Looks like the former Seal is telling things he shouldn't in his book...

[Guest050715-1]

Originally Posted by ekim008

That goes ditto for the wingnuts...

Kinda, but not quite. They can claim to be working to save all our souls not to be open minded. A pox on both houses I say. Neither side is any better or any more closed minded than the other.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

Don't you know? Liberals aren't bigoted. During their indoctrination, they get a card that says that they and all those like them are excused from being considered ignorant, close minded or bigots based on their knowledge of humanity and faith in their own dogmatic bullshit.

poor olivia, she is a perfect exapmle of a closed minded, ignorant, bigoted, indoctrinated hypocrite wallowing in her own dogmatic bullshit

[Guest050715-1]

Originally Posted by CJ7

poor olivia, she is a perfect exapmle of a closed minded, ignorant, bigoted, indoctrinated hypocrite wallowing in her own dogmatic bullshit

In your mind maybe. Let's play a game shall we, you come up with your own thoughts and people positively reinforce you for it by understanding WTF you are talking about - ALL ON YOUR OWN. You shouldn't need to parrot my words back to me for you to be understood. Ready? Set? Go.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

In your mind maybe. Let's play a game shall we, you come up with your own thoughts and people positively reinforce you for it by understanding WTF you are talking about - ALL ON YOUR OWN. You shouldn't need to parrot my words back to me for you to be understood. Ready? Set? Go.

~~~~~~~~ [[[[[ Twighlite Zone music playing in the background ]]]]] ~~~~~~~

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by ekim008

You got a link to that?Or is this something you got from the republican talking points? Hadn't seen where anyone has come up with credible evidence...

From HuffPo: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1574499.html

Originally Posted by KCJoe

Didn't the Bush Administration in their defense of outing Valarie Plame say that when the President does it(acting President Dick Cheney), it okay?

You're thinking of the Clinton Administration

[Fast Gunn]

Dan Rather did not lie about Bush's so-called service record.

He told the story just how it was, but of course, the White House did not appreciate the unflattering portrayal of their commander in chief especially since it was true. Bush would merely make cameo appearances at the base. He was not really serving, just wanting to look like he was.

The controversy then became a power struggle between Dan Rather and George Bush.

As often happens, the truth became the first casualty.

. . . The fact is that the White House is generally able to exert more pressure than even a top ranked news anchor as Dan Rather painfully discovered when he was fired because of the incident.

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I guessed you missed the end of that episode. It turned out that Dan Rather lied about Bush's service and it got him fired.

After this crappy, biased convention coverage can you take NBC's word for anything?

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by timpage

Already happening. I heard on the news this morning that the douchebag former SEAL that is trying to swiftboat Obama has already gone on record as saying that the disclosure of any confidential info by this author is Obama's fault. Imagine.

Wow. That was fast.

"What have you done for me lately?" should be your tag line.

The guy was risking his life for his country just this past April and already you have tagged him as a douchbag and a Swiftboater? And all because his account may slightly differ from the official record. And he was actually there, unlike the White House crew.

And he didn't even bash Obama. Others are using his book to cast aspersions on the White House. So that's like second hand criticism that he doesn't even control.

There are some on the left who clearly will brook no criticism of the Messiah, isn't there? But they will bash folks on the right who circle the wagons around Bush with no sense of irony.

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by Fast Gunn

Dan Rather did not lie about Bush's so-called service record.

He told the story just how it was, but of course, the White House did not appreciate the unflattering portrayal of their commander in chief especially since it was true. Bush would merely make cameo appearances at the base. He was not really serving, just wanting to look like he was.

The controversy then became a power struggle between Dan Rather and George Bush.

As often happens, the truth became the first casualty.

. . . The fact is that the White House is generally able to exert more pressure than even a top ranked news anchor as Dan Rather painfully discovered when he was fired because of the incident.

You, like many in this post, are having difficulty recalling what happened to Rather, aren't you?

So let me refresh your recollection.

