The Right Coast
September 13, 2004
Why Rather is wrong
By Tom Smith
Here is RatherBiased.com 22 point rebuttal of Herr Rather's rather pathetic defense of his documents' authenticity. It's pretty crushing. By that I mean completely devastating. It has lots of those, make sure the other guy is dead moves, along the lines of "even if the Texas Guard happened to have a specialized type composing machine, it could still not have produced the documents for the following 7 reasons . . . " That is to say, they don't just kill Rather's argument, they do a King Edward on Braveheart thing to it. Not pretty. If you read the whole thing, you may need professional help. I did, and I may. On the other hand, you probably need it less than a certain leading news anchor person.
This is starting to get ridiculous, I know. It's rather like the crop circles debate, where some scientists give 328 reasons why, no, the flattened crops could not have been caused by microwave lasers or ultrasonic energy bursts, but are more consistent with the lonely guy with a 2x4 and a rope hypothesis. But no matter. It's up to the scientists to prove it wasn't ET, and the Hampshire Extra-Terrestrial Fellowship isn't really listening.
BTW when I was in college I met Edward R. Murrow's protege Charles Collingswood, whom some of you oldtimers may have heard of. He was a nice man and could certainly hold his liquor, but an astute observer of anything, he was not. I know Murrow was a brave man and said "This is London" in a thrilling way, but could we agree to stop saying "The tradition of Edward R. Murrow blah, blah, blah . . ." I'm not sure he would have performed any better than Rather under the circumstances. Just a cranky thought. Look at Walter Cronkite.
AND you must read this very important essay that may explain the weirdness going on at CBS. It makes sense. At NRO.