Discussion:
Faux "news"
(too old to reply)
Cliff
2007-10-27 10:19:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
--
Cliff
Tom Gardner
2007-10-27 14:47:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cliff
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
--
Cliff
The precedent was set by CBS and Dan Rather, he's the master of fabrication.
Too bad he got caught.
Ed Huntress
2007-10-27 14:52:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Cliff
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
--
Cliff
The precedent was set by CBS and Dan Rather, he's the master of
fabrication. Too bad he got caught.
The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather. For Fox,
it's their basic business plan. Think of them as Matt Drudge in Italian
suits.

--
Ed Huntress
Gerry
2007-10-27 17:22:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather."

Only because they got caught. Had they not, Dan would still be there
spreading his lies
J. Carroll
2007-10-27 17:22:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gerry
"The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather."
Only because they got caught. Had they not, Dan would still be there
spreading his lies
How soon can the American public expect Bush to meet even the low standard
set by Dan Rather and CBS and resign?
--
JC
F. George McDuffee
2007-10-27 18:17:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Gerry
"The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather."
Only because they got caught. Had they not, Dan would still be there
spreading his lies
How soon can the American public expect Bush to meet even the low standard
set by Dan Rather and CBS and resign?
=========
One of the many advantages of the internet and high speed access
is the ability to download videos from other parts of the world.
As it turns out, ABC [as in Australian Broadcasting Company, not
American Broadcasting Company] channel 7 has a weekly program
that examines both electronic and print national [Australian]
media accuracy. We badly need something similar in the US.
click on
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/

If you have high speed access [c. 36 meg file] and WMV or MP4
viewer software installed for an example click on
http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/tv/mediawatch/mediawatch_2007_ep34.wmv
http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/tv/mediawatch/mediawatch_2007_ep34.mp4
Note how in-depth the coverage is on each item -- better than a
Paul Harvey "Rest of the Story.".

If you find this interesting consider installing a tv viewer for
8,000 "channels" to see what's going on in the world and for
alternative news stories. click on
http://participatoryculture.org/
for a free download.
try GoLeft.TV to start [your heart]


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
============
Merchants have no country.
The mere spot they stand on
does not constitute so strong an attachment
as that from which they draw their gains.

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826),
U.S. president. Letter, 17 March 1814.
David R Brooks
2007-10-27 20:30:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by F. George McDuffee
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Gerry
"The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather."
Only because they got caught. Had they not, Dan would still be there
spreading his lies
How soon can the American public expect Bush to meet even the low standard
set by Dan Rather and CBS and resign?
=========
One of the many advantages of the internet and high speed access
is the ability to download videos from other parts of the world.
As it turns out, ABC [as in Australian Broadcasting Company, not
American Broadcasting Company] channel 7 has a weekly program
that examines both electronic and print national [Australian]
media accuracy. We badly need something similar in the US.
click on
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/
[snip]
But Channel 7 (& 9, 10) are not the ABC. ABC is public radio, funded by
the Govt. 7, 9 & 10 are straight commercial channels.

Personally, I read 3 international papers on the Web, one each from
Australia, UK & USA. It's often instructive to compare their different
"takes" on things.
F. George McDuffee
2007-10-27 23:02:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
distro trimmed to rec.crafts.metalworking

On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 04:30:37 +0800, David R Brooks
Post by David R Brooks
Post by F. George McDuffee
click on
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/
[snip]
But Channel 7 (& 9, 10) are not the ABC. ABC is public radio, funded by
the Govt. 7, 9 & 10 are straight commercial channels.
http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/tv/mediawatch/mediawatch_2007_ep34.wmv
My bad -- don't know where I got the seven
Post by David R Brooks
Personally, I read 3 international papers on the Web, one each from
Australia, UK & USA. It's often instructive to compare their different
"takes" on things.
Indeed, in some cases I have to check they are reporting the same
events.
I suggest
http://www.breitbart.com/detail.php?wfeed=ap&ch=ap-biz {US}
http://www.spiegel.de/international/ {Germany in English}
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardian/ {UK}
and/or
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/ {Scotland}
for a change of pace click on
http://www.irna.ir/en/frontpage/menu-232/ {Iran in English}

For a Dan Rather specific video [c. 225 meg / 21 minutes] click
on
http://media.goleft.tv/medias/ROF_Greg_Palast_John.m4v


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
============
Merchants have no country.
The mere spot they stand on
does not constitute so strong an attachment
as that from which they draw their gains.

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826),
U.S. president. Letter, 17 March 1814.
Tom Gardner
2007-10-28 01:57:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Gerry
"The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather."
Only because they got caught. Had they not, Dan would still be there
spreading his lies
How soon can the American public expect Bush to meet even the low standard
set by Dan Rather and CBS and resign?
--
JC
He's going to resign some time late next year...or not...moght just stay on
as king! That would be fine with me, if only to piss you off!
J. Carroll
2007-10-27 23:01:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Gerry
"The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather."
Only because they got caught. Had they not, Dan would still be there
spreading his lies
How soon can the American public expect Bush to meet even the low
standard set by Dan Rather and CBS and resign?
--
JC
He's going to resign some time late next year...or not...moght just
stay on as king! That would be fine with me, if only to piss you off!
Exactly Tom,
You care more about sticking you fingers in someone's eye than you do about
either yuor country, its constitution, or the values they represent.
You're just a coward.
Well, not exactly. You are a poor imitation of the coward currently
pretending to be the President of the United States.
--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com
Tom Gardner
2007-10-28 04:03:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Gerry
"The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather."
Only because they got caught. Had they not, Dan would still be there
spreading his lies
How soon can the American public expect Bush to meet even the low
standard set by Dan Rather and CBS and resign?
--
JC
He's going to resign some time late next year...or not...moght just
stay on as king! That would be fine with me, if only to piss you off!
Exactly Tom,
You care more about sticking you fingers in someone's eye than you do about
either yuor country, its constitution, or the values they represent.
You're just a coward.
Well, not exactly. You are a poor imitation of the coward currently
pretending to be the President of the United States.
--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com
I see George doesn't HAVE to declare himself king to piss you off...cool!
Before you have another 'nippy-fit, consider that you've just been
HAD...again. You're just too easy.
Ed Huntress
2007-10-28 02:18:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Gerry
"The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather."
Only because they got caught. Had they not, Dan would still be there
spreading his lies
How soon can the American public expect Bush to meet even the low
standard set by Dan Rather and CBS and resign?
--
JC
He's going to resign some time late next year...or not...moght just
stay on as king! That would be fine with me, if only to piss you off!
Exactly Tom,
You care more about sticking you fingers in someone's eye than you do about
either yuor country, its constitution, or the values they represent.
You're just a coward.
Well, not exactly. You are a poor imitation of the coward currently
pretending to be the President of the United States.
--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com
I see George doesn't HAVE to declare himself king to piss you off...cool!
Before you have another 'nippy-fit, consider that you've just been
HAD...again. You're just too easy.
What should we expect? After Ronald MacDonald turned down the nomination,
they had to take what they could get.

--
Ed Huntress
J. Carroll
2007-10-28 02:36:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ed Huntress
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Gerry
"The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather."
Only because they got caught. Had they not, Dan would still be
there spreading his lies
How soon can the American public expect Bush to meet even the low
standard set by Dan Rather and CBS and resign?
--
JC
He's going to resign some time late next year...or not...moght just
stay on as king! That would be fine with me, if only to piss you off!
Exactly Tom,
You care more about sticking you fingers in someone's eye than you do about
either yuor country, its constitution, or the values they represent.
You're just a coward.
Well, not exactly. You are a poor imitation of the coward currently
pretending to be the President of the United States.
I see George doesn't HAVE to declare himself king to piss you
off...cool! Before you have another 'nippy-fit, consider that you've
just been HAD...again. You're just too easy.
What should we expect? After Ronald MacDonald turned down the
nomination, they had to take what they could get.
I was just thinking that those kids in Camden that were freed by a jury in
1973 wouldn't even have had a trial today.
--
JC
vinny
2007-10-28 03:53:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Ed Huntress
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Gerry
"The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather."
Only because they got caught. Had they not, Dan would still be
there spreading his lies
How soon can the American public expect Bush to meet even the low
standard set by Dan Rather and CBS and resign?
--
JC
He's going to resign some time late next year...or not...moght just
stay on as king! That would be fine with me, if only to piss you off!
Exactly Tom,
You care more about sticking you fingers in someone's eye than you do about
either yuor country, its constitution, or the values they represent.
You're just a coward.
Well, not exactly. You are a poor imitation of the coward currently
pretending to be the President of the United States.
I see George doesn't HAVE to declare himself king to piss you
off...cool! Before you have another 'nippy-fit, consider that you've
just been HAD...again. You're just too easy.
What should we expect? After Ronald MacDonald turned down the
nomination, they had to take what they could get.
I was just thinking that those kids in Camden that were freed by a jury in
1973 wouldn't even have had a trial today.
--
JC
Laura Dew
Rebecca Gomez
my GOD i could go on for a whole page. It has nothing to do with news, its a
beauty pagent? What are you guys thinking? Without fox news half the hot
chicks on tv would be gone. We'd all be forced to watch the spanish channel.
Tom Gardner
2007-10-28 07:37:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by vinny
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Ed Huntress
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Gerry
"The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather."
Only because they got caught. Had they not, Dan would still be
there spreading his lies
How soon can the American public expect Bush to meet even the low
standard set by Dan Rather and CBS and resign?
--
JC
He's going to resign some time late next year...or not...moght just
stay on as king! That would be fine with me, if only to piss you off!
Exactly Tom,
You care more about sticking you fingers in someone's eye than you do about
either yuor country, its constitution, or the values they represent.
You're just a coward.
Well, not exactly. You are a poor imitation of the coward currently
pretending to be the President of the United States.
I see George doesn't HAVE to declare himself king to piss you
off...cool! Before you have another 'nippy-fit, consider that you've
just been HAD...again. You're just too easy.
What should we expect? After Ronald MacDonald turned down the
nomination, they had to take what they could get.
I was just thinking that those kids in Camden that were freed by a jury in
1973 wouldn't even have had a trial today.
--
JC
Laura Dew
Rebecca Gomez
my GOD i could go on for a whole page. It has nothing to do with news, its
a beauty pagent? What are you guys thinking? Without fox news half the hot
chicks on tv would be gone. We'd all be forced to watch the spanish channel.
It does seem that Fox likes hot chicks, AND hot chicks with attitude. Works
for me!
Ed Huntress
2007-10-28 04:45:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
<snip>
Post by vinny
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Ed Huntress
Post by Tom Gardner
I see George doesn't HAVE to declare himself king to piss you
off...cool! Before you have another 'nippy-fit, consider that you've
just been HAD...again. You're just too easy.
What should we expect? After Ronald MacDonald turned down the
nomination, they had to take what they could get.
I was just thinking that those kids in Camden that were freed by a jury in
1973 wouldn't even have had a trial today.
--
JC
Laura Dew
Rebecca Gomez
my GOD i could go on for a whole page. It has nothing to do with news, its
a beauty pagent? What are you guys thinking? Without fox news half the hot
chicks on tv would be gone. We'd all be forced to watch the spanish channel.
That's a good point. They must recruit from really fine journalism schools.
d8-)