Rather (and CBS) received the most ridiculously bogus letter in history from a Bush hater (Bill Burkett) from (I think) West Texas. Bill Burkett, a former officer of the Texas Air National Guard (TANG), faxed to CBS News letters/memos allegedly taken from the files of a deceased Lt. Col. Killian, Bush's former commanding officer. The letters/memos made disparaging comments about Bush's TANG service and insinuated Bush had received preferential treatment.

The letters were supposedly typed in the early 1970s. At that time, an Air National Guard unit would have been equipped with typewriters, probably manual Underwoods or maybe electric ones if they were lucky. The typeface would have been Elite or Pica and would have been evenly spaced - NOT proportionally spaced. Word processors didn't exist back then.

The asshole who forged the letter (Burkett) couldn't be bothered to get the typeface right. He typed the letters on his computer using the DEFAULT font setting for MicroSoft Word (in 2004!!). That was Times New Roman and it is a proportionally spaced font. In other words, he selected a font that wasn't used in 1972 and typed it on a machine that didn't even exist in 1972.

The assholes at CBS - Rather included - took it hook, line and sinker. A minimally competent 10th grader could have spotted the forgery, but not the fact checkers at CBS.

The copies of the forgeries were released to the public, of course. Within hours - not days, hours - the Internet lit up with WTF articles, posts and comments about what an obvious fake it was.

CBS and Rather tried to make excuses, but were forced within a short period of time to make a complete retraction. After a brief internal investigation, CBS fired the producer of the show, Mary Mapes, and other senior news executives were asked to resign. CBS apologized to the public. Rather quit 60 Minutes and retired from CBS shortly after that.

So, no, Rather did not outright lie. But he also didn't tell the story just as it was, because the story was a fabrication. Rather just disregarded all the obvious warning signs in order to broadcast a story that perfectly fit all of his biases.

And, no, Bush and the White House did not put pressure on CBS News. If they had, CBS would have told them to pound sand. The media have been winning against US politicians since at least NY Times v. Sullivan. That's one of the things I like about this country.

But Bush and the White house didn't have to put pressure on CBS. Instead, Internet bloggers and competing news outlets, particularly Fox and CNN, tore Rather and CBS new assholes. So much for the "power struggle" between Bush and Rather.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the Bush White House didn't enjoy every minute of it. It must have been like watching their worst enemy commit suicide. They were only too happy to sit on the sidelines and watch the spectacle.

A lot of big media figures have fallen over the last decade, but Rather was the first big pelt the blogosphere was able to nail to the wall. Others have followed since. That's another thing I like about this country.

We often hear the saying "If it looks too good to be true, it isn't true". Rather ignored this old bromide when he was presented with a fake story that every Bush hater wanted to believe was true. And so, he forgot his principles and better judgment.

[cptjohnstone]

Originally Posted by Fast Gunn

Dan Rather did not lie about Bush's so-called service record.

He told the story just how it was, but of course, the White House did not appreciate the unflattering portrayal of their commander in chief especially since it was true. Bush would merely make cameo appearances at the base. He was not really serving, just wanting to look like he was.

The controversy then became a power struggle between Dan Rather and George Bush.

As often happens, the truth became the first casualty.

. . . The fact is that the White House is generally able to exert more pressure than even a top ranked news anchor as Dan Rather painfully discovered when he was fired because of the incident.

at least did not break a ROTC contract like you boy willy did, my roommate broke his and spend 4 years as an enlisted man

[CuteOldGuy]

Apparently the author is going to contest the government's position. Good for him.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/polit...-threat/56433/

[Fast Gunn]

Really? That is how you really see it?

Some very seasoned reporters get scammed in by some amateur college boys without any adults bothering to confirm their stories?

That is not how high-level reporting works especially when you know that the story is going to bring some serious heat down on you from the White House.

A good reporter will have someone else to double-check the facts before coming against the President of the United States and Dan Rather knew what the consequences would surely be. A professional is ready for the blow-back.

. . . What Rather apparently did not know know what how much force the White House would come down with and make it look like he had bad data when all the while Bush was fucking around the base missing days when it suited him and showing up only when he could get photographed to enhance his political stature.

