapons, policies, and bathroom practices.

The point is, it was largely the enlisted who made them up, used them, and knew their meanings. Officers were above all that.

That is not to say that ‘hip’ officers were not aware of them, and maybe even used them occasionally, but it was not the sort of thing an officer would use in a written form.

Are there others who remember the common usage of these terms in the military? RogerA?

Sep 10, 2004 - 11:55 pm 41. zeppenwolf:

Nice work by Samuel.

Regarding your difficulty to understand how/why W weathers these onslaughts in quiet dignity, I believe that he has a very *exalted* view of the presidency– the office of, I mean. Like it’s a noble, or sacred thing. And I believe he thinks very highly of The Teflon President himself. So…

*****

Some in the blogosphere are suggesting we may have already seen our moment of glory, that we should not hope for more, that it will pass and be forgotten, eclipsed…

I say to heck with that– I want to see Rather BURN. And I want to see CBS go up in flames. For pete’s sake, this is like some sick, 1984 homage film from Hollywood, except they would have to tone down the arrogance and bald-faced coverup just to make it believeable.

.

Sep 11, 2004 - 1:24 am 42. DEagle:

RogerA,

Hey, no fair comparing DU with Freepers (I know it is all the rage). Freepers after all started all this CBS (Rather) fuss and deserve some credit.

Sep 11, 2004 - 2:41 am 43. Terrye:

Samuel:

No doubt the arrogance of both Rather and the Dems have led them to this place. They have, to coin a phrase, painted themselves into a corner.

The president can not and will not discuss whether these docs are real, for now, because the moment he does so he enters the frey.

That is our job.

Sep 11, 2004 - 5:43 am 44. Syl:

Do you think Rather should get a Purple Heart out of this?

You know, self-inflicted wound under hostile fire and all that? ;-p

Anyway.

re Bush. Great post, Samuel.

I think you’re right on. But still there’s something weird going on here. I mean whether Bush acts or responds or ignores, he leaves pileups on the side of the road wherever he goes.

The status quo is forever changed.

Afghanistan, the graveyard of kings, check.

Iraq, cradle of civilization, Saddam gone, check

Libya WMD programs neutralized, check

Khan’s Nuclear Adventure kaput, check

Arafat near virtual exile, check

The UN discredited, check

French perfidy exposed to all, check

The MSM shown for what it is, check

The leftish element driven to self-destructive behavior, check

Al Qaeda forced to depend on its own version of 527’s, check

And we still managed to put two robots on Mars and come out of a recession.

I just can’t see how anybody could think we’re going in the wrong direction.

Sep 11, 2004 - 6:08 am 45. RogerA:

All: I must apologize for my earlier post when I lumped freepers with DUers–As you rightly point out, Buckwheat unearthed the story.

John Lynch: You are correct–the acronyms were used by the enlisted men–I learned them because I was enlisted before I went to the Academy. Most officers were aware of them but didnt normally used them–except for CYA which was in common usage among officers as they were much more likely to be the recipients of gravity flow excrement.

Sep 11, 2004 - 7:22 am 46. Charlie (Colorado):

Sandy, I think this link is what you were looking for.

Sep 11, 2004 - 7:57 am 47. Charlie (Colorado):

“Wlf”?

Sep 11, 2004 - 7:59 am 48. Catherine:

I don’t even own pajamas.

Sep 11, 2004 - 8:20 am 49. Catherine:

Carbon copies

O-my-God—–

How many carbon copies did I make back in college?

I always liked carbon copies. I miss them today. Carbon copies and mimeographs.

My children will grow up never having known the delicious experience of sniffing a brand-new, still-wet mimeograph hot off the teacher’s mimeograph machine in the office.

Dan Rather is an idiot.

Sep 11, 2004 - 8:23 am 50. Knucklehead:

Samuel,

Thank you for a great post.

The Democrats are dirty but the MSM is even filthier and the real villains for in truth they were supposed to be guardians of the process, yet they shirked their duties. In their personal desires and wicked arrogance they could not help themselves as they are trapped between the tainted consciences of the damned and their desire to cleanse themeselves of such by endeavoring to be the do-gooders of society. One problem is they no longer have the ability to properly discern between good and evil as they are jaded. They are the “unwashed” seeking to do the work of the “washed”

The “press” is given a special and exalted postition within our society. It goes to the first ammendment to our consitution. With is special position comes responsibility to play a role within our society and that role is to help the citizenry figure out the important issues facing it. They have abrogated that responsibilty, that duty to the citizenry which has given them their special place. The MSM believes it is they who are “the press”. If they continue to refuse to accept their responsibility to society which grants them special privilege, then they must be replaced by a “press” which accepts its responsibilities along with its privilege. That new “press” may be what people like our host are in the process of creating.

Sep 11, 2004 - 8:23 am 51. Knucklehead:

Catherine (!AZ),

Thanks for the Chuckling Trip Down Memory Lane. Just a few weeks ago I ran across some VERY old work I’d done. What I had was the carbons. It really was enlightening to look at it and remember how difficult it once was to produce clean copy. The carbons showed the evidence of typos that couldn’t be repaired and had to be stricken through and that was, once upon a time, completely acceptable for anything but the most formalized work.

It was downright quaint to see my yellow “file copy” with the not so crisp type and all that evidence of having been done on the (not so high) quality of typewriter that an ordinary old student might own or have access to “back in the day”. I showed it to my daughters and they looked at it like it was some dried up old shard of bone excavated from an archeological dig. They had, of course, kinda sorta heard about “carbon paper”, but it never dawned on them what it might be like to use it or what copies looked like.

OK, so now I’ll return the “memory lane” gift.