--
Ed Huntress
vinny
2007-10-28 05:45:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ed Huntress
<snip>
Post by vinny
Post by J. Carroll
Post by Ed Huntress
Post by Tom Gardner
I see George doesn't HAVE to declare himself king to piss you
off...cool! Before you have another 'nippy-fit, consider that you've
just been HAD...again. You're just too easy.
What should we expect? After Ronald MacDonald turned down the
nomination, they had to take what they could get.
I was just thinking that those kids in Camden that were freed by a jury in
1973 wouldn't even have had a trial today.
--
JC
Laura Dew
Rebecca Gomez
my GOD i could go on for a whole page. It has nothing to do with news,
its a beauty pagent? What are you guys thinking? Without fox news half
the hot chicks on tv would be gone. We'd all be forced to watch the
spanish channel.
That's a good point. They must recruit from really fine journalism
schools. d8-)
--
Ed Huntress
Rebecca Gomez(I like just typing her name) has just graduated from college.
She is now a meteorologist.
She's smart and super freakin hot. Screw the news, I can get that on pbs.

Anybody seen "extreme journalism"?
Its young people, and they have major opinions in their news, but...their
too young to mind control us, so you can see the truth. iT'S THE BEST! Real
stuff.
Ed Huntress
2007-10-27 17:48:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gerry
"The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather."
Only because they got caught. Had they not, Dan would still be there
spreading his lies
But Fox got caught and they didn't fire anybody. That's the difference. Fox
doesn't care, except that they would rather not get caught. Fox is like
Bush: they're never going to admit a mistake or do anything about it,
because being provocative, self-righteous and smug is how they connect with
their audience.

Fox's posture is carefully crafted. Bending the truth to make provocative
headlines and stories is part of their schtick. Roger Ailes, the head of Fox
News, was not a newsman. He was a P.R. man, for politicians and the tobacco
industry. And that's the sensibility he brings to Fox. He once said "never
pull the trigger until you're sure you're going to win," or something close
to that. That could be a metaphor for the way Fox selects the news to cover
and the angle it puts on it. The rest of the media is accused of bias, and
often rightly so. At Fox, it's different. Biasing the news is part of their
business plan.

--
Ed Huntress
b***@aol.com
2007-10-27 18:13:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 13:48:46 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
Post by Ed Huntress
Fox's posture is carefully crafted. Bending the truth to make provocative
headlines and stories is part of their schtick.
Oh, come on now, left or right leaning, News has rarely let the truth
get in the way of a good story.

Tom
Dan
2007-10-27 20:15:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ed Huntress
Post by Gerry
"The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather."
Only because they got caught. Had they not, Dan would still be there
spreading his lies
But Fox got caught and they didn't fire anybody.
CBS didn't get caught, but fired Rather anyway...

In this comparison, Fox actually did better than CBS!

Dan
Cliff
2007-10-29 06:16:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dan
Post by Ed Huntress
Post by Gerry
"The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather."
Only because they got caught. Had they not, Dan would still be there
spreading his lies
But Fox got caught and they didn't fire anybody.
CBS didn't get caught, but fired Rather anyway...
Correct. Forced by wingers, not facts ot truth.
As far as we know Rather was 100% correct to begin with
though it's remotely possiible that it was a setup by the same
folks that fabricated the lies about Clinton.

I did some research & it turns out that the specific
IBM Selectric typehead in question actually was in (rare)
use by the US military & reserves at the time. Just not
common standard-issue use.

OTOH It's well documented thet bush & the neocons had his
records removed from the archives .. which is probably a felony
right there.

AND it's odd that nobody can remember him being there ....
would YOU remember some incompetent that barely passed the
tests and was jumped in over the heads of deserving ACTUAL
Vietnam pilot vets (such as everybody else) AND whose daddy was
director of the CIA?

From the partys?
Post by Dan
In this comparison, Fox actually did better than CBS!
They say Al Jazeera is far better than Faux "news" ...
http://english.aljazeera.net/
Post by Dan
Dan
--
Cliff
Maxwell Lol
2007-10-29 21:39:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cliff
I did some research & it turns out that the specific
IBM Selectric typehead in question actually was in (rare)
use by the US military & reserves at the time. Just not
common standard-issue use.
Hmm,. Wonder if it could be traced to a high ranking official's
office?
Cliff
2007-10-29 06:03:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ed Huntress
Post by Gerry
"The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather."
Only because they got caught. Had they not, Dan would still be there
spreading his lies
But Fox got caught and they didn't fire anybody.
They fired the whistleblowers IIRC.
Post by Ed Huntress
That's the difference. Fox
doesn't care, except that they would rather not get caught.
They don't care. Tell a lie often & loudly enough & everyone
knows you are a repub, winger, neocon or ...
Post by Ed Huntress
Fox is like
Bush: they're never going to admit a mistake or do anything about it,
because being provocative, self-righteous and smug is how they connect with
their audience.
I blame the US educational system.
Post by Ed Huntress
Fox's posture is carefully crafted. Bending the truth to make provocative
headlines and stories is part of their schtick. Roger Ailes, the head of Fox
News, was not a newsman. He was a P.R. man, for politicians and the tobacco
industry. And that's the sensibility he brings to Fox. He once said "never
pull the trigger until you're sure you're going to win," or something close
to that. That could be a metaphor for the way Fox selects the news to cover
and the angle it puts on it. The rest of the media is accused of bias, and
often rightly so. At Fox, it's different. Biasing the news is part of their
business plan.
Seems to about their entire plan. Plus outright lying.
--
Cliff
Too_Many_Tools
2007-10-27 19:15:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ed Huntress
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Cliff
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
--
Cliff
The precedent was set by CBS and Dan Rather, he's the master of
fabrication. Too bad he got caught.
The difference is that CBS wouldn't tolerate it and fired Rather. For Fox,
it's their basic business plan. Think of them as Matt Drudge in Italian
suits.
--
Ed Huntress- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.

Rather is now suing them and will likely win.

The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven. Since Rather
was "in charge" of the department...or in other words given the
responsibility but few if any resources to do the work, it was just a
matter of time before a disaster happened.

Fox seems to not have that problem...I suspect they do no fact
checking at all based on the whoppers I have heard.

The big three networks used to be excellent in doing real journalism
but that costs real money and significant time. What the American
public is getting now is the equivalent of the Walmart "news as cheap
as we can make it".

It is really sad....I used to really like to watch good news programs.

As for Fox News...well let's jsut say friends don't let friends watch
it.

The first time I saw Fox News at a conservative's friends house, I
thought it was some parody on the news industry by SNL or MadTV...it
was that over the top.

I also note that those who get their "news" from Fox seem to have
significant personality problems.
Post by Ed Huntress
From what little I have seen of their broadcasts, it does not surprise
me that they attract the less stable members of our society.

After all, many people believe that those reality tv shows that are
popular are for real.

TMT
Jim Adamthwaite
2007-10-27 19:51:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Too_Many_Tools
What the American
public is getting now is the equivalent of the Walmart "news as cheap
as we can make it".
What can you expect from an industry committed to faking sincerity at the
lowest possible price.

And they don't care so long as your end of the boat sinks first.
Gunner Asch
2007-10-28 04:44:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.

Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.

And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.

Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.

So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.

Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.

Gunner
Dan
2007-10-28 05:24:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Runner, you really shouldn't show your ignorance so plainly. Not one
single half-truth, let alone actually true statement in your entire
post. That is good, even for you...

Dan
Gunner Asch
2007-10-28 18:16:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dan
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Runner, you really shouldn't show your ignorance so plainly. Not one
single half-truth, let alone actually true statement in your entire
post. That is good, even for you...
Dan
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker

Gunner


"[L]iberals are afraid to state what they truly believe in, for to do so
would result in even less votes than they currently receive. Their
methodology is to lie about their real agenda in the hopes of regaining
power, at which point they will do whatever they damn well please. The
problem is they have concealed and obfuscated for so long that, as a group,
they themselves are no longer sure of their goals. They are a collection of
wild-eyed splinter groups, all holding a grab-bag of dreams and wishes. Some
want a Socialist, secular-humanist state, others the repeal of the Second
Amendment. Some want same sex/different species marriage, others want voting
rights for trees, fish, coal and bugs. Some want cradle to grave care and
complete subservience to the government nanny state, others want a culture
that walks in lockstep and speaks only with intonations of political
correctness. I view the American liberals in much the same way I view the
competing factions of Islamic
fundamentalists. The latter hate each other to the core, and only join
forces to attack the US or Israel. The former hate themselves to the core,
and only join forces to attack George Bush and conservatives." --Ron Marr
Bob Brock
2007-10-28 18:28:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Dan
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Runner, you really shouldn't show your ignorance so plainly. Not one
single half-truth, let alone actually true statement in your entire
post. That is good, even for you...
Dan
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/19/tv.ratherlawsuit.ap/index.html
Joseph Gwinn
2007-10-28 19:47:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob Brock
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Dan
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Runner, you really shouldn't show your ignorance so plainly. Not one
single half-truth, let alone actually true statement in your entire
post. That is good, even for you...
Dan
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/19/tv.ratherlawsuit.ap/index.html
My question all along was who the hoaxers were and what were their
motives. I've never seen this discussed let alone documented by a
credible source.

Whoever they were, Rather took the bait hook, line, and sinker. When
the story first broke, I rummaged around and got a photocopy of the
famous memo, and knew instantly that it had to be fake. How? Because
it was too pretty, clearly having been produced using MS Word, which did
not exist at the time.

I worked at the Federal Communications Commission in the early 1970s,
and all the typewriters then available were worn-out Underwoods left
over from WW2. There were a few expensive IBM Selectric typewriters
that could do something resembling that memo, but no ordinary National
Guard organization had any such thing, and even if they did, they would
not waste it on ordinary personnel memos.

And this is what puzzled me. Rather is old enough to remember the
typewriters of that day, in fact probably banged out many a story on
one, and should have known that something that typographically pretty
could not be what it claimed. My guess was that his desire to believe
exceeded his reporter's sixth sense.