Bush with his family connections had finagled a really sweet gig with no real danger and no sweat involved, but that appearance was totally bogus, but then you don't just leak that story out to the public when you have political ambitions.

Originally Posted by ExNYer

You, like many in this post, are having difficulty recalling what happened to Rather, aren't you?

So let me refresh your recollection.

Rather (and CBS) received the most ridiculously bogus letter in history from a Bush hater (Bill Burkett) from (I think) West Texas. Bill Burkett, a former officer of the Texas Air National Guard (TANG), faxed to CBS News letters/memos allegedly taken from the files of a deceased Lt. Col. Killian, Bush's former commanding officer. The letters/memos made disparaging comments about Bush's TANG service and insinuated Bush had received preferential treatment.

The letters were supposedly typed in the early 1970s. At that time, an Air National Guard unit would have been equipped with typewriters, probably manual Underwoods or maybe electric ones if they were lucky. The typeface would have been Elite or Pica and would have been evenly spaced - NOT proportionally spaced. Word processors didn't exist back then.

The asshole who forged the letter (Burkett) couldn't be bothered to get the typeface right. He typed the letters on his computer using the DEFAULT font setting for MicroSoft Word (in 2004!!). That was Times New Roman and it is a proportionally spaced font. In other words, he selected a font that wasn't used in 1972 and typed it on a machine that didn't even exist in 1972.

The assholes at CBS - Rather included - took it hook, line and sinker. A minimally competent 10th grader could have spotted the forgery, but not the fact checkers at CBS.

The copies of the forgeries were released to the public, of course. Within hours - not days, hours - the Internet lit up with WTF articles, posts and comments about what an obvious fake it was.

CBS and Rather tried to make excuses, but were forced within a short period of time to make a complete retraction. After a brief internal investigation, CBS fired the producer of the show, Mary Mapes, and other senior news executives were asked to resign. CBS apologized to the public. Rather quit 60 Minutes and retired from CBS shortly after that.

So, no, Rather did not outright lie. But he also didn't tell the story just as it was, because the story was a fabrication. Rather just disregarded all the obvious warning signs in order to broadcast a story that perfectly fit all of his biases.

And, no, Bush and the White House did not put pressure on CBS News. If they had, CBS would have told them to pound sand. The media have been winning against US politicians since at least NY Times v. Sullivan. That's one of the things I like about this country.

But Bush and the White house didn't have to put pressure on CBS. Instead, Internet bloggers and competing news outlets, particularly Fox and CNN, tore Rather and CBS new assholes. So much for the "power struggle" between Bush and Rather.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the Bush White House didn't enjoy every minute of it. It must have been like watching their worst enemy commit suicide. They were only too happy to sit on the sidelines and watch the spectacle.

A lot of big media figures have fallen over the last decade, but Rather was the first big pelt the blogosphere was able to nail to the wall. Others have followed since. That's another thing I like about this country.

We often hear the saying "If it looks too good to be true, it isn't true". Rather ignored this old bromide when he was presented with a fake story that every Bush hater wanted to believe was true. And so, he forgot his principles and better judgment.

[CuteOldGuy]

FastGoon, you never cease to amaze.

[Fast Gunn]

The Truth, they say is stranger than . . .

. . . Porter Wagner!

[CuteOldGuy]

Do you remember Porter Wagoner and Dolly Parton doing those Duz Detergent commercials?

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by Fast Gunn

Really? That is how you really see it?

Some very seasoned reporters get scammed in by some amateur college boys without any adults bothering to confirm their stories?

That is not how high-level reporting works especially when you know that the story is going to bring some serious heat down on you from the White House.

A good reporter will have someone else to double-check the facts before coming against the President of the United States and Dan Rather knew what the consequences would surely be. A professional is ready for the blow-back.

. . . What Rather apparently did not know know what how much force the White House would come down with and make it look like he had bad data when all the while Bush was fucking around the base missing days when it suited him and showing up only when he could get photographed to enhance his political stature.

Bush with his family connections had finagled a really sweet gig with no real danger and no sweat involved, but that appearance was totally bogus, but then you don't just leak that story out to the public when you have political ambitions.

OK. Help me out here. What language are you speaking?

Because until I can find a translator, i haven't the foggiest idea how to respond to what you just drooled.