Remember what Dan Rather said about bush

[Laura_B_manslaughter]

It's been three years but don't ever forget what the famous news-reader said on the Dave
Letterman show a few days after Sept 11, 2001.

**Rather, the CBS News anchor, pledged allegiance to President Bush as
the president decides what to do next. ``Wherever he wants me to line
up, tell me where,'' Rather said.**

http://www.suprmchaos.com/bcEnt-Tue-91801.index.html

This is the "liberal" american press for you. Shamelessly admitting that they do whatever bush tells them.

[aquart]

1. Welcome to DU.

Define "a few days."

[TacticalPeek]

3. With a URL containing "Tue-91801", and "Tuesday 18 September, 2001"

at the top of the linked page, I'd say six days, since the ref is to the previous night's show.

[amber dog democrat]

2. Dan Rather has no credibility

At best he comes accross as an appologist for the powers that be.
Even after 9/11 I had no allegiance to the Chimp but that aside, how stupid do these so called journalists think we are ?

The answer: very .

[PurityOfEssence]

4. and even with that, he has much more than Brokaw or Jennings

Rather actually does care, and his heart's in the right place. He stays within the system and does what he can to shed some light on things and nudge us in the right direction, and he truly is a moderate liberal.

The question of how much does one go along with a system that demands one to go along is always an interesting one, but truly, one is tainted by being in videojournalism these days, and that's just about that. He deserves some credit: he's not a narcissistic tool like Koppel.

[West Coast Democrat]

5. Dan Rather is one of the toughest anchors on Bush*

but why judge him now on something he said 7 days after Sept 11?

[Beetwasher]

7. Exactly, Thank You

It's ridiculous to take people's emotional responses in the days after 9/11 and their expressions of national unity and use it against them now...It's unfair. Lot's of people felt similarly right after 9/11 and yet they are working to defeat Bush now. Now, I'm not saying Rather is proactively working to defeat Bush, but I do think his news broadcast is one of the most OBJECTIVE and that's what you really want anyway. Objectivity NOT anti-bush or pro-Kerry...

[ClassWarrior]

9. Agreed. But we can't let up on any of 'em.

The pendulum's swung so far to the right these days that we need to give it a BIG shove back to the left.

[Laura_B_manslaughter]

13. I know he's better than the others but.....

He should have never said this. An honest journalist never trusts the govt.

[number6]

6. This is the "liberal" American press for you.

CBS as liberal press, a hoax

Rather ,``Wherever he wants me to line
up, tell me where,'' Rather said.** to Bu$h

Remember that ...

[number6]

8. and ...Welcome to DU

Laura_B_manslaughter

[chookie]

10. Have you watched CBS since Sept 11 2001?

You may not be aware that Mr Rather has long since come out to say that he made this statement in a moment of extreme emotional vulnerability in the aftermath of the attacks, and that it was most imprudent to have done so, and that he regreteed using thse words. What he was attempting to convey was that he would do anything for his country -- but he admittedly stated it most awkwardly.

Watching CBS might surprise you. No doubt they stumble sometimes -- as in uncritical appraisal of the events leading to the war in Iraq -- but they consistently have done stories since that have exposed the wrong-doing in the Bush administration -- for example, they broke the Abu Ghraib story. Their reporters have also done the best job of reminding people how the day's events are tied in with events of the past. John Roberts, White House correspondent, is very straightforward in reporting the duplicity of the administration and can in 2 minutes encapsulate many of the accusations we discuss on DU.

Sure -- CBS News Tonight is not Free Speech TV's excellent "Democracy Now" which is a specifically left view of current events, but to categorically describe CBS News as biased stenographers for the Bush administration is a gross mistatement.

Seriously -- check them out some evening and judge for yourself.

Again, it's not the view from a left perspective by a long shot, but they do some very good reporting and break many important stories. Yes, they also do occasional "feel-good stories" that support the claims of the right-wing --why, I do not know, except that they may be trying to put forth a "balanced" perspective that shows this side of the story; many otherwise objective media sources also do this.

[amber dog democrat]

11. Out of fairness, no, I don't watch TV - at all.

and I am a guy with a degree in Radio-Television-Film.
I guess i am hardly qualiied to venture an informed opinion. What I manage to glimpse while in hotel/motels or in the gates at airline terminals has not yet convinced me I am missing much.
I think the taint of mainstream videojournalism is still too evident to extend much credibility to the talking heads on the networks that are largely owned by large corporations.

I don't think i will ever see much that is really useful or courageous from Dan Rather and this is sad if he is considered one of the best.

[Laura_B_manslaughter]

14. Abu Ghraib story?? Rather admitted that CBS sat .......

on the story for two weeks before they published!!! And just because the military asked them to!!! Then they realized the story was coming out anyway and they ran with it. I see no glory there.

[chookie]

18. "No glory there" Come on.

If you want news from the left perspective, there is the excellent Amy Goodman on the excellent Democracy Today. My point is merely that Dan Rather has publically stated that he regretted making the statement you are decrying him for.

As you do not wish to contaminate your clear vision of reality by checking out coverage by CBS News to see for yourself if Mr Rather is guilty of, then there is nothing further for us to discuss on this matter.

Nothing but emotional self-righteousness here -- your ideas are in fact very dull and hackneyed despite the loud volume you declaim them in -- so time for me to move on and put you onI find your ideas very dull and hackneyed and I'm putting you on ignore before I zzzz.

[never_get_over_it]

12. You are completely misinterpreting what he said

and being unfair to Dan Rather. What he meant is that our nation had been attacked and if the pResident wanted him to line up and defend our country he would be ready to go. To interpret this any other way is as bad as some of the interpretations of the "liberal" media. The folks who disapproved of Bush right after 9/11 and I am one of them are in the VAST minority - can you imagine the whipping Rather would have taken to criticize Bush at that time - even Randi Rhodes has stated she waited for two weeks to start hammering on Bush. I've always thought Rather was closer to being on our side than most journalist.

[LTR]

15. Bush had 90% approval rating immediately following 9/11

Let's be honest. I'm sure there's a few here who cut the guy some slack.

I was outraged after 9/11, and I was at least willing to give him a chance. Too bad he screwed it all up by taking a sharp turn to the right and invaded Iraq.

Currently, I can't stand the bastard.

[Laura_B_manslaughter]

16. I'm not saying danny should have slammed bush

But he shouldn't have defended him either.

[never_get_over_it]

17. He was not defending Bush

he was offering to defend his country - like it or not the freak was our pResident at the time - and Dan was offering to support the office and the country not the man.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

19. Oh Christ, another hit on Dan Rather!

STOP IT already! Dan said that in a very sensitive moment in our Nation's History.

I forgive him for this.

Dan, Tom, and Peter our good people and so it Jim Leher, so stop attacking them.

Some here need to get their facts worked out.

:eyes: