But probably 40% of Americans believe Rather, which is more than the % that have even an inkling as to how our economy works.

Dan who?

Firsties?

Anyway, Bugs Bunny said it best "what a maroon!"

This can't possibly still be amazing to you ... I remember the first time I saw the Alps ... that first mountain was amazing ... and the second ... and the third ... by number 200 or so, it wasn't quite so amazing ... same with clueless lefties.

Kalb is a Rather buttboy from way back.

Between the denials and the conspiracy theories, I found it amusing.

My neighbor's two year-old daughter behaves better that this idjit.

And she's a heckuva lot smarter, too.

I bet Dan is working on an exclusive with a little known mother of a soldier killed in Iraq who will soon be announcing her opposition to the war effort.

"She has courage coming out in the face of such media hostility," Rather solemnly intoned.

Did anyone really expect Rather or Mapes either one to just 'fess up? The only thing that has happened here that I expected to be different was that I expected both of them to find a scapegoat to lay the blame on. It makes you wonder how high up the fault actually lies when Dan Rather is the fall guy.

Isn't it time that somebody raised the question that ought never to be asked: Does this man have a drinking problem? I know that some of us like to drink and think, but we're not national newscasters. Poor old Dan R looks - and behaves - like a victim of severe advanced soggy-brain.

Time to increase Dan's meds.

Rather is technically correct: the Bush Guard memos were never proven to be fakes because noone, except for Karl Lucy Rodriguez, ever saw them. .

#1 song_and_dance_man

The answer my friend, is blowing in the wind... No.

OT -- Delay stepping down -- TX grand Jury indicted him!

He is morphing in to what he accused Nixon of being. So much irony that I almost believe in divine intervention here!

Ha Ha

Everything is a conspiracy.

Dan,please return to the mother ship,your bolts need tightening.

alzheimers is a bitch, eh dan?

Rather is a clueless has-been.

He got sloppy over time, indulging his huge ego instead of performing his job like a professional, and he got burned.

He still doesn't realize it, or want to admit it if he does, but that's the end of the story. His continued sputtering is just embarrassing.

I was listening to this inerview on my way to work about three days ago, whenever it aired on CSPAn radio.

Dan Rather at one point was asked about bias and he says something like (paraphrase) "Well, you know, concerning the Iraq war, I think perhaps reporters were a bit too patriotic and gung-ho.. I know I'm guilty of this myself"

I swear, I nearly ran off the road.

He follows up with someong like "well, nobody questions my patriotism sitting down!"

I'm just going to go on record here and say I do question Dan Rather's patriotism. And I'd question it no matter whether he were sitting, standing, laying, dancing, pooping, or hanging.

He'd ra^ther not face reality. Ra^ther delusional, if you ask me.

Somewhere, Richard Nixon is walking around with a big smile on his face.

#20 Amy

He got sloppy over time, indulging his huge ego instead of performing his job like a professional, and he got burned.

I don't think he was ever professional. Ever. Rude to the Presidents - Nixon and Bush Sr - slobbered over the Clintons, fake but accurate, blah blah blah.

So this is one little finger in the wind, saying I prefer to use press rather than the word media.

Ugh, I don't want to be caught downwind from that finger, if you know what I mean.

Ten years from now, he's going to be in some nursing home, drooling on himself and periodically snarling "bloggers!" before lapsing into incoherence again.

ok, five years, tops.

"I need to return to something before I forget it…why is it that every poll shows that reporters are not held in the kind of esteem that we once were. I think by and large, that we are responsible for that. And I do not exclude myself from that criticism." Dan Rather

I found this interview to be a mea culpa for Mr. Rather, obviously he would not like to end his half century career on such a sour note, but he has uttered a truth here: the "kind of esteem" that they once held is gone, why? Because they no longer control the truth, there are experts in every imaginable field who have the ability now to post a newspaper on the net shredding the biased and ignorant conclusions of the reporters. They have been revealed to be littler more than leftist proselytizers, whole-cloth hacks who "report" their version of the world.

Yes they have declined in esteem, down to zero.

Like I wrote in an earlier comment:

Long ago, I wonder if this discussion ever happened:

old guy 1: So do you think this "automobile" thing can be called a buggy?

old guy 2: Well, I don't know. Perhaps someday, if these "automobiles" can be improved and if they can have a horse in front of them (after all, a buggy must have a horse and ideally a buggy whip). Until then, I don't think we can give them the noble distinction of "buggy", which has an important role in society.

Crimsonfisted #24

His career began long before Nixon and Bush I.

I believe he was professional and a good reporter when he started out, but then he fell into that old trap of believing his own press and thinking that he deserved to be a big star telling everyone what to think instead of reporting the facts.

He should have taken a leaf out of Murrow's book instead of grandstanding.

God, I am starting to feel sorry for this guy just like I do for any person entering the threshold of dementia. But after the MSM discredited itself by publishing innuendo, rumor and supposition as "fact" during and after Katrina, Rather is looking more and more like Moses parting the waters and leading his tribe to the great Motherhood of truth!

/NY Times available at every checkout counter

"I need to return to something before I forget it…why is it that every poll shows that reporters are not held in the kind of esteem that we once were

I worked with reporters at Bur. Nat'l Affairs and USA Today.

With a few notable exceptions, they sucked personally and professionally.

So Dan claims that the press is being mean to poor old Mamma Moonabt, and that the same press is too patriotic. So are we like living in Bizzaro world now? This guy is off his rocker, "Goodbye, Me am Dan Rather, Am too patriotic for only smearing the troops 99.99% of time, and am mean to Sheehan for only showing good footage of her."

#26 Right Brain

the "kind of esteem" that they once held is gone, why? Because they no longer control the truth, there are experts in every imaginable field who have the ability now to post a newspaper on the net shredding the biased and ignorant conclusions of the reporters

Since you put it that way, I guess the "kind of esteem" that Dorothy and company had for the Wizard of OZ went down when Toto pulled the curtain back. The truth is though, that the Wizard never did deserve it; he just bluffed his way into acquiring it. As did Ra^ther. Until Charles and other participants in the blogosphere pulled his curtain back. The difference is that the Wizard knew when the jig was up.

In the fevered minds of the Dan Rather's, Cindy Sheehan's/Michael Moore's/Howard Dean's - it ought to be tue so therefore it is true.

Dan Rather thinks the guard memo forgery unmasking was a sinister plot.

Meanwhile, a couple of years back, Charles Johnson himself was spouting that the unfortunate trampling deaths at Mecca were evidence that Islam believed in human sacrifice.

So who's the "paranoid pathetic" man now?

I'm just so glad Dan finally had his long-overdue comeuppance.
And sorry it took so long.

The DUmmies are weighing in with their usual penetrating analyses:

StrafingMoose
17. I think Rove 'strawman'ed Rather.. AFAIK, Rove created a forged paper, sent it in the pile of real documents, the media swallowed it, then the whole thing got discredited for this 'fake' document.

SlipperySlope
20. Very interesting... I need to read more about this.

WhereIsMyFreedom
27. No forgery There was no conclusive proof that the document was a forgery, the entire thing was that Rather was unable to prove their authenticity. Of course, the freepers and the 'liberal media' hid that fact well and harped that it was a fake.

wryter2000
19. There's no doubt the story is true Even if the memos are fake (and that's not proved), every bit of evidence says the story is true. The main evidence against the memos -- the secretary -- insists the story itself is true.

I'd point SlipperySlope in the right direction, but I've long since been banned from DU.

I'm so upset.

Dan Rather: Informative not credible.

I wonder if the typesetting for Dan's headstone will be done using MSWord or some obscure 1970's typewriter?

#34 nogroG

So who's the "paranoid pathetic" man now?

Um, that would be you...

#34 nodroG

You are, and always have been.

#34 Gordon

Islam does believe in human sacrafice. It is a death cult. How many Muslims have to explode themselves for an idiot like to get it?

#34
nodrog,welcome back,where the hell ya been
baby,we sure did miss you

/must I

#34 nodroG

So who's the "paranoid pathetic" man now?

Please, do you never tire of embarrassing yourself here?

So childish. Bleh.

#36 brianstein

StrafingMoose might have one synapse snapping because it at least accepts that one of the documents were fakes.

Love the self-fisking

Even if the memos are fake (and that's not proved), every bit of evidence says the story is true

Even if one of the set is false, every one in the set are true. Huh?

BTW, do you still have an impressive collection of membership cards and 8 x 10 glossies of the Pres, mailed almost daily from the RNC?

#34 Gordon

That is quite the reach back. Completely unrelated to the topic, _and_ it made no sense.

Do you think you are commenting just for the sake of it? Sorry, but I just don't see the enthusiasm.

I expected more from you.

He can't change his story now. Otherwise, SSI will cut off his disability checks.

Geez, Gord, do you keep a file cabinet full of moral equivalencies? They don't make much sense, but their sheer number and variety are breathtaking.

He's the poster boy for Persecutory Delusonal Disorder:

"Individuals with persecutory delusional disorder experience what is known as persecutory delusions: an irrational, yet unshakable, belief that someone is plotting against them. Delusions experienced by individuals with delusional disorder are more plausible than those experienced by paranoid schizophrenics; not bizarre, though still unjustified. Individuals with delusional disorder may seem offbeat or quirky rather than mentally ill, and, as such, may never seek treatment."

