Dan Rather appeared on Larry King Live tonight, and the most charitable description one can give Rather is incoherent. He could barely complete a sentence, and when he could, he sputtered about grand conspiracies among “Big Corporations” to undermine independent journalism. Declaring that “this is the right fight at the right time,” he couldn’t explain why he told Larry King that he and CBS made a mistake in running the story, only eight months after the collapse of the CBS story.
It’s almost breathtaking in its excruciating wonder. He says that he’s the only man who bring out the truth about what happened at CBS, when he could stammer out a coherent thought at all. Bear in mind that the truth-seeking Rather still thinks that his source (Bill Burkett) has never been impeached, that the type-set memos still haven’t been proven impossible to produce on the Texas Air National Guard’s typewriters of the day, that Rather ignores that Burkett now no longer claims that he delivered the originals to CBS but retyped copies from a mysterious Lucy Ramirez, and that the memos themselves had numerous context and formatting errors. If the truth bit Dan Rather on any of his extremities, he still wouldn’t recognize it.
Of course, Rather tried to steer the conversation away from the documents whenever he could. He now claims that the documents are little more than red herrings, even though CBS proclaimed them as the proof of their story at the time. Instead of acknowledging the fraud of the memos, he accused Dick Thornburgh of participating in a fraud in the internal CBS investigation. He insists that the network forced him to deliver a fraudulent apology — well, more or less forced, as he continually backed away from it. When that didn’t work, he kept bringing up Abu Ghraib, as if that story — which CBS reported months earlier — had anything to do with the TANG story.
The one word that describes Rather outside of incoherent is paranoid. He keeps blaming Big Corporations and Big Government for his downfall, and thinks people like Sumner Redstone and Les Moonves are in on the conspiracy, along with the Bush administration. He held himself up as the epitome of the objective, idealistic journalist, the only one willing to tell Truth to Power. However, when King played a clip from Mike Wallace in 2006 saying that Rather should have resigned when CBS fired the team that produced the TANG story, Rather got rather defensive about having all of his previously-declared integrity challenged.
King, by the way, barely kept his skepticism hidden. He wasn’t buying it, and neither would anyone who watched this pathetic collapse of Rather.
UPDATE: Our friend Bernie Goldberg also called Rather “paranoid” — and that was before Rather’s appearance on Larry King. Goldberg says CBS shouldn’t and won’t settle. The most delicious part of this lawsuit will be CBS arguing that the memos were fraudulent, because that’s the only way they can defend against Rather’s suit.
UPDATE II: A couple of minor grammatical corrections, as well as mistakenly putting Abu Ghraib after the TANG story instead of before it. That begs the question — if CBS wanted to curry favor with the Bush administration, why would Les Moonves have allowed the Abu Ghraib story to remain at the top of the CBS play list for so long?
44 thoughts on “Rather On King: Incoherent”
Comments are closed.
People often make cruel and tasteless jokes about senility, but in this case I am really, seriously wondering: is Rather suffering from senile dementia? I can understand why a man with his ego would cling to a belief that the TxANG Documents story was valid, but this lawsuit just makes no rational sense to me. He can’t possibly win, so why is he doing it?
So… I’ve read a few rants about Dan Rather on here recently. He’s apparently an idiot (according to CQ). Ok, fair enough; he was accused of using lax checks on one of his stories about Bush, and now he’s completely insane. Nevermind all the other organizations (like let’s say the Pentagon or White House?) that don’t source their information well enough and then end up being wrong (although I’m not sure Rather was ever actually wrong, just didn’t have the right piece of paper… still waiting on the decision on if the story was wrong or not); Rather is obviously the worst of the bunch considering the venom spewed here.
So let’s get a recap of his Larry King appearance from CQ. “Incoherent and Paranoid” – This is because he believes that Big Business has an interest in the news and shaping it the way they want it. That’s not really that insane Captain – In fact I believe most people, including yourself, are constantly accusing and dismissing people because of the vast conspiracy on the left to manipulate news… I’m not mistaken on that one… But when Rather turns it around, he’s crazy?
Well this post is extremely disappointing. It’s more of an educated high school hit piece. There is no substance whatsoever. There isn’t even a quote showing how much of a lunatic he really is… We are just supposed to go along with what you say, because obviously you are the best person to unbiasedly assess a Dan Rather appearance (sarcasm).
I usually enjoy the logic you use in your posts, and have come to appreciate your viewpoint. But this is nothing but a post of insults. Comparable to Malkin going off on Fields… It’s really absolutely nothing. You hate Rather, that much is clear, thanks for posting.
