78 Comments

1. Warthog:

Holy crappola batman!

Sep 15, 2004 - 3:29 pm 2. Charlie (Colorado):

They must have lost their minds. This is just astonishing.

Sep 15, 2004 - 3:37 pm 3. Kevin P:

Roger:

You should submit a piece to Saturday Night Live. It will open with a clearly drunk Rather in a dimly lit room. It will show him talking to portraits of Murrow and Cronkite. I think you could take it from there.

Sep 15, 2004 - 3:38 pm 4. David Thomson:

This is getting funnier by the minute. The top echelon of CBS must be really scared. I am now 95% certain that a top democrat official give Sixty Minutes the documents. Needless to add, this scandal is not going to disappear. Heads will roll by no later than next Tuesday. The rest of the liberal media are trapped between a rock and a hard place. Ultimately, they will have to pull the plug on Dan Ratherís crew. Are they interested in doing the right thing? Not necessarily, Iím talking about crass self preservation.

Sep 15, 2004 - 3:41 pm 5. RogerA:

As the ever astute Jerry pointed out on a thread below, note the use of the word “accurate” vice authentic. CBS is using the phoney but accurate defense here. The epistemological implications of that position aside, that is not the criterion I want to see for news media. George Orwell missed the date by 20 years.

Sep 15, 2004 - 3:43 pm 6. Flap:

Stonewall,,,,,,Stonewall…….Stonewall!

Sep 15, 2004 - 3:43 pm 7. idi_amin:

LOL, excellent title Roger!..

this statement was delayed 6 hours because their expert was showing them how Word spellcheck was really difficult to use and requires you to “go out of your way” and stuff.

Sep 15, 2004 - 3:44 pm 8. mwalls:

If this was prepared by a top executive, he/she probably doesn’t know how to use MsWord.

Sep 15, 2004 - 3:47 pm 9. RogerA:

Note also the last sentence which gives them their mission to continue to ask the President about his TANG service–the referent is NOT clear and the statement does not clarify what questions remain to be answered. Clearly there were lots of billable hours generated by that miserable “statement.”

Sep 15, 2004 - 3:47 pm 10. RogerA:

and all of this is good news for the President: this will keep Kerry off the news and those hectoring him to “answer the questions,” have been discredited. Karl Rove must be enjoying himself tonite.

Sep 15, 2004 - 3:49 pm 11. Terry:

Dan’s doing a new segment tonight

Sep 15, 2004 - 3:59 pm 12. jerry:

RogerA:

My lunch time prediction is now half-validated. Let’s see if the second half happens. i.e., now that they claim a higher truth will some junior staffer fess up to “ginning up” the documents as props and not as a deliberate attempt to forge documents.

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:03 pm 13. zeppenwolf:

I don’t really care alot about “authentic” vs “accurate”– I can’t quite believe that these guys think they will escape the black hole by playing those kind of hyper-nuanced word games. If they did, they probably would have spelled corroborate correctly.

To me, this is the big news here:

“Statement by the President of CBS News, Andrew Heyward”

Not only is Dan strapping on the C4, he’s going to give the President of CBS News a big bear hug, too.

Not the president he wanted to damage, but maybe better than nothing.

I have to wonder what kind of a moron Heyward must be to have reached out his hand to Dan-in-the-Quicksand? There’s no reason whatsoever, (I can think of???), that Heyward shouldn’t have stood stoicly on the banks and let Rather drown. But he did, apparently, put his name on this.

Oh well! Two down, legions to go!

PS: By the way– I’ve been trying to find that one quote in the Bible for a long time– the one that goes something like, “Oh woe to them who say that what is good is evil, and that what is evil is good”. Anybody recognize that one? It might have been a good time for it…

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:05 pm 14. Knucklehead:

The Granny Option with an Accurate Twist. They took a non-story and turned into The Big Story all to satisfy a RatherVendetta. I guess they have to keep it alive long enough for the DNC to run their Fortunate Son campaign.

One little thing, however. Given that CBS is clearly familiar with MS Word defaults by now, shouldn’t they have at least run the thing through spellcheck?

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:11 pm 15. Warthog:

I told my daughter I would help her with her paper on relativism. Little did I know I’d have to live the friggin’ thing.

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:13 pm 16. Connecticut Yankee:

zeppenwolf:

I think you’re looking for Isaiah 5:20 ff–

“Ah, you who call evil good and good evil,

who put darkness for light and light for darkness…. who acquit the guilty for a bribe and deprive the innocent of their rights!… they have rejected the instruction of the Lord of hosts, and have despised the word of the Holy One of Israel.”

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:13 pm 17. ambisinistral:

I think it was maybe in the Book of Lamentions. Something along the lines of, “Woe to them that can’t tell the difference between a typewriter and a word processor.”

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:16 pm 18. DennisThePeasant:

Meanwhile, Dan and Marcel make plans to open a palm-reading parlor for Tribeca’s horny housewives…

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:16 pm 19. Birkel:

I think this is good news for Senator Kerry. After all, people can’t stand the guy. He’s bad on TV and worse in person. Anything and I mean anything that keeps him off the air is a GREAT thing for Kerry.