#25 religion of bacon

Ten years from now, he's going to be in some nursing home, drooling on himself and periodically snarling "bloggers!" before lapsing into incoherence again.

ROFLMAO! I can picture it, too.

Too bad universities allow themselves to become echo chambers for has beens & crackpots. Not sure they're serving the interests of students or advancing learning.

See yesterday's "Academentia" by Victor Davis Hanson for his view on this sad state of university affairs.

#28 Amy

From Jump Street --Parkland Memorial Hospital, his first claim to fame-- he always had a penchant for inserting himself into the smack dab middle of the story, so that the story he ended up doing was as much about Dan Rather as it was about anything else. He may as well have waved his arms and repeatedly screamed, "Look at me! Look at me!" To my mind he was never a good journalist.

Seven replies to one nodrog dropping. (yeah, I guess 8 now)

Why do I imagine him putting slashmarks on a nearby chalkboard?

and the wisdom to know the difference

#34 Gordo

You're slipping,you forgot the exclamatory victory claim.

44 Renna

Evidently, I'm not as elevated in the hierarchy as you - I only had one 8x10, which I mailed to a Bush-hating socialist friend of mine after the election. I'm thoughtful, that way. My buddy acknowledged the largesse, and says he now farts daily in my honor.

Sort of like my Buddhist relatives burning incense, only different.

#28 Amy
I searched for the link on ratherbiased or one of those sites, because I remember reading he predicated his career on a lie during the Kennedy assassination. He wasn't where he said he was, reported something fraudulently or something like that. But I haven't been able to find the link again to provide support. So,I think (and this is just my opinion) he is a gasbag and a fraud and was never professional. He started that way. I also recall he was pretty vicious to snatch the job from Walter Cronkite too.

IMHO is all.

#55 Crimsonfisted

He wasn't where he said he was, reported something fraudulently or something like that.

Here ya go, sweetcakes

Well, the same Travis County Demonrat machine that probably created the Bush TANG memos have gotten DeLay to step down as Majority Leader.

They made be sad and pathetic, but they're not going down without a fight.

He wants to the memos to be true.

He is DAN RATHER IMPARTIAL OBJECTIVE NEWSMAN.

Therefore the memos are true.

See it is all really rather (pun intended) simple.

Meanwhile, a couple of years back, Charles Johnson himself was spouting that the unfortunate trampling deaths at Mecca were evidence that Islam believed in human sacrifice.

Are you really that stupid? I believe the point was that since these little accidents occur at almost every Hajj, and are always dismissed as the Will of Allah, Mulsims don't value life all that much.

Subtle, I know.

Or, too use a Qerie word, nuanced

#57 Ed: If DeLay weren't as crooked as the Crooked River, I would perhaps shed a tear.

to use, not too use.

I would have pimped, but supervisor was walking into office and I was taking a call.

#34, Nodrog:

It's not too much work for you to link to any evidence you might have to prove your assertion?

I mean, why would we think Islam isn't a Religion of Peace™?

# 57 Ed

I was just checking on that myself and came across a Mark Levin post stating:

Here's my first take on this indictment (I've only read the indictment and nothing more for now): The indictment is three pages in length. Other than a statement that "one or more" of 3 individuals, including Tom DeLay, entered into an illegal conspiracy, I can't find a single sentence tying Tom DeLay to a crime. That is, there's not a single sentence tying DeLay to the contribution. The indictment describes the alleged conduct of two other individuals, but nothing about DeLay. You would think if Ronnie Earle had even a thin reed of testimony linking DeLay to the contribution, it would have been noted in the indictment to justify the grand jury's action. Moreover, not only is there no information about DeLay committing acts in furtherance of a conspiracy, there's no information about DeLay entering into a conspiracy. I honestly believe that unless there's more, this is an egregious abuse of prosecutorial power. It's a disgrace. I understand that not everything has to be contained in an indictment, but how about something!

Too bad that damage has already been done, but we'll see...

Only slightly OT. Another reporter that seems to always want to make the story about himself is Geraldo Rivera. I get tired of him the minute he opens his mouth, let along listening to the cliches that come pouring out. WHAT kind of literature did he read as a child?

Are you really that stupid?

You know the answer to that question.

#54 brianstein

I must be remembering wrong then. ;-) I thought it was you (and a third lizard I can't remember right) now that I was talking to about giving some small amount ($10? $20?) to the Bush-Cheney campaign, and then we were all inundated with daily solicitation letters (blowing our donation on postage) and those attaboy gifts, like my "platinum" RNC membership card. (If 10 bucks gets me platinum, how little did the green card members give?) I think my glossy count was two, so not so very much higher. I did get a faux invitation to the inauguration (fine print says does not actually allow admittance to any activity), framed on my office wall.

