Video: Rather: Fox News takes talking points from the White House

posted at 4:28 am on November 18, 2006 by Ian

Former CBS anchor Dan Rather accused Fox News of taking talking points from the White House on Friday’s edition of “Real Time with Bill Maher”.

BILL MAHER, HOST: I want to bring your attention to something that was on my friend Arianna Huffington’s blog today, the Huffington Post, it was an internal memo from Fox News, an organization I guess that would never hire you. And it says, “Be on the lookout for any statements from the Iraqi insurgents thrilled at the prospect of a Democratic controlled Congress.” That strikes me as the opposite of journalism, as looking for the end of the story before you find what the real truth is.

DAN RATHER: Well, I think it’s fair to say, Bill – in fact I know it is – that Fox News operates, at least in a somewhat different way, than every other news organization that I know, that they have their talking points. In other words, somebody in the hierarchy, whether this is Roger Ailes who runs the place or not, we know that they get talking points from the White House, and they can say, “Well, we don’t always take those talking points.”

Ha! Dan Rather accusing other news organization of taking talking points from the White House! Just another case of the pot calling the kettle.

(hat tip: Newsbusters)


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Anything coming from “Fake-But-Accurate” Rather on Maher’s show should be automatically dismissed as a lie.

Remember what Mark Halprin said on Hugh Hewitt’s radio show:

MH: I never say MSM, because I don’t believe the old media is mainstream. They’re out of the mainstream on most of the issues I’ve been referring to. So I don’t use that phrase. I believe that as I’ve said several times, happy to say again, that anyone who’s conservative in this country has every justification to be skeptical about anything, an internal memo, or product that goes on the air, from the old media, because of a forty year or more history of liberal bias on a range of issues. And after what CBS News did in 2004, regarding the President’s National Guard record, I would be…I am thankful that any conservative looks to us every for news and information, given how outrageous what they did was.

http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/g/8096249b-e534-43ac-81ac-8c4722648377

Halprin is ABC’s political news director and he should know!

georgej on November 18, 2006 at 4:37 AM

What a loser. This clown just got free promo for his program that will fail (has it even started?) on Fox in at least 2 interviews that I saw, but it seems like 3 or 4. I saw him on Fox & Friends and I think Cavuto (not sure it was Cavuto, but it was at least one other interview on FNC). By the way, HA readers might remember that this POS is still standing by the debunked Bush guard story. When you get to that page, make sure you follow the link to Confederate Yankee. Rather isn’t even saying “fake but accurate”, he stands by the completely debunked documents!!!

RightWinged on November 18, 2006 at 4:40 AM

Oh, and I said this in the thread on that internal FNC memo… what exactly is the problem? It stated a fact, and as we know Fox likes to cover different stories and different angles on the regular stories, and that’s why they’re number 1. But more to the point, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Al Aqsa endorsed the Dems before the election and our enemies have cheered their victory publicly. What the hell is wrong with Fox wanting to cover that angle because the rest of the media won’t? That’s what they do with all stories.

RightWinged on November 18, 2006 at 4:43 AM

Dan thinks he’s getting his talking points from Edward R. Murrow, but it’s really just the LSD talking.

Pablo on November 18, 2006 at 4:46 AM

Whoa,

For a minute there I thought I was at ScrappleFace.

Dan Rather complaining that FoxNews “had wished the election had gone another way and sought to position their programming . . .” is laughable.

iNeXuS on November 18, 2006 at 4:47 AM

FNC’s ratings have fallen since Bush’s second term began. My guess is it is the disgust of conservatives at big government Republicans. Fox does present both sides. However, the right side of FNC tends to be more Republican than conservative (with the exception of the boss).

Having said all that, Rather is a chube with legendary faulty instincts.

Valiant on November 18, 2006 at 6:06 AM

Anything Dan Rather says should have a disclaimer scrolling across the bottom of the screen like those old Joe Isuzu commercials, “I’m lying”. No offense to David Leisure who played the character, after all, he was just acting.