People like Bush and he’s getting no attention. He’s the one who can change voters’ minds if they see him and he’s lost that opportunity.

That is why the Republican base must stay energized and take NOTHING for granted!!!

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:16 pm 20. David Thomson:

ìI have to wonder what kind of a moron Heyward must be to have reached out his hand to Dan-in-the-Quicksand?î

Perhaps Heyward knew of the probable Democratic top level person who provided the documents? There is a very good possibility that Dan Rather talked to a number of CBS executives before the segment appeared on Sixty Minutes. They might have given him their blessing. A lot of individuals therefore may be in serious jeopardy. Rather will unlikely go down alone.

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:17 pm 21. RattlerGator:

I have been amazed by this whole thing . . . so . . . (and I’m just asking) is it possible that Heyward himself is involved in the chain of custody that brought these fakes to CBS?

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:19 pm 22. Samuel:

It is amazing as I just heard on Fox News that CBS has officially decided to further wage bets on a dead horse! Even Juan Williams had to cave in a bit. Unbelievable! They are acting quite like the poster child of what not to do when one find themselves in the predicament they are in.

Dan and CBS leadership stick their collective heads in the sand. But what is worse is that since they have been exposed in their full nakedness they fail to realize that their burying of heads places their asses up in the air and will rightly be interpreted as a full moon to the citizenry of the nation! Again UNBELEIVABLE! As my father said, there is bold Chutzpah to be respected, and stupid ass Chutzpah. I think I know which kind we are looking at. Damn!

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:19 pm 23. Knucklehead:

Now that the idiots have gone from “authentic” to “accurate” (meaning they admit their journalistic standards include using forged documents so long as they believe the content is “accurate”), how are they going to explain away the signatures and initialing?

Not like DNA?!?! How stupid do they think we are? If, in the days of typewriters, documents could be traced to individual machines to the satisfaction of courst of law, do these idiots really believe that in today’s world documents can’t be shown to have been NOT typewritten? Please.

Where are the originals, CBS? And who did you get the documents from?

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:21 pm 24. Pearl:

Insulting! Condescending! And full of crap!!!

Maybe we should take up a donation and order up a truckload of steer manure and dump it at Black Rock to let them know what we think of their latest bullsh**.

WHERE DID THESE MEMOS COME FROM AND WHEN?????

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:22 pm 25. DennisThePeasant:

This just in…

CBS just announced the documents have been authenticated by Amelia Earhardt, D.B. Cooper and two girls named ‘Frank’.

That settles that.

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:23 pm 26. teletwanger:

They’re gonna stonewall. Every reputable expert says the docs are fake, their retired typewriter repairman says they could conceivably be legit. As far as they’re concerned, that’s enough cover. They will stand by the story, and stand by their Dan. Their ratings and ad revenues probably won’t suffer (or not much, and not for long). They couldn’t care less about their integrity.

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:23 pm 27. FredRum:

Just wait until the next Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ad comes out either tomorrow or Friday. Based on comments from John O’Neill last night on Hannity & Colmes as well as on hints posted at CrushKerry.com, I’m assuming it will rely heavily on Kerry’s own unreleased after-action report for the Silver Star incident, which was rumored to have been found in the Naval Archives earlier this week by independent researchers.

Between it and the bullet-time train wreck of Rathergate, it’ll take a windsurfing trip off the coast of Alabama for JFK to get any decent media coverage for the next week.

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:25 pm 28. Pearl:

More interesting thoughts:

http://www.seanet.com/~jimxc/Politics/September2004_2.html#jrm2604

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:27 pm 29. Rick Ballard:

Birkel,

I disagree. W can grab the spotlight at the time of his choosing. This is doing absolutely nothing for Kerry. It is hammering home to the Republican base the absolute necessity of GOTV and it is confirmation of the depths to which the DNC/MSM will sink.

This is an unmitigated disaster for Kerry and all Dem candidates that will worsen by the hour. Sure 27% will claim to believe in the memos but there is another percentage for whom this will be the last straw. And still others who will turn from the Democrat party forever, even if they never join the Reps. 27% could turn out to be 80% of what the Dems get in total.

I want to hear what Catherine’s husband says next week after digesting (or vomiting up) this ironclad example of the depth of the corruption in the Democrat party. Who can listen to a DNC/MSM agitprop organ again without snickering? The NYT/WaPo/Globe/CBS/ABC/NBC are all cut from the same cloth. It’s a favorite with tailors working on the emperors clothes.

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:29 pm 30. Roberts:

I actually think this will reinforce the Republican meme that the press doesn’t like “us” and will increase turnout come election day.

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:31 pm 31. David Thomson:

ìTheir ratings and ad revenues probably won’t suffer (or not much, and not for long).î

Thankfully, youíre wrong. The year is 2004 and we have the ubiquitous Internet. Dan Rather and CBS, though, probably would have gotten away with this nonsense just ten years ago. It’s only going to get worse for them.

