In addition to Rathergate.com's form mail to execs, I emailed Nissan and Pfzer (of which I own stock thru mutual funds) and Citibank and Amex (whos cards I hold) and informed them that their sponsorship of CBS was unacceptable. If you drive a Ford, eat Cambell's Soup, have Sprint service, etc., let these companies know you are paying attention -- companies hate this kind of shit!

Remember, keep it SHORT, POLITE and NON-PARTISAN.

NON-PARTISAN?

Pul-eaze.

Whatever. partisanship may help drive the story and get the charges looked into, but ranting either way on this issue is besides the ultimate point.

Just as additional information, three of the email's bounced... which is pretty good, 94% of the emails hit a target somewhere.

There is a list of advertisers (with links) at http://www.boycottcbs.com/advertisers.php

I had emailed companies that had previously advertised on 60 Minuets [sic] and advised them that if they continued to advertise they would be taking a blatantly political stand...

Whatever. partisanship may help drive the story and get the charges looked into, but ranting either way on this issue is besides the ultimate point.

Heh. Right on. Keep that line going as long as possible.

I can't believe that we suckered the media about this. I mean, we keep telling them we've released all of his records, but then they keep trickling out. But this time we got them to focus on these forgeries rather than the ultimate point: that we keep hiding documents, and that his time in the ANG was not his prettiest moment.

Sucks that the Washington Post got Scott to say that even more documents are coming out, but since the media won't hound us on actually coming clean on everything, its no real political loss for us. Instead, people think the media is biased against us, and the actual facts about Bush's service are being ignored!

Nicely done, if I do say so myself.

Karl.

karl, you are an idiot.

Hey, try to be polite and non-partisan!

Recognizing idiocy is a truly non-partisan activity.

You got me on the impoliteness, though.

PS - Where's my damn check?

In the mail, bill.

Keep up the good work.

Karl.

(on a serious note: I agree that the CBS credibility issue is important and one to be persued. Rather is toast. I'm forever struck by everyone giving the actual story of bush's ANG time a pass, though, which has been largely substantiated. And I am struck by a lack of accountablity on an administration who has claimed to release everything, yet keeps releasing more things...

Boggles the mind.)

(Oh, and I continue to think that everyone assumes to much as to the doc's origins. Coulda been either a dem or a repub plant, or the work of a disgruntled former ANG commander. Way too early to know).

I'm forever struck by everyone giving the actual story of bush's ANG time a pass, though, which has been largely substantiated.

Yawn. Bush has never run on his ANG career.

Yawn. Bush has never run on his ANG career.

And Clinton never ran on Monica or Flowers, either.

What's yer point?

Cute Karl Marx, er, Rove.
At least Bush is releasing stuff. Why hasn't Kerry signed his 180 form? Or his sugar-momma's tax records? And you did vote for Bush the Elder and Dole over Clinton, right?

Personally I am quite willing to say that Kerry's Viet Nam service was better than Bush's TANG service. But I'm not voting on who was better thirty years ago. I am voting on who's going to be better at protecting America, today.

Cute Karl Marx, er, Rove.
At least Bush is releasing stuff. Why hasn't Kerry signed his 180 form? Or his sugar-momma's tax records? And you did vote for Bush the Elder and Dole over Clinton, right?

Well, they say they are releasing 'stuff' but everyday it is clear that he hasn't.

But that's not being persued, because they're pushing the forgery issue, which apparently is the bigger story.

Me, as a loyal Bush patriot I wrote in GWB's name in each election going back to 1972.

Personally I am quite willing to say that Kerry's Viet Nam service was better than Bush's TANG service. But I'm not voting on who was better thirty years ago. I am voting on who's going to be better at protecting America, today.

Personally, I wish both sides would drop the whole damn thing. The question should be on who's better at protecting America, today, and I don't think GW has that one won.

But that's not being persued, because they're pushing the forgery issue, which apparently is the bigger story.

Well, of COURSE!

A major press organization is trying to pass forgeries as actual records, in order to influence an election. That's a massively bigger story than the nonsense about Bush's ANG service.

What's fascinating is that all the real documents say Bush did his service, got his points, and got the exact same early out that Kerry did. It's only the forgeries that say anything was wrong with his service, and the forgeries don't make any sense when compared to the timeline or other facts we know are true.

Check out this sight (admittedly a shameless plug) the post under
"Springing the "Cover Up Trap" i think sums this whole situation up nicely.

http://rightmakesright.blogspot.com/

A major press organization is trying to pass forgeries as actual records, in order to influence an election. That's a massively bigger story than the nonsense about Bush's ANG service.

The assumptions in your line of argument really hurt it, including that CBS had intent to influence an election, rather than intending to break a huge news story (something that all media outlets try hard to do). Similarly, the assumption here is already who did it and why. None of those lines have been connected yet, period.

