If the CBS memos about Bush's military service prove to be forgeries then it's my theory that it was done by Republicans to make the MSM look foolish. If experts are touting that they are fake so quickly then CBS should have at least raised some real concern and should have been rock-hard positive that they were real. I think my theory would be so righteous if it were true. There's nothing like exposing the MSM for what they really are, mostly left-leaning, biased "reporters".
Posted by Tim at September 9, 2004 09:22 PMI did some research on my own:
http://rupertzone.net
http://www.rupertphotography.com/forgery/
I like your theory. I disagree it's some sort of evidence that CBS "is mostly left-leaning, biased 'reporters'." If true, it simply shows CBS didn't do basic fact checking, probably in a rush to scoop other news organizations. And if it is the Republicans it's possibly an excellent tactic to choke off further review of Bush's National Guard status by embarrassing reporters on that trail.
A smart Republican operative would have anticipated the SwiftyLiars campaign would trigger an investigation of Bush's military past. Obviously they couldn't stop an investigation but they could use a tactic to embarrass the investigators.
Death toll in Iraq goes over 1000 with no end in sight, and the US cedes more and more of Iraq to insurgency. The budget deficit hits records levels as President Bush saddles our children with this generation's debts. Keep it focused on what's important, Senator Kerry, keep it focused.
Posted by: Tom at September 10, 2004 05:23 AMSwiftyLiars? Don't think so. Maybe wrong about some things but 250 vs. 14 is compelling. Let's see some investigation into the "band of brothers". Who's supporting their Kerry travels. What are their consultant fees?
re: Keep it focused on what's important, Senator Kerry, keep it focused.
I agree he should focus on what's important but he's blown so much capital on his Vietnam service. Now he's all negative all the time. Looking for some real proposals. His Iraq stance changes weekly.
Posted by: trogers34 at September 10, 2004 09:01 AM1) We'll have to see what the origin of the paper is. When I first saw it I recognized the computer font and artificial dither right away. Can't believe a newsman would miss that, even Jayson Blair. How would rebulican operatives be able to inject it into the process?
2) "Maybe wrong about some things but 250 vs. 14 is compelling". Numbers aren't the clear indication of truth. That's called Mob Rule. What gives them credibility is their ethos, consistency and lack of ill motive.
Okay, I can't resist posting and I SWEAR I told myself I wouldn't. Glenn: "What gives them credibility is their ethos, consistency and lack of ill motive."
Their lack of ill motive? What? Were these guys appointed anonymously by the Pentagon to review the medal records of all Vietnam War-era soldiers? Do they have a standardized, unbiased method to review multiple soldiers' military records in search of Vietnam purple heart fraud?
Glenn...
These guys wanted to get Kerry. That's the reason the organization exists. That's the reason the book was published. Did you have any doubt they'd find problems with Kerry's war records? Are you telling me these guys are unbiased researchers with some sort of double-blind, scientific method?
In our wacky country, UFO researchers always find UFOs, Satanic Ritual Abuse believers find satanic abuse, and Holocaust deniers find reasons to deny the Holocaust.
Oh, and you Republicans always dislike the Democratic candidate. My prediction for 2008. Want to bet I'm right?
Posted by: Tom at September 10, 2004 03:13 PMKinda thought I'd get taken to task on that third point. Unfortunetely the point about mob rule got lost.
Examining motives is a tricky business. What is a good motive to some is an ill motive to others. Is anyone really objective? Probably not.
Thanks Tom - I was wondering when I'd get a rise out of someone!
Posted by: Glenn at September 13, 2004 10:29 AM