Interesting observation that CBS has to argue against the documents. If they were valid, then they really did screw Rather. If they aren’t valid, Rather screwed them. Or, at least, has no claim on CBS because he was responsible for deciding on whether to use them.
Delicious.
So delicious that settling, with a confidentiality agreement is inevitable, although disappointing.
What I don’t get is why Rather thinks he’d have grounds for a lawsuit even if (and this is an enormous if) he was “unfairly” made a scapegoat by CBS.
As I understand it, he wasn’t exactly fired–his contract just wasn’t renewed. Since when is a private company required to renew an employee’s contract? And why do the grounds for their not doing so matter in the slightest? I can’t think of any profession where the decision to renew or not renew a hiring contract is subjected to anything resembling due process in law. Fair or not–how is it grounds for a lawsuit? Totally apart from the lack of merit of his allegations against CBS, he seems to be demanding special and totally unprecedented treatment for himself in relation to the hiring decisions of a private company.
More death rattles from the dinosaur media.
I gotta wonder to this day, if Bill Burkett hadn’t been an extraordinary idiot… and had gone to the trouble to produce better fakes… would they have gotten away with it?
Someone close to this sad, little man should really tell him it’s time to hang it up though. Every time I think he can’t possibly look more foolish over this incident… he continues to pop up and find a means to. I think at this point even John Kerry would stand up and admit the story was fake…
… ok well maybe not John Kerry… 😉
Somewhere in the history books of the ultimate examples of irony though… it lists Dan Rather complaining that someone is trying to “reshape” the news… and that he was the last true “objective” journalist who is just trying to make sure the “corporations” can’t skew the news to meet their own agenda.
The item listed next on that page… is the famous NBC exploding truck…
Charles Johnson, at Little Green Footballs, live blogged this. It seems Dan Rather made a statement about “Little Green Flame.” … Not that he knows anything about the Internet, mind you.
For those who don’t remember? Charles Johnson put up the pulsing “overlays.” Taking the C-BS “memo” used by Rather, as “proof” that Bush avoided his National Guard Service.
And, that’s where you could see the Microsoft program; in Courier; doing the proportional spacing that was UNAVAILABLE in the 1970’s.
Proving that what Dan Rather was saying was FAKE. Not even forged. SInce real documents never existed.
Lucy Ramirez never existed.
And, Bush did not lose his re-election bid in 2004.
Left a lot of the mainstream media, reporting election night, as if someone in the family had died. They were glum.
Now? Dan Rather’s just crazy. And, at some point he nearly lost his false teeth.
Two old geezers, in suspenders. Sure, you can’t prove the Easter rabbit isn’t real, either.
Will Dan Rather get $70-million, now that he’s filed his lawsuit?
Maybe, he can get that judge, who filed a $70-million dollar lawsuit against his dry cleaners. For losing his pants. I hear this judge is appealing the jury verdict.
Maybe, this is why Rather has hope?
Or, maybe, it’s seeing IMUS ending up with serious cash?
Doesn’t matter. Rather already made a name for himself in American politics. Too bad, we can’t get Baghdad Bob, hired at C-BS, to bring us the latest updates. And, the news ahead. Then, they could “pay Dan off” on their ratings bonanza.
I’m watching the repeat right now, and wolfwalker is dead on in his assessment, I’m sorry to say. As the Captain notes, when King tried to question him on specifics, Rather dodged and went of on a tangent about Redstone, Thornburgh, or anything but a direct answer to an obviously incredulous Larry King.
But the parts of the interview that told me Dan Rather is mentally way off the rails was when Larry King cut away to the old clips, with Rather today in one window and the clips of his previous performances in another.
He was smiling. He was damned proud to be watching himself. He honestly believes everything he said then was absolutely true, and he believes everything he’s saying now is absolutely true, and he’s too far gone to see how patently nuts this attempt to restore the ‘old’ Dan Rather to his rightful place as the epitome of television journalism, and it’s staunch defender!, will appear to anyone viewing it who remembers the way the TANG story/scandal actually played out.
Whoever’s representing Dan Rather should be fired for gross incompetence for allowing him to appear on Larry King last night. As soon as the clips hit YouTube, newspapers and other media outlets across the nation are gonna have a field day showing just how incoherent Gunga Dan has become.
Didn’t Rather have some kind of psychotic break where he went crazy on a sidewalk? I have very vague memories of something like that happening a few years ago.
ck:
Did you actually watch the CNN Larry King interview? I did. Rather came off exactly as the Captain described.
