Or, more accurately, effective as soon as she opened up her anti-Semitic cakehole and spouted this crap all over Al Gore’s invention. Details are brief for the time being, but I’m sure more will come out as the day goes on. I figured if that didn’t get her fired…er, “enticed into early retirement”…nothing would.
How funny that her career’s ending parallels that of Dan Rather’s. Both are hopelessly liberal journos who were revered by their media brethren (and no one else), only to have their lengthy shark-jumping careers shamefully ended, crushed by the righty blogosphere that exposed their true colors.
When I first read about this, I had to make sure it was authentic, i.e. not on one of Dan Rather’s memos. Nope, it’s real. Here’s what the disgraced former newsman said to Leg Tingles Matthews on MSDNC about B.O.’s inability to get America to drink the Kool-Aid on socialized medicine:
Part of the undertow in the coming election is going to be President Obama’s leadership. And the Republicans will make a case and a lot of independents will buy this argument. “Listen he just hasn’t been, look at the health care bill. It was his number one priority. It took him forever to get it through and he had to compromise it to death.” And a version of, “Listen he’s a nice person, he’s very articulate” this is what’s been used against him, “but he couldn’t sell watermelons if it, you gave him the state troopers to flag down the traffic.”
The video clip is at this link, and you’ll note Tingles trying to talk over Gunga Dan in order to prevent further humiliation. Both of Matthews’ viewers were mortified.
Exit question (and one that you can see coming a mile away): Care to imagine what the reaction would be from the left and the MSM (pardon the redundancy) had this analogy come from a conservative?
Fake but accurate Just accurate. Details:
Bad news for Dan Rather: His $70 million lawsuit against CBS is no more.
In a 19-page decision made public Tuesday, a state appeals court dismissed the legendary newsman’s suit against CBS.
Rather, 77, sued the Tiffany network in 2007 after his career at CBS collapsed in the wake of a “60 Minutes II” report about former President George W.Bush’s Vietnam-era military service.
The folksy newsman accused CBS executives of caving to Republican interests, coercing him into a public apology after the controversial report aired in September 2004.
The report claimed “high-level political influence” kept Bush out of combat by securing him a cushy spot in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War.
As recently as Sept. 21, lawyers for Rather said he would be vindicated and that Bush’s military service would be proven to be a sham.
The news story wasn’t on a memo obtained by CBS News, so it’s likely authentic.
Quite the fitting end to the credibility and career of a lifelong leftist political hack, no?
Hey, those forged documents aren’t going to write themselves! From See B.S.!:
CBS (NYSE: CBS), reeling from disappointing earning in the last quarter has done some layoffs, at the corporate level, and separate from that, at some local O&O stations. On corporate level, TVNewser reports that CBS News has made cuts in to editorial, technical operations and the bureaus. The total cuts amount to 1 percent of the staff, the post says.
Dan Rather was unavailable for comment. Actually, that’s not true…he’s unemployed these days, so he is available for comment!
While this isn’t exactly a story about media bias, it’s certainly an example of how the MSM’s institutional sloppiness and lust for titillation (uh-huh-huh…I said “tit”illation!) keeps a spotlight of shame on a once-vaunted industry. From National Review:
The LA Times has started an internal investigation to determine the validity of documents at the core of a recent story linking Sean Combs to the murder of Tupac Shakur:
Los Angeles Times Editor Russ Stanton said today he will launch an internal investigation into the authenticity of documents used in a story last week asserting that the newspaper had uncovered new evidence implicating associates of rap impresario Sean “Diddy” Combs in a bloody 1994 assault on hip-hop superstar Tupac Shakur.
Stanton ordered the review after the editor of the celebrity-centric website, The Smoking Gun, told the newspaper that he had reason to doubt The Times’ account and in particular the FBI records that were supposed to buttress the story.
The website this morning posted a story saying the records — purportedly statements by an unnamed informant to an FBI agent, which the newspaper posted on its website — appeared to be forgeries. The Smoking Gun (www.thesmokinggun.com) said the documents seemed suspicious for multiple reasons, including the fact that they appeared to be written on a typewriter, rather than a computer, and included blacked-out sections not typically found in such documents.
Although The Times has not identified the source of the purported FBI reports, The Smoking Gun story asserts that they were created by convicted con man James Sabatino, who the website contends was a starry-eyed music fan with a long rap sheet and a history of exaggerating his place in the rap music world.
“The Times appears to have been hoaxed by an imprisoned con man and accomplished document forger, an audacious swindler who has created a fantasy world in which he managed hip-hop luminaries,” the report on the website says.