Joe Gwinn
Dan
2007-10-28 22:47:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Bob Brock
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Dan
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Runner, you really shouldn't show your ignorance so plainly. Not one
single half-truth, let alone actually true statement in your entire
post. That is good, even for you...
Dan
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/19/tv.ratherlawsuit.ap/index.html
My question all along was who the hoaxers were and what were their
motives. I've never seen this discussed let alone documented by a
credible source.
Whoever they were, Rather took the bait hook, line, and sinker. When
the story first broke, I rummaged around and got a photocopy of the
famous memo, and knew instantly that it had to be fake. How? Because
it was too pretty, clearly having been produced using MS Word, which did
not exist at the time.
I worked at the Federal Communications Commission in the early 1970s,
and all the typewriters then available were worn-out Underwoods left
over from WW2. There were a few expensive IBM Selectric typewriters
that could do something resembling that memo, but no ordinary National
Guard organization had any such thing, and even if they did, they would
not waste it on ordinary personnel memos.
And this is what puzzled me. Rather is old enough to remember the
typewriters of that day, in fact probably banged out many a story on
one, and should have known that something that typographically pretty
could not be what it claimed. My guess was that his desire to believe
exceeded his reporter's sixth sense.
Joe Gwinn
Well, the fact that the information contained in the memo has been
confirmed by other sources to be true certainly helped. Yet, after all
this time, the memo has not been demonstrated to be a forgery... and
people who remember the time better than you claim they are perfectly
reasonable for the time and place. Go figure.

Dan
Joseph Gwinn
2007-10-28 23:16:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dan
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Bob Brock
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Dan
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Runner, you really shouldn't show your ignorance so plainly. Not one
single half-truth, let alone actually true statement in your entire
post. That is good, even for you...
Dan
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/19/tv.ratherlawsuit.ap/index.html
My question all along was who the hoaxers were and what were their
motives. I've never seen this discussed let alone documented by a
credible source.
Whoever they were, Rather took the bait hook, line, and sinker. When
the story first broke, I rummaged around and got a photocopy of the
famous memo, and knew instantly that it had to be fake. How? Because
it was too pretty, clearly having been produced using MS Word, which did
not exist at the time.
I worked at the Federal Communications Commission in the early 1970s,
and all the typewriters then available were worn-out Underwoods left
over from WW2. There were a few expensive IBM Selectric typewriters
that could do something resembling that memo, but no ordinary National
Guard organization had any such thing, and even if they did, they would
not waste it on ordinary personnel memos.
And this is what puzzled me. Rather is old enough to remember the
typewriters of that day, in fact probably banged out many a story on
one, and should have known that something that typographically pretty
could not be what it claimed. My guess was that his desire to believe
exceeded his reporter's sixth sense.
Joe Gwinn
Well, the fact that the information contained in the memo has been
confirmed by other sources to be true certainly helped. Yet, after all
this time, the memo has not been demonstrated to be a forgery... and
people who remember the time better than you claim they are perfectly
reasonable for the time and place. Go figure.
Huh? CBS certainly thinks that the memo was a forgery, and an obvious
one at that. If they had not so concluded, they would not have fired
Rather and four or five others. They would have instead stood by Rather
and pressed the knife home into Bush. But they couldn't. It cannot
have been pleasant.

Nor does it matter if some things said in the memo later turn out to be
true, or not. The issue is that the document is a forgery, and good
forgeries are usually a mixture of fact and fiction. If there were
documents proving *all* the assertions in the memo, why generate a
forged document? Just publish the other documents.

I'd really like to know where the hoax came from, and why.

Joe Gwinn
Curly
2007-10-29 01:32:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joseph Gwinn
The issue is that the document is a forgery, and good
forgeries are usually a mixture of fact and fiction.
I disagree. _The_ issue was/is Bush's lies about his military record.
Post by Joseph Gwinn
I'd really like to know where the hoax came from, and why.
Like Jimmy Hoffa, a good con is never revealed. We can make a few guesses
though. Such disinformation is a hallmark of Karl Rove, which would be my
first guess.

-- Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://thegreen.stanleylieber.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Gwinn
2007-10-29 01:54:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Curly
Post by Joseph Gwinn
The issue is that the document is a forgery, and good
forgeries are usually a mixture of fact and fiction.
I disagree. _The_ issue was/is Bush's lies about his military record.
No. CBS are not Bush supporters. If CBS could have proven the
allegations, they would have done so, and would have thundered it from
the rooftops, in the middle of a general election. The problem was that
absent legally sufficient proof, they were vulnerable to a libel suit.
Not to mention considerable loss of credibility.

Joe Gwinn
Too_Many_Tools
2007-10-29 02:02:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Curly
Post by Joseph Gwinn
The issue is that the document is a forgery, and good
forgeries are usually a mixture of fact and fiction.
I disagree. _The_ issue was/is Bush's lies about his military record.
No. CBS are not Bush supporters. If CBS could have proven the
allegations, they would have done so, and would have thundered it from
the rooftops, in the middle of a general election. The problem was that
absent legally sufficient proof, they were vulnerable to a libel suit.
Not to mention considerable loss of credibility.
Joe Gwinn
And that is why Rather was thrown to the lions.....

Life is about balance...and what goes around does come around.

Watch what happens come the elections of 2008.

TMT
Cliff
2007-10-29 06:58:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joseph Gwinn
they were vulnerable to a libel suit
Unlike Faux "news", eh?
I doubt it.
--
Cliff
Gunner Asch
2007-10-29 02:03:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Curly
Post by Joseph Gwinn
The issue is that the document is a forgery, and good
forgeries are usually a mixture of fact and fiction.
I disagree. _The_ issue was/is Bush's lies about his military record.
Post by Joseph Gwinn
I'd really like to know where the hoax came from, and why.
Like Jimmy Hoffa, a good con is never revealed. We can make a few guesses
though. Such disinformation is a hallmark of Karl Rove, which would be my
first guess.
-- Regards, Curly
Michael Moores hallmark.

Gunner
Post by Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://thegreen.stanleylieber.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Curly
2007-10-29 02:29:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Curly
The issue is that the document is a forgery, and good forgeries are
usually a mixture of fact and fiction.
I disagree. _The_ issue was/is Bush's lies about his military record.
I'd really like to know where the hoax came from, and why.
Like Jimmy Hoffa, a good con is never revealed. We can make a few
guesses though. Such disinformation is a hallmark of Karl Rove, which
would be my first guess.
-- Regards, Curly
Michael Moores hallmark.
While you study the difference between "patriot" and "loyalist" be sure to
learn the difference between "exaggeration" and "disinformation."

-- Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://thegreen.stanleylieber.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gunner Asch
2007-10-29 05:22:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Curly
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Curly
The issue is that the document is a forgery, and good forgeries are
usually a mixture of fact and fiction.
I disagree. _The_ issue was/is Bush's lies about his military record.
I'd really like to know where the hoax came from, and why.
Like Jimmy Hoffa, a good con is never revealed. We can make a few
guesses though. Such disinformation is a hallmark of Karl Rove, which
would be my first guess.
-- Regards, Curly
Michael Moores hallmark.
While you study the difference between "patriot" and "loyalist" be sure to
learn the difference between "exaggeration" and "disinformation."
-- Regards, Curly
Oh..I know well the differences.

The first two apply to most Conservatives
The latter two apply to most Liberals

Or is there another reason most military people are conservatives, and
most antiwar, anti Americans are liberals?

Was there any other questions?

Gunner
Post by Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://thegreen.stanleylieber.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Brock
2007-10-29 16:06:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Curly
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Curly
The issue is that the document is a forgery, and good forgeries are
usually a mixture of fact and fiction.
I disagree. _The_ issue was/is Bush's lies about his military record.
I'd really like to know where the hoax came from, and why.
Like Jimmy Hoffa, a good con is never revealed. We can make a few
guesses though. Such disinformation is a hallmark of Karl Rove, which
would be my first guess.
-- Regards, Curly
Michael Moores hallmark.
While you study the difference between "patriot" and "loyalist" be sure to
learn the difference between "exaggeration" and "disinformation."
-- Regards, Curly
Oh..I know well the differences.
The first two apply to most Conservatives
The latter two apply to most Liberals
In gummer's world, this it true. It is not what was done that is the
determining factor about whether it was right or wrong. The determining
factor is the political beliefs of the person that did it.

A classic case of situational ethics.
Too_Many_Tools
2007-10-29 01:59:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Dan
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Bob Brock
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Dan
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Runner, you really shouldn't show your ignorance so plainly. Not one
single half-truth, let alone actually true statement in your entire
post. That is good, even for you...
Dan
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/19/tv.ratherlawsuit.ap/index.html
My question all along was who the hoaxers were and what were their
motives. I've never seen this discussed let alone documented by a
credible source.
Whoever they were, Rather took the bait hook, line, and sinker. When
the story first broke, I rummaged around and got a photocopy of the
famous memo, and knew instantly that it had to be fake. How? Because
it was too pretty, clearly having been produced using MS Word, which did
not exist at the time.
I worked at the Federal Communications Commission in the early 1970s,
and all the typewriters then available were worn-out Underwoods left
over from WW2. There were a few expensive IBM Selectric typewriters
that could do something resembling that memo, but no ordinary National
Guard organization had any such thing, and even if they did, they would
not waste it on ordinary personnel memos.
And this is what puzzled me. Rather is old enough to remember the
typewriters of that day, in fact probably banged out many a story on
one, and should have known that something that typographically pretty
could not be what it claimed. My guess was that his desire to believe
exceeded his reporter's sixth sense.
Joe Gwinn
Well, the fact that the information contained in the memo has been
confirmed by other sources to be true certainly helped. Yet, after all
this time, the memo has not been demonstrated to be a forgery... and
people who remember the time better than you claim they are perfectly
reasonable for the time and place. Go figure.
Huh? CBS certainly thinks that the memo was a forgery, and an obvious
one at that. If they had not so concluded, they would not have fired
Rather and four or five others. They would have instead stood by Rather
and pressed the knife home into Bush. But they couldn't. It cannot
have been pleasant.
Nor does it matter if some things said in the memo later turn out to be
true, or not. The issue is that the document is a forgery, and good
forgeries are usually a mixture of fact and fiction. If there were
documents proving *all* the assertions in the memo, why generate a
forged document? Just publish the other documents.
I'd really like to know where the hoax came from, and why.
Joe Gwinn- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You apparently have never worked in a large organization....good
people are used for scapegoats ALL the time.

If Rather had fabricated the docs then I would say "fire the
bastard"....he did not.

The conservatives really need to remember that the people they are
defending will use them just as quick...as they have been doing.

TMT
cavelamb himself
2007-10-29 02:26:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Too_Many_Tools wrote:


Snipped a hundred er so lines - neatness counts!
Post by Too_Many_Tools
You apparently have never worked in a large organization....good
people are used for scapegoats ALL the time.
I've been a scapegoat before.

