Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by Guest, Sep 24, 2004.
There is much speculation that Dan Rather will be fired from CBS News.
What do you think?
Well, I goofed in my own poll, ha!
I meant to vote for
"He will be reassigned to some mediocre task until retirement."
In my opion, I don't think he will be fired, he is too much of an icon in the media business!!
Besides the Liberal media will probably let this matter slowly blow into the wind.
At least his the false documents he fell for didn't get us into a war.
Dan Rather may not be fired, but I would bet that the pool of underlings who performed the research are in the unemployment line right about now.
Well, if they first fire half of the crew at the Fox News Network for over reporting the false crapola given them to them by Karl Rove and his swift boats for bullshit, then I would support firing Rather.
I believe Rather will fade away in 2005 - although as stated previously, I have no doubt that GW and family pulled strings to get him his cush job outside of harms way during the war, to use questionable evidence is not acceptable. Of course, if you fire Rather, you would have to also fire the researchers (who really did the work) along with the President of CBS News.
It is amazing how fast the Neo Cons are going after Rather when their own gang of bullshit reporters are spewing out the same lies and rhetoric and have been doing it for 20 years now.
Yawn - I will be glad when this election is over and Jr. is being walk off into the sunset of hell (Texas - same place). )
Have a pleasant day...
CBS News credibility is already as close to zero as you can get. If they don't fire Rather they will be completely disgraced. They have shown beyond any shadow of a doubt that they are willing to go to the lowest depths to get Bush out of office. They could not be more biased.
I will stick with FOX "fair and balanced" coverage. At least they always give both sides of the story and let the viewer decide for themselves.
Very true. Fox News always presents both sides. They have liberals and conservatives (and extremists from both) on discussing and debatng the issues and, as you say, the people decide.
I would like to see more moderates as hosts, however. I like Chris Matthews (MSNBC) of Hardball. He is very fair.
Hello McFly! Fair and balanced? Where? Are you talking about Hannity and Combs where they put a total wimp as the liberal representative against a grown up gangbanger type? O'Reilly's no spin zone has never been fair about anything. O'Reilly is merely a National Enqurier type anyway - with more big words and no real action (another draft dodger).
If you really researched Murdoch, you would know he is so far right he is about ready to fall off the other side. He has managed to create an empire because of the drones who don't know better, or don't know how to research.
On a scale of 1-10 where 10 is fair and 1 is partisan, Fox is with no doubt a zero.
Ugh - the drones are still marching on... (no wonder why a chimp like Bush would get elected).
BTW: I would vote for Buchanan - at least he is a real conservative an not one of these wimpy neo-cons.
It's funny that you pick the shows on Fox that are not meant to be straight news, but are commentary and opinion pieces. Hannity and Colmes, and O'Reilly don't pretend to be unbiased. Neither do Begala and Carville on CNN's Crossfire. I am referring to Fox's straight news coverage. It is the most evenhanded coverage available on TV today -- absolutely no doubt about it. CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, all pretend to be giving news when they're actually giving opinion. At least Fox lets you know which is which.
Personally I believe all successful politicians are liars/cheats.. its just part of the game.
but one point for Hanniey is he does invite some big names to come on but they never bite.
He does get them on the radio from time to time but they mostly dodge the TV spots.
Also theres no doubt Bush had it easier than some during the war and draft situtation. But that kind of activity happens every day.
If you companies CEO's son/daughter or president's / senators son/daughter came to work at your company they would get special treatment. Its just how the world works.
What next, phrenology?, or, "Kenneth, what is the frequency?"
Why is it that some liberals, who are so gotdamned (in Coleman Alexander Young's classic term) sensitive about diversity and acceptance and toleration and embracing this that and the other thing, are so prone to try to make Bush's chimp-like facial rictus an index of either his intellect or his morals?
If only pretty is right and only handsome is true, then a rather National Socialist social darwinism has crept into our political life while every body (yes, two words) was busy being diverse.
Sort of Mapplethorpe and Hitler trading class notes in hell.
- - - - - - -
Oh, and, yes, I do believe in an actual literal hell and that the two deceased gents above are in it. Coleman I'm not so sure about; by now he will have finagled his way toward wherever the money is in the great beyond.
Hello, my friend,
I think your comments show you have not watched Hannity and Colmes very much at all or you simply don't understand the debate . They have had such left-leaning people as Ron Daniels (near socialist), Congressman Greg Meeks (nearly 100% liberal voting record), Congresswoman Shelia Jackson Lee (nearly 100% liberal voting record), former VEEP candidate Geraldine Ferraro, liberal columnist Ellis Henigan, former Dukakis campaign manager Susan Estrich, and others. None of these I have mentioned are wallflowers by any stretch.
You mention Bill O'Reilly. I have heard him being very critical of some of Bush's policies. O'Reilly is opposed to capital punishment and is a strong environmentalist--hardly right-winged views. O'Reilly has invited Jesse Jackson and John Kerry on his show. Both declined.
You really should watch and listen more.
From: Your favorite Republican, ha!
Look at all the publicity it has brought to CBS. In another week or so this story will be history.
Re: Re: Will Dan Rather be fired?
Negative publicity, however, is not good and the ratings of CBS News have plummeted remarkably.
Re: Re: Re: Will Dan Rather be fired?
CBS has been at the #3 spot among the big three for some time now. If they were going to fire Rather for low ratings, they would have done it some time ago.
I have watched the Faux Commentary Network (or as they call themselves, the Fox News Network). If I were anyone of any importance, I would not accept an interview with Hannity or O'Reilly. The reason is simple, both Hannity and O'Reilly are not interested in knowing the truth or understanding the interviewee, they are interested is their own selfish self-promotion. When proven wrong, the both resort to immature name calling and yelling matches. O'Reilly takes the cake - he even has a totally made up background in a vain attempt to justify his politcal agenda. O'Reilly will always be associated with "National Enquirer" news anyway - their is nothing he can do to change that image.
Was it you who said that Chris Matthew's is part of the "liberal media"? Are you kidding? I love the guy, he is hard hitting, and unlike the intellectual midgets like O'Reilly, Brit Hume, and Hannity, can actually format an argument without getting patently abusive.
I bet you don't even know the political persuations of most of what you label the "liberal media" - do you? If you do, post a non-FNN link (I put the FNN in the same catagory as the Weekly World News - fiction made up by Ruppert Murdoch. (Ruppert can't help being a partisan, he can't see past it).
Not bad points; flawed, but not bad; not exactly Aristotelian either. You might do better using the Socratic method.
OK - I will bite. Never say that I cannot be educated. Please explain the Arisotelian or Socratic method. (sorry, I must have missed that class during my engineering/business/and IT studies). If my points are flawed, why do you feel that way? (other than stating just your opinion). When using the term "flawed", are you talking about the formulation of the argument or merely the fact that what I am stating is contrary to your argument?
Damn, you is smart...
Far, far from it, my favorite nemesis!
Actuallty, I am surprised that one who was in law enforcement doesn't know this.
You should have studied it in your training in investigation and interrogation.
I haven't been able to access DI until today. Sorry for the delayed response.
Separate names with a comma.