Does Dan Rather need some cheese to go with that whine?

Question

First thing I see when I open up Yahoo! this morning is that Dan Rather is suing CBS for $70 million because they made him "look bad" in the aftermath of the piece he ran on Dubya's military service. Well, gee, when six document experts refuse to verify that the "proof" you have is genuine and one of them says he's reasonably sure it's a forgery, yet you go ahead and pedal it as truth on the CBS Evening News, what do you expect? Am I the only one that think Rather is showing himself as the epitome of a whiny-butt liberal? Don't you think Dubya should be able to sue Rather for libel and defamation of character using the same logic?

Sunny, here's the problem: The issue isn't what Dubya did or did not do during his military tenure -- the issue at hand here is the fact that Dan Rather was told in no uncertain terms by six experts that the documents he had could not be verified as authentic, yet he went ahead with the story and laid those documents out in front of the American public as TRUTH. He violated virtually every journalistic rule in the book about verifying information before releasing it to the American public. BOTTOM LINE: He tried to sell a bald-faced lie to John and Jane Q. Public and got called on it.

Answer 1

Rather as many other LIBERAL media biased reporters and so called journalist have been spreading the hate for Bush since 2000. They all dug their teeth into anything and every thing that made him look bad and reported it too the max! Rather wanted that story out and many others that turned out to be not true, just because he hated Bush that bad. Rather however didn't keep his eye on his ratings. His numbers had been going down and really decided to retire before he got more egg on his face. this story was his last horrah, at the Bush bashing. He knew it was B.S. and he made the decision to run it, now as any good LIBERAL LEFT WING KOOK; he is sueing and placing the blame on everyone else besides himself. Notice how the elitest never take responsibilty when they do wrong?

Answer 2

seems you in basic terms had to call Dan rather pathetic and say he exchange into whining, no longer ask a query. you should expound on that. Why do you think of he's whining? approximately what? Why? What did he say? Why ought to we care?

Answer 3

I'm not a liberal but I know that you're going to bash me anyway so I'm just going to say it. Just because those particular documents were found to be fakes doesn't mean that the initial accusations (which have still not been dispelled because they were overshadowed by the Rather situation) were false. It just means the documents were. Dubya was not absolved of anything and that's why he's not suing.

I wasn't excusing him for false information or saying that he has right to his lawsuit. I'm just sick of important issues being tossed by the wayside because someone came along and muddied the waters and, apparently, Americans can't walk and chew gum at the same time. He's a journalist and, obviously, there are standards that need to be met. He didn't meet those standards, he deserved what he got. I was pretty sure that went without saying so I apologize for not bothering to say it. Unless, of course, the network was in cahoots and then hung him out to dry in which case they should both be sanctioned. Also, never said that the "premise was true." I very correctly stated that the premise was never invalidated because we got distracted. Please don't put words in my mouth and don't make assumptions. I'm not indiscriminately anti-Bush nor am I indiscriminately anti-liberal. Unlike most, I'm pro-truth. Sorry I got under your skin for pointing out the obvious.

Answer 4

look at Given2fly's question. He is blaming the firing of the old fff art on Bush lying about the war.

What a pitty old man, Rather that is. Typical of the liberal society, blame other for one's own failure. Not that no one watch the CBS news, not that he was ranked last of the original three network, not that he lied about a news broadcast with fictional documents. No. It was that he is a "scapegoat". So PITTY.

Answer 5

Sunny's reply is pretty humorous, if you want to take it a little farther. She excuses Rather for presenting false evidence because the actual premise is true (in her eyes), yet I'd be willing to bet believes the anti-Bush diatribe about the yellowcake from Niger episode, in which the particular document was questionable, but there was no doubt that the basic premise was true (this is verifiable by a quick look at the IAEA web site detailing Iraq's dealings with Niger in the past).

Dan Rather championed a trumped-up story, got caught, and suffered the consequences. That's it. The old whining bastard just needs to retire and go golfing. Maybe OJ needs a partner to help him search for his wife's killers.

Answer 6

I totally agree! What a Baby! He's the victim of a bunch of backfired lies - his own lies! He was an anchor for all those years at a Major News Agency and he didn't have the insight to see that story was full of holes? Yeah, right!

I'd like to dedicate a song to poor Dan - Journey's, "Who's Crying Now?"

Answer 7

And he can use that to help him wash down the crow and humble pie, too!

CHOMP!!! CHOMP!!! CHOMP!!! Dannyboy! We've been out here eating the crap you've been dishing out WAY TOO LONG! What I can't understand is how Chris can be related to you at all!

Have a right-wing day!

Answer 8

Yes I do agree with you. He says they destroyed his reputation. And that’s right “Rich is trying to get richer”
Can anyone here answer my last question I got zero answers.

Answer 9

A nice, stinky Fontina would do just fine.

Answer 10

Its because rich try to get richer...he sounds looks like a greedy politician himself now.