I'd rather be the Escaped Lamb...

Ya'll can have this mess.
Gunner Asch
2007-10-29 02:02:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:16:49 -0400, Joseph Gwinn
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Dan
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Bob Brock
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Dan
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Runner, you really shouldn't show your ignorance so plainly. Not one
single half-truth, let alone actually true statement in your entire
post. That is good, even for you...
Dan
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/19/tv.ratherlawsuit.ap/index.html
My question all along was who the hoaxers were and what were their
motives. I've never seen this discussed let alone documented by a
credible source.
Whoever they were, Rather took the bait hook, line, and sinker. When
the story first broke, I rummaged around and got a photocopy of the
famous memo, and knew instantly that it had to be fake. How? Because
it was too pretty, clearly having been produced using MS Word, which did
not exist at the time.
I worked at the Federal Communications Commission in the early 1970s,
and all the typewriters then available were worn-out Underwoods left
over from WW2. There were a few expensive IBM Selectric typewriters
that could do something resembling that memo, but no ordinary National
Guard organization had any such thing, and even if they did, they would
not waste it on ordinary personnel memos.
And this is what puzzled me. Rather is old enough to remember the
typewriters of that day, in fact probably banged out many a story on
one, and should have known that something that typographically pretty
could not be what it claimed. My guess was that his desire to believe
exceeded his reporter's sixth sense.
Joe Gwinn
Well, the fact that the information contained in the memo has been
confirmed by other sources to be true certainly helped. Yet, after all
this time, the memo has not been demonstrated to be a forgery... and
people who remember the time better than you claim they are perfectly
reasonable for the time and place. Go figure.
Huh? CBS certainly thinks that the memo was a forgery, and an obvious
one at that. If they had not so concluded, they would not have fired
Rather and four or five others. They would have instead stood by Rather
and pressed the knife home into Bush. But they couldn't. It cannot
have been pleasant.
Nor does it matter if some things said in the memo later turn out to be
true, or not. The issue is that the document is a forgery, and good
forgeries are usually a mixture of fact and fiction. If there were
documents proving *all* the assertions in the memo, why generate a
forged document? Just publish the other documents.
I'd really like to know where the hoax came from, and why.
Joe Gwinn
Ultimately...George Soros and the DNC.

Gunner
Dan
2007-10-29 23:20:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Dan
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Bob Brock
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Dan
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Runner, you really shouldn't show your ignorance so plainly. Not one
single half-truth, let alone actually true statement in your entire
post. That is good, even for you...
Dan
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/19/tv.ratherlawsuit.ap/index.html
My question all along was who the hoaxers were and what were their
motives. I've never seen this discussed let alone documented by a
credible source.
Whoever they were, Rather took the bait hook, line, and sinker. When
the story first broke, I rummaged around and got a photocopy of the
famous memo, and knew instantly that it had to be fake. How? Because
it was too pretty, clearly having been produced using MS Word, which did
not exist at the time.
I worked at the Federal Communications Commission in the early 1970s,
and all the typewriters then available were worn-out Underwoods left
over from WW2. There were a few expensive IBM Selectric typewriters
that could do something resembling that memo, but no ordinary National
Guard organization had any such thing, and even if they did, they would
not waste it on ordinary personnel memos.
And this is what puzzled me. Rather is old enough to remember the
typewriters of that day, in fact probably banged out many a story on
one, and should have known that something that typographically pretty
could not be what it claimed. My guess was that his desire to believe
exceeded his reporter's sixth sense.
Joe Gwinn
Well, the fact that the information contained in the memo has been
confirmed by other sources to be true certainly helped. Yet, after all
this time, the memo has not been demonstrated to be a forgery... and
people who remember the time better than you claim they are perfectly
reasonable for the time and place. Go figure.
Huh? CBS certainly thinks that the memo was a forgery, and an obvious
one at that.
Your evidence for this assertion is?
Post by Joseph Gwinn
If they had not so concluded, they would not have fired
Rather and four or five others.
"Business Major" are you? Try Political Science 101, then trace
loyalties of CBS management, especially the top, then follow up with
actions taken in the year or so prior to, and subsequent to, Mr.
Rather's ejection. Get back to us, won't you!
Post by Joseph Gwinn
They would have instead stood by Rather
and pressed the knife home into Bush.
"They who?
Post by Joseph Gwinn
But they couldn't. It cannot have been pleasant.
Sure, I believe that. Where did you say that bridge was?
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Nor does it matter if some things said in the memo later turn out to be
true, or not.
Not "later turn out to be true," were verified to be true long before
the episode was aired.
Post by Joseph Gwinn
The issue is that the document is a forgery, and good
forgeries are usually a mixture of fact and fiction.
You have evidence for this assertion, that the document was a forgery?
It has been, how long, and none have come forth with any EVIDENCE that
the document was a forgery. Now much of what the Bush administration
has proffered for their little forays into international politics,
proven to be forgeries...

Slight difference in requirements between someone pedaling news to the
masses and a Resident selling the deaths of tens of thousands to
millions of people, don't you think?
Post by Joseph Gwinn
If there were
documents proving *all* the assertions in the memo, why generate a
forged document? Just publish the other documents.
EXACTLY!
Post by Joseph Gwinn
I'd really like to know where the hoax came from, and why.
Joe Gwinn
The hoax came from a previously unknown blogger who, within minutes of
the broadcast, posted his "evidence" that the memo was a fake, then
taken up by the entire MSM without a bit of research within hours.

But I'll let you figure out where the hoax is.

Dan
Joseph Gwinn
2007-10-30 03:43:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dan
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Dan
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Bob Brock
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Dan
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Runner, you really shouldn't show your ignorance so plainly. Not one
single half-truth, let alone actually true statement in your entire
post. That is good, even for you...
Dan
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/19/tv.ratherlawsuit.ap/index.html
My question all along was who the hoaxers were and what were their
motives. I've never seen this discussed let alone documented by a
credible source.
Whoever they were, Rather took the bait hook, line, and sinker. When
the story first broke, I rummaged around and got a photocopy of the
famous memo, and knew instantly that it had to be fake. How? Because
it was too pretty, clearly having been produced using MS Word, which did
not exist at the time.
I worked at the Federal Communications Commission in the early 1970s,
and all the typewriters then available were worn-out Underwoods left
over from WW2. There were a few expensive IBM Selectric typewriters
that could do something resembling that memo, but no ordinary National
Guard organization had any such thing, and even if they did, they would
not waste it on ordinary personnel memos.
And this is what puzzled me. Rather is old enough to remember the
typewriters of that day, in fact probably banged out many a story on
one, and should have known that something that typographically pretty
could not be what it claimed. My guess was that his desire to believe
exceeded his reporter's sixth sense.
Joe Gwinn
Well, the fact that the information contained in the memo has been
confirmed by other sources to be true certainly helped. Yet, after all
this time, the memo has not been demonstrated to be a forgery... and
people who remember the time better than you claim they are perfectly
reasonable for the time and place. Go figure.
Huh? CBS certainly thinks that the memo was a forgery, and an obvious
one at that.
Your evidence for this assertion is?
Post by Joseph Gwinn
If they had not so concluded, they would not have fired
Rather and four or five others.
"Business Major" are you? Try Political Science 101, then trace
loyalties of CBS management, especially the top, then follow up with
actions taken in the year or so prior to, and subsequent to, Mr.
Rather's ejection. Get back to us, won't you!
Ah. We've slid into ad hominem arguments. No further response needed.

Joe Gwinn
Post by Dan
Post by Joseph Gwinn
They would have instead stood by Rather
and pressed the knife home into Bush.
"They who?
Post by Joseph Gwinn
But they couldn't. It cannot have been pleasant.
Sure, I believe that. Where did you say that bridge was?
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Nor does it matter if some things said in the memo later turn out to be
true, or not.
Not "later turn out to be true," were verified to be true long before
the episode was aired.
Post by Joseph Gwinn
The issue is that the document is a forgery, and good
forgeries are usually a mixture of fact and fiction.
You have evidence for this assertion, that the document was a forgery?
It has been, how long, and none have come forth with any EVIDENCE that
the document was a forgery. Now much of what the Bush administration
has proffered for their little forays into international politics,
proven to be forgeries...
Slight difference in requirements between someone pedaling news to the
masses and a Resident selling the deaths of tens of thousands to
millions of people, don't you think?
Post by Joseph Gwinn
If there were
documents proving *all* the assertions in the memo, why generate a
forged document? Just publish the other documents.
EXACTLY!
Post by Joseph Gwinn
I'd really like to know where the hoax came from, and why.
Joe Gwinn
The hoax came from a previously unknown blogger who, within minutes of
the broadcast, posted his "evidence" that the memo was a fake, then
taken up by the entire MSM without a bit of research within hours.
But I'll let you figure out where the hoax is.
Dan
Too_Many_Tools
2007-10-28 21:53:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Bob Brock
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Dan
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Runner, you really shouldn't show your ignorance so plainly. Not one
single half-truth, let alone actually true statement in your entire
post. That is good, even for you...
Dan
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/19/tv.ratherlawsuit.ap/index.html
My question all along was who the hoaxers were and what were their
motives. I've never seen this discussed let alone documented by a
credible source.
Whoever they were, Rather took the bait hook, line, and sinker. When
the story first broke, I rummaged around and got a photocopy of the
famous memo, and knew instantly that it had to be fake. How? Because
it was too pretty, clearly having been produced using MS Word, which did
not exist at the time.
I worked at the Federal Communications Commission in the early 1970s,
and all the typewriters then available were worn-out Underwoods left
over from WW2. There were a few expensive IBM Selectric typewriters
that could do something resembling that memo, but no ordinary National
Guard organization had any such thing, and even if they did, they would
not waste it on ordinary personnel memos.
And this is what puzzled me. Rather is old enough to remember the
typewriters of that day, in fact probably banged out many a story on
one, and should have known that something that typographically pretty
could not be what it claimed. My guess was that his desire to believe
exceeded his reporter's sixth sense.
Joe Gwinn- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Joe...Rather was NOT the fact checker....so he did not do the
verification.

When your hamburger is checked for E.coli, does the CEO do the
checking?

Heck no...it is some guy in a lab.

Those guys in the lab are the ones let go when a downsizing occurs.

Also it is very likely these days that documents are scanned into a
computer for archival purposes...and the originals are destroyed.

As has been said before, Rather was presssured into running the story
by his bosses...and when the conservative backlash occurred, those
cowards needed a scapegoat.

These people are the same ones now being sued by Rather....and he will
likely win.

And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.

Bush is a deserter, a drug user and our President...you just got to
love him.

