Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

rcne · Sep 21, 2004, 09:18 am

So, I've been watching these boards and have as yet not seen the infamous 60 minutes docu-drama discussed.

Now that CBS and Dan Rather have publicly apologized for airing the story with unconfirmed facts (after weeks of denial and mounting evidence to the contrary), the additional ramifications are beginning.

My question is - why in the world would CBS accept as fact those documents from a biased source?

Now that the tables are turned, links are being potentially established to the Kerry campaign. Again - how stupid is that?

If links are 'credibly' established to the Kerry campaign, well it may be time for the Fat Lady to sing.

Why, oh why can't these guys present a campaign of issues and differences rather than the speculation on events 30 years ago.

RickSp · Sep 21, 2004, 09:41 am

A long and tedious thread already.

http://www.volconvo.com/forums/index.php?s...?showtopic=3069

The Republicans never cared that Bush used forged documents regarding Niger yellow cake in his State of the Union address to lie us into a needless war, but are now overjoyed and fiegning outrage that Dan Rather & CBS have been made to look foolish.

It is way past time to talk about the real issues in this election. We all know that George W. was a drunken slacker in 1972. Let's move on.

tusaki · Sep 21, 2004, 09:46 am

Quote:

My question is - why in the world would CBS accept as fact those documents from a biased source?

The Republican: That's because the media is liberal and they will stop at nothing to attack our president!

The Democrat: That's because even if the memo was forged, the essence of it is still true.

Me: Because media seek sensation to sell advertisements, and they thrive on the polarisation of the US. 'shocking' news on either candidate will attract emotional responses from both sides, but most of all it will draw viewers.

bishop · Sep 21, 2004, 10:37 am

Quote:

Why, oh why can't these guys present a campaign of issues and differences rather than the speculation on events 30 years ago.

my sentiments exactly. which is why i haven't given any mind to this nonsense..

what's funny to me is that nobody ever questioned the validity of the swift boat crew. now they're all up in arms over this one. what would aesop say? start talking about something that MATTERS.

Technosoul · Sep 21, 2004, 10:51 am

So both the Navy "questioning" cleared Kerry and the CBS report was likewise withdrawn (and a few here will recall I said before that they will do that if need be).

Oh my gosh, not only did Bush use "questionable sources" to attack Saddam but now Dan Rather used "questionalbe sources" to attack the military records of Bush.

A good source is hard to find nowadays.

Perhaps the world was created by a Myth, perhaps everything is just a big conspiracy and we are not even here at all?

Pinching self, ouch!

I think and therefore I is, I think conspiracy and therefore it is also. Whatever, keep the faith.

Technosoul.

harumscarum · Sep 21, 2004, 10:56 am

ditto (to the issues portion).

What I found strange is that thing Rather did. I think some people call it an apology? I thought that when you were in the wrong you just spun your way out of it. In this day in age it is ridiculous for persons to take responsibility for their actions.

I agree with tusaki about the "sensation" factor and that they knew the "docs" were shady but had a golden opportunity to break a story.

gr8fuldaniel · Sep 21, 2004, 02:04 pm

Dont you guys realize it was Karl Rove who "leaked" these documents to Dan Rather. The facts were real, and should not be discredited by a Republican psy-op. They merely took the actual documents that slammed little boy bush, forged them and released them. Not very sophisticated at all. They cant win a fair campaign that deals with real issues and facts, they have to pull this shit! I expect it from them. This is not an event, but a pattern.

Edit to fix spelling

Zeebadee · Sep 21, 2004, 03:32 pm

Quote:

Originally posted by gr8fuldaniel,
Dont you guys realize it was Karl Rove who "leaked" these documents to Dan Rather. The facts were real, and should not be discredited by a Republican psy-op. They merely took the actual documents that slammed little boy bush, forged them and released them. Not very sophisticated at all. They cant win a fair campaign that deals with real issues and facts, they have to pull this shit! I expect it from them. This is not an event, but a pattern.

Edit to fix spelling

And your source for this claim?

bishop · Sep 21, 2004, 04:16 pm

take your pick

RickSp · Sep 21, 2004, 04:51 pm

The first time Bush ran for governor of Texas, during a critical period where Ann Richards was pounding W for his lack of experience, a "bug", an illegal wiretap, was discovered in Bush's campaign office. It was never establisehd who planted the bug, but did provide a lot of distraction in which Karl Rove effectively controlled the new cycle.