Zorro on November 18, 2006 at 8:02 AM

Rather is someone you pull out when you want to show what happens when journalism goes wrong…That said, why would that memo represent the opposite of journalism? When this country used to have investigative reporters, they would hit the ground running, leaving no stone unturned to get all the facts they could for their story. Didn’t the WH indicate that the terrorists wanted a Democratic victory? Yes. And didn’t Iran and Syria rejoice? Yes. So is that not a legitimate news piece? The MSM only want to present a story that supports their position..hence you have stories loaded with unnamed sources. They are more than happy to shove leaks down our throats just get get their message out..Anyone who covered Clinton and dared to tell the truth is a hack, anyone that covers the WH and tries to get a story on a claim is doing the opposite of journalism…Yes. Oh wait a minute, we are talking about Rather and Maher! My mistake…So sorry Ian, carry on! P.S. just a catty observation, but have you noticed how scarce Huffington is when on a panel type program? She doesn’t do well if challenged therefore she sends her minions out to speak for her, or goes on shows that won’t challenge her positions..

Pam on November 18, 2006 at 8:13 AM

Was the memo typed in Microsoft Word?

Ropera on November 18, 2006 at 8:14 AM

The networks get theirs from the NYT.

jman on November 18, 2006 at 8:17 AM

Osama, Et all, get their talking points from MSNBC and CNN…

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on November 18, 2006 at 8:22 AM

Rather’s fragile mind HAS to hold on to the delusional concept that the memos were in fact real. To do otherwise would be an admission that his whole life was spent as a willing tool , and not an especially sharp one at that.

bbz123 on November 18, 2006 at 8:24 AM

Osama, Et all, get their talking points from MSNBC and CNN…

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on November 18, 2006 at 8:22 AM

Maybe its the other way around

jman on November 18, 2006 at 8:50 AM

Rather is a discredited idiot that simply needs to fade into the sunset never to be seen or heard from again. It’s amazing how this egocentric fool never seems to learn.

rplat on November 18, 2006 at 9:05 AM

Maybe its the other way around

jman on November 18, 2006 at 8:50 AM

I have a hard time believing that. However I’ll fully admit that it’s because I don’t want to see it.

It like of like seeing Obermann as a foolish tool, as apposed to likening them to Adam Gadahn.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on November 18, 2006 at 9:08 AM

It like of like seeing Obermann

Proofread… proofread… proofread…

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on November 18, 2006 at 9:08 AM

Rather was bought and paid for by Saddam Hussein and Fidel Castro. Take a look in the mirror, you bitter old man.

JammieWearingFool on November 18, 2006 at 9:10 AM

DAN RATHER: Well, I think it’s fair to say, Bill – in fact I know it is – that Fox News operates, at least in a somewhat different way, than every other news organization that I know

I guess he means that Fox looks for stories that fit their world view instead of just making them up on the spot like Dan did.

Benaiah on November 18, 2006 at 9:13 AM

Dan been hanging with Ted Turner?

Wade on November 18, 2006 at 9:14 AM

Remember the good old days Dan when you had all of them on your side, didn’t you? Didn’t you? You believed in all your lies, didn’t you? Didn’t you?

(some of this comment may have been plagiarized)

Kevin M on November 18, 2006 at 9:35 AM

DON’T LET GREBROOK SEE THIS!!! HE MUSTN’T KNOW!!!

Troy Rasmussen on November 18, 2006 at 10:03 AM

Dan Rather…on Bill Maher’s show…discussing a blog on Huffington’s Post…veracity…veracity…gets more credible the further you dig into it.

It was Hugo Chavez who posted the info on the Huffington blog, from information given him by George Soros, who’d been given the leaked memo by Cesare Borgia, who’d given it by Tomás de Torquemada at a cocktail party hosted by Pontius Pilate to honor Judas Iscariot. Marcus Junius Brutus vouches for its authenticity.

…or, at least that would be the logical provenance of this non-story….

Puritan1648 on November 18, 2006 at 10:05 AM

Oh,Grebbers will go into some strawman argument,Hannity this,Rush that,can see it coming a mile away.Let him rant,keeps him out of real trouble with tasers and stuff.

bbz123 on November 18, 2006 at 10:07 AM

Rather evidently has his own talking points when it comes to his Military service.