The rest here.
Boy, it’s a good thing the MSM has all of those layers of fact-checking that us bloggers don’t have, right? Look on the bright side, LAT: you could always argue “fake, but accurate” like Gunga Dan!
After the Old Gray Hag ran her “heavy on innuendo, light on the proof” hit piece on McCain last week, they received (deservedly so) tons of scorn. Heck, McCain’s standing with the electorate improved as a result of the smear! With that kind of negative publicity, the NYT certainly didn’t need this latest headache:
Now if Danny Kinko’s gives you his seal of approval, that plus a quarter will get you a steaming hot cup of Jack Squat!
This couldn’t have happened to a better guy, could it? From New York Mag:
If he weren’t famous, he’d be mistaken for a veteran of a long-ago war: khaki safari shirt on his back, scuffed combat boots on his feet, that wiry crest of a brow, rheumy eyes under heavy lids, lower lip jutting out like an ornery fish resisting a hook.
When Dan Rather sits on a bench in Central Park to tell how his 44-year career at CBS News ended in ignominy and humiliation, he is in fact still waging a war, a bitter and personal one. And the memories of the battles that undid him are still fresh on his mind. “Monday morning, about 8:49—and I think that is the time precisely,” he says. He’s recalling January 10, 2005, when he first received the 224-page report commissioned by CBS that excoriated his infamous 60 Minutes Wednesday segment on President Bush’s National Guard service. Of that report, Rather says, “When I read through it, all I could say to myself, on each page, is, ‘What bullshit. What pure, unadulterated bullshit this whole thing is. What a setup. What a fix.’ ” He nearly spits the word fix.
Three years later, Rather cannot forget. He’s suing CBS and its former parent company Viacom—along with Viacom’s chairman, Sumner Redstone; CBS chief Leslie Moonves; and former CBS News president Andrew Heyward—for $70 million. The core of Rather’s lawsuit is a mundane contract dispute over whether he received the airtime he was promised in his final year on CBS. But like Rather himself, it’s charged with hurricane-force drama, draped in a larger tale of conspiracy and corruption. He hopes that depositions and subpoenas can complete the unfinished business of “Rathergate,” proving not only that he was right all along, that his National Guard story was accurate, but also that CBS buried him so Sumner Redstone could shield Viacom’s corporate interests in Washington from White House blowback. “My opinion,” says Rather, “is that Redstone is the heavy in this.”
This is Dan Rather’s last big story, his crusade to save his reputation as one of the late-twentieth century’s great TV newsmen. “Look, I don’t want to be some Don Quixote out here tilting at windmills, without even a Sancho,” says Rather. “I think when people hear what I was told and what I was not told by CBS executives concerning the Guard story, that they’ll understand.”
But with much unproved, Rather’s claims have left him standing alone. CBS has already fired back, motioning to dismiss his case and calling his allegations “bizarre” and “far-fetched,” his motives purely ego-driven. In launching his attack, Rather risks what’s left of his credibility: If the case makes it to trial, it could uncap the biggest media scandal ever told—or reveal Rather to be the crumpled icon of a fading era, courting madness in the twilight of public life.
I’m leaning towards the latter.
You ought to read the whole article, if you have about 10 minutes to kill. It contains quite a bit of hilarity and sidesplitting moonbattery by a once-repsected (by many, not by me) anchorman. Appetizer: “As the commission’s investigation dragged on through the fall, Rather began to piece together his conspiracy theory. ‘As soon as we began to see that the company was wobbling,’ says Rather, ‘I said to myself, ‘I think Redstone said to Moonves, Make this disappear. This is killing us in Washington.”. Now, everywhere he looked, he saw signs of his company’s caving to pressure from the Bush administration.” Seriously, aside from implementing a virtual pole dancer, I can’t think of anything else after that nugget that could get you more interested to read it.
I’d love nothing more than to quit rehashing something that is three years old, but damned if Gunga Dan won’t let sleeping dogs lie. From NRO:
The Gift That Keeps on Giving…
According to Drudge, Howard Kurtz’s new book reveals that CBS producers weren’t comfortable running Rather’s infamous National Guard story. When they balked at running it so soon without securing additional corroboration, Rather threatened to leak it to The New York Times.
I keep thinking that surely the Rathergate story must be exhausted. But years later, we’re still unearthing new angles that demonstrate the Rather’s hubris. The man is the Hindenberg of journalistic integrity.
There’s also more interesting stuff about Kurtz’s book over at the Media Blog.
Kudos to CBS for not wanting to run the unvetted story in the first place, but a pox on them for ultimately giving in to Rather’s blackmail.