#60 Gordo

Proof?

Keep in mind "feelings" and accusations don't constitute proof.

Gordon,

You do recognize don't you that your psychosis over Charles Johnson is rivaled only by Rather's paranoia over a sinister conspiracy, Farrakhan's paranoia over victimhood, and Shitty Sheehan's paranoia over being recognized as both unimportant and irrelevant. I would be inclined diagnosis your disease as small penie psychosis.

And being totally unbiased because I know neither of you, I notice Charles J. is secure enough to allow you to continue to post when you never miss a chance to bad mouth him. Tells me two things without knowing either of you: (1) The quality of his character vs. your character and (2) how irrelevant but humorous he finds you. Are you by any chance related to Ms. Sheehan?

Marvin Kalb - nice man overall, I'm sure, but not unobjective.

Subject changing,obfuscation and goalpost moving in

5
4
3
2...

#34 Gordon,

That comment does not even possess any internal logic. Can you explain how the one is in any way related to the other?

Make that objective.
I have someone talk talk talk talking to me...

Dan and Cindy can share a seat on the bus ride to obscurity.

#73 Gabba

Wouldn't that be the "short bus" to obscurity?

#32

I guess the "kind of esteem" that Dorothy and company had for the Wizard of OZ went down when Toto pulled the curtain back. The truth is though, that the Wizard never did deserve it; he just bluffed his way into acquiring it. As did Rather. Until Charles and other participants in the blogosphere pulled his curtain back. The difference is that the Wizard knew when the jig was up.

... that's going to leave a mark.

Dan Rather has a point.

He did look like a fool. I wouldn't be over yet either.

#74 TotallySirius

Absolutely!

This quote from the interview, from the questioner, is hilarious:

It was the blogger, the internet blogger, who instantly went after you and CBS, with an effect that was very damaging all the way around, and played an impact indeed on the presidential campaign. I've always been astonished that even before the program ended, it was still on. A blog site called Freerepublic.com, run by an active Air Force officer, blasted the program. Four hours later, another website called Buckhead, ran a detailed critique of the documents that you used in the report. And I've always wondered to myself, that's an amazingly swift bit of research.

LOL! Not only do these people not have a clue, they don't even know what a clue is.

"another website called Buckhead" -- hahahahaha!

And they act like "four hours" is a fast response time in the blogosphere. Four hours? How about four minutes, buddy.

Absolutely pathetic.

Poor Dan. Demanding relevance.
At the right dose, Zyprexa will stop those pesky voices.

#61 Ed
I hope you meant pimfed.

#78 Zombie

While the moonbats were viewing porn,spewing hate and thinking up email scams,we were figuring out how to use the web as a research tool.

#68 Gordon

Near as I can tell, the only thing that Delay ever did "wrong" was be the quintessential political animal. In that role he was the engineer behind the redistricting --"gerrymandering"-- of Texas's congressional districts in 2003, which resulted in the Democrats loss of seats in 2004. The Texas Democrat machine has been vengefully on a jihad and otherwise out to get him ever since. Accusations that he's dirty and corrupt has been their main strategy, because those kinds of cheap shots are free, anybody can accuse anybody of anything, and they can't beat him straight up.

All that said, I don't feel too sorry for Delay. And I don't believe he feels sorry for himself either. Being on the receiving end of cheap-shots goes with the territory he sought to occupy, and he's way smart enough to know it.

On Tom DeLay:

Again the democraps,because of lack of ideas to honestly challenge the right,resort to smear tactics.

But my attitude when we go into stories, is we go into them together, we ride through whatever happens, and we come out the other end together.

Dan, you nailed that one. Now who's gonna clean up the mess?

#60 nodroG

If DeLay weren't as crooked as the Crooked River

Turn off the Ratherisms already. Talk about hackneyed.

grayp #56

Thanks for that link - fascinating stuff I didn't know about. I was only 9 years old in November of 1963 and have no memory of the claim that kids were cheering.

All of you guys who are bothering to debate with el Gordo are missing the entire point - he doesn't much care what he says (or if it's rational, logical or even true - a real tribute to Dan Rather's TANG story) as long as he says something that he thinks will wind us up. He doesn't even realize how pathetic he is.

#56 grayp
Thanks! Somehow I lost all my links in Firefox. I deleted them by clicking too fast on something and wiped everything out. Bummer, I lost a lot of good stuff I wanted to keep. :(

Lets hope that Rather stays where he can stand in the limelight and plays the idiot every time.

That way he will be happy and stay there. We definitely dont want him back here again

Insane but rational

#56 grayp

Wow, Eddie Barker, there's a blast from the past, for those of us who grew up in Dallas in the sixties. My dad always watched the news on the that station (KRLD-TV, Channel 4), after Uncle Walter.

Perhaps, CBS should have picked Roger Mudd to replace Cronkite. He subbed way more than Rather and seemed reall calm and collected andable to do the job. In the intervening years, I can't remember any adverse stories on Mudd.
RAther always had this disrepectful edge to him.
Interesting the Texas connection: Rather, the local head of CBS, eddie, JFK murdered there,LBJ-Senator.Also John Kerry's aunt who helped Marina Oswald in later years.
Also W governor there, Houston takes in hurricane flee-ers, and has a threat from hurricane, itself.

Thank God for the internet and bloggers. Back in the day there was no way to expose the liberal media lies. Everyone mostly took for granted that our news media was telling us the truth. How wrong we were. What’s funny to me is they haven’t figured out we now have the power to fact check them and call them out on it. They keep stepping in their own bullshit.

Amy, most welcome. Yah. I was 11. They sent us home from school early. Got off the bus, walked to Church to pray with my friend Donna. Got home and watched my mom and the neighbor glued to the TV in tears. They had already broken out the bourbon.

My husband was 23 in the Nat'l Guard in NY. He tells me people did cheer. They thought they were going to have to deploy

Wow, Crimsonfisted, that IS a bummer. If you would like to email me, I'll send you all my Dan Rather links to help you rebuild.

I tried to watch that interview on CSPAN the other night, but the blathering was so intense, I had to change the channel.
I just tried to read the transcript at Radio Blogger, but it made my eyes cross.
I'll just go in the kitchen and get the Reynold's wrap. Then I can make myself a Special Hat and give it another try.

They must hold to the belief that if you repeat a lie often enough, others will come to accept it as truth.

Hell, Mike al'Moor has made a career off doing just that, so why can't ol Danny boy.

/rhetorical question off

#91 BigL
Wasn't Roger Mudd the reporter who did the country such a favor in 1979 by derailing TeddyK's presidential bid? You know, he asked him "Why do you want to be President?" And TeddyK totally blew the answer. His answer was painful (as a former Dem) to watch.

What kind of person would believe Dan Rather's crap?
Well, KosKidz, of kourse!
The CBS Papers and the USAF's evasion of duty

Until Bush and his superiors deny that these are real and until the USAF decides to do its duty and investigate them as the forgeries that George Bush's followers declare they are but don't want to prove officially, they should be considered as real--and the crimes that they reveal also. George W Bush and his superiors committed crimes against the USAF and the American public--and the USAF wants to see that they get away with it.

This is a very long and rambling essay that essentially says, "I believe they're real because I want to."

OT...Some facts concerning Ronnie Earle...

He is an elected DEMOCRAT who has used his office in the past to smear Texas Republicans, including Kay Bailey Hutchison and Jim Mattox. Regarding Hutchinson, the case was dismissed following Earles refusal to present evidence that he felt the judge would not allow a jury to see. Instead, Earle called a press conference, presented the evidence to the Austin (read wack job moonbats) press corp, and pronounced he received a guilty verdict from the moonbat jury. Of course, Hutchison was not present to defend herself, not unlike the Salem Witch Trials of the late 17th century. Why did Earle pull this political stunt? Hutchison had just been elected to a Senate seat that had been owned by the Democrats for years, and like Democrats everywhere, they went right back to their play book of dirty tricks. Earle will not convict Tom Delay, and he knows it. Heres why...

"The indictment centers around a money swap that took place between the Texans for a Republican Majority PAC (TRMPAC), to which DeLay has ties, and the Republican National State Elections Committee (RNSEC). TRMPAC sent $190,000 to RNSEC, and RNSEC then sent the same total amount in seven checks ranging from $20,000 to $40,000 to Texas House candidates in 2002. Travis County DA Ronnie Earle, a Democrat, calls this money laundering, because the money that TRMPAC sent to RNSEC came from coporations, which are barred from contributing to campaigns in Texas.

What you won't hear in the press is that A) This is a perfectly legal move, and B) the Democrats did the exact same thing. An Institute on Money in State Politics study reveals that on Oct. 31, 2002, the Texas Democratic Party did the same thing when it sent $75,000 to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and received $75,000 back from the DNC the very same day."

National Review, media blogs.

What he will do, is ruin Delays name and win favor from the Democrats yet again.

Solution?

Earle has been indicted for releasing sealed evidence in the Hutchison trial, and Delay is claiming that the same thing has happened concerning the charges levelled at him. Someone needs to nail Earle on these charges, and quite frankly, an investigation needs to take place regarding possible links between Earle's actions and the national Democratic party. They are probably smart enough to cover their tracks, but you never know.