“B.G. Burkett, co-author of the book “Stolen Valor,” a history of the media’s portrayal of the Vietnam conflict, says he’s tired of Rather’s double-talk and hypocrisy.”

“Rather has continually hid behind the flag and his own military service claims to deflect criticism of his reporting, Burkett said.”

“Burkett added that Rather is greatly exaggerating his record.”

“And Burkett is flabbergasted that Rather continues to proudly describe himself as a “Marine.”

“But Burkett notes that Rather “never got through Marine recruit training because he couldn’t do the physical activity.”

“As Burkett explains in “Stolen Valor,” Rather “was discharged less than four months later on May 11, 1954 for being medically unfit.”

there it is on November 18, 2006 at 10:09 AM

Bill Maher: Pot calling the kettle black, “That strikes me as the opposite of journalism, as looking for the end of the story before you find what the real truth is.” (emphasis added)

CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, NYT, LATIMES, etc. never does this, right Libs?

Troy Rasmussen on November 18, 2006 at 10:10 AM

Better to take talking points from the White House than from the Kremlin.

DAT60A3 on November 18, 2006 at 10:25 AM

I’m SURE that Dan Rather and Bill Maher have proof of this. A leaked document from Rove perhaps? A smudgy post-it note with Cheney’s handwriting? I mean — Dan Rather! He’s a respected journalist! I daresay! He wouldn’t make something up — like an unsubstantiated charge — would he? On camera?! Bah!

by the way… has anyone tried to deconstruct & diagram Dan Rathers bloviating drivel? It’s impossible. All you get is “Fox News has talking points.”

Go out on that limb, Dan!
Truth to power, Dan!
Courage!

stevezilla on November 18, 2006 at 10:30 AM

Hey,DAT,Teddy the swimmer has been doing it for decades and he still gets re-elected.

bbz123 on November 18, 2006 at 10:33 AM

What’s the code Kenneth?

wytammic on November 18, 2006 at 10:39 AM

Maybe its the other way around

jman on November 18, 2006 at 8:50 AM
*******************
I have a hard time believing that. However I’ll fully admit that it’s because I don’t want to see it.

It like of like seeing Obermann as a foolish tool, as apposed to likening them to Adam Gadahn.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on November 18, 2006 at 9:08 AM

I said this tongue in cheek. My point is that the moral outrage of the main stream media tends to mirror that of the Arab world when it comes to US policies & actions while there is very little outrage for the terrorist that deliberatly target civilians for torture & murder. We are being held to standards out enemy is not. I do not know how you can win under these circumstances.

If I recall, the NYT has around 50 front page stories about abu ghraib. How many front page stories did they run about our captured soldiers being tortured, beheaded & mutilated? Any sympathy I may have had for the prisoners in abu ghraib vanished after the the first beheading…

jman on November 18, 2006 at 11:13 AM

I want to bring your attention to something that was on my friend Arianna Huffington’s blog today,

Haha, Maher name dropping Arianna Huffington. Must be trying to impress the moonbats.

it was an internal memo from Fox News, an organization I guess that would never hire you.

This is a supposition, but I doubt Fox News would hire an anchor that presents a falsified news story about a sitting president a few weeks before an election. Just a guess.

Be on the lookout for any statements from the Iraqi insurgents thrilled at the prospect of a Democratic controlled Congress.” That strikes me as the opposite of journalism, as looking for the end of the story before you find what the real truth is.

So reporting the reaction to the election results from our enemies is not journalism? I suppose then that running propaganda video supplied by the enemy of our soldiers being assassinated without analysis of the enemy’s motives and desperation tactics is good journalism.

Maher and Rather: to old fools who deserve each other.

Mallard T. Drake on November 18, 2006 at 11:14 AM

That strikes me as the opposite of journalism, as looking for the end of the story before you find what the real truth is.

Thanks Maher, for pointing out Rather’s M.O. Just goes to show how blind Maher is to reality.

“Be on the lookout for any statements from the Iraqi insurgents thrilled at the prospect of a Democratic controlled Congress.”

Now here’s the difference between Fox and CBS. Fox puts out a statement to be on the lookout for actual statements. Rather and CBS circumvented this critical part of news reporting, falsified a document, made up a phony story, reported it as factual and stood by their story for days on end until the new media exposed their lies.

CBS would never let facts get in the way of reporting a story that could negatively affect the outcome of Bush’s re-election.

Don’t ya just love these two nitwits, willing to go before a camera and make total asses of themselves?

fogw on November 18, 2006 at 11:21 AM

Dan Rather a gleaming example of journalistic integrity. Why did he not join a reality series (television death) or something after Rathergate? Any reasonable person has to question why he would even appear on a show to question another network’s standards.

SCGOPgirl on November 18, 2006 at 11:34 AM

ummm….slow news weekend
Lets do some polls…
What about….the foxes of fox???
=-)

lsutiger on November 18, 2006 at 11:37 AM

Can do my obnoxious foreign/democrat/mooonbat poll. Rather, huffington and Mahir are all there

http://www.anklebitingpundits.com/abp_forum/viewtopic.php?t=2978&start=30

William Amos on November 18, 2006 at 11:42 AM

Well Dan, at LEAST if what you say is true, then Fox is getting facts out of the White House to report to the people, rather than making up things, and repeating the ignorant lies of the seditious traitors at the DNC and their toadlike followers, like you and your fellow liberal “reporters” do.

NRA4Freedom on November 18, 2006 at 11:43 AM

ummm….slow news weekend
Lets do some polls…
What about….the foxes of fox???
=-)

lsutiger on November 18, 2006 at 11:37 AM

Yet lets have some fun. Here is a fox news babe poll. Sorry I didnt put Michelle (Malkin) up there wouldnt be a contest she would win outright.

Can veiw Fox babes here (Could only do 8 on the poll)

http://www.yourgeorgia.net/Georgia/FoxNewsBabes/

Poll is here

http://billbobruce.freepolls.com/cgi-bin/polls/049/poll_center.htm

William Amos on November 18, 2006 at 11:59 AM

Osama, Et all, get their talking points from MSNBC and CNN…

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on November 18, 2006 at 8:22 AM

Maybe its the other way around

jman on November 18, 2006 at 8:50 AM

Jman is absolutely right… remember the terrorist sniper propaganda film on CNN (I’m sure you all read about it and the Blitzer/Mrs. Cheney interview here… “It wasn’t propaganda” (seconds later) “Of course we knew it was propaganda”). But as I said, it’s irrelevant. The Fox memo (if it was real anyway) just stated the known facts – terrorists support the Dems and use their talking points. They use their talking points in their cave videos and they endorse Dems before the elections, and cheer their victory. What’s so wrong with Fox wanting to report that angle? They always report the different angles the rest of the MSM won’t.

And Isutinger… The Fox News Foxes, eh? Well, I gave you some serious Kiran Chetry video linkage in the Jane “Top Cock” Skinner thread, but if that’s not enough, I give you GirlsOfFoxNews.com. Ha! I hadn’t been their for a while, but if you scroll down their are screen caps of a side of Gretchen Carlson I’ve never seen before.

RightWinged on November 18, 2006 at 12:18 PM

why do I keep spelling “there” like “their”?!

RightWinged on November 18, 2006 at 12:20 PM

Right Dan…you are the most credible “Talking Head” ever.

Golfer_75093 on November 18, 2006 at 12:29 PM

Poll is here

http://billbobruce.freepolls.com/cgi-bin/polls/049/poll_center.htm

Man, you left out Banderas and Kendall?? I know you can pick only 8…choices and choices.

Hey rightwinged..I saw that on some fox site a couple of weeks back…but it is hillarious

lsutiger on November 18, 2006 at 12:30 PM

PS – I wonder if Skinner is getting more votes due to her freudian ( or not) slip…lol

lsutiger on November 18, 2006 at 12:31 PM

**going to get
Too many margaritas last night

lsutiger on November 18, 2006 at 12:32 PM

“They had wish the election had gone another way, and they sought to position their programming which would raise as many questions about it as possible“???

I’m still waiting for the Repubs and Fox to start beating the “machines were rigged” or the “voters disenfranchised” drum. They could have picked up right where the Dems left off the night before the elections. (insert wink smiley)

I’d say that this guy is Rather Biased.