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:32 pm 32. Birkel:

Emily Will, the document expert just confirmed she received two documents, neither of which she authenticated, on Hardball. She raised questions about both documents to CBS.

One of those documents appeared on 60 Minutes II and the other did not. So, CBS had six forged documents and chose to withhold two from the broadcast. Of course, there’s no answer to the question “Why would you withhold two documents, as if they were fake, yet go to press with four others?”

It’s just so damned stupid on CBS’s part!!

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:32 pm 33. Kevin P:

Zeppenwolf

Still working on the quote you asked for but here is one Dan Rather should read-

Proverbs 6:16-19, There are six things which the Lord hates, Yes seven which are an abomination to Him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, A heart that devises wicked plans, feet that run rapidly to evil, A false witness who utters lies, And one who spreads strife among brothers.

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:37 pm 34. DennisThePeasant:

Here’s what I think is really funny…

I’ve read a couple of reports saying that the Kerry campaign and the DNC had these memos for several weeks and really didn’t think too much of the possibility of them being authentic…

But here’s the funny part, what if McAuliffe had turned them over to Rather and basically said, “Here are some letters we received on Bush. We think they are probably fake, but why don’t your people (CBS) check them out? If they are good, run them. If not, just throw them away”? In other words, what if McAuliffe and the DNC never dreamed Rather and CBS would run the documents without proof they were authentic? It would explain the DNC’s ‘Fortunate Son’ ad…they released it assuming CBS actually had confirmed the facts for them.

Could that be the reason for the stonewalling? How could they burn the DNC as ‘the source’ under this scenario? They didn’t really do anything wrong! And, it would actually make CBS and Rather out to be more incompetent and dishonest than they already appear to be! Could it be the Dan Rather is so damned stupid he’s put McAuliffe’s, Kerry’s and the DNC’s collective head in a noose by accident?

Makes me feel good all under just thinking about it….

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:38 pm 35. RogerA:

The aspect of this affair that drives home the mindset of the MSM to me is they would accept without complaint the assertion that the essential truth is more significant than the validity of the evidence. That is so breathtakingly arrogant it boggles my mind.

It also points to major flaws in the code of journalistic ethics (an oxymoron?) and the content of J-school curricula. For journalists to accept this assertion without question or objection drives home the last point Roger made in his essay above. Those that do not object are as corrupt as Dan Rather and the “journalists” at CBS.

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:39 pm 36. Fresh Air:

So as far as Bush being AWOL, if I’m following SeeB.S.’s logic correctly, absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

P.S. If anybody uses that as a headline they owe me a dollar.

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:40 pm 37. jerry:

Dennis:

Never thought of that angle. It would be ironic if an overzealous Dan Rather ended up destroying the Kerry campaign. If true McAuliffe must be going through the overhead. He must know that even if the DNC is innocent of malice in passing the memos to CBS for validation nobody is going to believe that. I think a Clintonista like McAuliffe is ruthless enought to screw CBS if your supposition is correct. He would get the word out that he foolishly relied on the premier broadcast news network to do proper fact checking. He can’t help it if they turned out to be irresponsible. Of course he will probably say that anyway, even if he was in the middle of it.

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:54 pm 38. Alley Fox:

If I ever received a resume with a spelling error on it, it would immediately be in the trash can. Apparently, the same CBS summer clerk that verified the authenticity of the National Guard memos was demoted to spell-checking official CBS statements.

Poor guy. They probably handed him a copy of the statement to proof-read, and he took it to his desk, saying to himself “This time I won’t screw up. This time I won’t screw up.”

Sep 15, 2004 - 4:55 pm 39. Fresh Air:

Here’s one more tactical blunder. By calling out the White House, they have given them cover to fire back at will. They have invited some really caustic remarks that will make 41’s crack about Rather’s 7-minute temper-tantrum look like a schoolboy insult. How about this: “We don’t respond to stories in the National Inquirer, and we don’t respond to scurrilous, unsourced allegations by the likes of CBS.”

What’s more, one of the principal players, Staudt, is still alive. He’s very publicity shy, but it’s entirely possible he could pop out and declare the whole thing B.S. A known unkown, as Rummy would say.

The saddest part of all is I truly believe Dan Rather thinks the story is true. He has been so blinded by his internalized rage that he can’t tell reality from illusion anymore. The forger/conduits are raving moonbats who bit Danny Boy in the neck and injected their moonbat poison. He has gone completely delusional. He needs medication and he needs psychiatric help.

Courage.

Sep 15, 2004 - 5:05 pm 40. Katherine:

Knuck – How stupid do they think we are?

Very.

Sep 15, 2004 - 5:10 pm 41. RattlerGator:

The amazing thing to me is he (Rather) really, really, really seems to think that if all of his stuff were true it would make some kind of difference.

It wouldn’t make the first bit of difference to me. I keep thinking to myself — they are LYING for THIS!?!