Does anybody get the feeling that when Gordon's mom told him to eat because there where starving children in Africa, he just ate rather than say, "Wait a minute how will eating this help them?" Gordon you are indulging in a false analogy. The pathetic-ness of Dan Rather has no relation to any failures that Charles, Tom DeLay or anyone else might have. It stands or falls on the merit of the evidence and your opinion fo Charles has no relevance.

#34 gordon... are you SERIOUS? you are just being silly now.

/pats gordo patronizingly on the head

rest, my son, rest... the voices will soon fade as your haldol takes effect.

The kind of insanity that possesses Dan Rather is quite common amongst the faculties and administrations of university campuses. Having tenure as well as absolute power over students and underlings breeds a sense of omnipotance amongst those who are too out of touch with reality to realize where the edge of the earth really is. There are a million Dan Rathers manipulating the minds of students every day, each of whom knows the truth as they see it.

#97 Killgore

Real until proven forgeries!

/bassackwards

But he/she is right about one thing. The AF should investigate and press charges for forging official documents. Most of the investigation is already done.

Reminds me of my strategy when I got nabbed stealing tests and selling them, back in high school:

Deny, deny , deny.

#64 rabid fox

I disagree; I enjoy Geraldo Rivera's evident, authentic joy at seeing our troops at work in Iraq or arriving on the scene of Dante's Inferno in NOLA last month. His enthusiasm and unabashed pro-America attitude make up for his lack of literary qualities you seem to expect.

People say the same dismissive stuff about the President's verbal abilities. Go ahead and misunderestimate people as the talented & well-versed muclit-culti French parleying linguist Jhzan Kerry did.

#34, Gordon, If you can't get that shitstain off with straight ammonia, try to hide it with some lipstick. It's an old Clinton family remedy for practically everything.

#96 nute gingrich

Can you believe in 1979 while Ayatollah manhandled our embassy employees 444 days, Democrats' choices for US President to fight the evil empires confronting the US were Djimmy Carter & Chappaquidick Kennedy, sailing upstream with no paddle?

#96 nuke gingrich

Wasn't Roger Mudd the reporter who did the country such a favor in 1979 by derailing TeddyK's presidential bid? You know, he asked him "Why do you want to be President?" And TeddyK totally blew the answer. His answer was painful (as a former Dem) to watch.

Teddy should have said, "I want to be president because it's my turn now." At least his answer would have been whag he truly thought.

#98 SaneInMN

Well, to be fair, Jim Mattox is a Dem. He used to be my congressman from the 5th Cong. Dist. (East Dallas). He was also AG for the state of Texas, which is what he was when indicted. He also tried a run for Governor.

Mattox was a real a-hole. When he first went to the House, he got in trouble with the leadership for wearing shortsleeve shirts on thr House floor.

Scroll down to "Mattox: The Insurgent"

108 Ward Cleaver...

Thanks for the clarification.

#109 SaneInMN

No problem. He also wouldn't wear a tie. That really pissed 'em off. Mattox started out as a state legislator, then ran for the U.S. House. Pete Sessions (R), son of former FBI director Judge William Sessions, now holds that seat. BTW, both of the Sessionses were at the night-before-the-election Bush rally at SMU last year, where I got to be in attendance, and see W and Laura (cool).

#97 Killgore Trout

What kind of person would believe Dan Rather's crap?
...
This is a very long and rambling essay that essentially says, "I believe they're real because I want to."

No, I think it's something else a bit more complex. There are people in this world who are completely ignorant of how technology works. It's all witchcraft -- telephones are magic; transporters (Star Trek) are magic; typewriters are magic; warp drives are magic. Since everything is equally mysterious to them, they only distinguish between fact and fiction by consulting some authority. In a college environment, the name for these people is "communications majors." They then graduate from college and become "journalists." Now "journalism" as practiced by these people consists of a single activity repeated over and over -- "interviewing" some "authority" and writing down or otherwise recording the explanations of these experts. In this "journalism" activity, fairness and accuracy means spelling your interviewees' names correctly. And these "journalists" have all sorts of religious questions about how to choose authorities.

When the rest of us (who were not communications majors in college) try to communicate with these folks there is this vast divide. You see when we saw the "memos" we knew that they were not produced in 1972 or 1973. We knew not because of Charles' authority, or Newcomber's authority, or Buckhead's authority, but because of our own knowledge of typewriters and word processors. Since "journalism" is all about believing incomprehensible (to journalists) things which are spouted by sufficiently authoritative authorities, "journalists" think that attacking the credentials of an authority is sufficient to show the falsity of whatever the authority is claiming. But we don't believe things because of who is making the claim -- we are competent to judge these things based upon our own knowledge. When others would point out this or that thing, we were able to understand their arguments and see for ourselves, so even if the person pointing these things out is crazy, or weird, or dumb, we can still decide that this or that particular thing that the nut/weirdo/idiot is saying is nonetheless correct.

It's really sort of embarassing to watch... Rather/Mapes/etc. really do believe that just pointing out that "buckhead" and "freeper" are goofy-sounding names is somehow a devastating demolition of their opponents' many statements of obvious fact.

cathy :-)

Ronnie Earle updates...

Ronnie Earle, May 12, 2005.
Houston Chronicle

Earle had this to say at a Democratic Fundraiser this May..."...this case isn't just about Tom Delay. If it isn't this Tom Delay, it will be another one. One bully will be replaced with another..."

No political motivation?

Ed Mahmoud

Well, the same Travis County Demonrat machine that probably created the Bush TANG memos have gotten DeLay to step down as Majority Leader.

There's something very wrong in Travis County, TX. Maybe there's something in the water? First they had Burkett at the Rodeo getting papers from some obscure woman and now this Delay indictment.

I think we should have Charles check out the fonts on that check and indictment. ;)

#111 cathyf

This is a very long and rambling essay that essentially says, "I believe they're real because I want to."

Sounds like they're talking about Pamela Anderson, or Anna Nicole Smith.

#12 Hoserjoe:

Isn't it time that somebody raised the question that ought never to be asked: Does this man have a drinking problem? I know that some of us like to drink and think, but we're not national newscasters. Poor old Dan R looks - and behaves - like a victim of severe advanced soggy-brain.

#34 Gordon

So who's the "paranoid pathetic" man now?

Uh...you.

#111 cathyf

We knew not because of Charles' authority, or Newcomber's authority, or Buckhead's authority, but because of our own knowledge of typewriters and word processors. Since "journalism" is all about believing incomprehensible (to journalists) things which are spouted by sufficiently authoritative authorities, "journalists" think that attacking the credentials of an authority is sufficient to show the falsity of whatever the authority is claiming. But we don't believe things because of who is making the claim -- we are competent to judge these things based upon our own knowledge.

Bravo!

if you're just going to listen to one of the sound clips, scroll down and listen to this one
in 8 seconds, Rather stuns the interviewer into silence by saying...
check it out

09-27rather-9.mp3

#56 grayp

I read that about Rather. Nobody, but nobody could doubt the truth about the memos and the truth of how much of a POS Rather is after reading that story. Thanks.

cathyf #111

Excellent post.

dan, you ought to read Appendix 4 from the Thornburgh Report.

#111 cathyf

You've identified so many things that all conspire to create this obvious disconnect.

Now "journalism" as practiced by these people consists of a single activity repeated over and over -- "interviewing" some "authority" and writing down or otherwise recording the explanations of these experts. In this "journalism" activity, fairness and accuracy means spelling your interviewees' names correctly.

Right there, you've nailed the biggest problem with journalism in general; that they are utterly unequiped to validate facts, and unconcerned about it, to boot. It's bad enough that they don't have the wherewithall to separate fact from fiction, which they are supposed to do, but they simply don't seem to give a rip.

They've been spoon feeding this stuff through this one-way media for so long, and not experiencing any consequences, that it comes as an utter shock when a two-way medium comes along and attempts to correct them. So what do they do? They get defensive. Kill the messenger. It's a natural reaction, but after you've been shown the obvious facts again, and again, you would think that they would eventually see reason.

But the don't. There's another element here; it's called collective delusion. The delusion is difficult to break, because everyone reinforces everyone else's delusion. The poor slob who actually speaks up and says that the emperor has no clothes is socially and economically cast out (witness Bernie Goldberg). So they keep telling each other that the emperor has clothes. From our perspective they appear foolish, but from their perspective, it's a matter of social and economic survival.

#111 Cathyf high five...I am going to send your post to a friend who is a graduate of the Medill Schoool of Journalism. He will read it and agree that he wasted 100K on an education he could have gotten in 2 minutes by reading your comments.

I don't know how it is that Dan Rather could have spent so long in the journalistic rat race and not even realize that he's a rat.

All I can say to Mr RATher is...MEOW!

E2m #122

So they keep telling each other that the emperor has clothes.

The real pity is that they actually do think that the Emperor does have clothes. You're right - it's a collective delusion that they'll continue to defend to the bitter end while they viciously attack anyone who has the nerve to take off the blinders.

#124 Amy

The real pity is that they actually do think that the Emperor does have clothes.

That seems like a subtle distinction, but it actually has very powerful consequences. Absent any social pressure, people will generally be open minded, and will consider solutions and explanations that are "outside of the box". Once you add this social dimension to it though, it takes on a very different character, because the pressure is not just to say, but to believe. Thus the "box" of acceptable ideas gets smaller until no reasonable answer will fit in it.

This explains a lot of cult behavior; not only do they feel pressured not to say certain things, they feel pressured not to think them, either. And along with being pressured not to think certain things, comes being relieved of the responsibility to think. For some people that relief of responsibility is very rewarding, because it then licenses them to think, speak, and do some very unacceptable things.

Collective delusion isn't just a question of keeping each other under social pressure, it's just as much about granting each other license.

E2m #125

I'm going to have to think about that one for a while; there's an awful lot of meat in that post to chew on...

Looks like they're gonna have to send ol' Billy B. down to Kinkos to assist Ronnie in his investigation.

#126 Amy

Funny you should say that, because I really hadn't intended to go there when I started typing that post, it just happened. I think this that goes well beyond the question of media culture and media social systems, and describes other cult behavior, including Islamist cult behavior and Nazi cult behavior.

I really hadn't though of it in exactly those terms before, but it does make some sort of sense; that when you subscribe to a rigid set of beliefs like that, it brings benefits of license. You see that prominently in the Islamic outlook with the privilege accrued to men of abuse of women, but if you look closer, you see it in a lot of other places. Odd as it seems, membership has it's privileges. IMHO, it's not worth the price, but I can see how they believe that it is.

The other side of that question, though, is if privilege accrues to one group on the inside at the expense of another group on the inside (again, the example being men v.s. women), why should the loosing side buy in? The answer, and this relates the a different thread earlier today, is that by submitting to the group, they still get the "benefit" of relief from responsibility to think and take responsibility for one's life.

You and I don't look at it as a benefit, but those who have known no other generally do.

# 122 Earth2moonbat:

Right there, you've nailed the biggest problem with journalism in general; that they are utterly unequiped to validate facts, and unconcerned about it, to boot.

That reminds me of one reporter who actually could think, analyze, and comprehend serious information, and relay them to us in an easy to understand manner: Former ABC Science Editor Jules Bergman. There is no one, I repeat no one, around today with his abilities, not that any of the new ones would even try.

#129 RickZ

There is no one, I repeat no one, around today with his abilities, not that any of the new ones would even try.

Not only they won't try, they won't get any support from above if they do. The organization just doesn't see it as their job to verify or validate anything. Getting it right menas zip to them.

You know, if Charles was anonymously sent a photocopy of a document which said "You know, I couldn't care less about ending the war in Iraq anymore, I just love seeing my face on TV. I think people like my dumbass son deserve to get shot for supporting the Republican war machine" and had Cindy Sheehan's (photocopied) signature at the bottom, do you think he'd say

(a) "OMFG! CINDYGATE! This will bust Camp Casey wide open! Fact check... hey, yeah, that sort of looks like her handwriting. AWESOME! Sticky link at the top of the page!"

(b) "... apparently, SOMEbody thinks I was born yesterday."

This is the difference between the far left and... well, everybody else. We know that if something's too good to be true, it literally is too good to be true. When we're going to go public with something, we fact-check our own asses lest they be fact-checked for us.

Quit whining, you got caught! Shut up now!

These guys are Dumb and Dumber. I'm just not sure which is which

Danny Boy is just mad because his career ended not in an administration-destroying bang, but an egg-on-his-face whimper. I have little doubt that he had high hopes for the TANG memo story because of what happened to him in the 2000 election. How many times did he call Florida for Gore only to grudgingly put it back in the "undecided" column? He wanted Bush to lose in 2004 and he thought the TANG memo story was going to be his final magnificent triumph before his retirement. Thankfully, the truth won out in the end.

In response to Captain Ed, I agree with him that elected officials need to remember their duty to cut the pork.

DeLay Politicking: The Buck Stops Here

Tom Delay may be a shining model of our bureaucracy with all of its strengths and weaknesses, ultimately selling out (no more or less than anyone else), absorbed by the system, unable to achieve the ideal dream of smaller government. Why unable? Beyond electoral results, where is our supportive strength in demanding (at least promoting) headway of Republican platform ideals on Capitol Hill? Voters simply make a person an official in an office. Voters' decisions are based upon self-interest. Lobbyists rule the world above voters.

Dash the lobby as it is. Government could "repent and be saved" if:
1. every suggestion/request must be submitted in writing;
2. all requests make it onto the conference agenda;
3. meeting with officials could only transpire via an open door conference policy (no private deal-making);
4. and absolutely no gifts or donations be allowed from anyone to anyone.

Campaign without funds, everyone. Write your own speeches, everyone. Be accountable to your campaign platform, everyone. Dash the system that can only crank out crooks. Really, it's all too much to demand from Delay or any one.