Looking for the enemies of this country to be gleeful over having the “cut and run” Party of Capitulation and Appeasement take control of the House and Senate is akin to watching shoppers go berserk over the last PS3… We all knew that it would happen.

RalphyBoy on November 18, 2006 at 12:33 PM

Poll #2. No Babe left behind poll

http://billbobruce.freepolls.com/cgi-bin/polls/050/poll_center.htm

William Amos on November 18, 2006 at 12:39 PM

You see that protrusion just below Dan’s left ear in the screencap?

I think it’s the receiving antenna from the Heaven’s Gate mother-ship.

eeyore on November 18, 2006 at 12:41 PM

Sadly, the delightful Heather Nauert has moved on to ABC, I think. She’s got gumballs. But there is a bright side to the troop rotation and her name is Rudi Bakhtiar.

Thank you, Mr Murdoch.

Pablo on November 18, 2006 at 12:44 PM

The stupidity in this thread can be summed up as follows:

“Yeah, Fox is pure Republican propaganda, but CBS was biased too, so therefore it’s ok!”

Grebrook on November 18, 2006 at 12:50 PM

…left out Harris Faulkner? The mellifluously named Uma Pemmaraju?

Puritan1648 on November 18, 2006 at 12:54 PM

You see that protrusion just below Dan’s left ear in the screencap? — eeyore

…no…it’s an inflation nipple…like on a volleyball….

Puritan1648 on November 18, 2006 at 12:55 PM

The stupidity in this thread can be summed up as follows:

“Yeah, Fox is pure Republican propaganda, but CBS was biased too, so therefore it’s ok!”

Grebrook on November 18, 2006 at 12:50 PM

Who is that directed at?

RightWinged on November 18, 2006 at 12:57 PM

Oh, in case anyone missed it, the Gretchen Carlson screen caps I’m talking about isn’t the cleavage one… keep scrolling…. WHOA!

It would appear she’s trying to top Alisyn Camerota (here and here)

RightWinged on November 18, 2006 at 1:01 PM

…blah-blah…stupidity…blah-blah…summed up…blah-blah…pure Republican propaganda…blah…so therefore it’s ok!” — Grebrook

…let’s not have a day like yesterday…the webmasters pitching us softballs ’cause folks couldn’t keep a lid on things….

Someone is outrageous or offensive to one side, the other side retaliates. We end up not exchanging ideas but beating eachother with boilerplate and invective. It’s not even fun to make fun anymore if it’s going to give rise to childishness.

No more of the “same-old/same-old”. Let’s break new ground today. Let’s be civil.

Puritan1648 on November 18, 2006 at 1:01 PM

The stupidity in this thread can be summed up as follows:

“Grebrook is here.”

Pablo on November 18, 2006 at 1:20 PM

The greebster is here to fight. Not reason, or debate. It gets off on self-righteously doing ‘battle’ against the evil republican empire.

I, for one, will no longer feed it. I suggest you all do likewise. Eventually it will tire and go play elsewhere.

Same goes for all the new trolls/mobies currently soiling this otherwise excellent venue.

techno_barbarian on November 18, 2006 at 1:31 PM

Puritan, you magnificent but very very bad man, I thought this blog was for adult conservatives to discuss and debate Stuff. We should be able to do that without constantly being attacked by a jerk-femme who only wants to disrupt and annoy the grown-ups. I’ve been reading his/her comments for a while, and he/she usually either misrepresents or lies outright–along with the occasional howler like ‘liberals don’t indulge in groupthink’

It’s purpose is only to sabotage and ruin worthwhile debate. So….If it can’t / won’t be banned from this site, it should be ignored

Janos Hunyadi on November 18, 2006 at 1:53 PM

This was laughable. I hate to say I watched this but I did. Anyone who wants to see what a bubble these people live in, watch a rerun of this episode. The guests, (Tom Morello,Richard Dreyfus, Norman Lear) were crawling all over each other for space up Rathers ass. Dreyfus was an unbelievable blowhard, and they are all still saying the media dosen’t ask the “tough Questions”. As if the MSM is on board with the White House. Unbelievable. Also, Maher has a giant head, It’s really kind of bizarre.