It must be, according to Charles Lane:
I have obtained new documentary evidence regarding Dan Rather’s relationship with his former bosses at CBS News.
Obviously, I cannot identify my source. But he told me during a collect call from Sofia, Bulgaria, that he has access to Rather’s “personal files” and that his typewriter was built after 1966. To authenticate the document, I showed it to some of my kids’ friends, and they said it was awesome.
Here, then, the letter — written by Dan Rather and dated Nov. 31, 2006:
“Dear CBS News:
“My new career at HDNet is keeping me busier than a bordello at Mardis Gras.
“But I did want to take a moment to thank you for your kindness and consideration during my 44 years as the finest broadcast journalist any network ever had.
“Let’s face it. At times I did or said things that some people, most of them partisan political operatives, considered unbecoming, ridiculous or even ‘firing offenses.’
“In 1987, I walked off the set of the evening news, leaving you to fill several minutes of dead air, because you delayed the news to finish coverage of the U.S. Open tennis tournament. That came back to haunt us the next year, when then-Vice President George H.W. Bush mocked me about it. But you stood by me.
“In 2001, I accidentally gave a speech at a Democratic Party fundraiser in Austin. Later, I realized that some powerful and extremely well-financed forces think that journalists shouldn’t help political parties raise money. For a minute there, the issue got hotter than a hamburger on a hickory fire. You guys put out a statement calling it an ‘honest oversight,’ and we rode it out together. Thanks.
“But what really made me gratefuller than a Pilgrim in November was the way CBS News handled my Sept. 8, 2004, broadcast of those fake documents — you know, the ones that said President Bush finagled his way into the Texas Air National Guard during Vietnam and then skipped a Guard physical, etc., etc.
“You guys stood by me, and the report, until it became impossible to deny that it was a whopper, and then you let me make a dignified exit from ‘CBS Evening News’ several months later.
“Until I left the network in June 2006, you kept paying me a $6 million salary, even though I wasn’t really doing much work.
“The nicest part, though — the part that shows you are more compassionate than Mother Teresa in a 12-story leper colony — is that after I apologized for the bogus report, you asked me to keep my mouth shut about it, even though I was itching to retract the apology.
“Thank you, CBS, thank you for saving me from myself.
Yes, there is another document making the rounds that suggests that Dan Rather is actually bitter at his former employers. I am referring to the 32-page “lawsuit” in which Rather purportedly accuses various chieftains at CBS of “coercing” him into a false apology for the National Guard broadcast and then muzzling him and starving him of airtime to please the White House.
Clearly, this “lawsuit” is a forgery — and a pretty crude one at that.
No man in Rather’s position would admit that he could be made to apologize for a story he believed was true. A straight-shooting newsman like Dan Rather would have resigned rather than obey an order to lie to the public.
No sensible person would allege that CBS’s investigation of the National Guard story was both hopelessly biased because it was led by George H.W. Bush’s former attorney general and that the investigation “exonerated” Rather.
No sane individual would start a legal battle that could result in his being deposed under oath about his own conduct at the network over 44 rocky years.
Finally, no one in his right mind would keep insisting that those phony documents are real and that the Bush National Guard story is true. (Well, Ellis does, but then again, you DID say “in his right mind”, didn’t you? – Ed.)
If there’s one thing we’ve learned about Dan Rather, it is that he’s a perfectly reasonable guy. Otherwise, CBS News would never have put him in the anchor’s chair in the first place. And he sat there for 24 years.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it, Rather apologists.
The pitiful saga of a once-respected (by many, not by me) journalist continues to unfold before our very eyes, and it couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy than Dan Rather. From San Franistan’s Examiner:
Former CBS “Evening News” anchor Dan Rather choked back tears on several occasions today when discussing his decision to file a lawsuit against CBS and he left many audience members with a sense that he may call President George W. Bush as a witness should the lawsuit proceed to trial (and Rather said he hoped it would).
When asked by Carol Joynt, host of the “Q&A Café” held at Nathans restaurant who worked with Rather at CBS in the 1970s, whether “he’d like to” call President Bush as a witness in the trial, Rather paused, then said “I’d like not to answer the question,” leaving both Joynt and audience members wondering whether the newsman has Bush in his sights.” Joynt later told Yeas & Nays, “From the look in his eye — and he gave me a definite Ratheresque look — I got the impression he will call the president as a witness. Possibly both of them: 41 and 43. He implied the suit is not against them, but what the suit is about stems directly from his antagonistic relationship with them.”
