http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070921/D8RPKMPO0.html This kills me. He was wrong, knows he was wrong and doesn't care. Now this suit is about ethics? The majority of its substance is him whining about how he's not on television anymore.
He wasn't wrong about the basic facts of the story. It was pathetic that CBS didn't support him on that.
Well, he was framed and railroaded - cause for complaint, anyway. Unless everyone's OK with appointing a board member of the Gannett Corp and a former Bush family AG selection to investigate a news fraud involving W's military "service". Maybe a lawsuit like this will at least get some kind of straight story out of that odd forgery business.
No, he wasn't correct ...not even close! Can't and shouldn't support what isn't true and factual! And that report(s) was not true nor factual. Don't you find it odd, funny, strange, that he's just now getting around to suing CBS? Ya' want to know why? Well, his recent endeavors haven't been very successful ....no one believes him anymore. And rightly so. Baron Max
Bush was an AWOL blowmonkey. Every other eyewitness said so. Rather could have left the forged memo out and the story would still stand on it's own.
there really aren't any thats the point no one remembers seeing him their there is no evidence that he served
So the integrity of EXACT facts are no longer an issue with you? Interesting. I'll remind you of this claim the next time you split hairs on issues because of pertinent facts not meshing up the way you think they should. Bush is an asshole who probably avoided the draft just like every wealthy kid in his generation did. The fact that right wing crybabies are quick to point out Clinton's avoidance of the draft annoy me equally. Who cares-- Vietnam was a nonsensical war fought for nonsensical reasons, I sure as hell wouldn't have gone. However, until you can prove, substantially, that there was subterfuge afoot, then you have nothing to talk about. When a "respected" (which is a joke) news anchor, working for the Tiffany Network makes outrageous claims that are totally unsupportable, then you can bet the guy got what he deserved. It doesn't matter if the "spirit" of the truth was there or not, Rather's team made claims, Rather supported those claims to the detriment of his erstwhile credibility and it cost him his career. All you lefties out there caterwaul like a coop of hens whenever a conservative forgets to dot an "i", and yet you circle the wagons for a guy like Rather who OBVIOUSLY had political motives in his actions and had little regard for the truth. Great, Rather hates Bush! Who doesn't? Get the guy on the stuff he deserves and not on some invented shit and you'll actually be taken seriously. ~String
You err in your ascription of motive. All of "us lefties" don't like Rather much, neither do we respect his political motives. What we are talking about is the fact that Rather did get the facts straight in his story - in detail - and dismissing the facts of the story because he was set up with forged documents shows disregard for the truth by those in pursuit of a political agenda. You knee-jerk righties keep overlooking that. Rather was very probably set up - unless you think he had those documents forged himself - and set up with the obvious goal of herding all the righty-ranters into a chorus of drown-out frogs for what was a politically damaging circumstance of W's life - one that illustrated his lack of personal responsibility and integrity, his drug problems and sense of privilege, his impatience and immaturity, and his inability to actually accomplish anything or follow through on arduous tasks. Whoever supplied those forgeries knew the facts - they were accurate, as confirmed by the secretary who would have typed them had they been the originals. Gore didn't. Kerry didn't. Lots of wealthy kids didn't. W was running for office against Gore and Kerry; an office in which real military experience might be - proved to be - an important factor. And W didn't just hide from the draft - he crapped out on even the minimal responsibilities of his hidey hole. He got his daddy to pull strings and get him a sweet deal, and then he failed to live up to even that. It was a real story, in other words. It wasn't a puffup of triviality. And that is how he has fulfilled his responsibilities as President. That would have been worthwhile info for deciding votes, had it not been drowned by the frog-swamp. But to return to the topic: Rather was probably framed, and railroaded. If so, he has every reason to sue, and much as I can't stand the guy I hope he wins - and I look forward to maybe finding out, years late, where those forgeries came from.