TMT
Joseph Gwinn
2007-10-28 23:04:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Bob Brock
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Dan
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Runner, you really shouldn't show your ignorance so plainly. Not one
single half-truth, let alone actually true statement in your entire
post. That is good, even for you...
Dan
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/19/tv.ratherlawsuit.ap/index.html
My question all along was who the hoaxers were and what were their
motives. I've never seen this discussed let alone documented by a
credible source.
Whoever they were, Rather took the bait hook, line, and sinker. When
the story first broke, I rummaged around and got a photocopy of the
famous memo, and knew instantly that it had to be fake. How? Because
it was too pretty, clearly having been produced using MS Word, which did
not exist at the time.
I worked at the Federal Communications Commission in the early 1970s,
and all the typewriters then available were worn-out Underwoods left
over from WW2. There were a few expensive IBM Selectric typewriters
that could do something resembling that memo, but no ordinary National
Guard organization had any such thing, and even if they did, they would
not waste it on ordinary personnel memos.
And this is what puzzled me. Rather is old enough to remember the
typewriters of that day, in fact probably banged out many a story on
one, and should have known that something that typographically pretty
could not be what it claimed. My guess was that his desire to believe
exceeded his reporter's sixth sense.
Joe Gwinn- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Joe...Rather was NOT the fact checker....so he did not do the
verification.
True, but he was the boss, and presumably was expected to at least read
the memo in question before going live. And is expected to have good
judgement.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
These people are the same ones now being sued by Rather....and he will
likely win.
I have no idea what evidence either side will present, so I have no idea
who will or even should win. Nor does any of us.

And Rather was in a position from which one can be fired for bad
judgement alone.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.
Umm. Guilty until proven innocent? Or was it innocent until proven
guilty? It's so hard to keep these straight.

Joe Gwinn
F. George McDuffee
2007-10-29 00:54:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:37 -0400, Joseph Gwinn
<***@comcast.net> wrote:
<snip>
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Too_Many_Tools
And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.
Umm. Guilty until proven innocent? Or was it innocent until proven
guilty? It's so hard to keep these straight.
============
This is another one of those strange coincidences.

"All" the documents normally in a military personnel folder seem
to be missing from W's file from the reports I keep seeing.

I note in passing that if it was known there were [photo] copies
of the real CO's memo (and possibly other documents) "floating"
around, possibly being used as leverage, it would be a master
stroke to retype in M/S word, use features such as superscripts,
print on a laser printer, and spread these copies around, knowing
that sooner or later someone in the media will bite. The
obviousness of the forgery can then be pointed out, and the
[copies of the] original documents are also rendered harmless as
simply being newer/better forgeries.

In any event what has gone wrong with the electorial process that
these are the *BEST* people [and I am not limiting this comment
to the republican party] we can come up with? What would the
worst be like? I have a feeling that we are about to find out in
'08.


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
============
Merchants have no country.
The mere spot they stand on
does not constitute so strong an attachment
as that from which they draw their gains.

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826),
U.S. president. Letter, 17 March 1814.
Joseph Gwinn
2007-10-29 02:01:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by F. George McDuffee
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:37 -0400, Joseph Gwinn
<snip>
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Too_Many_Tools
And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.
Umm. Guilty until proven innocent? Or was it innocent until proven
guilty? It's so hard to keep these straight.
============
This is another one of those strange coincidences.
"All" the documents normally in a military personnel folder seem
to be missing from W's file from the reports I keep seeing.
I've read that too. No idea if it means anything, even if true.
Post by F. George McDuffee
I note in passing that if it was known there were [photo] copies
of the real CO's memo (and possibly other documents) "floating"
around, possibly being used as leverage, it would be a master
stroke to retype in M/S word, use features such as superscripts,
print on a laser printer, and spread these copies around, knowing
that sooner or later someone in the media will bite. The
obviousness of the forgery can then be pointed out, and the
[copies of the] original documents are also rendered harmless as
simply being newer/better forgeries.
I thought of this too, but have never seen it alleged, never mind
proven, in mainstream media. Nor have I seen any credible theory of who
the hoaxers were, and why.

There must be a way to work Karl Rove into this. Somehow...
Post by F. George McDuffee
In any event what has gone wrong with the electorial process that
these are the *BEST* people [and I am not limiting this comment
to the republican party] we can come up with? What would the
worst be like? I have a feeling that we are about to find out in
'08.
My theory is that the best people will not tolerate the process of
becoming President, unless those best people are themselves convinced
that Civilization will otherwise end. So we will see giants only in
times of great stress. Like World Wars.

Joe Gwinn
Post by F. George McDuffee
Unka' George [George McDuffee]
============
Merchants have no country.
The mere spot they stand on
does not constitute so strong an attachment
as that from which they draw their gains.
Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826),
U.S. president. Letter, 17 March 1814.
Cliff
2007-10-29 06:54:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by F. George McDuffee
I note in passing that if it was known there were [photo] copies
of the real CO's memo (and possibly other documents) "floating"
around, possibly being used as leverage, it would be a master
stroke to retype in M/S word, use features such as superscripts,
print on a laser printer, and spread these copies around, knowing
that sooner or later someone in the media will bite. The
obviousness of the forgery can then be pointed out, and the
[copies of the] original documents are also rendered harmless as
simply being newer/better forgeries.
I thought of this too, but have never seen it alleged, never mind
proven, in mainstream media. Nor have I seen any credible theory of who
the hoaxers were, and why.
There must be a way to work Karl Rove into this. Somehow...
Involved in disappearing the records while bush was
governor of Texas.
--
Cliff
Cliff
2007-10-29 06:42:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 18:54:43 -0600, F. George McDuffee
Post by F. George McDuffee
"All" the documents normally in a military personnel folder seem
to be missing from W's file from the reports I keep seeing.
IIRC They found a copy of pay records in an archive
(North Dakota or Nebraska?) .... he was not paid while
AWOL .....
--
Cliff
Maxwell Lol
2007-10-29 21:36:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by F. George McDuffee
"All" the documents normally in a military personnel folder seem
to be missing from W's file from the reports I keep seeing.
Here are some of the other issues about GWB's service in the Air
National Guard:

* He checked the "do not volunteer" for overseas duty when he signed up.

* He scored 25% - the lowest possible passing grade - in the pilot
aptitude test.

* Bush got a commission as second leutenant after 6 weeks of basic training.
It normally takes 18 months or 8 semesters in college.

* Bush failed his physical for unspecified reasons. Officials refuse
to release the report.

* He was suspended and grounded from flying duty for failing to pass
the medical exam. Since training is expensive, an Inquiry Board is
normally called to justify this suspension. No Inquiry Board meeting
was convened to explain why Bush was unfit for flying.

* In his 5th and 6th year in the Guard he did not have any single
service day. So in the last 2 years of his service, no one
apparently knows where he served. He was involved in helping
Blount's re-election campaign while serving in the Guard.


http://uggabugga.blogspot.com/2003_01_12_uggabugga_archive.html
Jeff McCann
2007-10-30 03:03:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Maxwell Lol
Post by F. George McDuffee
"All" the documents normally in a military personnel folder seem
to be missing from W's file from the reports I keep seeing.
Here are some of the other issues about GWB's service in the Air
* He checked the "do not volunteer" for overseas duty when he signed up.
* He scored 25% - the lowest possible passing grade - in the pilot
aptitude test.
* Bush got a commission as second leutenant after 6 weeks of basic training.
It normally takes 18 months or 8 semesters in college.
* Bush failed his physical for unspecified reasons. Officials refuse
to release the report.
* He was suspended and grounded from flying duty for failing to pass
the medical exam. Since training is expensive, an Inquiry Board is
normally called to justify this suspension. No Inquiry Board meeting
was convened to explain why Bush was unfit for flying.
Point of clarification: Bush refused an order to take his flight
physical, he didn't take it and fail. The physical he refused to take
was the first such physical wherein he could have been subjected to a
test for illicit drugs.

Jeff
Post by Maxwell Lol
* In his 5th and 6th year in the Guard he did not have any single
service day. So in the last 2 years of his service, no one
apparently knows where he served. He was involved in helping
Blount's re-election campaign while serving in the Guard.
http://uggabugga.blogspot.com/2003_01_12_uggabugga_archive.html
Too_Many_Tools
2007-10-29 01:56:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Bob Brock
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Dan
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the
story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Runner, you really shouldn't show your ignorance so plainly. Not one
single half-truth, let alone actually true statement in your entire
post. That is good, even for you...
Dan
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/19/tv.ratherlawsuit.ap/index.html
My question all along was who the hoaxers were and what were their
motives. I've never seen this discussed let alone documented by a
credible source.
Whoever they were, Rather took the bait hook, line, and sinker. When
the story first broke, I rummaged around and got a photocopy of the
famous memo, and knew instantly that it had to be fake. How? Because
it was too pretty, clearly having been produced using MS Word, which did
not exist at the time.
I worked at the Federal Communications Commission in the early 1970s,
and all the typewriters then available were worn-out Underwoods left
over from WW2. There were a few expensive IBM Selectric typewriters
that could do something resembling that memo, but no ordinary National
Guard organization had any such thing, and even if they did, they would
not waste it on ordinary personnel memos.
And this is what puzzled me. Rather is old enough to remember the
typewriters of that day, in fact probably banged out many a story on
one, and should have known that something that typographically pretty
could not be what it claimed. My guess was that his desire to believe
exceeded his reporter's sixth sense.
Joe Gwinn- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Joe...Rather was NOT the fact checker....so he did not do the
verification.
True, but he was the boss, and presumably was expected to at least read
the memo in question before going live. And is expected to have good
judgement.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
These people are the same ones now being sued by Rather....and he will
likely win.
I have no idea what evidence either side will present, so I have no idea
who will or even should win. Nor does any of us.
And Rather was in a position from which one can be fired for bad
judgement alone.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.
Umm. Guilty until proven innocent? Or was it innocent until proven
guilty? It's so hard to keep these straight.
Joe Gwinn- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Rather was not the boss...the boss fired Rather.

It is common for middle management to take the fall for those
above. ...one of the perks for being the CEO.

Like I said, I look forward to the trial....and Rather has the deep
pockets and the motivation to make it happen.

TMT
Gunner Asch
2007-10-29 02:01:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:37 -0400, Joseph Gwinn
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Too_Many_Tools
And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.
Umm. Guilty until proven innocent? Or was it innocent until proven
guilty? It's so hard to keep these straight.
Joe Gwinn
With Libtards...its Guilty even if proved innocent.

Its not the evidence, its the charge they care about.

Gunner
Too_Many_Tools
2007-10-29 02:27:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by F. George McDuffee
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:37 -0400, Joseph Gwinn
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Too_Many_Tools
And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.
Umm. Guilty until proven innocent? Or was it innocent until proven
guilty? It's so hard to keep these straight.
Joe Gwinn
With Libtards...its Guilty even if proved innocent.
Its not the evidence, its the charge they care about.
Gunner
No...its let have a trial and squeeze the truth out of those who hide
in the gutters.

TMT
Gunner Asch
2007-10-29 05:20:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:27:47 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Post by F. George McDuffee
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:37 -0400, Joseph Gwinn
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Too_Many_Tools
And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.
Umm. Guilty until proven innocent? Or was it innocent until proven
guilty? It's so hard to keep these straight.
Joe Gwinn
With Libtards...its Guilty even if proved innocent.
Its not the evidence, its the charge they care about.
Gunner
No...its let have a trial and squeeze the truth out of those who hide
in the gutters.
TMT
Sure. Lets start wth the Clintons and the Dems. Ready?

Gunner
F. George McDuffee
2007-10-29 15:26:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 21:20:13 -0800, Gunner Asch
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:27:47 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Post by F. George McDuffee
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:37 -0400, Joseph Gwinn
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Too_Many_Tools
And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.
Umm. Guilty until proven innocent? Or was it innocent until proven
guilty? It's so hard to keep these straight.
Joe Gwinn
With Libtards...its Guilty even if proved innocent.
Its not the evidence, its the charge they care about.
Gunner
No...its let have a trial and squeeze the truth out of those who hide
in the gutters.
TMT
Sure. Lets start wth the Clintons and the Dems. Ready?
Gunner
==========
Congress has identified the problem. Rep. Waxman is holding
hearings on banning cigars even as I type.


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
============
Merchants have no country.
The mere spot they stand on
does not constitute so strong an attachment
as that from which they draw their gains.

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826),
U.S. president. Letter, 17 March 1814.
Curly
2007-10-29 18:30:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:27:47 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by F. George McDuffee
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:37 -0400, Joseph Gwinn
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Too_Many_Tools
And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.
Umm. Guilty until proven innocent? Or was it innocent until proven
guilty? It's so hard to keep these straight.
Joe Gwinn
With Libtards...its Guilty even if proved innocent.
Its not the evidence, its the charge they care about.
Gunner
No...its let have a trial and squeeze the truth out of those who hide in
the gutters.
TMT
Sure. Lets start wth the Clintons and the Dems. Ready?
Gunner
In case you haven't noticed Clinton has been out of office for seven
years. The current criminal in chief is a Republican, George Walker Bush.

What's with your Clinton obsession anyhow, or is he the object of your
homoerotic fantasies?

-- Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://thegreen.stanleylieber.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Huntress
2007-10-29 19:00:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Curly
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:27:47 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by F. George McDuffee
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:37 -0400, Joseph Gwinn
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Too_Many_Tools
And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.
Umm. Guilty until proven innocent? Or was it innocent until proven
guilty? It's so hard to keep these straight.
Joe Gwinn
With Libtards...its Guilty even if proved innocent.
Its not the evidence, its the charge they care about.
Gunner
No...its let have a trial and squeeze the truth out of those who hide in
the gutters.
TMT
Sure. Lets start wth the Clintons and the Dems. Ready?
Gunner
In case you haven't noticed Clinton has been out of office for seven
years. The current criminal in chief is a Republican, George Walker Bush.
What's with your Clinton obsession anyhow, or is he the object of your
homoerotic fantasies?
The assault-weapons ban. It all stems from that. The rest is just window
dressing.

--
Ed Huntress
Bob Brock
2007-10-29 23:53:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Curly
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:27:47 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by F. George McDuffee
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:37 -0400, Joseph Gwinn
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Too_Many_Tools
And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.
Umm. Guilty until proven innocent? Or was it innocent until proven
guilty? It's so hard to keep these straight.
Joe Gwinn
With Libtards...its Guilty even if proved innocent.
Its not the evidence, its the charge they care about.
Gunner
No...its let have a trial and squeeze the truth out of those who hide in
the gutters.
TMT
Sure. Lets start wth the Clintons and the Dems. Ready?
Gunner
In case you haven't noticed Clinton has been out of office for seven
years. The current criminal in chief is a Republican, George Walker Bush.
What's with your Clinton obsession anyhow, or is he the object of your
homoerotic fantasies?
It's apparent that, hidden deep in his subconscious, gummer had true
affections for Monica. When Bill destroyed gummer's fantasy of a Camelot
life with Monica, he simply never recovered. His dying words may very well
be something about his hate of Bill Clinton for taking away the only true
love of his life.
Too_Many_Tools
2007-10-30 02:28:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob Brock
Post by Curly
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:27:47 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by F. George McDuffee
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:04:37 -0400, Joseph Gwinn
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Too_Many_Tools
And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.
Umm. Guilty until proven innocent? Or was it innocent until proven
guilty? It's so hard to keep these straight.
Joe Gwinn
With Libtards...its Guilty even if proved innocent.
Its not the evidence, its the charge they care about.
Gunner
No...its let have a trial and squeeze the truth out of those who hide in
the gutters.
TMT
Sure. Lets start wth the Clintons and the Dems. Ready?
Gunner
In case you haven't noticed Clinton has been out of office for seven
years. The current criminal in chief is a Republican, George Walker Bush.
What's with your Clinton obsession anyhow, or is he the object of your
homoerotic fantasies?
It's apparent that, hidden deep in his subconscious, gummer had true
affections for Monica. When Bill destroyed gummer's fantasy of a Camelot
life with Monica, he simply never recovered. His dying words may very well
be something about his hate of Bill Clinton for taking away the only true
love of his life.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Do you think Gunenr wears a blue dress under his street clothes?

Stained of course.

TMT
Cliff
2007-10-29 06:39:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joseph Gwinn
And Rather was in a position from which one can be fired for bad
judgement alone.
Unlike liars at Faux or in the WH, eh?
--
Cliff
Gunner Asch
2007-10-29 02:00:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 14:53:24 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Joe...Rather was NOT the fact checker....so he did not do the
verification.
Of course not. He was intimately involved in the conspiracy and knew
full well it was bogus.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
When your hamburger is checked for E.coli, does the CEO do the
checking?
Heck no...it is some guy in a lab.
Snicker..talk about twisted similies.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Those guys in the lab are the ones let go when a downsizing occurs.
Also it is very likely these days that documents are scanned into a
computer for archival purposes...and the originals are destroyed.
Sure they are.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
As has been said before, Rather was presssured into running the story
by his bosses...and when the conservative backlash occurred, those
cowards needed a scapegoat.
Right...oh fuck yes.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
These people are the same ones now being sued by Rather....and he will
likely win.
And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.
Actually..yes it has. Btw..do you still molest your little brother?
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Bush is a deserter, a drug user and our President...you just got to
love him.
TMT
See the love from the Libtard. 3 lies in the same sentence...and yet
he thinks he is a hero.

Gunner
Too_Many_Tools
2007-10-29 02:27:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 14:53:24 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Joe...Rather was NOT the fact checker....so he did not do the
verification.
Of course not. He was intimately involved in the conspiracy and knew
full well it was bogus.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
When your hamburger is checked for E.coli, does the CEO do the
checking?
Heck no...it is some guy in a lab.
Snicker..talk about twisted similies.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Those guys in the lab are the ones let go when a downsizing occurs.
Also it is very likely these days that documents are scanned into a
computer for archival purposes...and the originals are destroyed.
Sure they are.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
As has been said before, Rather was presssured into running the story
by his bosses...and when the conservative backlash occurred, those
cowards needed a scapegoat.
Right...oh fuck yes.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
These people are the same ones now being sued by Rather....and he will
likely win.
And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.
Actually..yes it has. Btw..do you still molest your little brother?
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Bush is a deserter, a drug user and our President...you just got to
love him.
TMT
See the love from the Libtard. 3 lies in the same sentence...and yet
he thinks he is a hero.
Gunner
Well Gunner...good to see that you are having a nice weekend.

What I discussed is what I have seen in real life....so it is easily
believable that it could happen when the stakes are the election of
the next President.

Being a vet yourself, I am still surprised that you stand up for this
sorry individual that this Nation has for a President. Considering
based on your comments that you did time in Nam, you know darn well
how those who could found anyway not to go...and both Bush and Cheney
are prime examples of cowards hiding under a conservative wolf skin.

You are not the judge of character you think you are.

TMT
Gunner Asch
2007-10-29 05:19:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:27:01 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Post by Gunner Asch
See the love from the Libtard. 3 lies in the same sentence...and yet
he thinks he is a hero.
Gunner
Well Gunner...good to see that you are having a nice weekend.
Indeed.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
What I discussed is what I have seen in real life....so it is easily
believable that it could happen when the stakes are the election of
the next President.
Being a vet yourself, I am still surprised that you stand up for this
sorry individual that this Nation has for a President. Considering
based on your comments that you did time in Nam, you know darn well
how those who could found anyway not to go...and both Bush and Cheney
are prime examples of cowards hiding under a conservative wolf skin.
Odd..the Democrat ranks are filled with people who also avoided going.
And frankly...if I had to do it again..I may not have volunteered to
go either. It was a divisive time, and few who had other options
went to war. And I dont blame them. On the other hand, Bush DID strap
on airplanes. Your butt buddy Clinton not only avoided the draft, but
in fact..acted in a treasonable fashion against his own country.

Yet you drop to your knees to suck his dick.
Another thing Jody....just because someone was in the military..or
even the Nam..they dont walk on water. Algor..and myself are two such
examples, not to mention Kerry, Murtha and so forth. The prisons are
full of Nam or other combat vets.

If service in the military was some sancrosact sacrament to you...you
would be castigating every Dem who refused to serve as well.

But its obvious that it really means nothing to you, except as some
way to try to piss on those you hate, from on high.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
You are not the judge of character you think you are.
TMT
Actually Jody..I am a pretty fair judge of charector. Which is why I
hold you in amused contempt, along with the vast majority of your
fucktard liberal friends.

Heads up...if its a choice between half a shit sandwich (Bush) and a
full shit sandwich with maggots and puke (Libs).....the half shit
sandwich wins every time.

Gunner
Bob Brock
2007-10-29 16:09:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:27:01 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Post by Gunner Asch
See the love from the Libtard. 3 lies in the same sentence...and yet
he thinks he is a hero.
Gunner
Well Gunner...good to see that you are having a nice weekend.
Indeed.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
What I discussed is what I have seen in real life....so it is easily
believable that it could happen when the stakes are the election of
the next President.
Being a vet yourself, I am still surprised that you stand up for this
sorry individual that this Nation has for a President. Considering
based on your comments that you did time in Nam, you know darn well
how those who could found anyway not to go...and both Bush and Cheney
are prime examples of cowards hiding under a conservative wolf skin.
Odd..the Democrat ranks are filled with people who also avoided going.
And the White House is filled with Republicans who also avoided going.
Stuart Wheaton
2007-10-30 03:34:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob Brock
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:27:01 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Post by Gunner Asch
See the love from the Libtard. 3 lies in the same sentence...and yet
he thinks he is a hero.
Gunner
Well Gunner...good to see that you are having a nice weekend.
Indeed.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
What I discussed is what I have seen in real life....so it is easily
believable that it could happen when the stakes are the election of
the next President.
Being a vet yourself, I am still surprised that you stand up for this
sorry individual that this Nation has for a President. Considering
based on your comments that you did time in Nam, you know darn well
how those who could found anyway not to go...and both Bush and Cheney
are prime examples of cowards hiding under a conservative wolf skin.
Odd..the Democrat ranks are filled with people who also avoided going.
And the White House is filled with Republicans who also avoided going.
Seems to me like theres a huge difference in those who said "The war is
wrong and I'm not going" and those who said "the war is important, but
I can't go because I'm special" The White House is full of people who
happily let other men die for them. The Dems wanted to end the killing.
Too_Many_Tools
2007-10-30 04:14:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Stuart Wheaton
Post by Bob Brock
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:27:01 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Post by Gunner Asch
See the love from the Libtard. 3 lies in the same sentence...and yet
he thinks he is a hero.
Gunner
Well Gunner...good to see that you are having a nice weekend.
Indeed.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
What I discussed is what I have seen in real life....so it is easily
believable that it could happen when the stakes are the election of
the next President.
Being a vet yourself, I am still surprised that you stand up for this
sorry individual that this Nation has for a President. Considering
based on your comments that you did time in Nam, you know darn well
how those who could found anyway not to go...and both Bush and Cheney
are prime examples of cowards hiding under a conservative wolf skin.
Odd..the Democrat ranks are filled with people who also avoided going.
And the White House is filled with Republicans who also avoided going.
Seems to me like theres a huge difference in those who said "The war is
wrong and I'm not going" and those who said "the war is important, but
I can't go because I'm special" The White House is full of people who
happily let other men die for them. The Dems wanted to end the killing.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
One group are cowards...guess which group?

TMT

Curly
2007-10-29 18:32:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Your butt buddy Clinton not only avoided the draft, but in
fact..acted in a treasonable fashion against his own country.
Yet you drop to your knees to suck his dick.
Please keep your homoerotic fantasies to yourself.

-- Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://thegreen.stanleylieber.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff
2007-10-29 06:37:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Too_Many_Tools
And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.
Pretty simple to do ... were it inaccurate.
BUT bush & cronies got to the records ....

Does anyone else have their records "missing" ALL of them?
--
Cliff
Steve W.
2007-10-29 23:30:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cliff
Post by Too_Many_Tools
And as been mentioned, the data contained in the document has never
been proven wrong.
Pretty simple to do ... were it inaccurate.
BUT bush & cronies got to the records ....
Does anyone else have their records "missing" ALL of them?
Yep a LOT of folks who served in WW2 have missing records because the
storage facility burned with the records in them. My FIL is one of them.
Other than the Discharge form and a couple pictures he has, the Army
says there is NO record he ever served. The VA has said that because of
this lack of records he is not eligible for benefits either.
--
Steve W.
Near Cooperstown, New York
NRA Member
Pacifism - The theory that if they'd fed
Jeffrey Dahmer enough human flesh,
he'd have become a vegan.
Cliff
2007-10-29 06:38:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Bush is a deserter, a drug user and our President...you just got to
love him.
He's gummer's personal war hero ...
Perhaps for lying to start illegal wars.
--
Cliff
Cliff
2007-10-29 06:34:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Post by Bob Brock
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Dan
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Runner, you really shouldn't show your ignorance so plainly. Not one
single half-truth, let alone actually true statement in your entire
post. That is good, even for you...
Dan
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/19/tv.ratherlawsuit.ap/index.html
My question all along was who the hoaxers were and what were their
motives. I've never seen this discussed let alone documented by a
credible source.
There are some traces thet may lead to the same crew that fabricated &
told the Clinton lies but ....
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Whoever they were, Rather took the bait hook, line, and sinker. When
the story first broke, I rummaged around and got a photocopy of the
famous memo, and knew instantly that it had to be fake. How? Because
it was too pretty, clearly having been produced using MS Word,
Old but seemingly false claim. Who told it to you?
Post by Joseph Gwinn
which did
not exist at the time.
I worked at the Federal Communications Commission in the early 1970s,
and all the typewriters then available were worn-out Underwoods left
over from WW2. There were a few expensive IBM Selectric typewriters
that could do something resembling that memo,
And guess what that guard unit was using .... Yep.
Post by Joseph Gwinn
but no ordinary National
Guard organization had any such thing,
They needed a typewriters, right?
Post by Joseph Gwinn
and even if they did, they would
not waste it on ordinary personnel memos.
Not even for the boss' secretary to use?
As was the case it seems.
Post by Joseph Gwinn
And this is what puzzled me. Rather is old enough to remember the
typewriters of that day,
Down to the fonts on all available typeheads?
Post by Joseph Gwinn
in fact probably banged out many a story on
one, and should have known that something that typographically pretty
could not be what it claimed. My guess was that his desire to believe
exceeded his reporter's sixth sense.
There were lots of other confirming points of data.
Post by Joseph Gwinn
Joe Gwinn
Find out where they hid his records <Snort>.
--
Cliff
Dan
2007-10-28 22:45:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Dan
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Runner, you really shouldn't show your ignorance so plainly. Not one
single half-truth, let alone actually true statement in your entire
post. That is good, even for you...
Dan
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker
Gunner
As it happens, Runner cannot tell truth from his own twisted fantasy world.

So it goes.

Dan
Gunner Asch
2007-10-29 02:29:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dan
Post by Gunner Asch
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker
Gunner
As it happens, Runner cannot tell truth from his own twisted fantasy world.
So it goes.
Dan
More denial from the twisted world of Commie Dan.

Laugh laugh laugh

Gunner


"[L]iberals are afraid to state what they truly believe in, for to do so
would result in even less votes than they currently receive. Their
methodology is to lie about their real agenda in the hopes of regaining
power, at which point they will do whatever they damn well please. The
problem is they have concealed and obfuscated for so long that, as a group,
they themselves are no longer sure of their goals. They are a collection of
wild-eyed splinter groups, all holding a grab-bag of dreams and wishes. Some
want a Socialist, secular-humanist state, others the repeal of the Second
Amendment. Some want same sex/different species marriage, others want voting
rights for trees, fish, coal and bugs. Some want cradle to grave care and
complete subservience to the government nanny state, others want a culture
that walks in lockstep and speaks only with intonations of political
correctness. I view the American liberals in much the same way I view the
competing factions of Islamic
fundamentalists. The latter hate each other to the core, and only join
forces to attack the US or Israel. The former hate themselves to the core,
and only join forces to attack George Bush and conservatives." --Ron Marr
Dan
2007-10-29 23:11:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gunner Asch
Post by Dan
Post by Gunner Asch
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker
Gunner
As it happens, Runner cannot tell truth from his own twisted fantasy world.
So it goes.
Dan
More denial from the twisted world of Commie Dan.
Right on schedule. Kind of boring, since he does all the work.

Dan
Too_Many_Tools
2007-10-28 07:00:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Ooooh...did someone wake up on the wrong side of the political
discussion?

Go fetch some cites for us Gunner....it is out there on the Net noting
the downsizing of the CBS news department....and the fact checkers are
some of the first to go.

And I look forward to Rather's lawsuit.....it will be interesting to
see who is called. We will likely find out what Bush was really up to
for real.

TMT
Dan
2007-10-28 22:39:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Ooooh...did someone wake up on the wrong side of the political
discussion?
Go fetch some cites for us Gunner....it is out there on the Net noting
the downsizing of the CBS news department....and the fact checkers are
some of the first to go.
And I look forward to Rather's lawsuit.....it will be interesting to
see who is called.
It WILL be interesting.
Post by Too_Many_Tools
We will likely find out what Bush was really up to for real.
That's just wishful thinking. Possible, but not likely.

Dan
Cliff
2007-10-29 06:26:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_Tools
Actually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
Another of your gay lames, eh?
Post by Gunner Asch
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Wrong yet again.
http://www.awolbush.com/
Post by Gunner Asch
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
Found out where he hid his records yet? Just burned them, probably.
Post by Gunner Asch
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
Like Faux?
Post by Gunner Asch
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Gummer is best known for his unflinching dishonesty.
--
Cliff
Cliff
2007-10-29 06:21:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Too_Many_Tools
The big three networks used to be excellent in doing real journalism
but that costs real money and significant time.
CNN's latest sthick is having you phone in the news
from your camera phone ....
We may be doomed. Place is now full of wingers too <GAK>.

Bear in mind that most people *only see things in this context*
and it's become VERY pervasive of late. The ministry of propaganda
must now have a huge budget.
--
Cliff
Too_Many_Tools
2007-10-29 16:02:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cliff
Post by Too_Many_Tools
The big three networks used to be excellent in doing real journalism
but that costs real money and significant time.
CNN's latest sthick is having you phone in the news
from your camera phone ....
We may be doomed. Place is now full of wingers too <GAK>.
Bear in mind that most people *only see things in this context*
and it's become VERY pervasive of late. The ministry of propaganda
must now have a huge budget.
--
Cliff
CNN's latest sthick is having you phone in the news
from your camera phone ....
It's cheaper that way....the "news" company doesn't need to have on
staff camera crews and all that unneeded staff you know like fact
checkers.....and the bonuses are larger for the management.

Kind of like the Republican FEMA approach towards news
conferences...reporters are not needed when you have FEMA suckups
asking the questions of their bosses.

Ever wonder why FEMA did that news conference on the spur of the
moment...with the very real chance of being exposed? Because some
idiot in the White House called and told them to hurry up and have one
to go along with Bush's photo op.

And the interesting part....FEMA has lost most of their long time
staff...staff that actually made a positive difference...since George
Jr. has been in office.