Sep 15, 2004 - 5:14 pm 42. Silicon valley Jim:

“PS: By the way– I’ve been trying to find that one quote in the Bible for a long time– the one that goes something like, “Oh woe to them who say that what is good is evil, and that what is evil is good”. Anybody recognize that one? It might have been a good time for it…”

Possibly Malachi 2:17, which reads as follows:

Ye have wearied the Lord with your words. Yet ye say, “In what way have we wearied Him?” When ye say, “Every one that doeth evil is good in the sight of the Lord and He delighteth in them; or, Where is the God of justice”?

To return to the main topic of the thread: I’m amazed at the utter contempt in which CBS holds its audience. It seems to me that they put these documents on the air, knowing that there was a good chance that they were fakes, because they thought that doing so served some higher truth. In other words, they don’t trust us to be able to figure out the truth given valid evidence. Now they won’t give us sources, won’t admit their error, and change their story daily. It’s just a bit reminiscent of a high school student caught cheating and trying to lie his way out of it.

Sep 15, 2004 - 5:32 pm 43. David [.net]:

Eh, I put it the topic above instead of here. But, they’ve put pdfs of the full statement and 4 attachments.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/08/60II/main641984.shtml

The attachments are not to be missed!

Sep 15, 2004 - 5:35 pm 44. watxc:

Fresh

There is actually another player in this.. Rufus G Martin who shared an office Killian.

Sep 15, 2004 - 5:38 pm 45. ricpic:

The finger! The finger! CBS is giving us THE FINGER!!!

Sep 15, 2004 - 5:46 pm 46. flenser:

Knucklehead

Just saw on The Kerry Spot, that Bush is ahead of Kerry 49 to 45 percent. In New Jersey.

Good grief. I’ve been laughing at those who said this would be a huge Bush blowout. Now, I’m not so sure.

Sep 15, 2004 - 5:47 pm 47. DennisThePeasant:

Here I’ve been thinking that Dan Rather would sign off his last day of work with “Courage”. Now it appears it will be “Do you want fries with that?”

Sep 15, 2004 - 5:48 pm 48. DennisThePeasant:

And what’s really funny is that Kerry will be the one behind him flipping the burgers!

Sep 15, 2004 - 5:49 pm 49. Sonetka:

Staudt is still alive? Whoa, didn’t know that. I had been assuming that, like Killian, he was enjoying this spectacle from a better place. I’m sort of hoping someone can unearth him and see what he thinks (hopefully his mind hasn’t weakened or anything – he must be fairly old at this point).

Rather et al really lucked out in one way. Suppose the secretary hadn’t been a rabid Bush-hater? They’d be in a worse corner than they are now, and they’re not too well situation as it is.

Sep 15, 2004 - 5:51 pm 50. Sonetka:

Eek – well situated. More tired than I thought.

Sep 15, 2004 - 5:52 pm 51. Rhod:

No one, including Rather, lost their/his mind(s) in this spectacle. They tried for another Two Minute Hate, but this one failed…for now.

Sep 15, 2004 - 5:57 pm 52. Catherine:

Samuel

Dan and CBS leadership stick their collective heads in the sand. But what is worse is that since they have been exposed in their full nakedness they fail to realize that their burying of heads places their asses up in the air and will rightly be interpreted as a full moon to the citizenry of the nation! Again UNBELEIVABLE! As my father said, there is bold Chutzpah to be respected, and stupid ass Chutzpah. I think I know which kind we are looking at. Damn!

THAT IS PRICELESS!!!!!

Samuel, if you get a chance, I posted something about dominance & “rope a dope” and the animal world on, uh, an earlier thread. (Oh, it’s the thread that has my name in it.)

It was sparked by one of your comments . . .

Rick B

I want to hear what Catherine’s husband says next week after digesting (or vomiting up) this ironclad example of the depth of the corruption in the Democrat party

You know . . . interestingly enough, what I perceive as his “partisan” commitment to the Democratic Party isn’t what I thought.

He’s a Vietnam War baby all the way . . . and, as it turns out, he never “transferred” the war over to the Republicans. He has always seen the Democratic Party as tarred by the actions of JFK & LBJ (as well it should be).

So while he’s always had the innocent-Democrat-victim-of-lying-Republicans thing, apparently he has been able to hold two contradictory ideas (way contradictory) in his head at the same time. Democrats pure and good, Democrats author of Vietnam War.

So . . . what am I saying here?

I’m saying that, astoundingly enough, I don’t understand the way my own husband’s mind works.

No, that can’t be it.

I’m saying that since he (apparently) hasn’t idealized the Dems the way I once did, he doesn’t have to turn against them the way I did, either.

And he won’t.

OTOH, it is interesting to see how completely removed he is, now, from Kerry, from the Democratic Party, from the election. It’s the exact kind of damage I think you’re talking about: the whole thing is such an utter debacle (talk about “miserable failure,” my god) that there’s no reason for him to identify himself with it.

I probably can’t express to you how universally disgusted with Kerry & his campaign the liberals I know are.

Disgusted and appalled.

DennisthePeasant

It would explain the DNC’s ‘Fortunate Son’ ad…they released it assuming CBS actually had confirmed the facts for them.

Could that be the reason for the stonewalling? How could they burn the DNC as ‘the source’ under this scenario? They didn’t really do anything wrong!

That is the first hypothesis I’ve read that makes perfect sense.

Perfect.

Also, we’ve already seen this exact kind of collateral damage happening for a fact all over the place, with major newspapers running stories on the documents because they thought CBS had vetted them.

The ridiculous thing about that is that it’s against the rules.

Years ago, when I first started writing for SELF MAGAZINE, I mentioned some source I’d used to my editor there and she started yelling at me.

Turned out I’d used a secondary source–I’d quoted another magazine–and you’re only supposed to use primary sources.

I didn’t know that.

Well, if I got in major hot water at a women’s magazine for quoting another magazine, it’s–yes–appalling to discover that all of our major newspapers are depending on each other to do their reporting-slash-vetting for them.

You probably have to be British to have the kind of vocabulary that would do justice to this event.

Sep 15, 2004 - 6:19 pm 53. Catherine:

Samuel & all

a full moon to the citizenry of the nation

This is my big, gripping concept of the Democratic Party now: the Party of maximum collateral damage.

Sep 15, 2004 - 6:22 pm 54. Catherine:

ohmygod

I just visited Drudge.

Accurate.

Wow.

You really have to see it in the flesh to believe it.

We established to our satisfaction that the memos were accurate.

No one wants to hear that s**t.

Ask Al No-Controlling-Legal-Authority Gore.

Sep 15, 2004 - 6:29 pm 55. DennisThePeasant:

You know, I thought the Dan and Marcel palm-reading joke was really funny. Nobody said a thing. I think I’ll go cry myself to sleep.

Sep 15, 2004 - 7:01 pm 56. Samuel:

Katherine and Knucklehead

How stupid do they think we are?

I think this kind of misses the point. Especially in Katherine’s case, and correct me if I am wrong, I believe you also voted for Clinton as did I. Now think about this for a minute. Did you really believe Clinton was over his womanizing ways after hearing Jennifer Flowers? Did the Sixty minutes episode cause you to say to yourselves “Hey that rings true?” Or was their performances adequate enough to justify his “viability” as a candidate? I remember that right after the Monica Lewinsky story broke, the public was polled and a clear majority said that if proven true, Clinton ought to resign as did many Democrats, even Lanny Davis said as much.

Ok. Let’s follow the progression. First we now know that the MSM had knowledge of all most information about Bill Clinton even before he was elected. The media kicked out a few “trial balloons” and when we showed apathy it was confirmed to the MSM that could “control events”. They also realized appealing to personal interests could inspire character issues to take a back seat. As I mentioned the other day in another thread, they learned with Nixon they could bring a man down, and with Clinton they could bear him up. Why did they feel it was ok to behave as such? Cleary it was because we sent a signal as a people that was ok with us. We gave them final discretion.

Now with that full discretion comes the MSM choosing the point of focus and presentation, or as we call it in politics, SPIN. It would be like a Hockey fight, who started it? With the MSM it depends, if it was started by a Democrat then they will focus on the over the top rough response of the Republican. If it was started by a Republican then they will roll the tape back to the beginning and focus on the “perpetrator” of the fight.

This was further confirmed with impeachment and Clinton’s cover up. They read the polls saying the people wanted him out if proven, so the MSM knowing they could “control events”, sought to change the dynamics of the story by joining in with the Clinton’s parroting the “it is just about sex” lines, presenting all the information in that light. Further they painted Ken Starr as a right wing religious over-reaching zealot. My problem with this, as many here know, in knew Ken Starr at that time, he coached my daughter’s softball team during impeachment and a more kind, thoughtful person I have never known. In truth though I like many wished it away, Ken Starr the man stood as a witness to my conscience how horrible things were. I was as blinded by politics as Dan Rather and the rest of the MSM at that time so I was blind, deaf, and dumb. as well But make no mistake it seared my conscience.

People, in the end we live in a Democracy. It is our job to not turn blind eyes and show apathy. It is our responsibility to elect people of character and not be so damn materialistic. It is our job to show we care about such things. We told them we wanted Clinton out if proven, they only thing we proved is it could be made too inconvenient for us and we would relent. The same tactic is now in play over Iraq and this President. After Clinton and the 2000 election fiasco, a Republican friend of mine said, “We will never understand the cultural costs to this nation of our first finding it too inconvenient to make Clinton pay, ad the fact that a clear majority couldn’t send a signal of change in the 2000 election, and now add to that the purposful tainting of our new President, parroting about about the ’suppression of votes’ and his ’selection’ by the supreme court. This is all coming home to roost.”

Either we show the MSM that we care, we expect them to act decent and be moral in their reporting and setting self-interest aside, or we must continue to expect the public well to be poisoned by the MSM, because that is what they are doing. They are poisoning the well, pointing the finger at Republicans (or whoever they see as a threat), and hoping we follow them to their pre-conceived conclusions. I sure hope the tide is turning and we are seeing a change, but I fear it may partly just be Kerry running a bad campaign. We will see.

Sep 15, 2004 - 7:08 pm 57. Catherine:

DtP

I thought the Dan and Marcel palm-reading joke was really funny.

It was a little over our heads.

We all liked the one about sitting on uncooked rice.

Sep 15, 2004 - 7:09 pm 58. Samuel:

Catherine

I am going to check out that thread (rope a dope), and come back. Also I left the referenced Bush=Hitler post Wichita was referring to in another thread. If you didn’t read it let me know and I will direct you to it.

Sep 15, 2004 - 7:12 pm 59. DennisThePeasant:

Hey, if I bat .500 I’m still doing better than CBS…

Sep 15, 2004 - 7:13 pm 60. Catherine:

Samuel

I think the media had some other things going on with Clinton.

For one, Howell Raines loathed Clinton, and published anti-Clinton editorials every single day of the week practically.

For another, I remember the public’s attitude on Lewinsky as changing over time–is that wrong?

I was with the general public that he should leave if the stories were proved true, and I distinctly recall being the Last Man Standing on that opinion. Everyone peeled off as it became more and more clear the stories were true.

My sense at the time was that reality called people’s bluff. They only wanted him out of office as long as they thought there was no chance of that happening.

Maybe I’m wrong.

Last, I remember David Broder (I think it was Broder) saying that when Clinton had first entered the primaries, they’d all gone to Arkansas and had heard all these wild stories about Clinton (Juanita Broaddrock among them) and they’d assumed the stories were too outrageous to be true.

He said they’d “given Clinton a pass,” and they’d learned never to do that again (though obviously they’re giving Kerry a pass on his Vietnam history, which may be different enough not to count).

It wasn’t that they decided to put one over on the American people, whitewashing a rapist & compulsive womanizer; they just didn’t believe half the stuff they heard about him.

I could tell Ken Starr was a good guy at the time.

Of course, I agreed with him.

That was one of my hobbyhorses at the time: I used to say the Democratic Party was doing itself in standing up for the guy.

Sep 15, 2004 - 7:21 pm 61. RiverRat:

Many of us I’m sure utilize cable TV systems for access to both High Speed Internet connections and TV reception.

I for one am writing tonight to Comcast telling them to either publicly denounce CBS and remove their broadcasts from their feed or I will be cancelling their service.

Think about doing the same.

Sep 15, 2004 - 7:23 pm 62. Catherine:

Samuel

sheesh.

I don’t have the link, and haven’t read it!

DtP

You’re also batting above .500.

Way above.

Sep 15, 2004 - 7:23 pm 63. J_Crater:

“After all, no one minds when the cops lie on the stand or plant

evidence on a suspect, as long as they only do that to suspects theyÔøΩre

pretty sure are guilty anyway.”

Isn’t that what CBS has done?

Sep 15, 2004 - 7:29 pm 64. Rick Ballard:

Catherine,

You mentioned the definition of consensus earlier. The way I understand the tem as it is used in polling reports is as follow:

Consensus = 50% + 1

General consensus = 55%

Overwhelming consensus = 60%

You need to know who is purchasing the poll in order to do the addition/subtraction necessary to adjust whether consensus actually exists but when you see general consensus used it is outside the MOE.

You interpreted my question concerning your husband correctly. I think that you will probably be seeing a rising level of disgust on his part unless the campaign changes entirely. He’s not going to join the Republican party and he may not vote for Bush – but he may not vote for Kerry either. Repeat five million times and you have an epic landslide. The 27% nutters don’t mean a damn thing in this election. They never have and never will. It’s the other 20% who call themselves Democrats but aren’t nutters at all who will determine the extent of Kerry’s defeat.

The New Jersey poll mentioned by JKR is very interesting. Gore took NJ by 16% yet W is leading among LV’s by 4% and among CV’s (certain voters) by 5%. Most intriguing is that W is getting 12% of the black vote. That’s 50% more than he took nationally in ‘00 and if it continues that fact alone would doom Kerry. Among all the things that Kerry doesn’t have, a positive message for minorities ranks very high.

As a personal observation, I live in a heavily Rep precinct in a heavily Rep district. I tried to volunteer as a precinct captain in early July and was told that the position was filled. I offered to do 10 hours a month on phone banks was told that they would contact me when needed. I called today to check and was told that although they appreciated my offer they didn’t need help on phone banks. I’m down to being on another waiting list for giving people rides to the voting stations on Nov. 2. I’m sure there are many precincts that do need help and you certainly can’t generalize from one observation but I was also phone polled on a bond issue the other night. The person polling offered to send an absentee ballot. I declined and she said “Do you know, practically no one is asking for absentee ballots, I’ve never seen anything like it.” Lot’s of California Republicans are going to make sure that their votes are counted by showing up in person.

Sep 15, 2004 - 7:33 pm 65. Terrye:

I know I am dreading the rest of the campaign. I don’t doubt that CBS and Kerry will drag out every thing they can find to discredit Bush. I think they believe they have nothing to lose.

But if those Congressional hearings turn out badly, that might no be true.

I think people will resent it. Not only because they are being decieved but because it is in such a brazen and cavalier fashion.

Those are the PUBLIC airways you know.

Sep 15, 2004 - 7:36 pm 66. Samuel:

Catherine

You are partly right on Clinton, where you are deadly wrong is the MSM never would have assumed these things were too outrageous to believe if they had such things on Nixon, Bush or even Reagan. I guarantee “lessons from Clinton” has nothing to do with it other then being used as an excuse for going after those they dislike. The disparity between vetting Kerry’s known anti-War activities compared to insignificant National Guard story proves this. Look at the prejudice Rather has just displayed, I guarantee that isn’t because he learned from Clinton.

As far as Howell Raines and other ultra-liberal’s disgust at “Republican-lite” Clinton? This is way different. This is akin to fiscal conservatives bemoaning Bush’s fiscal policies. Way different form those seeking personal destruction.

Sep 15, 2004 - 7:40 pm 67. WichitaBoy:

People, in the end we live in a Democracy. It is our job to not turn blind eyes and show apathy. It is our responsibility to elect people of character and not be so damn materialistic. It is our job to show we care about such things. We told them we wanted Clinton out if proven, they only thing we proved is it could be made too inconvenient for us and we would relent. The same tactic is now in play over Iraq and this President.

Threats aren’t worth a damn, opinions aren’t worth a damn, unless they’re backed up from time to time. There have to be consequences.

Saddam Hussein has learned that.

Sep 15, 2004 - 7:53 pm 68. Samuel:

Wichita

Amen! But I would add that the American people need a “vigilante” moment with the Democrats and the MSM. Somehow it has got to get through. Are we too damn “fat and happy” like during the 90’s? Or did 911 wake us up?

Wichita, I am afraid without the help of a horrible campaign by Kerry, we would be proven to have progressed very little.

Sep 15, 2004 - 8:02 pm 69. Terrye:

Wichita and Samuel:

How about if we all scream ‘Shut the hell up’ at the top of our lungs? Think they will get the message?

I feel like Dan Rather is saying you will listen, you will believe and you will think this matters. I have spoken.

I am at the point now where even if they did come up with something on Bush I still would not vote for Kerry if you paid me. If I have to accept that Senate testimony I really can not imagine what they can come up with on Bush that will top that.

Unlike Kerry he did not hurt other people.

Sep 15, 2004 - 8:11 pm 70. RogerA:

this whole MSM thing really saddens me–but they have cast their lot and dont have the courage or integrity to call BS on it–only a few luddites after this election will believe them. No matter.

The state by state polls are showing something that I had devoutly wished for but didnt think possible 6 weeks ago–the states are trending Bush–even in NY state, Bush is moving close to margin of error terrority–and his approvals are climbing while Kerry’s are tanking. And the beauty of this is that MSM are navel gazing while they are choking off any remote chance Kerry could get his message out. This is cosmic justice.

I thought the race would be close–but it is increasingly looking to me like a landslide for Bush. And that is a good thing, because I think the DNC will challenge any and all state results in court using the Algore model. The bigger the margin of victory the better for the Republic.

And finally–the MSM will be hoist on its own petard. They will have no credibility when the dust settles. These are propitious times we live in.

Sep 15, 2004 - 8:18 pm 71. Syl:

Okay, I know this is a bizarre thought. But remember towards the end when we found out that Dean didn’t really want to become president, he just wanted a voice and to be heard?

I’ve been thinking the same thing about Kerry. Yes, his ego is huge and he thinks he deserves the presidency. But I don’t think he really wants it. Not now.

Not when DC is a huge target and the president even more so.

I just get this weird feeling there’s a huge elephant in the room that some candidates are unconsciously seeing.

If Kerry is so smart and all (as some who have worked with him claim) then just why hasn’t he taken control of his campaign and put a stop to the madness?

Sep 15, 2004 - 8:22 pm 72. WichitaBoy:

Syl

But I don’t think he really wants it. Not now.

Not when DC is a huge target and the president even more so.

So that’s why he’s been missing 2/3 of his committee meetings–had to be out of town in case of attack?

Sorry about your mom, btw.

Sep 15, 2004 - 9:13 pm 73. Rick Ballard:

WichitaBoy,

The WSJ editorial isn’t quite as tough as I expected but it’s fairly comprehensive.

Sep 15, 2004 - 9:27 pm 74. Samuel:

Terrye

How about if we all scream ‘Shut the hell up’ at the top of our lungs? Think they will get the message

I tell you the ironic thing is that I knew most things were true about Clinton but didn’t care. (Well didn’t care enough). With Bush I wouldn’t even believe them.

Ironically those Democrats that actually believed Clinton’s spin would consider Bush being guilty as charged a no-brainer.