No one has proven that Rove arranged for the bug to be planted. I'm sure no one will tie Rove to the CBS documents either.

tusaki · Sep 21, 2004, 06:21 pm

O, they will tie him to the CBS documents alright, but just as with the bug, it cannot be proven so it is open to partisan interpretation. Do I believe Karl Rove to be capable of such an act: absolutely. Am I absolutely sure it wasn't a stupid Kerry trick: no way.

Although one could think it was so poorly executed that it is hard to believe the Kerry team could not have come up with something better. This is why I think our friend Karl did it: if the document was flawless (like: written on an old typing machine) it would hurt bush, but put such a glaring error in it and you can wave it around accusing the democrats of a setup.

RickSp · Sep 21, 2004, 07:49 pm

One element was very adriotly executed and points to Republican involvement. CBS stopped analysing the letters after they had been accepted by the White House without comment. Previously they had "experts" looking at the correspondence but pulled them when the White House didn't cry foul.

In some respects, it was the perfect set-up.

gr8fuldaniel · Sep 21, 2004, 09:59 pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Zeebadee,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Zeebadee,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Quote:

Originally posted by gr8fuldaniel,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (gr8fuldaniel,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Dont you guys realize it was Karl Rove who "leaked" these documents to Dan Rather. The facts were real, and should not be discredited by a Republican psy-op. They merely took the actual documents that slammed little boy bush, forged them and released them. Not very sophisticated at all. They cant win a fair campaign that deals with real issues and facts, they have to pull this shit! I expect it from them. This is not an event, but a pattern.[/b]

And your source for this claim?[/b]

Actually Rhandi Rhodes a DJ for Air America Radio, talked about this,
on the air. I found this damning little link to an LA Times article, in her message board:

Quote:

Blogger Who Faulted CBS Documents Is Conservative Activist
LA Times article
WASHINGTON — It was the first public allegation that CBS News used forged memos in its report questioning President Bush's National Guard service — a highly technical explanation posted within hours of airtime citing proportional spacing and font styles.

But it did not come from an expert in typography or typewriter history as some first thought. Instead, it was the work of Harry W. MacDougald, an Atlanta lawyer with strong ties to conservative Republican causes who helped draft the petition urging the Arkansas Supreme Court to disbar President Clinton after the Monica Lewinsky scandal, the Times has found.

The identity of "Buckhead," a blogger known previously only by his screen name on the site freerepublic.com and lifted to folk hero status in the conservative blogosphere since last week's posting, is likely to fuel speculation among Democrats that the efforts to discredit the CBS memos were engineered by Republicans eager to undermine reports that Bush received preferential treatment in the National Guard more than 30 years ago.

<snip>
<!--QuoteBegin-LATimes@
Republican officials have denied any involvement among those debunking the CBS story.[/quote]Oh darn, I guess that lets them off the hook. Just kidding.
<snip>
(8th paragraph from the bottom)
<!--QuoteBegin-LATimes
Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe even speculated openly to reporters that the whole thing could have been orchestrated by White House political advisor Karl Rove. The Bush campaign called the allegation "nonsense."[/quote]

Compugasm · Sep 21, 2004, 10:57 pm

[rhetorical question]
What's with a the document shuffling? Sandy Berger, Navy records, now this?
[/rhetorical question]
Major media outlets will be irrelvant in the next election anyway.

Sep 21, 2004, 09:18 am	#1 (permalink) (top)
rcne Moderator/nobody Posts: 1,566	So, I've been watching these boards and have as yet not seen the infamous 60 minutes docu-drama discussed. Now that CBS and Dan Rather have publicly apologized for airing the story with unconfirmed facts (after weeks of denial and mounting evidence to the contrary), the additional ramifications are beginning. My question is - why in the world would CBS accept as fact those documents from a biased source? Now that the tables are turned, links are being potentially established to the Kerry campaign. Again - how stupid is that? If links are 'credibly' established to the Kerry campaign, well it may be time for the Fat Lady to sing. Why, oh why can't these guys present a campaign of issues and differences rather than the speculation on events 30 years ago. Live Long and Prosper (Genetics and Capitalism)