TMT

TMT
Jim Alder
2007-10-28 02:23:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Cliff
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
They didn't "just" win it. It was years ago. And when you're charged with
something, sometimes it's easier to prove no such law exists.
Post by Tom Gardner
The precedent was set by CBS and Dan Rather, he's the master of fabrication.
Too bad he got caught.
Then he's not the master or he wouldn't get caught. I'm afraid the master
is still the Jr senator from NY.
--
President Bush was so buoyed by the warm reception he was given in Albania
that he immediately gave all 3 million Albanians American citizenship,
provided they learn Spanish. - Ann Coulter
Tom Gardner
2007-10-28 07:42:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
news:qcIUi.12491$4V6.7853
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Cliff
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
They didn't "just" win it. It was years ago. And when you're charged with
something, sometimes it's easier to prove no such law exists.
Post by Tom Gardner
The precedent was set by CBS and Dan Rather, he's the master of fabrication.
Too bad he got caught.
Then he's not the master or he wouldn't get caught. I'm afraid the master
is still the Jr senator from NY.
All's fair in politics and the Democrats get fairer and fairer!
Hawke
2007-10-28 05:16:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Cliff
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
--
Cliff
The precedent was set by CBS and Dan Rather, he's the master of fabrication.
Too bad he got caught.
I knew it! I'm psychic. I sensed that the minute someone said something
about Fox news that was negative that some right winger would change the
subject to something else. Lo and behold, I was right. As is par for the
course for a right winger the second someone says something critical about
Fox he has to change the subject to the liberal media and criticize it
instead of saying anything about Fox, which is the topic. I'm really feeling
the vibrations tonight.

One of the worst things about Fox and it's commentators, particularly
O'Reilly, is the way they get all over the mainstream media for being
biased. This wouldn't be so bad except for the fact that Fox and it's
commentators are pretending that they are neutral, ala O'Reilly's "no spin"
zone, which is a complete joke because he spins to the right something
fierce. It's common knowledge that Fox is strongly biased to the right wing
and towards the Bush administration and that only Fox and it's employees are
unaware of this. I wouldn't mind Fox so much except for its childish
pretense that the liberal media is biased but they are not. It's really
irritating because it's so obvious. I guess they are going for the big lie
propaganda technique. It worked well in the past so they have dusted it off
and are using it again today. It sure works on the ignorant right wing true
believers of which quite a few are to be found right here. I'm too polite to
mention any names though.

Hawke
§ñühw¤£f
2007-10-28 15:55:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 22:16:45 -0700
Post by Tom Gardner
Post by Tom Gardner
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to
the same>> old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
--
Cliff
The precedent was set by CBS and Dan Rather, he's the master of
fabrication.
Post by Tom Gardner
Too bad he got caught.
I knew it! I'm psychic. I sensed that the minute someone said
something about Fox news that was negative that some right winger
would change the subject to something else. Lo and behold, I was
right. As is par for the course for a right winger the second
someone says something critical about Fox he has to change the
subject to the liberal media and criticize it instead of saying
anything about Fox, which is the topic. I'm really feeling the
vibrations tonight.
One of the worst things about Fox and it's commentators,
particularly O'Reilly, is the way they get all over the mainstream
media for being biased. This wouldn't be so bad except for the
fact that Fox and it's commentators are pretending that they are
neutral, ala O'Reilly's "no spin" zone, which is a complete joke
because he spins to the right something fierce. It's common
knowledge that Fox is strongly biased to the right wing and
towards the Bush administration and that only Fox and it's
employees are unaware of this. I wouldn't mind Fox so much except
for its childish pretense that the liberal media is biased but
they are not. It's really irritating because it's so obvious. I
guess they are going for the big lie propaganda technique. It
worked well in the past so they have dusted it off and are using
it again today. It sure works on the ignorant right wing true
believers of which quite a few are to be found right here. I'm too
polite to mention any names though.
Hawke
Fox Noise is for ignorant pussies.

:)

Apparently Chimpy missed his true calling: baseball.

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/28/fox-baseball-bush-pitch/
Too_Many_Tools
2007-10-27 19:17:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cliff
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
--
Cliff
I guess that will be the excuse that FEMA will use to justify their
fake press conference of yesterday too.

If the Bush does it, it must be okay.

TMT
Curly
2007-10-27 20:50:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cliff
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
True but it is reason to revoke their FCC license.

-- Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://thegreen.stanleylieber.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Too_Many_Tools
2007-10-27 21:11:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Curly
Post by Cliff
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
True but it is reason to revoke their FCC license.
-- Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://thegreen.stanleylieber.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe...it won't happen while Bush in the White House but when the
Democrat picks new drapes to match those in Congress it is a very real
possibility.

Until then I will just laugh at them...what a circus.

TMT
cavelamb himself
2007-10-29 02:22:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cliff
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
Cliffie?

Can you come up with something to "enlighten" us about this?

Or is it just innuendo?


Hmmm?


Richard
Gunner Asch
2007-10-29 05:23:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 21:22:38 -0500, cavelamb himself
Post by cavelamb himself
Post by Cliff
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
Cliffie?
Can you come up with something to "enlighten" us about this?
Or is it just innuendo?
Hmmm?
Richard
Either way..Im sure the Liberal controlled Big Media is breathing a
sigh of relief....

Now when will they give us another exploding gas tank story.....?

Gunner
cavelamb himself
2007-10-29 07:45:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 21:22:38 -0500, cavelamb himself
Post by cavelamb himself
Post by Cliff
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
Cliffie?
Can you come up with something to "enlighten" us about this?
Or is it just innuendo?
Hmmm?
Richard
Either way..Im sure the Liberal controlled Big Media is breathing a
sigh of relief....
Now when will they give us another exploding gas tank story.....?
Gunner
Gunner, I don't believe ANYTHING on TV.

Right, Left, straight up and down, anything.

It's ALL propaganda, and I'm quite tired of people trying to con me
in the name of Truth, Justice, and the American Way.

Or to make an Almighty Buck.

And I don't beleve anything cross posted here...

Like Cliffie here...
Only his thing is to start a stupid argument -
and laugh at everybody who replies.

Crossposted seven times.

Why do you waste yourself on this flake?

"Pick the hill" ?


Richard
Gunner Asch
2007-10-29 15:29:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 02:45:43 -0500, cavelamb himself
Post by cavelamb himself
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 21:22:38 -0500, cavelamb himself
Post by cavelamb himself
Post by Cliff
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
Cliffie?
Can you come up with something to "enlighten" us about this?
Or is it just innuendo?
Hmmm?
Richard
Either way..Im sure the Liberal controlled Big Media is breathing a
sigh of relief....
Now when will they give us another exploding gas tank story.....?
Gunner
Gunner, I don't believe ANYTHING on TV.
Right, Left, straight up and down, anything.
It's ALL propaganda, and I'm quite tired of people trying to con me
in the name of Truth, Justice, and the American Way.
Or to make an Almighty Buck.
And I don't beleve anything cross posted here...
Like Cliffie here...
Only his thing is to start a stupid argument -
and laugh at everybody who replies.
Crossposted seven times.
Why do you waste yourself on this flake?
"Pick the hill" ?
Richard
Waste my time on Cliffie? He has been in my kill file for at least 2
yrs. I dont see his posts except when piggybacked on someone else.

Gunner
Too_Many_Tools
2007-10-29 16:05:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Too_Many_Tools
2007-10-29 16:06:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
2007-10-29 20:12:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gunner Asch
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 02:45:43 -0500, cavelamb himself
Post by cavelamb himself
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 21:22:38 -0500, cavelamb himself
Post by cavelamb himself
Post by Cliff
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
Cliffie?
Can you come up with something to "enlighten" us about this?
Or is it just innuendo?
Hmmm?
Richard
Either way..Im sure the Liberal controlled Big Media is breathing a
sigh of relief....
Now when will they give us another exploding gas tank story.....?
Gunner
Gunner, I don't believe ANYTHING on TV.
Right, Left, straight up and down, anything.
It's ALL propaganda, and I'm quite tired of people trying to con me
in the name of Truth, Justice, and the American Way.
Or to make an Almighty Buck.
And I don't beleve anything cross posted here...
Like Cliffie here...
Only his thing is to start a stupid argument -
and laugh at everybody who replies.
Crossposted seven times.
Why do you waste yourself on this flake?
"Pick the hill" ?
Richard
Waste my time on Cliffie? He has been in my kill file for at least 2
yrs. I dont see his posts except when piggybacked on someone else.
- how refreshing to meet a mind completely devoid of rational thought -

arf meow arf - everything thing i know i learned
from the collective unconsciousness of odd bodkins
sacramento - political pigsty of the western world
i am an etruscan dancer
Animated GIF Man
2007-10-29 20:16:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 07:29:57 -0800, Gunner Asch
Post by Gunner Asch
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 02:45:43 -0500, cavelamb himself
Post by cavelamb himself
Post by Gunner Asch
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 21:22:38 -0500, cavelamb himself
Post by cavelamb himself
Post by Cliff
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
Cliffie?
Can you come up with something to "enlighten" us about this?
Or is it just innuendo?
Hmmm?
Richard
Either way..Im sure the Liberal controlled Big Media is breathing a
sigh of relief....
Now when will they give us another exploding gas tank story.....?
Gunner
Gunner, I don't believe ANYTHING on TV.
Right, Left, straight up and down, anything.
It's ALL propaganda, and I'm quite tired of people trying to con me
in the name of Truth, Justice, and the American Way.
Or to make an Almighty Buck.
And I don't beleve anything cross posted here...
Like Cliffie here...
Only his thing is to start a stupid argument -
and laugh at everybody who replies.
Crossposted seven times.
Why do you waste yourself on this flake?
"Pick the hill" ?
Richard
Waste my time on Cliffie? He has been in my kill file for at least 2
yrs. I dont see his posts except when piggybacked on someone else.
Gunner
I take Gummer at his word when he says he doesn't
really hate 'faggots and queers', even if he does
seem like beer swilling biker type redneck to me.




--
Bob Hare Jr aka Animated GIF Man
news://alt.aol.tricks Contributor
http://members.aol.com/AGMLiteForU/
***@ix.netcom.com
.
DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from me
offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate...
.
Cliff
2007-10-29 08:06:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by cavelamb himself
Post by Cliff
over, even when a new question is asked, they run back to the same
old talking points.
You're thinking of Fox...
Fox "news" just won a court case.
Their defense: It's not illegal to lie about or fabricate the "news".
Cliffie?
Can you come up with something to "enlighten" us about this?
Or is it just innuendo?
Hmmm?
Richard
Search the Web & news or read the thread.

HTH
--
Cliff
cavelamb himself
2007-10-29 14:37:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cliff
Search the Web & news or read the thread.
HTH
I did/

If there is a link to whatever story yuo are braging about
it's well buried.

Personally, I think the alt.usenet.kooks tells the whole story.
Aratzio
2007-10-29 14:59:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 09:37:41 -0500, in alt.usenet.kooks, cavelamb
Post by cavelamb himself
Personally, I think the alt.usenet.kooks tells the whole story.
AUK: the laser targeted, rocket powered, smart munitions of usenet.

Give us your loons, your deluded, your kooky masses yearning to flee,
the wretches refusing to drink of the purple kool-aid. Send these, the
gormless, fruit cakes to me. I lift my LART with its Hammer of Thor.
Loading...