Oops
What's the left blogosphere saying about the phony dox rhubarb?
Oliver Willis:
Are the TANG docs real? It seems to be up in the air now, though CBS claims that they also cleared the content with Maj. Gen. Bobby W. Hodges, Killian's supervisor at the time. Dunno. I do know that the TANG charges aren't really sexy.
Which certainly hasn't kept Willis from
baying at the moon about it.
Josh "ua Micah" Marshall sniffs...:
They don't go as far as to say they're certain.
But the questions raised now no longer seem to be limited to amateurs or people doing experiments on their own copies of Microsoft Word.
...but leaves himself plenty of wiggle room:
But something in all this doesn't fit.
Atrios goes for the strawman:
I'd have a good laugh too if Dan Rather got punk'd, but the wingnuttery belief that the proportional fonts were Bill Gates's invention is hilarious.
But, in any case, CBS more than stands by their case.
Ah. Well, then, they'd have to. Wouldn't they?
Because they could build a pyramid with all the heads that'll have to roll if this really turns out to be a forgery.
Fontana?:
Of course, the point is not whether the documents are fake; it's whether there's room for confusion. Quine-Duhem, anyone?
No thanks, I just ate. And no, the question that really matters
is are the dox fake. CBS News' credibility is riding on it - or should be - for every sentient American.
Fecke?:
Finally, one sentence from the ABC story sticks out: "Many Democrats are worried that if they are found to be forgeries, it will be a setback for Sen. John Kerry's campaign to defeat Bush in November. "
Why would that be? Did John Edwards slip these documents to Dan Rather? Did John Kerry use the printer in the grassy knoll? The Swift Boat Vets were lying up one side and down the other--did any Republicans worry that the lies would be a setback for Bush?
The sad fact is, I would expect that this will be a setback for Bush even if the documents are shown to be forgeries. Sadly, what those Americans paying attention heard was something bad about Bush's service. If they hear these documents were fakes, they'll be mad--at CBS. Maybe.
Jeff's been moving too many loans in the fever swamp. It might be said that the alternative media is Bush's greatest asset in this election, and this story has pushed tons of bloody chum into the water. The Swifties (who, by the way, were not lying "up one side and down the other" - they've not even been credibly attacked yet, other than by people who just
say so) aren't gone yet, and while the dead tree media has declared the story dead, the right's alternative media has just gained a stupendous amount of mojo.
The big story? Forget about TANG - even if Bush didn't fulfill the letter of his obligation in the stricted bureaucratic sense (and Byron York pretty much trashed that notion), he's had four years of actual national leadership to be rated on.
No, the real story is that as much as the major media try to deny the elephant in the living room, iit's there. The notion that our media isn't actively carrying water for the left (to say nothing of "is objective") is dying the death of a thousand cuts.
And if this CBS forgery bit pans out, maybe a slash across the jugular.
Posted by Mitch at
September 10, 2004 08:21 AM
| TrackBack
I have to wonder, will this country /really/ be able to live with itself in December? Regardless of who wins, there is so much emotion involved, I think it outstrips 2000, that I don't think /either/ will get a /real/ mandate. Maybe if Bush wins in a landslide, but otherwise, no.
Personally, I blame both the media and the Democrats for this. Who in their right mind would dump charges like these out there based on such flimsy evidence? Or how about the idiotic focus on wmd by the media with regards to Iraq?
The two have played such a slime game that I cannot trust /either/ until they /both/ get a considerable enema. I worry that the wounds opened this year will fester for many to come, and undermine the process later on.
Posted by: Aodhan at September 10, 2004 10:31 AMHow nuanced you are, "Aodhan." Pfeh.
Posted by: Lee at September 10, 2004 04:29 PMInstaman links to a group that is offering a chunk of money to anyone who can recreate the memo on readily-available 1973 technology. I, for one, know that none of the officers at my Army base in Germany could have done so in 1981 & 1982 - I used to sneak into the office at night and use the XO's electric typewriter to write my stories, and my copies of those have none of the advanced features in the CBS docs.
HOWEVER...someone is likely to win the 10,000 and claim it's proof that Killian used his IBM Selectric. I think if you take long enough and have the CBS forgeries in front of you as a template, you can probably do it with micro adjustments to the paper and machine after every letter. It would take about 18 hours, of course.
Yeah, that must be what Killian did. Retirement must've been hard on the old guy.
Posted by: Brian Jones at September 10, 2004 08:26 PMHere's
http://epistoler.blogspot.com/2004/09/dear-john-kerry-updated.html
what John Kerry should worry about. what John Kerry should worry about.
Posted by: themarkman at September 10, 2004 09:15 PMQuoting Willis:
"Are the TANG docs real? It seems to be up in the air now, though CBS claims that they also cleared the content with Maj. Gen. Bobby W. Hodges, Killian's supervisor at the time."
ABC's the Note has something to say about that:
HODGES SAID HE WAS MISLED BY CBS: Retired Maj. General Hodges, Killian's supervisor at the Grd, tells ABC News that he feels CBS misled him about the documents they uncovered. According to Hodges, CBS told him the documents were "handwritten" and after CBS read him excerpts he said, "well if he wrote them that's what he felt."
Hodges also said he did not see the documents in the 70's and he cannot authenticate the documents or the contents. His personal belief is that the documents have been "computer generated" and are a "fraud".
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/NotedNow/Noted_Now.html
Posted by: Sav at September 11, 2004 12:42 AM