READER COMMENTS ON
"BREAKING NEWS! BlitzerGate!"
(14 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 9/20/2004 @ 4:09 pm PT...
CBS admits mistake. Rather apologizes.
That is the liberal mainstream media we have been talking about for years.
In 1992, the delegates at the Republican Convention had buttons that read "Rather Biased."
Rush was so right and so right today. If this story was the other way around, the mainstream media would be calling for the impeachment of Bush. Hannity was right. CBS, in their quest to get rid of Bush, bit the bullet on this one. Their viewerships have been taking dives for years too.
The DNC or the Kerry Campaign was probably behind the fake letters which would make them do "anything to win" or "anything to regain their power" since they lost it in 1994.
Bush's National Guard duty does not matter anyway because he was a 6-year governor and a 4-year president. Yet, CBS got bit in the butt on this one. Too funny! It's going to be a blowout!!!!!!
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
said on 9/20/2004 @ 4:54 pm PT...
Actually, had it been the other way around it never would have been reported false, and there certainly would be no apology. This apology was public, and played on all the airwaves.
Hmmm, imagine that. The message got out there.
And I listened to Rush the other day, making some loose connection between Rather's hatred, CBS and the Bush family. It never ceases to amaze me how brainwashed you are. But to be brainwashed, you hafta wanna be brainwashed.
Hey Paul, maybe you should be one of those 2 billion viewers he was talking about, who should send HIM money to buy a car!
I hold out hope for you Paul. Perhaps you can be born a third time.
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
said on 9/20/2004 @ 4:57 pm PT...
Paul, my last comment was inappropriate. I apologize.
Though you irritate me to no end, it doesn't mean you don't deserve your opinion, convoluted as it is.
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 9/20/2004 @ 6:27 pm PT...
It isn't about Bush's service for me. Hell, is anyone surprised that his dad may have pulled some strings? Really?
It's about CBS deliberately circumventing standard journalistic procedure to try and rush a story out into the public. They betrayed the trust of the public by presenting those documents as valid, regardless of the content being verified somewhere else.
And there is an animus b/t Rather and the Bush family going back to the late 80s. It wouldn't surprise me if Rather let that cloud his judgement. But I wouldn't state that as fact.
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 9/20/2004 @ 8:36 pm PT...
It was my understanding that the CONTENT of the memos was not denied, just the fact of their form. I think a semi-intelligent person would infer that Bush's silence on the content is obvious. I feel bad for Dan Rather. I've watched him for YEARS AND YEARS. He's a decent guy and a good reporter/journalist. I think he got Bush-whacked!
Either way, it seems that no one really cares whether Bush was awol or whatever. Of course, I think it matters. But the freepers don't. Small minds probably can't absorb too much info anyway, since they have all of Numbers and Leviticus committed to memory, lest they run into a heathen and need to pronounce Biblical judgement upon them.
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
said on 9/21/2004 @ 11:24 am PT...
It is implied that CBS was completely in the wrong for airing it to begin with. At least they are showing integrity in admitting they were wrong to do so. THAT is now the story, and has taken the heat once again off Bush and the content of the forged memo. Bush escapes scot-free again!
Oil and water, this guy.
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
said on 9/21/2004 @ 4:48 pm PT...
Oil and water? There is no story!!
Why even make a comment on the truths of a fake documents? Why say what they say is true! They are fake documents! It would not stand up in court. Teddy was right again!
Gore turned down this story.
This story has been around before Bush was governor of Texas and before he was president. Clinton proved that a draft dodger can be president, so "military service" is not required.
Even if all of it was true, it doesn't matter!
Rather has been openly biased for years.
We freepers do watch television. I remember seeing Diane Sawyer with contempt in her eyes while she was interviewing Ken Starr. She had a gleem in her eye a few weeks later when she interviewed Charles Manson.
When Peter Jennings announced that Bush was indeed the president on the United States, he had the look of despair.
We see this stuff and know that the old media is bias as all get out. They pretend they are not baised. 94% of journalists vote Democrat. These are known facts.
We like Rush and Hannity and local conservative talk show hosts because they tell you where they are coming from and they agree with us.
A Liberal talk show host usually gets his show canceled for lack of an audience amyway, like Jim Hightower.
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
said on 9/21/2004 @ 6:22 pm PT...
Oh Lord, do not lump me in with the freepers!! The fact that I think CBS/Rather need to be held accountable doesn't make me like Bush.
As I have said before, all this focus on 'Nam only benefits Bush. Because if we focused on the issues at hand, W would be getting buried.
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
said on 9/21/2004 @ 7:20 pm PT...
"We freepers do watch television. I remember seeing Diane Sawyer with contempt in her eyes while she was interviewing Ken Starr. She had a gleem in her eye a few weeks later when she interviewed Charles Manson."
Glad you remember that, Paul. Who can ever forget when Sawyer interiewed Starr in 1998 and then "a few weeks later" in 1994(!!!) she interviewed Manson.
Where do you "freepers" do your fact checking? CBS?
Get your fake stories straight before you bother lying about them slash re-typing them over here please, Paul.
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
said on 9/22/2004 @ 10:53 am PT...
Paul, speaking of your completely incorrect assessment of Peter Jennings, there was a study done (and I'll look for it if I have time today) a couple of years ago, that took a look at the subtle messages being sent via the media to persuade voters to believe in one candidate over the other.
I remember distinctly Jennings, who has a Republican slant, was shown talking about George W. Bush, then shown talking about Al Gore. They turned the sound down and asked randomly selected individuals to mark when they thought Jennings was reading good news, or bad news.
An overwhelming majority of people confirmed that when he was speaking of Bush he was positive, while when mentioning Gore it was decidedly negative.
Of course Jennings called all of it nonsense, and denied presenting information in any slant whatsoever. Mostly it was a bunch of hodge podge and way too intangible to be circumstantial, but I found it interesting nonetheless.
More importantly, it completely shows you have no clue what you're talking about.
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
said on 9/22/2004 @ 11:17 am PT...
Jennings is a Canadian socialist.
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
said on 9/22/2004 @ 11:24 am PT...
> focused on the issues at hand
Like the good economy?
Have you guys noticed that Rather apologized to everyone except Bush?
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
said on 9/22/2004 @ 11:26 am PT...
> interiewed Starr in 1998 and then "a few weeks later" in 1994(!!!) she interviewed Manson.
Must have been a re-run but it still makes the point.
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
said on 9/22/2004 @ 11:49 am PT...
Hardly. But nice try.
Better luck next time.