Dan "Blathering Idiot" Rather

This story about Dan Rather gets more interesting all the time. See here what Dan said on CNN last week about the Bush memos.

“The story is true. The story is true.” Dan then goes on about four questions raise by the story (ie the memos) regarding Lt Bush’s service in the National Guard. The four questions are serious, but, guess what Dan, since the memos are fakes, the story is now about how and why CBS and Dan Rather went with a story that their document examiners had serious reservations about and that some guy in his pajamas could prove was a fake in no time.

More quotes from the CNN interview:

“We are in a time of war and I stand behind my president…It’s no joy in reporting such a story. But my job as a journalist is not to be afraid and when we come with facts and legimite questions that are supported by witnesses and documents which we believe to be authentic, to raise those questions no matter how unpleasant they are…..I stand by my story.”

Later on he lectures this woman who states that she read in the Washington Post that there was an internal investigation at CBS on the story. “You know, the internet is filled with all kinds of rumours and I like a good rumour as well as the next fella but it is important to recognize what is a rumour and what is a fact.”

Unbelieveable.

One of the theories going around the net is that Rather, (as part of the Liberal Media) hate Bush so much and they believe the 4 questions are important so are willing to use fabricated evidence. Rather’s idea seems to be that the facts (Bush failed to take a physical when ordered, there was pressure on his superiors to write a good performance review) are correct so it does not matter if the evidence is fabricated. At about the 4 minute and 10 second mark of the clip, Rather states, “ This story is true, and that more important questions than how we got the story, which is where those who don’t like the story would like to put the emphasis, the more important question is what are the answers to the questions raised in the story which I just gave you earlier.”
In this portion, note that he never claims the memos are true, but that the story is true. While there is a case to be made that a lack of evidence is not necessarily proof of innocence, I am surprised a journalist would make this case. This is like some episode of the Twilight Zone and we are in some version of George Orwell’s 1984.