http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6052080/

Can you say egg all over someone's face? Or an entire news organization for that matter?

I just find it weird that Dan Rather ran with his gut believing that these were real and he has been slimed beyond belief as a liar, etc.

 

Bush went with his gut on bad intelligence believing that Iraq had WMD etc. and he hasn't gotten slimed by the major media when it's essentially the same situation (believing something is real, running with it and having it blow up in one's face)

He hasn't? Last time I checked, most of the media is going after GWB as a liar, etc. pretty good.

 

Your observation is interesting though.

Dan Rathers statement

 

Last week, amid increasing questions about the authenticity of documents used in support of a 60 MINUTES WEDNESDAY story about President Bush's time in the Texas Air National Guard, CBS News vowed to re-examine the documents in question—and their source—vigorously. And we promised that we would let the American public know what this examination turned up, whatever the outcome.

 

Now, after extensive additional interviews, I no longer have the confidence in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them journalistically. I find we have been misled on the key question of how our source for the documents came into possession of these papers. That, combined with some of the questions that have been raised in public and in the press, leads me to a point where—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.

 

But we did use the documents. We made a mistake in judgment, and for that I am sorry. It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting without fear or favoritism.

 

Please know that nothing is more important to us than people's trust in our ability and our commitment to report fairly and truthfully.

Well, the story served it's purpose. It changed the focus from Kerry's anti war, fake medal throwing, Hanoi Jane backing, congressional testifying antics to whether or not Bush was guilty of the unforgivable sin of missing a physical.

Well, the story served it's purpose.  It changed the focus from Kerry's anti war, fake medal throwing, Hanoi Jane backing, congressional testifying antics to whether or not Bush was guilty of the unforgivable sin of missing a physical.

It would be nice to actually hear some substance from the canditates sometime before... oh I don't know... ELECTION DAY?!?!?

 

I would almost swear that the two camps got together and planned out their BS so that their canditates wouldn't actually have to work at all. "OK first we release the swifties stuff, then you release the National Guard stuff, that should take us through October...."

There's probably more truth to this then we would all care to know.

When something works that well for a candidate, you wonder if they planned it.

 

or

 

With friends like this, who needs enemies.