I did something tonight I do not normally do- I watched CBS news. They did not let me down.
After leveling the charges again against Bush, they then noted Laura Bush’s quotation on the issue: and that she was the only member of the White House to comment:
“You know they are probably altered,” she told Radio Iowa in Des Moines yesterday. “And they probably are forgeries, and I think that’s terrible, really.”
The voice-over continued and stated, I kid you not:
“The First Lady did not provide evidence the documents were fake.”
I choked on my root beer. Who is running CBS? Atrios? The fucking Daily KOS?
*** Update ***
kelly
This whole episode is blowing my mind. Who is CBS protecting? And why? I mean, they’re not even trying to appear objective anymore. At least they used to TRY!
Sav
CBS apparently hired two experts to verify the authenticity of the docs before airing them on TV. Both think they’re frauds so CBS dropped ’em and brought in Marcel Marceau or whatever his name is.
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/Investigation/bush_guard_documents_040914-1.html
Al Maviva
John boy, that’s nothin. The whole left wing of the blogosphere is in complete denial. Most seem unable to mention the memos; the ones who do, are continually repeating that the memos are for sure genuine. Um, except for those lefties who say they are forgeries, but they are a clever Rove plant. Basically, everybody to the left of Olympia Snow has gone completely fucking insane, drunk the kool aid, dropped the acid, whatever. It’s an utter failure by the left to grasp reality. One wonders what kind of “direct action” protests these loons will get up to when they get their asses kicked in the next election.
I should be dancing with joy. But I’m not. It’s bad for the country when 40% of the people go stark raving nuts.
Dodd
Relax, Al. It’s nowhere near 40%.
But they’re still convinced they’re the “True” majority because they can find a few hundred others just like themselves at Democratic Underground any time day or night. The Internet has its drawbacks.
CadillaqJaq
Dodd is right, Al… but don’t you remember the day after the 1994 mid-term elections when any Repub that ran for office won? The Dems went nuts… and they haven’t gotten over it.
The frosting on the cake was when Imus In The Morning played Willie Nelson’s recording of “Turn Out The Lights,The Party’s Over…”
Very appropos.
GR
I agree with Dodd. Further, I think that the fact that journalists hang out in there little liberal cliques has convinced them of a greater extent of bush hatred than exists. They swore up and down that the electorate was so polarized that there would be no post convention bounce for Bush, and they were wrong.
Sure, in a few individuals, their hatred burns brighter than a thousand suns, but the populace by and large views Bush just as any other president: possibly a liar on some accounts, possibly corrupt on some accounts, but basically as good as we can hope for in a president.
Geoff Matthews
ABC’s smackdown of CBS is the harshest blow that has been struck so far. If you’re fooled by a forgery, you can move on and learn from it. But it is now painfully obvious that CBS wants the documents to be true and witheld vital information from the viewers about this. I can’t wait to see CBS’s reaction to that. Dan’s days have to be numbered.
Dean
But, to paraphrase Fox Mulder, “the *essential* truth is out there”!
The *essential* truth that the US military was the equivalent of Genghiz Khan was what made Kerry’s 1971 testimony true, regardless of the facts.
The *essential* truth that the US intervened in Cambodia is what makes Kerry’s 1986 testimony true, regardless of the facts.
The *essential* truth that Dubya walked away from his ANG service is what makes these charges and documents true, regardless of the facts.
Because, after all, the *essential* truth shall set you free.
Nahanni
The *essential* truth is that George Soros is trying to buy a President.
He already has one. He bought the office of President of Georgia earlier this year.
foghorn
>>>
When you really think it over the Democrats have been losing their grip for decades. Since 1968 they have only won in the following cases –
1976, Ford loses because he pardoned Nixon. If not, he would have won.
1992, Clinton runs as a Republican (for welfare reform, reducing crime, strong military even if I loathe it, etc.) and he had Perot to split the republican vote. Without Perot, no Clinton.