Yessss... I'm such a right winger. Mua-ha-ha-haaaa. And I'm part of your invented little conspiracy that has succeeded in framing Rather. For the record, again, I'm of the opinion that Bush avoided the draft and is a disaster of a president. Just because I don't buy into your histrionic theories on how the Republicans are the source of all things evil doesn't make me a right winger. Ahhh... no ice, Rather was handed a set of forgeries that [most likely] some leftie made in the hopes of splattering a little pie on Bush's face. Upon seeing the documents, Rather blew a load in his breeches at the prospect of a "GOTCHA" against Bush and rushed to judgment without properly checking his facts-- so says CBS. Had Betsy West (a liberal) ran a tighter ship and kept Rathers political agenda in check, they MIGHT have eventually gotten a real story out of the whole ordeal, but the thought of busting this story had them licking their chops for the president's blood (and little miss Betsy would still have a job with CBS who demanded her resignation over the whole ordeal). Of course, I don't know EXACTLY what went on internally at CBS, but the facts that I can surmise out of the whole ordeal are a lot more supportable than your ganymede-esque conspiracy theory which [SURPRISE! It's all the Republican's fault... they set up the poor, innocent Rather to take a fall] that is less credible than the notion that man sprung forth from a lightning strike on an oak tree. Well, I won't defend Bush. Allah knows that he probably did a lot more than that. I could care less about his drug use (or any other politician's drug use: there's a reason why you can't run for president until you're 35). This isn't about Bush-- which is an easy road to be diverted upon. It's too tempting. Blame Bush! But that's not the issue. Your claims are specious at best and I'd love to see you substantiate them with anything more than your articulate (I have to grant you) language. Show me the money (and I want footnotes). Otherwise, the facts are as they are-- not because I trust whatever the mainstream media presents, but because I'm skeptical of any claim made by anybody without real proof. Perhaps. But again, that's not the issue. The issue is that Rather and company didn't get THE facts right along with that really annoyingly necessary thing called: credible proof. I sympathize with your desire to find the proof and to know where the forgeries came from, but Rather was caught red handed dealing with the devil and he paid the price. Les Moonves and Rather hate eachother enough to stuff horse heads into eachother's beds, so whatever Rather has on CBS; Moonves, I am sure, has an equally damaging stash of skeletons on Rather. ~String
Rather had a great job for many years. I wonder why he can't just let it go and retire? It sems that with his money and health he could really benifit from retiring now. Instead of getting upset why not do as many other celebraties did and just retire with dignaty. I guess his ego just won't allow that to happen. To bad for now we are going to see allot of dirt thrown everywhere.
Most likely? How did that leftie get the facts accurate? Or the rightie, whoever ? No. If this was, as it appears to be, a Rove-style dirty trick coup, you're part of their target - a dependable sucker. They can count on you to miss the point and blow off the facts, when presented with bad liberal behavior leading you that-a-way. Wasn't "blaming Bush" for anything - simply pointing out that the story was important. What it meant for the W candidacy was not the sort of petty slander that, say, Edward's haircuts mean now. There was powerful motive here on all sides. And the net loser was the voter. But they did. Which is the issue - W was in trouble there. Rather and company did have the facts right and much credible evidence - even down to the content of the commanding officer's memos, verifiable by interviewing his secretary. Anyone who claims to be interested in facts, or truth, or the like, is faced with the triviality of the forgeries in the context of the rest of the evidence and the reality of the situation. (They weren't trivial in the matter of media bias or political campaign tactics, of course). So the question remains: who forged the memos? How did they know what to include for content? Another one: Why did CBS throw Rather under the bus like that?
A good question. But your basing your whole argument on the notion that the veracity of the story is unquestionable-- despite all the pesky lying on Mapes's part. In any court-- be that legitimate one or the court of public opinion, all of the ducks have to be in a row or the whole thing is out. To this day there are hordes of Bush-haters who are scouring the Earth in order to substantiate this story-- though Bush may have substantial resources, the Bush haters are far, FAR more numerous. I find it hard to believe that the reason why they were vexed on this issue is that the Republicans are just far too tricky. But if so, then I guess when trickery's afoot, then perhaps one deserves to loose by oneupmanship at the same game. Yes, ice, begin the insults directed at me (or anyone) because I that your story stinks with equal amounts of imagination and conspiracy, much like your claims of this Rove-style conspiracy on the Republican's part. I didn't say Bush was innocent-- there isn't a president since Lincoln who doesn't have blood on his hands. The difference between you and me is that I realize that Democrats and Republicans are different sides of the same evil coin. It's you who (IMHO) is a dependable sucker who is so fixated your partisan hatred of a politician and the corrupt party they are a part of that you cannot see the equal evil that Dems/Liberals do... but that's another debate. I didn't blow off the facts any more than I would blow off other facts. I think that the story's convenient timing and obvious forgeries level enough suspicion around for both parties in Memogate. I