When he tried to change the subject to “big corporations” and Abu Ghraib, he was busted immediately. I was surprised he didn’t bring up Halliburton by name.
If CBS was under Bush’s control, as Rather alleges, why did they air his hatchet job in the first place?
And Phil is right, his contract was not renewed. On the Democrat’s planet, that’s “being fired”. That’s because they can’t fathom any circumstance where they could be judged as any worse than anybody else. In more reasonable realms, having one’s contract not renewed, while a sign of rejection, doesn’t have the same stigma as being fired.
To semi-quote Sammy Davis Junior right after he kissed Archie Bunker:
“You’re no better than anybody”
I gotta wonder to this day, if Bill Burkett hadn’t been an extraordinary idiot… and had gone to the trouble to produce better fakes… would they have gotten away with it?
I think the answer is clearly yes. If Burkett (or Lucy Ramirez?) had used a older model typewriter it is doubtful that the truth would have come out until long after people made up their minds – and the MSM was very interested in Bush’s TANG service so they would have made this the story going into the election.
It is interesting to ponder how domestic politics would be playing out now if the TANG fakes had gotten Kerry elected, and their status was disproven say now…
It was a great idea for a con of course. By using a dead man’s words in such a way, it is very hard to disprove the charges.
It does amaze me though that the press has shown no interest in the source of the fakes. Sure Burkett is most likely the source, but it isn’t impossible that someone was using Burkett as a conduit.
Why is Dan doing this? Because he’s getting old, he’s no longer relevant, and he’s got the RatherGate anchor around his neck. He, like most politicans, wants his “legacy”. He’s got nothing to lose and hopes he’ll get CBS to agree to a quiet settlement that will be sealed by the courts. He’ll then claim that his name and his story have been cleared.
The early signs:
From:
Wrong from the Beginning: Even in 1963, Dan Rather was a poor excuse for a newsman
by Philip Chalk, 03/14/2005, Volume 010, Issue 24
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/324nfvwe.asp
excerpt:
I have to agree with the Alzheimer theory, at least provisionally. He’s at that age where it starts to make itself felt.
I’d also question the competency of the attorneys who are representing him. Doubtless he’s paying them the biggest payoff since OJ bought Johnnie Cochran, but I’m already seeing legal analysists like PowerLine hooting at the language in the lawsuit filed – how absurd, unprovable and written to the opposite of any laws currently on the books. I just don’t see how any attorney can hope to come off well by being part of this charade.
Could Dan Rather be suffering from early stages of dementia?
Something to consider.
Del Dolemonte –
No I didn’t watch the interview… Most people probably didn’t, although I’m sure a lot did…
But when you have a medium like CQ (which has a whole lot of readers) it’s usually advisable to explain exactly what made you feel the way you state you feel. The way it came across to me was just somebody hating on Rather. Now Rather may very well have been incoherent, but as of now I don’t believe it because I see no evidence of it.
I don’t think it’s fair to label Dan as being in the grip of Dementia… or Alzheimer’s… anything like that. He’s old… but that’s not the same as Demented.
Dan’s living in the same world he always HAS lived in… and he’s insulated from reality by people like Mary Mapes who – to this day – proclaim that the story is true. He trusts her… and that’s kinda nice. In a grandfatherly way. As a journalist, it’s naive, and it cost him his contract renewal.
Dan’s working with the information he’s been given, and that he trusts. Obviously he’s not up to the same level of debate competence as in his prime, but he’d lost a step before the TxANG story hit the air in the first place.
Mock the story, please. Mock his attitudes, his density, and his politics of course. But unless you are a qualified Doctor who has examined him, don’t make any medical judgments. After all, this kind of problem is endemic within the halls of the Radical Left in our country… they aren’t suffering from Alzheimer’s disease… They’re just Radical Leftists. This is what they are like.
ck-
Forgive my incredulity, but what evidence would satisfy you if you’re not going to watch the interview?
I work at a CBS/CNN affiliate, and there were more than a few stunned utterances this evening (in a very liberal newsroom, mind you) about how out of balance Dan looked… not to mention many mutterings about how poorly he conducted himself, just from putting together grammatically-correct sentences.
In most instances, ck, you typically conduct yourself with quite a bit of dignity here, but in this instance, I strongly recommend you find the interview on YouTube or at CNN.com and then come back and talk about it. I suspect you will respond differently.