bmac on November 18, 2006 at 2:03 PM

His head is normal-sized,but he’s like 3 ft tall,so it is an illusion of TV.

bbz123 on November 18, 2006 at 2:08 PM

Puritan, you magnificent but very very bad man, I thought this blog was for adult conservatives to discuss and debate Stuff…So….If it can’t / won’t be banned from this site, it should be ignored — Janos Hunyadi

(*puffs up magnificantly badly, like an Australian lizard*)

I wouldn’t ban, were it my decison to make…it’s also an adult decision to ignore. Read, consider, ignore.

It makes one appreciate Connie and Honey and a few others who drop by to drop bombs…as they seem to be real people, not the blog-equivelant of recorded political cold calls. Fight fiercely for a point if you will, but do it respectfully. All of our opinions are important, if only to us.

You can’t argue with a fact. A fact is a fact. You can only arrange and present your facts to put the presented facts in context. Where facts are murky, debate gets murky, and ceased to be debate.

Thank you, though, very much.

…have to ask though: what, no Mongolian?

Puritan1648 on November 18, 2006 at 2:15 PM

Harap én , -val minden lejáró tisztel

Pilgrim, this is difficult to translate from Magyar: the first part would be good for trolls: “Bite me”, …with all due respect”

With so many facts around in the social sciences, it is too eary to mangle and distort and misure them to create dishonesty. If most of us were having a discussion in person, we would not allow trolls to sit in, no?

Janos Hunyadi on November 18, 2006 at 2:26 PM

It’s purpose is only to sabotage and ruin worthwhile debate.

Debate? What debate? You fools didn’t debate anything before I came along. You just nodded your heads and repeated the same cliche talking points. No one disagrees with anyone on anything, that’s the entire reason you’re conservatives. You live in an isolated bubble of Fox News, talk radio and right-wing blogs and you essentially share the same opinion on everything.

Grebrook on November 18, 2006 at 2:40 PM

one disagrees with anyone on anything, that’s the entire reason you’re conservatives.

Not so. We disagree with you.

Grebrook, you speak of dabate but I have not heard any from you.

jman on November 18, 2006 at 2:51 PM

No one disagrees with anyone on anything, that’s the entire reason you’re conservatives.

Wasn’t that Grubby who was just recently chortling about what fun it would be to watch Republicans at each other’s throats over amnesty?

It would be so bad if Grubby was consistent, but it isn’t. It doesn’t even read it’s own crap.

Pablo on November 18, 2006 at 3:12 PM

Grebrook, are you just another AP user name here to mix things up? You can’t be a real person.

RightWinged on November 18, 2006 at 3:14 PM

That strikes me as the opposite of journalism, as looking for the end of the story before you find what the real truth is.

“Hey, let’s take some Muslims to a NASCAR race and show how those dumb rednecks act.” (Answer: Indifferent.)

Grebrook’s Guide to Debate:

Step 1: “Nuh-uh!”
Step 2: Repeat Step 1.

Jim Treacher on November 18, 2006 at 3:23 PM

So Dan Blather says Fox takes talking points from the White House. Sometimes, perhaps – if it’s news worthy. They wouldn’t have such strong ratings (declining or not) if all the only angle they reported was directed from the White House. What nut-job honestly, truly believes Fox gets its marching orders from Karl Rove? I think Dan any many others from CBS and the NYT take talking points from the DNC, but not specifically from Howard Scream, Nancy Pelousy or Al Bore. It’s very hard to find any news organization that doesn’t tilt one way or the other – which is why it’s important to get news from a variety of sources. In the end everyone will filter what they read or hear into the mold of their individual ideologies – either accepting or rejecting it.

thedecider on November 18, 2006 at 3:27 PM

Notice how the troll proves my point…..

It lies and distorts and insults; who would allow such a P.O.S. to sit in on any actual in-person discussion>

Janos Hunyadi on November 18, 2006 at 3:43 PM

Grebrook, are you just another AP user name here to mix things up? You can’t be a real person. — RightWinged

…some who would style themselves, as Reggie Jackson once said of himself, that they’re “the straw that stirs the drink”…and end up rather being the “turd in the punchbowl”….