In the lawsuit, Rather claims he was unjustifiably squeezed out of CBS by network executives following a 2004 story about President Bush’s service record in the Texas Air National Guard. After evidence emerged that the story’s primary documents were possibly faked or forged, Rather stated on air that “if I knew then what I know now, I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question.”
I’ll come back to the prior paragraph in a second, but I think it’s fair to give you a beverage warning right now. Put down your drink, pronto! OK, you’ve been warned!
Joynt asked Rather if he believes the president hates him, and Rather responded by saying that “hate is a strong word.” Then, he began to well up. “You’ve never met anybody who had more respect for the presidency than I do,” said Rather, choking back tears. He stood by his 2004 story, saying “we got the truth, but we left ourselves vulnerable.”
Interesting: I would have not gone ahead with the story”, but “we got the truth”? Still sticking to the “fake but accurate” script, are we, Gunga Dan?
The fact is, Dan, you were fired from CBS for bringing disrepute to the network, and its Evening News has never fully recovered (hiring Couric darned sure didn’t help) since your brazen attempt to sway the results of the election of 2004 with a bogus, uncorroborated story. Despite your numerous claims to be “fiercely independent”, you have always been a leftist partisan hack, even going so far as to be the keynote speaker at a 2001 Texas Democrats fundraiser.
Our CLOWNS snoopers Word has it that Dan Rather’s legal team will call a still gainfully employed prizewinning journalist named Ima Shyster from the National Enquirer who ran stories of Elvis on a UFO that (wouldn’t you know it?) just so happened to be fakes (who knew?), yet ran the story anyway with the “OK, the photos are fake, but the story is real” defense. This has not yet been confirmed.
BEVERAGE ALERT! Put down your drink pronto. You have been warned! From Newsbusters:
Most of Dan Rather’s pontifications on today’s “Morning Joe” rolled off my back, as I flipped between his performance and that of Tiger Woods over the closing holes at Carnoustie.
But something made me sit up and take notice. At 8:34 A.M. EDT, Rather suddenly blurted out: “I’m big on personal responsibility.” And yes, he managed to do so without laughing.
God (insert deity du jour here).
This is the same guy who put demonstrably fake documents on the air in his bid to bring down Bush a few weeks before the presidential election of 2004, then stood by as Mary Mapes and three other high-level executive henchmen took the fall, then just last year continued to stand by the since debunked “fake but accurate” story? Dan freakin’ Rather was trying to convince us that he’s all about “personal responsibility”?
I am marking on my calendar that Thursday, July 19, 2007, at 1:50 p.m. EST, I have officially seen everything.
- "hate crimes"
- 9/11 Commission
- affirmative action
- Air America
- al franken
- Al Sharpton
- ambulance chasers
- Andrew Sullivan
- animal rights wackos
- Ann Coulter
- Anthony Weiner
- Arizona shooting
- Arlen Specter
- Barney Frank
- big government
- Bill Clinton
- Bill Richardson
- Blog Talk Radio
- Bobby Jindal
- capital punishment
- Caroline Kennedy
- Charlie Crist
- Chris Christie
- Chuck Schumer
- Dan Rather
- Debbie Wasserman Schultz
- Duke lacrosse
- economic ignorance
- eminent domain
- Eric Cantor
- Fair Tax
- Fairness Doctrine
- Fort Dix Six
- Fox News
- freaky deaky
- Fred Thompson
- Ft. Hood
- global warming
- Godwin's Law
- gun rights
- health care
- Herman Cain
- Howard Dean
- Hugo Chavez
- illegal immigration
- Janet Napolitano
- Jesse Jackson
- John Boehner
- John Edwards
- Jose Padilla
- Larry Craig
- Lindsey Graham
- Marco Rubio
- Mark Sanford
- media bias
- Mel Martinez
- Michael Moore
- Michael Steele
- Michelle Bachmann
- minimum wage
- New Jersey
- New York
- news bytes
- Newt Gingrich
- Night and Day
- Ninth Circus Court
- North Korea
- Occupy Wall Street
- Operation Fast and Furious
- Osama bin Laden
- Paul Ryan
- political correctness
- property rights
- public education
- public service announcement
- quote of the day
- religion of peace
- Rick Perry
- Rick Santorum
- Rick Scott
- Robert Byrd
- Roman Polanski
- Ron Paul
- San Francisco
- separated at birth
- Social Security
- Supreme Court
- swine flu
- Tea Party
- The Memphis Posse
- Tim Geithner
- Tim Pawlenty
- United Nations
- vote fraud
- Wall Street
- Ward Churchill
- Warren Buffett