Bush memo story a lie...errrr mistake

[tunaplanet 0]

About time the truth comes out.

And now Dan "Rather" Biased is flip-flopping his statements. Before he was certain that these documents were true. In fact he stood behind them with passion screaming from the mountain-tops they were true. Now, today, we get this from him.

"I no longer have the confidence in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them journalistically."

Rather is a biased, flaming, washed-up anchorman. Check.

CBS is the most unreliable and biased netwrok on the air today. Check.

Well at least we know who to turn to when we want lies and deceit. Good job, guys. Way to let your liberal bias blind you and ruin both of your reputations for good!

Forty-two

[wmw999 2,570]

So CBS, who are responsible for showing information to a hopefully-informed public, deserve to be excoriated for using bad information.

But GWB, who is responsible for making decisions that affect the lives of our soldiers and our reputation as a country in the international arena, deserves to be commended for "staying the course" even in the face of information which has subsequently been shown to be bad? And it wasn't his (or his staff's) responsibility to determine the validity of it before making those decisions?

I'm sorry -- with greater consequences and greater power comes greater responsibility.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[TypicalFish 0]

Quote

Way to let your liberal bias blind you and ruin both of your reputations for good!

You know, I agree with most of your comments about how irresponsible they were, but I think you can file this under the heading of "sensationalism" rather than "bias"... Whether or not there is a bias on the part of CBS is definitely a debatable point, but I think it was "the hunt for ratings" that probably drove them.

What a bunch of morons.

And what's with the whole "Well, the memos are fake but what they say is not" thing? That whole segment was STRAIGHT out of "Bizzarro-land"...

"I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

[tunaplanet 0]

Ah, the reversed spotlight tecnique made famous by liberals.

Unfortunately this thread is about CBS, Rather and how they are a biased, untruthful news orginazation...not Bush. Start one up on him and we'll debate it.

Forty-two

[Botellines 0]

I think this thread is about how irresponsible and stupid it is to act upon information without double checking first its validity.

Bush fits VERY well, in this thread.

[Jib 0]

Quote

And it wasn't his (or his staff's) responsibility to determine the validity of it before making those decisions?

... and don't forget the Intelligence Committee. Oops, that would mean Kerry... if he were there.

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

[wmw999 2,570]

OK, so the thread is about CBS. I think they were acting as responsibly as they could based on the information they had. It was a shame that it was bad information, but it was the best information they had at the time, and they had set themselves a deadline.

BTW, if you want threads that only agree with you, or that only put up arguments that you can directly counteract (wait -- you normally don't counteract arguments, you just call them stupid), this is probably not the forum for that.

But hey, at least no one yet has said that Clinton lied

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Jib 0]

Quote

I think they were acting as responsibly as they could based on the information they had.

You mean the person that told them there were at least five problems with it?

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

[storm1977 0]

Quote

OK, so the thread is about CBS. I think they were acting as responsibly as they could based on the information they had. It was a shame that it was bad information, but it was the best information they had at the time, and they had set themselves a deadline.

BTW, if you want threads that only agree with you, or that only put up arguments that you can directly counteract (wait -- you normally don't counteract arguments, you just call them stupid), this is probably not the forum for that.

But hey, at least no one yet has said that Clinton lied

Wendy W.

Wendy, I disagree. CBS acted very poorly in the aftermath of this story breaking. In fact Rather himself came out on 2 seperate occasions and said The info and documents are real.

That is unethical. If you are to be in the "NEWS" business there are certain ethics which must be followed in order for you to retain your credibility.

Upon the questioning of their authenticity CBS should have stated why they felt they were credible and then released all info to an independant party to investigate their validity.
Instead CBS initiall refused and Rather came across as an arrogant Biased reporter in the Kerry Camp.

BAD MOVE!!! CBS who was at the bottom of the pile for ratings just took a gamble and knocked themselves even further down.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[billvon 3,095]

>You mean the person that told them there were at least five problems with it?

It will be interesting to see if there are people who will excoriate CBS for using incorrect information in a story while defending Bush for using incorrect information to start a war. (In both cases, people were saying in no uncertain terms that their information was flawed.)

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

OK, so the thread is about CBS. I think they were acting as responsibly as they could based on the information they had. It was a shame that it was bad information, but it was the best information they had at the time, and they had set themselves a deadline.

Wendy, do you really believe that? Did you know that at least two of the expert document examiners told CBS that they would end up in hot water if they ran with the story? None of the examiners, IIRC, would go so far as to authenticate the documents.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[wmw999 2,570]

Frankly, I think they rushed the story because they had a deadline. I also think that rushing a news story to make a deadline is a much smaller problem than rushing a war to make a deadline, but I've been told that I can't assign an importance by comparing it with that set of decisions.

I don't think it makes them a lying bunch of fucking cheats (or whatever the actual wording was).

It is not as important as a war -- it's a damn news show! They do what -- 9 of them a week? It's important to them, and it's bad and careless where they shouldn't be. But it's something that should be judged in context, rather than being used to excoriate the entire media.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[juanesky 0]

To many there, the problems started when he stated "unimpeachable source", then, on the second try (a couple days later) "we know" is forged but still portray the content as truth, and as hard it is for him to distance himself from being partisan, he requested Bush to answer his questions....

Yep, no bias there just on more right wing conspiracy

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

Ah, the reversed spotlight tecnique made famous by liberals.

The fact that this crap is even being talked about is because of the famouse conservative technique of talking about anything but the issues.

[juanesky 0]

And the issue being a fake report, from an "unimpeachable" resource, then, aknowledging the fact that it was "probably" fake they ask the secretary "do you think this is an actual memo" she declares no, and try to sell the story as "well, this memo is probably false" but yet the "context" still is true!!!.

I think that is the issue on this one pal.

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

Quote

Ah, the reversed spotlight tecnique made famous by liberals.

The fact that this crap is even being talked about is because of the famouse conservative technique of talking about anything but the issues.

We should all bow down and go by PK's rules - you know the ones where if he thinks he is losing an argument - you just ignore the questions posed to you.

Of course we should also stick to one topic like he does in every conversation there has been in Speakers Corner.

Bahahahwhwhwhwhaahahahwhwhahwh - Dude - you crack me up.

*sigh* *Deep Breath* *sigh*

Bahwaaawawahahahahaha

*Ohhhh* man my sides hurt.



And wendy -
Dan Ra(th)er WANTED to believe so badly that the documents were real that he let it cloud his judgement. It appears so evident, but that is because I want to believe that he finaly let his bias take him over the edge.

Hows that for fair minded?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[wmw999 2,570]

Turtle, I think you might have hit the nail on the head about Dan Rather. I'm sure he thought they were well enough validated. His reputation is tarnished, but not destroyed, by this. There's too much else his reputation is based on.

Again, though, while tuna wanted this thread only to excoriate Dan Rather and CBS, I think that also describes pretty well how Iraq came to be, only replace "Dan Rather" with "influential neocon of your choice"

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Quote

Way to let your liberal bias blind you and ruin both of your reputations for good!

You know, I agree with most of your comments about how irresponsible they were, but I think you can file this under the heading of "sensationalism" rather than "bias"...

No. It's abundantly clear that Rather, and many other liberal media "elites" want to help Kerry along in his quest for pow-... er, the presidency. And they will attempt any subterfuge -- no matter how risky to their credibility, apparently -- to pull the wool over the eyes of the voting public. The CBS-watching (and believing) public stand there with their mouths wide open while CBS cynically squats right over them and fills 'em with shit.

There is no question in my mind that Rather and CBS are all too happy letting their BIAS against Bush help them filter their "news" and scout for damaging "memos" about Bush, because they are in reality just a mouthpiece for the Democrats, a propaganda machine with the potential to influence voters. Don't tell me they're above using the influence they know they have for the gain of their political idealogical partners.