Debate presupposes that you acknowledge that the other guy has a right to his opinion as you have a right to yours, and you bounce ideas off eachother, sometimes raising sparks. What some seem to think their mission, instead, is to educate the ignorant plebes.

Oh! Before I forget today, my new buzzphrase, now that I’ve appointed myself an Acolard First Class in Da Boss’s Army of the Truculent:

HAIL THE BOSS!!

(…isn’t that in Animal Farm or Lord of the Rings? No matter.)

Puritan1648 on November 18, 2006 at 4:55 PM

‘A turd in the bowl’ .

good one… It can be the troll’s new nickname:

a trágya -ban ivás

On topic, Dan Rather’s political efforts go back a long way: Read his awful book ( or as much as you can stand )

He takes credit for ending the Vietnam War years sooner than Johnson or Nixon would have done, and also takes credit for undoing Nixon. Okay, he shares the credit with similar others, but he puts himself in the Gang Who Re-shaped America

That’s “journalism”?

remember TV LAPD Sergeant Jack Friday? “Just the facts, ma’am” ?

Janos Hunyadi on November 18, 2006 at 6:01 PM

Grebrook said: Debate? What debate? You fools didn’t debate anything before I came along.

oh good lord. what a charmer.

stevezilla on November 18, 2006 at 9:02 PM

You fools didn’t debate anything before I came along.

Grebrook on November 18, 2006 at 2:40 PM

Now you have to go and call us fools. But I recall only last week that you admitted being an atheist, did you know the very definition of fool is … atheist, Psalms 14:1 ? Or were you lacking that knowledge ?

Maxx on November 18, 2006 at 11:22 PM

Mr Rather, with all due respect, it’s polite to stand up when you’re talking out of your a$$ so people can understand you better. What a suckhole. Just retire and go intern chasing with Bill Clinton already.

austinnelly on November 19, 2006 at 3:25 PM

Once the venom against Rather is mopped up, the question is, Is there something to his statement? Surely you notice a great deal of consonance between what Tony Snow says and what the Foxies say shortly thereafter. To call it parroting would demean parrots. Of course none of them, including Snow, bear any resemblance to journalists. They are carnival barkers. There was a time not so long ago when press secretaries were chosing because they were plodders — that is, they just gave out the straight poop and that was all. Now it’s Tony Snow putting on the show that his boss is incapable of.

Troy Rasmussen says:

Bill Maher: Pot calling the kettle black, “That strikes me as the opposite of journalism, as looking for the end of the story before you find what the real truth is.” (emphasis added)

CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, NYT, LATIMES, etc. never does this, right Libs?

My answer is, No, they don’t do that. It always amuses me when my conservative friends blast every major organ of journalism in the country except the Wall Street Journal, because the Journal is famous for its excellent fact reporting side by side with its wild-eyed crazy editorial page. So I just encourage my pals to pick a story from the so-called “liberal” media and go see what the Journal has to say about it. Another good fact source with predictable loony editorial spin is NewsMax. I’ll accept those as factual sources any day. And you know what? If they report the same story as the “liberals”, the facts are likely to line up exactly in parallel with them. And we should all be very grateful that that is the case. It suggests we are getting the truth.

My beef with them all is that they are not asking the right questions. Here’s one: Two months ago, Iraq Prime Minister Al-Maliki announced that he was very close to a peace deal with the Sunnis that would end the insurgency, provided only that the parties agreed that the Americans would withdraw within two years — which, since it promised an end to the fighting, was quite reasonable. As I recall, that was on a Friday. By Monday al-Maliki was saying timetables were inappropriate and the deal fell through. I’m guessing Rumsfeld killed the deal because to the neocons a low-level war that allows our continued occupation for decades to come is quite acceptable, whereas withdrawal just defeats that fundamental purpose of the invasion. But that’s just a guess. But why hasn’t any news organization probed that event extensively? Is peace really held in such low regard in this war? Or is it just yet another comment on the sad state of journalism generally these days?

ProudLefty on November 19, 2006 at 8:17 PM