1996, Bob Dole is a stiff of a candidate and Clinton has all the trappings of the incumbent along with a media that has proven itself to be an extension of the Democratic party except when they are an extension of the communist party.
So . . . The truth is we are watching the last gasps of the latest incarnation of the Whigs. And, just like the Whigs, within 10-15 years there will be significant changes similar to the replacement of the 2nd party with the birth of the Republican Party.
Mikey
The problem that CBS is really looking at is the possibility of defamation suits from Col. Staudt and the estate of Col. Killian. Because they aren’t public figures, the NY Times/Sullivan standard does not apply, and these documents are so bad that questions would be raised merely upon viewing them. CBS ought to have very good lawyers advising them at this point, as should Mr. Rather.
Brian
“The First Lady did not provide evidence the documents were fake.”
Since when is it the accused’s job to provide proof of innocence? A shift of the burden of proof from the the left wing? Sounds strangely Sovietski style justice. That worked out well for them. Besides, that’s not how it’s done here.
Jim in Chicago
Speaking of that little sh*t Kos, did anyone catch Mr. Screw ‘Em on the CNN lead-up piece to the Instapundit interview last night?
Who knew he was a lisper?
Mikey
Upon reflection I remember that the dead can’t be defamed, so the estate of Col. Killian would not have a suit, though family members may have a claim for negligent or intentional infliction of emotional distress.*
*Its been a long time since I’ve dealt with torts, please check your state’s laws for variations.
adk46er
“the First Lady did not provide evidence…”
I too was struck by this comment. As several pajama wearers have already pointed out – the latest revelations from document experts CBS hired, make it clear CBS wasn’t duped they just ignored input that didn’t support their story. I wonder if the people who put this piece together were laughing when they came up with the idea of ending the piece by saying Laura Bush didn’t provide any evidence. The stonewalling was bad enough but now CBS has sunken further into the abyss… Their credibility may be gone forever.
Toren
CBC just announced they “can’t be sure if the documents are fake or not.”
ROFLMAO.
Sandi
Hardly no one cares anymore whether Bush got preferencial treatment in TANG. In my opinion he very well may have, but unlike Kerry he isn’t running on his military service, he is running on his record as Commander In Chief.
The “essential truth” isn’t about the accuracy or not of the CBS documents. The “essential truth” isn’t about Bush’s ANG service. These things have been rehashed until everyone has their mind set about them. They either care, or they don’t. The “essential truth” here is really about credible journalism. It is about stonewalling and coverup.
Unlike the blogosphere where the writer is accountable, and their readers can respond directly, MSM sits behind newsroom walls shielded from direct interaction with the viewers safe from accountabiltiy. Well the viewers will only swallow so much. CBS has been caught. The emperor has no clothes.
Bloggerhead
“The emperor has no clothes.”
Yeah, Sandi, my thoughts exactly, for about last the three years or so. And, to mix fables, no brain either.
It is interesting, though, that Laura has been the only administration personage to question the documents’ authenticity. More and more, she seems to be taking the point on sticky campaign issues, like her breaking the bad news about stem-cell research.
To be sure, it’s got something to do with fact that Cheney scares the children and rouses the dogs. But aren’t you wingers at least a little apprehensive about this naked grab for power, reminiscent as it is of her predecessor? Look at this way, she can scarcely do worse than her husband’s done, and perhaps we’d finally get weed legalized.
amy
I, personally, think having Laura speak out on these sorts of crazy issues is a great idea. The vast majority of the country thinks she is an honest and nice woman. Even most democrats refrain from talking trash about her.
adk46er
I don’t think anyone from the Bush camp needs to comment; isn’t there something about staying out of the way when your critics are self destructing?
Sandi
Bloggerhead, the administration doesn’t need anyone on point. Staying above the fray has been working quite well.
In the meantime the democrats have not only been shooting themselves in the foot, but seem to be emptying the whole clip.