In the meantime, folks, the rumblings I hear from way up the ladder in CBS-town are basically those of astonishment- the rough equivalent of trying to pull a hole in behind you. Whatever credibility he had left after what is known as RatherGate (and doubters, I simply point you to the steady decline in CBS’ ratings- my station is #1 with a bullet in our market, but people have been turning us off at 5:30 well before Katie came on) is going to go plunging into the crapper at this rate…
tmi3rd
Whooops!
General Staudt retired from the TexANG on March 1, 1972, approximately 18 months before Lieutenant Colonel Killian allegedly had written the memorandum about General Staudt’s trying to “sugar coat” Lieutenant Bush’s officer efficiency report.
Explain that one, ck. You too, Dan, what’s the frequency?
CK:
So which is it: “…Most people probably didn’t…” or “…I’m sure a lot did…”
Geez!
If that’s not bad enough, after admitting you didn’t see the interview, you write: “Now Rather may very well have been incoherent, but as of now I don’t believe it because I see no evidence of it.” Well of course, that makes sense!
God help us!
RE “Didn’t Dan have an incident on the sidewalk where he broke”
Ah, the “What’s the Frequency Kenneth” episode, which was never figured out…
the RUMOR that the reason it was never figured out was that all the major news anchors banded together to protect Dan – the ‘word’ was he was having an affair, and the husband of his paramour caught them, and beat the snot out of Dan. None of the OTHER anchors wanted to break the story, because if you look at it historically, they were having affairs TOO
It would be nice if CBS would actually retract the story someday. They haven’t so far, even after their internal investigation.
Barker may well have been the first “on air” with the news that Kennedy was dead, if it was a local broadcast. Rather was certainly the first to break the news on a national network. Give him his proper respect – he was a great on-the-scene-of-the-action news reporter. He just got promoted to and beyond his Level of Incompetence, in accordance with the Peter Principle.
The documents were obvious forgeries. It isn’t even close. There WAS a machine which could type in proportionate spacing available at the time – it was used in the printing business and cost over $15,000 in today’s dollars, so not many owned them. Since Killian did not type, according to his family and secretary, it is difficult to imagine that he would have either had access to such a machine or known how to use it.
The killing defect was the format (the font was devastating, but it was possible as noted above). Military memos were all typed flush left. It had been so since WWII. The memo centered the header and the signature, something no military, Reserve, or NG memo would have done.
This lawsuit has NOTHING to do with the viability of the evidence for the 2004 report, and everything to do with the large settlement Don Imus just received from CBS. The difference, of course, is that they did violate Imus’ contract and had no reason under its terms to terminate him, so they had to pay it off. Rather was retired; his contract allowed that – it was the effective equivalent of a “club option” in baseball which was not exercised.
Knowing the utter spinelessness of Les Moonves, Rather’s gambit will likely hit pay dirt with a settlement he never could have won at trial. Good for him. He’ll be happier than a possum in a persimmon tree.
In my less than professional opinion, Dan the Man is a “true believer” – those who “believe” in spite of the preponderance of evidence to the contrary. No amount of logic or reason will ever suffice. Other examples of true believers are those persons who believe Al Gore won the election, that global warming is a scientific fact brought about by human influence on the environment, that having an open dialogue with rogue, ruthless rulers will bring world peace….
Dan Rather: His Side
Dan tells his side in interview on LKL .
After being presented with his 2004 mea-culpa “I want to say personally and directly, I’m sorry” Dan reaffirms his “fake but accurate” belief:
KING: Are you sorry about that now?
RATHER: No.
KIN
I watched this interview with Rather and I have to give Larry King some credit, which I rarely ever do. He asked some good pointed relevant questions for once. He has quite a rep as a softball pitcher, but he really asked some good intelligent question of Rather, none of which were really answered well. I don’t think Rather was as incoherent as some people said, but he must have used the word “corporations” in every single answer that he gave.
Oh yeah, and Dan is in some real serious denial as far as the documents go, they were definitely proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be phoney because the typeface wasn’t available at the time they were supposed to have been typed. He still says that has not been proven, he is lying to himself. That kind of denial of the truth can make you look like a senile old fool.
Beldar has a link to the complaint. It is insane.
http://www.observer.com/files/Rather_suit.pdf
“52. Immediately after the Broadcast, internet bloggers began to attack the authenticity of the Documents. Many also accused Mr. Rather of being personally biased against President Bush. The next day some elements of the mainstream press also began questioning the authenticity of the Documents. Few, if any, of the blogs or media stories disputed the substance of the story that Bush received preferential treatment in connection with his Air National Guard Service.”