Remember the old school days when you’d be handed your test and the smell of it? Remember the incredible mess of setting up a mimeograph and cranking out copies?

Sep 11, 2004 - 8:33 am 52. richard mcenroe:

There is no CBS News. There is Dan Rather and the people who work for him. Read Prime Times, Bad Times by Ed Joyce (former president of CBS News) to see how this works…

Sep 11, 2004 - 8:39 am 53. richard mcenroe:

I’m an school SF fan. Anyone else here remember “collating parties” for mimeographed fanzines (think really, really, slow-loading websites on paper…)?

Sep 11, 2004 - 9:23 am 54. Catherine:

Samuel & everyone

as Juan Williams said the substance of accusations is more important than how it is delivered

Quick comment on this—-

Speaking as a journalist and as a former teacher & professor, in this particular case Williams is dead wrong and I’m sure he knows it.

If plagiarism is the capital crime of intellectual work, forgery is the atrocity.

Situations in which suspect documents like these are used as the basis of major news stories are so rare as to not even have a set & known punishment, such as expulsion from college or being fired from one’s position in a news organization.

Think about it.

Can you think of any other case of a major news personality–or any major, important organ of the MSM–not only falling for documents that raise this many questions about their authenticity, but then defending them? (Many critics of the war feel–wrongly–that this is exactly what happened in the case of Judy Miller’s reliance on Chalabi as a source for front-page TIMES stories on Iraq’s WMD. That’s why there has been such a huge and lasting Tsunami of outrage from the left over TIMES reporting on Iraq. Michael Moore is now writing an entire book essentially blaming the Iraq War on the MSM.)

It’s just barely excusable for a reporter or a journalist to be taken in by a forgery, though it doesn’t look good. It is a black mark on your permanent record.

But to react to questions about authenticity by circling the wagons is a profound breach of professional standards & ethics.

The only acceptable response would be to launch a full investigation, with promises of transparency to public and peers.

Assuming the documents do prove to be forgeries, if Rather were anyone else, he would have to be fired for this.

He may have to be fired, anyway.

Check out Drudge.

He’s running an upside-down photo of the 60 MINUTES logo.

What’s his readership?

10 million?

For anyone working at CBS, as for anyone owning CBS, that is a horror.

So . . . this is one case where “what the memos” say in fact does not matter at all.

What matters is that a major news organization has not only portrayed highly suspect documents as authentic, but has then, under fire, chosen to defend the documents rather than to launch an investigation and report back when it is completed.

Read Kaus on instapundit.

“They’ll be throwing bodies out the window” before this is over.

Sep 11, 2004 - 10:28 am 55. Catherine:

Samuel

Wow!

Clinton would have lost to Dubya’s father had he sought re-election, all the polls were clear on that, it was something we on the inside greatly feared

I’ve mentioned a couple of times now that this blog has been incredibly helpful to me personally & emotionally.

I’ve also mentioned that Samuel’s 5 points to the right post was one of the observations that finally let me answer the question, Did I change or did they?

Now I realize that my own move 5-points-to-the-right ended up being a change in category because I was already at the far right end of the Democratic Party spectrum before my post-9/11 shift.

Samuel’s new observation, about Bush 1, suddenly let me understand something else that has been bothering me for these 3 years now.

My husband, now, likes Bush 1.

He speaks of Bush 1 respectfully, says he wishes Bush 1 were in office, not Bush 2, etc.

This abrupt change has made me nuts.

All of a sudden he’s a foreign policy realist!

In my state of uproar, I’ve put the worst possible construction on this shift; I’ve seen this as the height of hypocrisy, coming after all these years of high-horse anti-Reagan foreign policy moralism.

But suddenly, reading Samuel’s comment, I realize I haven’t understood his changes in perspective any better than I’ve understood my own.

He’s not being hypocritical.

He’s changed.

This is his 5-point shift to the right.

From his starting point, a 5-point shift landed him in the camp of Bush 1.

From my starting point, a 5-point shift landed me in the camp of Bush 2.

Simple!

But not so simple to see.

Samuel, thank you!

I’m thinking it would probably be a good thing for people who are interested in politics to start using the concept of a “spectrum.”

My analogy is to the field of autism.

Autism had always been seen as a black-or-white, on-or-off condition. You had it or you didn’t, and if you had it you were sitting in a corner in an institution banging your head against the wall.

Then Ed Ritvo did a study of every single autistic person living in the state of Utah.

Some of the moms would bring their autistic kids in, and they’d say, “Well, he’s just like my husband.”

Ed Ritvo began to think, “Gee. Maybe he is just like her husband.”

The rest is history.

Ritvo and his team took a look at the parents and discovered “11 Married Autistics.”

I think that was the number. Eleven.

It took awhile, but a few years after his observation was published people began to think of autism as a spectrum disorder.

That’s the way I’m going to start thinking about politics.

As a spectrum disorder.

Sep 11, 2004 - 11:24 am 56. Catherine:

Samuel

Well we are at the parts of the story where first, the Public gave the “Thumbs Up” much to the disdain of the Democrats and MSM after the Republican Convention and Bush’s brilliant defense of his Presidency. With this they went in for the kill and as they moved to finish Bush off, a majority of the nation has just erupted with “Live!”, “Live!”, Live!

I love it!

Syl

You know, I think you’re onto something.

People who go head-to-head with Bush seem to end up committing suicide a lot.

That’s exactly what Saddam did.

I remember a great op-ed in the NYTIMES, after Saddam issued his 1000-page “response” to the Resolution demanding that he disarm.

The author said Saddam’s response was the longest suicide note ever written.

Sep 11, 2004 - 11:34 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: