CBS

[Atrocities]

You got me.... I miss read the article - Sunday Sept 19th Columbian. (Page A10 Second collum of the news story "The Lessons Of Rathergate.") I apologize for the confussion.

Eventually the Old Media took another look and, using news-gathering expertise unavailable to bloggers, chased the story all the way to a Kinko's in Texas.

From MSNBC - (Cleared things up.)

Strong, the former Guard officer, said Last week that when Rather showed him the documents, they contained a header showing they had been faxed to the network from a Kinko's copy shop in Abilene.

Virtually every document specialist and viable news source, except CBS, are calling the memo's "Modern Day Forgeries."

"I know Dan Rather is right," Marian Carr Knox, a former secretary in Bush's Guard unit, recalled saying. The neighbor said she should do something about it. So she called a Houston newspaper, Knox told CBS, but did not get a call back. Dallas Morning News reporter Pete Slover soon tracked down Knox and showed her copies of the Killian memos.

"These are not real," declared Knox, who said she handled Killian's memos. "They're not what I typed, and I would have typed them for him."

Now I am not questioning wether or not Bush received favorable treatment while in the TexANG, to think otherwise is just silly, what I am questioning are the memo's.

I have read and according to FOX, the rumor mill is ablaze that these memo's were dilibrately made to discredit CBS news and Dan Rather. I am sorry, but I find that laughable to say the least. CBS thought they had a smoking gun, it turned out it was not. They wanted to save face in the intensifying light of the truth, and they hurt their crediblity. These things happen. Remember the exploding chevy trucks that Date Line faked?

I have no doubts that CBS honestly felt that the memo's were real, or at least had a more likely than not that they are real mentality toward them with the view that if they were not authentic, that it would be up to the white house to prove it, and that was a huge mistake given all the Blogs out there.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6039473/
And an article in the Sunday Columbian ( http://www.columbian.com/ ) - by Beth Gillin.

And as much as I hate the thought, I feel Kerry has this election in the bag. (Thanks to brillant election tactics and under handed tactics and the support of the liberal left main stream media.)

[Will]

Ok, I couldn't find the article in the Columbian, but the MSNBC article clarified a few things. After reading through it, I would say that the inconsistencies that were brought up are not covered by duplication, and it is probable that the memos are partially or entirely fake (ie, parts could be from actual memos, other parts "reconstructed" in a computer). However, that doesn't mean that the content was false, as a lot of people are trying to claim; "if pigs fly, then bacon comes from pigs". Conclusion can be (and in the example, is) true regardless of the premise.

So, journalists are now focusing on the accusations made by the memos, rather than the memos themselves, which should have been the focus all along. The forgery stuff is secondary, and only served as a distraction; in the end, it is irrelevent as long as it is clear that favourable treatment was given. Some of the things disputed in the documents, like the Col. that was supposedly putting pressure to gloss over negative details being hon. discharged a year earlier, don't even seem like valid arguements to me. If he's retired, he can still influence things that happen in the ranks, it's not like retirement means he cuts himself off from all ties to the Guard. And so on...

I guess we'll see as the week goes on how this affects things, but it looks like a (after a fashion) Bush supporter is starting to be convinced of a Kerry victory, and a (after a fashion) Kerry supporter is convinced of a Bush re-election... things are going to be confusing for a while.

This strict two-party business is starting to get to me even more now though. Things are so polarized, and there doesn't seem much hope of things getting better, that a civil war and/or hostile takeover to a single party system almost seems plausible in 25 years. Scary.

[Atrocities]

However, that doesn't mean that the content was false

I Agree.

[tesco samoa]

Question. Why does what happened in the early 70's matter. Is it just to attempt to swing the middle class vote ? When I mentioned this stuff a few years ago. It was because I was so pissed off by that mission accomplished. And I tied it in with the cutting of benifits for veterns.

Is this a panic measure by the Dem's because they feel they are lossing the election ?

I just want to know why this is so important when there are far more important things to talk about in USA election.

[Will]

It's a character thing. In the past, Bush has (alegedly, but few actually doubt it) abused position and power to get away with things other people couldn't. And (alegedly) brag about it. Fast forward thirty years later, and he's doing pretty much the same thing with the Presidency. So, we are led to conclude, if it has happened before in the past, and it has happened recently, it is then reasonably safe to assume that the same abuses (erosion of civil liberties, tying "terrorism" into anything and everything, unilateral pre-emptive invasion for dubious reasons at high cost to average citizens, almost no crackdowns on corporate scandals, the list goes on...) and bragging ("Mission Accomplished" photo-op on carrier, the circus that was made around the capture of Saddam and the invasion of Iraq as a whole, "We're fighting evil!", and so on) will continue to happen in the future. With just what's happened recently, there's still a strong arguement to vote someone else. By showing a pattern of the same behaviour, they hopefully lock in that arguement so as to be irrefutable except by those blinded by partisan dogma. Meaning those people that think that all that stuff Bush did is great (I know they exist, I've met some).

What actually seems to be happening is that people end up hating one candidate and merely disliking the other. Both candidates' attempts to lift up their own image is on shakey ground, too, so it doesn't look like the hate/dislike combo is going to change in 43 days. And in the absence of any viable alternative, most people are going to vote for dislike just so hate doesn't get in.

[Atrocities]

Look at what Clinton did. Given what Clinton did while president, Bush's character is pretty much above reproach when compared to that of Clintons. Clinton reduced the reputation of the white house to that of a brothel, he lied to congress, and we kept him around for eight years.

Having someone pull strings for you when your 18 or 19 years old is nothing new. I know that when I was 18 I made some pretty horrible choices in my life that I know now I would have done differently. If we accept your POV that a person’s character remains the same from youth through adulthood, then my character is just as rancid as it was 15 years ago.

I put to you that a person character is what they are at the moment, that their character is built by experience and life, not by the strings your dad pulls for you.

And about the fighting evil thing, ya its laughable now, but if Kerry is elected, rather when Kerry is elected, he wants to wage a kinder, gentler war against terrorism. Doesn’t that just send a shudder up your spine? Its Clintons foreign policy all over again. The same policies that got us into this mess.

I really don't believe that terrorist would be impressed with our kinder gentler side. IMHO they would view it as a weakness and really step up their reign of terror.

Then again I could be wrong and who knows, perhaps Kerry can bring the world together in a way never before done. I simply cannot see into the future, I can only predict possible happenstances. And honestly one of those predictions is an America one step closer to the grave, and several steps further away from the freedoms we now enjoy.

Ok that was self serving BS, but honestly I do fear what Kerry will do as president. I honest to God do.

But back on topic, what do you thing the eventual out come of this will be now that CBS is conceeding that perhaps the documents themselves are not authentic, even if the content might be?

[rextorres]

Can you please catalogue Bush's successes?

When will you hold Bush responsible for the fact that things have gotten worse in the Last 4 years?

Off the top of my head here what I see.

• - Rest of world views the US more negatively - more than ever before.
  - No resources or will left to tackle Iran or N. Korea.
  - Two bungled invasions.
  - Allies not willing to work with us on anything.
  - A weakened UN.
  - Israeli/Palestinians situation is as bad as it's ever been.
  - Russia is reverting back to a dictatorship.
  It goes on and on.

Anyway blaming Clinton doesn't hold water in my book.