Blatantly false. The notion that a retired officer could pressure existing staff to give Bush preferential treatment was widely ridiculed then and since.
“58. By coercing Mr. Rather publicly to apologize and take responsibility for the airing and vetting of the story, CBS intentionally caused the public and media to a tribute [sic] CBS’s alleged bungling of the episode to Mr. Rather. This fueled elements of the media who dubbed the episode “Rathergate”.”
Did they coerce Rather into insisting the documents were geniune and backed by “unimpeachable sources” nine days earlier? CBS has destroyed the online record of that statement with their announcement of the Thornburg probe on 9/22/04.
“122. CBS had knowledge of the derogatory statements concerning Mr. Rather made by its employees, including those made by Walter Cronkite, Mike Wallace, Andy Rooney and others, and by permitting these statements to continue, significantly contributed to the barrage of bad press Mr. Rather faced following the Broadcast.”
So much for the Corporations staying out of journalism. There’s a free press, and there’s bad press, and the Corporation should have put a muzzle on Cronkite, Wallace, and Rooney. That’s worth $20 – $50 million to Rather right there, or so he claims.
Dan Rather, What a Fool
I remember the night that Rathergate developed in the blogosphere. I was reading Free Republic one evening and picked up a thread about a news story that 60 Minutes had just aired impugning George W. Bush’s service in the National Guard. That news had …
Blather for President?
Seems like there are a lot of parallels between Dan Blather and the Clintons. Both Clintons have been accused of being paranoid. Hillary, has been known to sputter swear and throw things at Bill when one of his dollies gets in the news. She is famous for vast right wing conspiracies, evil Republicans and evil big business when defending Bill after one of his dollies gets in the news. Bill is sometimes delusional about his accomplishments in office. Both Clintons are noted for gratuitous lying including telling a small lie when not required and telling a big lie when a small lie would do.
Dan is way ahead of the game as a candidate for President.
dan’s an old man. pack it in dan. retire.
Interesting question above:
Had Burkett and CBS been cannier and actually managed to throw the election before the story was busted, what would be their attitude.
My guess is it would be ear-to-ear grins–not just because they got Kerry in, but because they beat the chumps, which is us–and a series of public statements in the vein of, “Whatcha gonna do about it now, fool?”
I’m one of the ‘I’m sure alot did’ that actually watched the King interview, and to describe Rather as incoherent is being charitable. For a man who repeatedly reminded us that he’d been in the business as a journalist for over four decades, he was a mess. Just when he should have been making clear, logical arguments he instead rambled from topic to topic, hardly completing a thought.
In the space of half an hour, less really because of commercials, he painted himself as powerless, claiming ‘other people wrote’ the apology he read on the air, and that he didn’t have a button that put a story on the air, other people did that, too. For a man who made his living with words, he looked like an amateur last night.
As for his physical performance, he sounded alot like he had dry mouth and had trouble with diction and pronunciation. Perhaps he on medication, but perhaps he’s on the sauce, not unknown in the world of journalism.
Rather IS the MSM.
Biased, paranoid, delusional, antiquated, lazy and useless.
The left confuses “freedom” with “license”.
Just because you can do it, doesn’t mean you should do it.
Just because you can tell lies and be completely biased in favor of the absolutely worthless Democrat Party, doesn’t mean you should do it.
And “freedom of the press” doesn’t shield the left wing press from the consequences of their actions.
Such as looking utterly and completely ridiculous, in the view of any thinking, responsible human being.
ck,
With his “coverage” of President Bush’s National Guard service, Dan Rather made a very blatant attempt to impose his will and desire on a Presidential election. The substance (or lack thereof) and timing of the piece could have meant nothing else. Regardless of your politics, the mere fact that one man in a position of trust would feel justified in doing so, should outrage everyone. Dan Rather deserves the contempt of us all.
Your defense of the man shows me that you are not capable, at least in this instance, of rising above your own prejudices to recognize the enormity of Rather’s misdeeds in his betrayal of our democratic principles. Indeed, “… (although I’m not sure Rather was ever actually wrong, just didn’t have the right piece of paper”, your version of the “fake but accurate” meme – a thoroughly specious argument that completely and deliberatley misses the point – illustrates wonderfully your refusal to see what is before your eyes.
And interesting quote from The Yells post: Many also accused Mr. Rather of being personally biased against President Bush.”
