More than six weeks ago, an opposition research staffer for the Democratic National Committee received documents purportedly written by President George W. Bush’s Texas Air National Guard squadron commander, the late Col. Jerry Killian. The oppo researcher claimed the source was “a retired military officer.” .
Sounds to me like CBS got snookered. They were so fast out of the gate with these papers – that they failed to stop and check, and double check, the authenticity of them. Now they have to go back and do the double checking – - after they’ve already aired the program. If they had fully checked out the documents, they would not have to be squirming right now. Regardless of the outcome they look bad.
Camp Kerry had the documents for six weeks to verify the authenticity yet passed it on to CBS to do the fact checking without telling them of their doubts. CBS runs with it claiming that they did in fact do the checking. These stories both stink. Could there be some collusion going on or are the producers at CBS very stupid or extremely biased or both.
This one is going to be BAD for Kerry when these documents are proven as the fakes that they are. I watched a Dem. strategist on Fox this morning who was trying to answer for this issue – - in the end, after much questioning, he said, “Hey – I’m trying to save my party, here!”
Lovely.
CBS NEWS executives have launched an internal investigation into whether its premiere news program 60 MINUTES aired fabricated documents relating to Bush’s National Guard service, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.
“The reputation and integrity of the entire news division is at stake, if we are in error, it will be corrected,” a top CBS source explained late Thursday.
The source, who asked not to be named, described CBSNEWS anchor and 60 MINUTES correspondent Dan Rather as being privately “shell-shocked” by the increasing likelihood that the documents in question were fraudulent.
Rather, who anchored the segment presenting new information on the president’s military service, will personally correct the record on-air, if need be, the source explained from New York.
Didn’t everyone stop questioning Rather’s bias when he went over to Iraq to interview Saddam Hussein?
Other sources of interest:
CBS’s Big Blunder
Son of Late Officer Questions Bush Memos
False Documentation?
The CBS News Story That Started It All
G.W.Bush, the Pussy that’s led us through 2 wars. You’re right, no backbone at all. Clinton, now that’s a guy with a spine! He taught the whole world that you could get away with kicking America in the nuts. The first WTC attack, The USS Cole, The Embassy bombings and the crown jewel of his gutless career the Somalia Campaign and subsequent hasty withdrawl after one fire fight. Yup, Bill was tough SOB. A REAL Leader……Open mouth, insert foot.
Yeah Bush rocks. America get’s kicked in the nuts and he tries to stall an investigation into it, then doesn’t co-operate with the cover up council he appointed. But he’s no pussy he’s fighting so hard he’ attacked the wrong country! Kicking ass and killing American youth all around the world! That balls out cowboy has gone and earned himself over 1000 kills.
What would a Canadian know about military strategy?
You know, I seem to recall a story about the “Art against Bush”-festival, or whatever it was called (let’s face it, that’s what it ultimately boiled down to), where the most creative art seemed to be just how colorful the anti-Bush language could get, and just how many “creative” ways the f-word could have been used. Reading so many posts using profanity against Bush reminds me of that, and if the point is to express one’s personal fear and anger against Bush, consider the point received.
However, the excessive profanity doesn’t seem to cover up the fact that the arguments used are the same old arguments that have been ignored twenty times over, and for those who have a habit of ignoring profanity…well, let’s just say it’s quite possible this could prove to be counter-productive for those hoping that excessive profanity will get attention to the same old tired arguments. It’s just like Kerry’s “decorated war vet”-plea being the only card — and a pretty shaky one at that — he seems to be able to play.
I thought liberals were supposed to be more creative and original than this. Really, I’m tremendously disappointed.
Oh, that’s a lot better.
To me, that’s like saying, “I didn’t say I admired Ted Bundy — I said I admired Jeffrey Daumer.” 
In other words, you’re simply trading one butcher for another.
As for the comparisons between the Nazis and libs, I have two very good reasons:
1) The phrase “Nazi” is short for the phrase “National Socialist Party.” That’s right — they were socialists, a fact that most libs seem to forget.
2) Much like the Nazis, libs are quite fond of propoganda, and seldom allow the truth to stand in the way of whatever image they’re trying to create. Once you get down to it, is there really much of a difference between the work of Michael Moore and Leni Riefenstahl?
Now there is a way to prove me wrong about my theories, though I somehow doubt that you are up to it. Rather than throwing as many four-letter words as you can think of at me in a desperate attempt at deflection (or as many as seem to be allowed by the administration, I might add), or only reinforcing my point through the same tired arguments, you could try thinking of all of this on your own, and coming to your own conclusions rather than quoting the likes of Michael Moore and Dan Rather.
AG, Liberals aren’t creative, exept in creating ways to leach off the decent people who work and don’t work at causing trouble like the Kerry trolls.
Note to the administrator of this site:
Shiloh has confessed to using this site while at work. He is stealing from his employer. Take the IP address recorded when he logs on and send a message to the administrator at his employer with a few choice quotes, showing how he is using his employer’s resources. If it was my company I would definitely want to know about this.
Why would I do that? I wonder how many of the people here comment on this site while at work? Do you suggest it because he shares different views than the majority in this forum?
Sorry, different views are acceptable, Johnathan. I don’t agree with a whole lot of what shiloh posts here – - however, I’m not here to play thought police.
“What would a Canadian know about military strategy?”
A lot more than someone who doesn’t work knows about work!
In regards to #57 and 58, Thank you Lisa. I like to check in when at work also. I didn’t think it was a crime. In fact, I am sure my employer would back me. AZ is going to BUSH THIS YEAR!!!
