Ace,

Perhaps we should all send a stick of butter each to the Kerry Campaign, 'cause they're TOAST.

Once upon a time there was a network called See BS. But in a momument to hubris, their flagship news program was caught in a blatant case of partisan forgery...

Da_Wiz Sends

Holy fuck! Is anyone else watching Rather right now? What a complete cock-sucker. "Hey, evil partisans are questioning the authenticity of the documents, instead of questioning Bush on what those forgeries say!"

This guy is unbelievable.

Anyone else take a look at Ebay, and how the only type-writers with bids on them, are the ones in question, and they're going for like a buck effin fifty! lol

Oh shit, read some of the stats on the Selectric 2 from this guys auction, specifically:

The Selectric II had a lever (above the right platen knob) that would allow the platen to be turned freely but return to the same vertical line (for inserting such symbols as subscripts and superscripts), whereas the Selectric I did not.

These were quite expensive back in the day

More food for thought...

Anyone else think that Dan Rather was up screaming all night long last night?

fatkid,

You're young, aren't you?

That's the way MOST typewriters were. You could turn the knob a half-click to elevate a letter or number (like to write x squared, but with a raised two).

But you were only elevating the number. You weren't shrinking it into a smaller font size.

Furthermore, since the letter was full-size, it would begin a half-line above the main line and end a half-line above the main line. It would be a full-size letter, just clicked one half-line upwards.

This has always been completely and utterly possible on typewriters.

That's not the question.

The question is about the smaller-font superscripted double-characters ("st," smallfont and elevated).

Anyone else think that Dan Rather was up screaming all night long last night?

That or hitting the sauce.

Or both.

Hey people,

I really think we're fooling ourselves here. We're working ourselves into a frenzy and I fear that nothing will come of it. The bloggers who have done the work (PowerLine, Allah, Ace and a number of others, mad props to them all) and their readers know the truth and are rightly outraged, but the MSM is just going to sweep this under the rug (or insert other appropriate cliche) and it will be like it never happened. Regardless of how silly Rather looks to us now and hereafter, most people won't know or care why he is so flustered and will believe him about the partisan evil conspiracy nonsense.

I invite discussion on this because nobody at my work (research university) even KNEW about the potential for the memos being forged, even Friday afternoon, over a day after the bloggers were hitting it HARD. Most other media is merely talking about the memos and their content rather (I hate that word now...) than their authenticity. The weekend and Ivan will bury the story and we will all be left shaking our heads. I really hope I'm wrong, but it would be typical. Someone convince me I'm fulla shit.

hinzman

Okay, I just read Ace's Partisan Liar piece and I feel a little better but the potential is still there for this stuff to disappear....

hinzman

Two words for you, hinzman:

Sandy
Berger

Of course it will disappear.

Thanks Patton, but I wanted to be convinced in the other direction!! ;)

hinzman

Hinzman--Well, the WaPo led with it today, right? And Fox ought to thrash it out. And maybe Joe Scarborough.

And the Wall Street Journal. I look at least for their op-ed page to run it.

Plus, I sent a couple of links for my mom to begin e-mailing around to her non-techie friends. That'll get the word out.

But ultimately no, there's no reason for anyone to pay attention to what we say on the web, even if we're right. If the MSM acknowledges its fault here it will

1. undercut their own credibility
2. undercut Kerry's credibility

So they might just close ranks around Dan after the weekend.

Hinzman,

The story will never "disappear," in the sense that no one mentions it anymore. There's just no way, in this day and age, with the collective memory of the blogosphere. We will always have someone to dredge up every scrap of a reason to support or reject a claim. Thus, although Monica-gate broke years ago, it will never be forgotten and used as evidence that Bill Clinton is a lying lecher.

On the other hand, I think you're asking whether the story will do any real damage. I can echo Patton's response - Sandy Berger - and point out that a newsman's job is probably much more secure than a political operative's job. There simply isn't the same pressure to resign in the face of scandal. Granted, people can vote on television shows by changing the channel, but I have two more words for you.

Chris.
Matthews.

People can and do make absolute fools out of themselves day after day on television, and nothing ever comes of it. And neither of the people who still watch CBS are very likely to read blogs. So I think Rather is safe, and as embarrassing as the whole episode may be to CBS, Rather, McAuliffe or John "I didn't get the memo" Edwards, I suspect real repurcussions will be virtually nil.

I could be wrong. Liberal bloggers take credit for bringing down Trent Lott. But then again, Republicans are more likely to resign, because they have a sense of honor.

One more thing here:

As long as this story stays alive, and there's a tiny tiny possibility that the documents are true--as admitted by their expert-- the DNC et al. can use it to bash Bush. Look at CBS's current CYA article at cbsnews.com. They are using this chance to talk about the forgeries' content as if it were true.

And i predict they'll continue to do so, and to keep bringing up the fact that Bush missed a physical in 1972 or whatever.

All this to say this could still backfire, and this could prove a Pyrrhic victory..

I don't get it. I just don't get it. Rather addresses two or three straw-man points, never even touches on the discrepancies in style, the *amazing friggin' coincidence* that Word just so happens to exactly reproduce an obscure memo written thirty years earlier, the fact that Killian's own family hadn't any idea in hell where the documents came from, the fact that it's weird enough that these are in a non-Courier font (with all the niggling over kerning, this particular thing is easy enough) when every copy of legitimate memoranda from that office at that time use Courier, oh - and need I mention - the fact that this Lt. Col. supposedly gave his memo the title of "CYA"? C.Y.A. CY-friggin-A. That's like a mob boss having a file in his office labeled "Extortion and Graft Files".

I'm afraid this is going to die down - the fact is, the blogosphere can scream all it wants, but short of an actual assault on CBS offices it is powerless to control what Dan Rather chooses to say about it ("A few right-wing loonies questioned the fact that the document contained a superscript" - never even mentioning the fact that there *are* other issues). And the true believers will swallow it. Hell, I know a few true believers personally who were shown the overlaying texts, had the terminology discrepancies explained, who muttered that "CYA" was kinda unlikely, but in the end, they still believed. Why? Because "Everyone knows that Bush was AWOL."

Spooky. True believers and their Ratherian ilk remind me a bit of the old saw (sorry, quoting from memory, a few words may be scrambled):

I walk the streets, my name is Jowett
If it is knowledge, then I know it
I am the Master of Balliol College
If I don't know it, it isn't knowledge.

hinzman, for the story to live, _someone_ has to write up the definitive 'end version', and _that_ has to make it around the net.

Not a whitewash, one that shows each and every issue both _succinctly_, and with pros and cons discussed (even if those are on a separate page or site).