Yeah riiiight! All journalists called him “Mr. Bush,” vice the correct and respectful President Bush.
Sorry, only Rather did that on a consistent and continuing basis. There needs not be ANY other evidence of Rather’s bias than that.
Who’s Dan Rather and what is a Larry King?
Don’t encourage them with your patronage or they will never go away. If you want to see a car wreck watch NASCAR.
Rather being scared of big corporations is a hoot. Dan Rather – watching out for the little guy. Not. Who pushed the story in the first place, other than media conglomerates? Who tore it apart, other than bloggers in pajamas? As if this had nothing to do with manipulating the public with a contrived story before an election.
Rather is exposed as an ignorant partisan who had no qualifications to comment on anything with authority, other than how pretty he looks with makeup in front of a camera. Sounds like a good definition for all TV jornalism.
don’t use “beg the question” when you mean “leads to the question.” just don’t use it ever and you won’t make an error in its application
To elaborate on the typeface issue, the documents use Times Roman, which no equipment the Texas Air National Guard (TANG) had could produce. It’s a standard computer typeface now days, though. I believe it was Charles of LGF who duplicated the documents exactly by simply typing in the content in Microsoft Word, default settings.
Additionally, the “memos” used terms the TANG didn’t use. Army terms that Bill Burkett would have been familiar with.
Combine this with the “memos” referring to General Staudt as though he weren’t retired, and I think you’re reached the preponderance of evidence standard required in a civil suit.
But here is the real kicker: the story had relevance back in the 2000 campaign, when people didn’t know what kind of Commander in Chief (CIC) Bush would make, but in the 2004 campaign they’d already seen him perform as CIC, so the TANG story was irrelevant. It only mattered in the obsessed minds of Rather and Mapes.
“Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.”
Rather (and his dwindling number of defenders) is a Troofer. He believes that those TXANG “memoes” are real and no amount of evidence will convince him to the contrary. As I wrote the other day, forget about convincing him or other Troofers that Bush didn’t get preferential treatment to stay out of Vietnam. As far as Troofers are concerned, he MUST have, and that the evidence of this is flimsy (to say the least) matters not a jot to them. It’s important for Troofers to believe that Bush got preferential treatment, because it underpins their cherished belief that he’s an idiot in the pay of Halliburton who masterminded the destruction of the WTC on 9-11 and lied about WMD to further the cause of the Trilateral Commission and therefore should have been impeached for stealing the election in Florida in 2000.
Cap’n Ed: Of course, Rather tried to steer the conversation away from the documents whenever he could. He now claims that the documents are little more than red herrings, even though CBS proclaimed them as the proof of their story at the time. Instead of acknowledging the fraud of the memos, he accused Dick Thornburgh of participating in a fraud in the internal CBS investigation. He insists that the network forced him to deliver a fraudulent apology — well, more or less forced, as he continually backed away from it. When that didn’t work, he kept bringing up Abu Ghraib, as if that story — which CBS reported months earlier — had anything to do with the TANG story.
I’ve noticed that Troofers (and libs in general) do this a lot. For example, when discussing the war in Iraq, they inevitably will start waving their arms about 9-11 or Don Rumsfeld’s photo with Saddam from years ago or that one of Bush’s ancestors fought in the Crusades. They are simply incapable of staying on topic; for people who are broadly represented by moveon.org, they show a surprising inability to “move on”.
Yes, yes, yes, BIG CORPORATIONS.
One of many ironies here is that Rather would be Joe Schmoe without big-corp CBS, and a much less resourced Joe Schmoe at that.
If Bill Paley were alive today, I’m sure he’d be taking Diaper Dan over his knee for a well-deserved big corporation spanking.
[Posted by ck | September 21, 2007 12:11 AM]
“No I didn’t watch the interview…”
snip
“Now Rather may very well have been incoherent, but as of now I don’t believe it because I see no evidence of it.”
Three monkeys: one with his eyes covered, one with his ears covered, one with his mouth covered.
Ever seen a rendition of that, CK?
You would have been much better off to remember this (as it pertains to your particular beliefs regarding this interview): absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
You “didn’t watch”, therefore you “don’t believe”, because you “see no evidence”.
Your disbelief requires a willful suspension of belief by those who did watch. How wonderfully left-wing-liberal as a SOP.
Rather paranoid
After reading this, I think maybe Dan Rather, aged 75, is suffering from something more serious than his own inflated sense of superiority. I think perhaps he needs to be tested for Alzheimer’s. It doesn’t sound like his brain is