Terrye to them Kitty Kelly is a great arbiter of truth because they can “look at Bush and into his evil eyes” and know he would do such things as:

1) Beat his Wife Laura, especially when drunk because unknown sources said so.

2) Be a very angry drunk because unknown sources said so.

3) Get very drunk after he quit drinking because unknown sources said so.

4) Buy and sell cocaine after he got religion because unknown sources said so.

5) Cover for Daddy Bush Sr. as he ran around on Barbara Bush (She cried about it a lot, they must have sacred her into shutting up) because unknown sources said so.

First I’d like to see Bush Sr’s physical condition and visit him in the hospital after the “lady with the white hair” caught George Sr. doing such things. No matter like Danny Boy, Kitty has no corroborating witnesses, she doesn’t need one! Like Danny it doesn’t matter because in their prejudice they just know they are true and for them it isn’t libel or slander because they say so. First hand witnesses are not needed anyway, because we know:

1) Bushies will take them out and kill them so they can’t talk and are rightfully scared, as Kitty states , “Wouldn’t You Be?”

2) Corroborating witness Sharon the “scorned wife” Bush, divorced one from the “immoral brother” Neil has said that Kittty is lying through her teeth! The Cocaine Stories are false, and George Bush is a decent funny guy. (Neil is another matter). Of course Kitty says, “Poor thing is scared. No doubt she has been threatened to recant, she is scared, wouldn’t you be scared?” They are the most powerful family in the world!”

3) According to Poor Kitty she will now be smeared for telling the truth, “look at what they have done to everyone else who has told the truth! ” They have sought to destroy them! They will do the same to me for simplt telling the truth.”

Of course Kitty isn’t seeking anyone’s destruction now is she. Terrye, a sad fact is when the NBC morning show (Matt and Katie) has Kitty Kelly on three successive days to go over her book, and never have John O’Neil or any Swifty on ever, that is trying to control news and events. If they did have John O’Neil on they would be harder on him, but I would still love to see it, smug Katie and her plastic perky smile cracking off her face.

Terrye, in truth we are already screaming…

‘Shut the hell up!’

and at the top of our lungs. Like 527’s can’t stop political speech. Danny Boy and the MSM, try as they may, can’t keep us from finding a way to our free speech rights either. We just are doing it through the Weblogs, the MSM knows this and that is why they disparage them. Good luck Dan, Kitty and the rest of my former party trying to shut people up they don’t want to hear and force feed us news we reject. When you fail to do that, you seek to out scream us by controling news events bringing out fake memos, Kitty Kelly etc. You may as well be trying to stop Hurricane Ivan before it hits the shore, you are wasting precious time. Good luck you are going to need it, take care to not get caught in a tidal surge.

Sep 15, 2004 - 9:30 pm 75. Katherine:

Samuel,

I can plead few excuses over Clinton: first, I was still learning about politics and did not appreciate the role of media in all this, and second, I was trying to concentrate on Clinton policies, which were only half bad, especially after the healthcare reform fiasco.

I am one of those who ñ wrongly, as it turned out – did not pay attention to Clintonís abuse of power until after his reelection. Yet I, like so many people, did not care about his womanizing, but I told myself (my husband is an impeachable witness to this) that if Clinton were to be impeached, it should have been for his dealings with Chinese, specifically the technology transfers. After it became clear that he lied in Monica affair I was against his impeachment (though I enjoyed the proceedings ñ 3 branches of government tied up in a pointless business, what a boon to economy!) because by then I recognized that Al Gore had all characteristics of a fanatic, and my experience taught me to be particularly wary of ideologues, and should Clinton resign, we would be blessed with Goreís presidency.

I am not sure how my tortured and fuzzy reasoning reflected thinking at large at the time.

My personal fault was lack of recognition how corrupting power can be. I knew about it on an abstract level, but not in practice. What was also working against me was a belief in inherent honesty of American system of politics, including the press. I still think it is remarkably transparent, compared to other places. But it requires eternal vigilance and willingness to keep open mind on the part of the citizens.

I leaned my lesson well, I think.

Sep 15, 2004 - 10:45 pm 76. Syl:

Well said, Katherine. You learned much much faster than I did.

I didn’t get the ‘abuse of power’ thing until much later, neither did I get the bias of the MSM. I was quite politically naive in those days.

I did turn against NOW, though. I guess that’s worth something.

My turn against NOW made me examine other interest groups as well and I found plenty of them that had basically achieved their original goals yet continued to push ever more extreme positions.

I decided that any group pushing social, environment, or identity group policies should have a built-in sunset clause.

Sep 16, 2004 - 12:24 am 77. Katherine:

Excellent idea, Syl. So should most laws, except the most fundamental ones.

Sep 16, 2004 - 8:03 am 78. labar:

Im sorry, I didn’t realize that CBS was playing by a different set of rules than we are. Hmmm, I’d just assumed that requirements would’ve been the same.

Sep 21, 2004 - 8:50 am

Write a Comment

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