Blue skies,
-Jeffrey
-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

It is not as important as a war -- it's a damn news show!
Wendy W.

The fact remains, it's "a damned news show" that attempted to manipulate -- using documents they had no business claiming were "true" since they have ended up being fake -- the opinions of the voters of this country who are about to decide who the next president will be.

If they were reporting on some minor issue, like phone companies overcharging customers, that'd be one thing. Here they are seen using their position as newsbringers to deliver a flawed story based on information they insisted was reliable when in fact they really hadn't even vetted that information. It'd be like me trying to claim to you that my car is in the parking lot right now in normal condition, when I haven't seen it in three hours and for all I know it may have been stolen, vandalized, or hit by a meteorite. How can I say, "MY CAR IS FINE" when I can't possibly actually know it at this moment? The best I could really do is say, "I suppose it's fine; it was last time I checked, but I have to admit that anything could have happened."

So instead of saying, "Well, we have these documents and we don't know yet if they are real or fake, so we can't say, 'These are real, we are confident about it, take it to the bank,' " CBS asserted what it had no business asserting; it got indignant and re-asserted it, defiantly; and now it should hang by the balls and lose its credibility.

Blue skies,
-Jeffrey
-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

Frankly, I think they rushed the story because they had a deadline.

Correct -- for CBS, the deadline is Nov. 2nd.

. . =(_8^(1)

[TypicalFish 0]

Quote

There is no question in my mind that Rather and CBS are all too happy letting their BIAS against Bush help them filter their "news" and scout for damaging "memos" about Bush, because they are in reality just a mouthpiece for the Democrats, a propaganda machine with the potential to influence voters. Don't tell me they're above using the influence they know they have for the gain of their political idealogical partners.

Of course they are, all I am saying is, based on the sensationalistic aspect, I am pretty sure they would have rushed to put out a Kerry story if the documents were equally as inflammatory and un-authenticated. I guess I just don't have much of an expectation that they worry about ANYTHING but their own ratings. I would almost feel better about it if I WAS convinced they were trying to advance Kerry's cause, as opposed to just being scum-sucking prostitutes. I don't doubt that it is on their radar to push forward a liberal candidate, but I think it is secondary to their want to get a big story out.

Cynical, I know.

"I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

[Jib 0]

Quote

Quote

Ah, the reversed spotlight tecnique made famous by liberals.

The fact that this crap is even being talked about is because of the famouse conservative technique of talking about anything but the issues.

Some assholes try to slime Bush and it's somehow about changing the topic??

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

[TypicalFish 0]

Quote

Quote

Frankly, I think they rushed the story because they had a deadline.

Correct -- for CBS, the deadline is Nov. 2nd.

Are you saying that if Bush remains in office CBS will go out of business? Truth be told, I think they could give a shit. Haven't the major networks been around for alot longer than that?

"I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

[TypicalFish 0]

Quote

Some assholes try to slime Bush and it's somehow about changing the topic??

This is "some asshole sliming Bush"?:

"But GWB, who is responsible for making decisions that affect the lives of our soldiers and our reputation as a country in the international arena, deserves to be commended for "staying the course" even in the face of information which has subsequently been shown to be bad? And it wasn't his (or his staff's) responsibility to determine the validity of it before making those decisions?"

Based on some of the stuff that is said on this forum about Kerry, THIS is sliming? You're kidding, right?

"I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

Of course they are, all I am saying is, based on the sensationalistic aspect, I am pretty sure they would have rushed to put out a Kerry story if the documents were equally as inflammatory and un-authenticated.

I'd be willing to bet that you're wrong about this one. Rather has a long history of manipulating the story and showing his liberal bias. Bernie Goldberg wrote an interesting book about CBS's manipulation of the stories. It's worth a read.

-
Jim

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.