had already made up my mind LONG before the elections NOT to vote for Bush (or Kerry either). A fact that I pointed out in my last post, did I not? Had Rather and Co. run a tighter ship and done their fact checking properly, they probably could have kept this story under wraps until they came across something truly valuable to the voters, which could ALSO be substantiated without some major scandal on their part. But they didn't. Until being meticulous about the whole matter, they rushed to judgment. Who knows? Perhaps some ex-military liberal who served/lead in Bush's unit/wing/division/[whatever] and who knew enough to make some assemble the whole thing to make Bush look even worse than he did. A conspiracy theory can go both ways. Because Rather wouldn't let the thing die or apologize when he should. He also wouldn't keep his mouth shut about the matter and let others sort it out. He kept stamping his seal of approval on the whole debacle, and then when Moonves gave him an ultimatum on the story, I'm sure that Rather crossed the line and got his contract canceled. ~String
Or he was such a common sight that he blended into the back ground, Hell I couldn't confirm were half of the people that I served with were at any given time, or that they completed their service fully, and at the time early out were being handed out like candy, all you had to do was not piss off the First Shirt, and having been a recipient of one of the early outs I can tell you the way it was handled was to put you in a statues, were you weren't being paid, and releasing you from duty, but your ETS was still at the end of your contracted enlistment date, I was given a 90 day early out, I went on terminal leave to separation, I was not on duty for those 90 day, I received no pay, but I was not AWOL, and I showed up on no duty reports, and I could have been re-called if the shit hit the fan, ( In a way the shit did hit the fan, I had a few run in with liberals anti war bastards, who just didn't know when to leave well enough alone, and had to try and rub my service up my Nose) and my offical seperation date was still Dec. 19, 1972, so I re-called my self, hadn't even used up the 90 days of early out.
But they aren't equivalent conspiracies. The one is fairly trivial - the bad and incompetent replacement by forgery of just another piece of evidence, this one gone missing under mysterious circumstances but apparently known to many people, to add to an otherwise well supported case. The other is a brilliant setup and destruction of a legitimate news outlet reporting accurately on significant events, with resultant intimidation effects on the media coverage of a political power group. There isn't a single news outlet or anchor that can't be set up as Rather was, and they know it. The remarkable kid-glove treatment that this administration has received needs some explanation - that would be a likely part of it. There is no way to set up a conspiracy theory that does not involve the essential facts: W was AWOL, extremely and noticeably negligent in the performance of his already soft and privileged wartime duties in the Texas Air National Guard, protected from the ordinary consequences of that, and deserving of whatever bad judgments on his character and likely job performance as Commander In Chief that would incur. There is plenty of circumstantial evidence of that, eyewitness testimony by the secretary et al, and all documentation that would exonerate him (or, by failing to, convict him by contradicting specifics) has mysteriously disappeared. And Rather was framed and railroaded, with consequences not only to his career and reputation but to bigtime news coverage in general. You really think I "began" the insults? You ? You guys don't even read your own posts carefully, do you.
Which may well be true, but the fact is NOBODY has any proof to substantiate it other than some vivid tales and some testimony which, though nicely worded, is not beyond the ability of the Bush haters to instigate. Yes, ice, I do. Are you implying that by not reading my posts I have somehow missed the fact that I called you a sucker or some other condescending name? Or that by not reading my post, I somehow missed the fact that I deserve such a moniker? At any rate. I don't want to get off track with another personal ping-pong match with you. Distilled down to its essential facts: those who are caviling about a conspiracy here are light on substantiated facts and heavy on theories. Again, I'm not defending Bush (which, btw, seems to get me in a whole heap of trouble with liberals, who have no problem subscribing to the Bushism, "you're with us or against us," in that, if I don't ardently support every puerile attack on Bush, I'm somehow a Bush supporter). His whole administration smells of rotten prepuce-- but that doesn't imply a conspiracy where, in actuality, there is only idiocy. ~String
There are pay stubs for the those weekends and summer drills that he was required to attend, and once you are given a early out there are no more pay stubs because you aren't required to attend drills, and you aren't being paid, My cousin who was in the guards at the same time I was in regular service was given a early out, a release from further attendance of drills, and after he was released from the reporting requirements, he didn't receive any more pay stubs, but he was credited with full time, and given his Honorable. So why should it be any different for George? because it make a good political smear for the democrats to report it as AWOL. There is still no hard evidence, or paper work that shows President Bush was AWOL, and didn't complete his service requirements, and the documentation that Rather staked his career on has been shown to be fabricated, forged, bogus, how many years and still no offical documentation, all of the documentation that exist has been reviewed, time and again, and still no offical paper work to prove that the President was AWOL.
