i always thought dan rather as the elite news guy. i had been thinking about he may have been the a 'stand up guy' to take the hit about the reporting of president bush. he does have that attitude that he is willing to take the bullet for someone else. i just think he maybe rethinking that he may have been used and he wants to savage part of legacy.
please folks do not report anyone opinion on my question. i welcome all answers. thank you.
2007-09-21 17:51:34 · 3 answers · asked by just hanging around 5 in News & Events ➔ Media & Journalism
I think that every thing came at Dan so fast and from so high above that he just stuttered for a bit and now that he has time to think about what happened he is doing the right thing. Don't let those crazy politicians ruin your great reputation Dan, go after them. I think you should hit them a little harder though.
2007-09-21 18:02:30 · answer #1 · answered by MJM 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Let's be real here. GWB was absent without leave during his years in the national guard. He avoided service during the Viet Nam war while many others died in the service of their country. Who cares that someone may have messed up a few of the facts.
It speaks volumes that the network (CBS) would turn on a reputable anchor person to protect itself from retaliation from this imperial presidency.
I'd like to see this fully vetted in a court of law so that we can learn the truth. Of course, that's never going to happen. Everyone will quietly settle this case.
2007-09-22 01:45:00 · answer #2 · answered by Skeptic 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Rather is saving face. His mistake was he failed to supervise his editorial and journalist staff---who handed him material that got him in trouble; he just took the stuff w/out review and aired it. Afterwards a CBS internal rift occurred when political empowerment flexed IT's muscle---and we know the rest. Ooops.
2007-09-22 01:09:48 · answer #3 · answered by Hard Rocker 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