Sep 21, 2004, 09:41 am	#2 (permalink) (top)
RickSp Volcanic Erupter Posts: 9,491	A long and tedious thread already. http://www.volconvo.com/forums/index.php?s...?showtopic=3069 The Republicans never cared that Bush used forged documents regarding Niger yellow cake in his State of the Union address to lie us into a needless war, but are now overjoyed and fiegning outrage that Dan Rather & CBS have been made to look foolish. It is way past time to talk about the real issues in this election. We all know that George W. was a drunken slacker in 1972. Let's move on. Rick "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." Sinclair Lewis

Sep 21, 2004, 10:56 am	#6 (permalink) (top)
harumscarum Igneous Magma Posts: 183	ditto (to the issues portion). What I found strange is that thing Rather did. I think some people call it an apology? I thought that when you were in the wrong you just spun your way out of it. In this day in age it is ridiculous for persons to take responsibility for their actions. I agree with tusaki about the "sensation" factor and that they knew the "docs" were shady but had a golden opportunity to break a story. under construction....

Sep 21, 2004, 02:04 pm	#7 (permalink) (top)
gr8fuldaniel Fire the Liars Location: California Posts: 7,090	Dont you guys realize it was Karl Rove who "leaked" these documents to Dan Rather. The facts were real, and should not be discredited by a Republican psy-op. They merely took the actual documents that slammed little boy bush, forged them and released them. Not very sophisticated at all. They cant win a fair campaign that deals with real issues and facts, they have to pull this shit! I expect it from them. This is not an event, but a pattern. Edit to fix spelling ~~ Helpful Linx * Huff Post * WRH * RAW STORY ~~

Sep 21, 2004, 04:16 pm	#9 (permalink) (top)
bishop moderat-e/o-r Location: boston Posts: 11,184	take your pick hope for america... http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

Sep 21, 2004, 10:51 am	#5 (permalink) (top)
Technosoul Volcanic Erupter Posts: 8,663	So both the Navy "questioning" cleared Kerry and the CBS report was likewise withdrawn (and a few here will recall I said before that they will do that if need be). Oh my gosh, not only did Bush use "questionable sources" to attack Saddam but now Dan Rather used "questionalbe sources" to attack the military records of Bush. A good source is hard to find nowadays. Perhaps the world was created by a Myth, perhaps everything is just a big conspiracy and we are not even here at all? Pinching self, ouch! I think and therefore I is, I think conspiracy and therefore it is also. Whatever, keep the faith. Technosoul.

Sep 21, 2004, 04:51 pm	#10 (permalink) (top)
RickSp Volcanic Erupter Posts: 9,491	The first time Bush ran for governor of Texas, during a critical period where Ann Richards was pounding W for his lack of experience, a "bug", an illegal wiretap, was discovered in Bush's campaign office. It was never establisehd who planted the bug, but did provide a lot of distraction in which Karl Rove effectively controlled the new cycle. No one has proven that Rove arranged for the bug to be planted. I'm sure no one will tie Rove to the CBS documents either. Rick "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." Sinclair Lewis

Sep 21, 2004, 06:21 pm	#11 (permalink) (top)
tusaki Playful Location: Groningen, the Netherlands Posts: 805	O, they will tie him to the CBS documents alright, but just as with the bug, it cannot be proven so it is open to partisan interpretation. Do I believe Karl Rove to be capable of such an act: absolutely. Am I absolutely sure it wasn't a stupid Kerry trick: no way. Although one could think it was so poorly executed that it is hard to believe the Kerry team could not have come up with something better. This is why I think our friend Karl did it: if the document was flawless (like: written on an old typing machine) it would hurt bush, but put such a glaring error in it and you can wave it around accusing the democrats of a setup. Hope & Dream

Sep 21, 2004, 07:49 pm	#12 (permalink) (top)
RickSp Volcanic Erupter Posts: 9,491	One element was very adriotly executed and points to Republican involvement. CBS stopped analysing the letters after they had been accepted by the White House without comment. Previously they had "experts" looking at the correspondence but pulled them when the White House didn't cry foul. In some respects, it was the perfect set-up. Rick "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." Sinclair Lewis

Sep 21, 2004, 10:57 pm	#14 (permalink) (top)
Compugasm Son of X51 Location: San Diego Posts: 3,643	[rhetorical question] What's with a the document shuffling? Sandy Berger, Navy records, now this? [/rhetorical question] Major media outlets will be irrelvant in the next election anyway. I'd like to thank Charlie Hodge, bringing me scarves and water.