The Canadian obviously doesn’t know much about the loyalty and patriotism of the majority of the US Military. You see, we’re volunteers. Bush did not kill any of those young men. Some were very close to me, so I took that comment rather personal. I believe that it belittles the true reason they gave the last full measure. They died so America can continue to be safe. They died keeping the terrorists busy so they couldn’t attack American soil again. They gave everything they had so that American civilians could continue to live their lives uninterrupted. Yet the simple beauty of their sacrifice gets lost to some of the civilian population. People who have never lived a life of service cannot understand the real reason these young men spill their blood in a foreign land. I believe most will never appreciate what they have unless they’ve tried in vain to stop that blood from pouring out of their friend. It would be so nice if people knew the truth, but you cannot impress the truth in a political discussion.
” Yet the simple beauty of their sacrifice gets lost to some of the civilian population.”
I believe our soldiers believe they are doing the right thing. They are doing their job the way they were trained to do it.
It is their President who has taken advantage of their patriotism.
if you owned a lumber company and you were paid to clear cut hill A but you send your crew out to clearcut hill B, your crew may have done their job, but because you made a mistake someone is going to pay.
In Iraq, that someone is our children.
If Bush gets re-elected there will be a draft. Then there will be an overwhelming outcry against the war in Iraq.
Don’t mistake patriotism for blind niavety. If John Kerry was a stand up guy who promised to see this war through to the end then my pick for Commander in Chief might be a little tougher. I however see none of those qualities in the man. I’m also having trouble with the analogy that Iraq was innocent by-stander on the terrorism playing field. Possibly there is a better qualified candidate out there, but he doesn’t have the nuts to stand up and run. So I’ll take Bush’s Teddy Roosevelt like tenacity over Kerry’s own indecisiveness.
Oh, that’s a lot better.
To me, that’s like saying, “I didn’t say I admired Ted Bundy — I said I admired Jeffrey Daumer.” 
In other words, you’re simply trading one butcher for another.
As for the comparisons between the Nazis and libs, I have two very good reasons:
1) The phrase “Nazi” is short for the phrase “National Socialist Party.” That’s right — they were socialists, a fact that most libs seem to forget.
2) Much like the Nazis, libs are quite fond of propoganda, and seldom allow the truth to stand in the way of whatever image they’re trying to create. Once you get down to it, is there really much of a difference between the work of Michael Moore and Leni Riefenstahl?
Now there is a way to prove me wrong about my theories, though I somehow doubt that you are up to it. Rather than throwing as many four-letter words as you can think of at me in a desperate attempt at deflection (or as many as seem to be allowed by the administration, I might add), or only reinforcing my point through the same tired arguments, you could try thinking of all of this on your own, and coming to your own conclusions rather than quoting the likes of Michael Moore and Dan Rather.
Just a bit of information dg…. I have 2 friends that signed up for the military this last February. They signed up AFTER the start of the war in Iraq. They signed up AFTER the start of the insurgency in Iraq. They signed up KNOWING that they could very well GO to Iraq. Regardless, they signed up because they wanted to make a difference. They wanted to help the people of Iraq get their country back on its feet. They didn’t sign up because they had to. George Bush didn’t make them. Their parents didn’t make them. Their parents are probably scared out of thier minds, but they respect their decisions and support them 100%. One of them is scheduled to depart for Iraq this November. I pray for his safety, and if something happens to him, I will still honor his decision, his memory, and his compasion for humanity. I will not blame George Bush for his decision.
I don’t blame George Bush for your friend’s decision to join and I, too admire the troops on the ground.
I blame Bush for HIS decision!! The President is taking advantage of their patriotism!
The evidence is that a lot of people have died and will continue to die — unnecessarily — because Bush clearly failed to defend us on 9/11, and pushed, exaggerated, even fabricated “evidence” of Saddam’s quest for WMD!
The Bush family has close relations with the Saudi’s and have received financing from members of the bin Laden family.
During the Reagan Administration, Bush41, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Pearle played both sides of the Iran-Iraq War while giving ample support to Saddam Huessein — even as Saddam used chemical weapons against Iran and filled mass graves in his own country. Now they tell us what a monster he is. A monster they created!
When Reagan sold weapons to Iranian terrorists in the mid 80′s, how do you think Saddam felt? After Rumsfeld HIMSELF told Saddam TO HIS FACE that Iraq had the full support of the US and WOULD NOT SELL WEAPONS TO IRAN? (Iran held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days in 1979-80).
And don’t forget: Gulf War I began when oil companies in Kuwait were slant drilling into Iraq, effectively stealing Iraqi oil. One of the Companies was Arbusto/Harken, the same one Salem bin Laden financed for Bush. Bush sold his shares in the company two weeks prior to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait.
Did you know Bush was negotiating with the Taliban prior to 9/11?
But it wasn’t about terrorism. It was about building an oil pipeline through Afgahnistan!
Now, we are at war with these very same players. Frankensteins, created by the facist wing of the Bush Admin.
You don’t feel betrayed?
I will rank that about 3rd dumb:roll:est posts for dg
The Draft? I honestly don’t see that ever happening..alot of military jobs now are so specialized that it would take too long to train them only to let them get released in 2 to 3 yrs..my husbands’ tech school was a year long and that was years ago. The Draft just ain’t gonna work anymore..you can’t go to Basic training for 8wks, than just show up at a base or Iraq and now what you’re doing..systems are hi-tech now..no longer the days of “On the Job Training.” Don’t worry dg..I doubt you’ll send a love one off at the train station against their will.
Ok dg, so if Kuwait was slant drilling into Iraq, then why didn’t Iraq settle this problem “diplomatically” rather than just invading? Seems you have another double standard. Also, Bush didn’t start the problems in the middle east. He’s just trying to clean up after all that came before him. And no, he is NOT taking advantage of my friend’s patriotism. They donate their freedoms and patriotism freely. It’s called freedom of speech. Maybe you’ve heard of it?