What's fascinating is that all the real documents say Bush did his service, got his points, and got the exact same early out that Kerry did. It's only the forgeries that say anything was wrong with his service, and the forgeries don't make any sense when compared to the timeline or other facts we know are true.

That's inaccurate. There are gaps in the records that almost every reputable news agency is searching to fill in, and they include matters of so-called service in Alabama and how he got into the guard in the first place.

Yer buddy Kevin Drum has the skinny on all of that, here

Bill, joking aside, you're right on the money re: partisanship. CBS keeps trying (with the help of the LA Times and Kos) to spin this into a partisan issue. See this quote from a "CBS source" (http://www.drudgereport.com/cbsd3.htm):

"The audience appears to [be] polarized," a top CBS source said from LOS ANGELES on Thursday. "Rightly or wrongly, we're being perceived as 'anti-Bush,' which I do not think is fair to Dan, who is a fine journalist..."

They just don't get it. They're pursuing a story that's irrelevant to a majority of the electorate - in a way they never pursued accusations of Clinton's draft-dodging (http://www.mrc.org/realitycheck/2004/fax20040211.asp). They used concocted evidence to prove their point. When called on their evidence, they trotted out someone from the forgee's secretarial pool to strafe the battlefield. They continue to insist that their "document expert" - who's really a handwriting expert - backs them up, when he's told everyone else in the free world that he did NOT authenticate the documents.

I'm no partisan. I tend to vote Republican, and will probably vote Bush this election cycle because I think Kerry will try and socialize medicine and cut bait on Iraq. I have a laundry list of differences with Bush that stretches a good half-mile - differences on marriage equality, the economy, and the blending of church and state. I would love to see these issues discussed in depth in the media, and the two candidates put on the spot about how they'd address these issues in practical terms.

Instead, CBS distracts us with this sideshow. It's obvious they're out to "get Bush" - and the future of this country be damned. Everyone should be disgusted by this sham, regardless of political persuasion.

Karl, when are you going to pressure Teddy Kennedy and the Dems to admit that the contents of their "don't confirm that judge or we could lose the affirmative action case in Michigan" memos far outweighs how they got leaked? 'nuther question, which part of Kerry's Vietnam record outweigh Bush's TANG service, the part where he faked his heroism, the part where he came back and committed perjury before the Senate to undercut support for the war and slime 2.5 million honorable veterans, or the part where he met with and collaborated with the Viet Cong and NVA to commit treason?

...enquiring minds want to know.

see drudge re ratings...

CBS is dead freaking last among broadcast in NYC... behind 3 sitcom reruns and abc and cbs (and all the other NYC broadcast channels)

we're talking dennis miller / john macenroe numbers here...

not good for broadcast...

dan should be rolling by tuesday

Here's how I laid out my letter, FWIW:

1. Short summary of Dan Rather's and CNS News violation of standard journalistic practice including "shooting the messenger" by claiming partisanship of his critics.

2. Ergo, until corrected, I feel uncomfortable getting my news from CBS; will get my news elsewhere.

3. Referencing Rather's introduction of the partisanship issue, state that should evidence emerge of *his* partisanship, I may need to discontinue watching *any* CBS programs.

4. Emphasized that there is still time to correct this issue but time is *very* short. "I trust you as a Class B shareholder of Viacom stock will take whatever actions you can to correct this situation. Thank you for your consideration."

"CNS"? That's "CBS". Preview is waaay over my head...

The assumptions in your line of argument really hurt it, including that CBS had intent to influence an election, rather than intending to break a huge news story (something that all media outlets try hard to do). Similarly, the assumption here is already who did it and why. None of those lines have been connected yet, period.

They're hardly unreasonable assumptions. If CBS had intended to just research a story, they would have paid attention to sources that disagreed with their line of attack. They ignored anyone who disagreed with them, and continue to only quote the people who agree with them.

For example, how many of the people calling the memos fakes have been asked on CBS?

NONE.

Yer buddy Kevin Drum has the skinny on all of that

Kevin Drum is no "buddy" of mine. As far as I'm concerned, he's one of the lowest forms of life on the planet.

Why? He's been trying to score political points off of his misunderstandings of the counts of Saddam's victims. He's so desperate for political points he'll deny Saddam's atrocities.

That, and considering you're nothing but an anonymous coward hiding behind a pseudonym makes me realize I'm wasting my time arguing with you.

Oh, but they are unreasonable assumptions. Says nothing about whether they are correct or not, just that they are baseless at the moment. And if I were CBS and just got punk'd, I'd want to be very careful about CmyownA. I think much of the backlash is very much politically motivated, TYVM, and isn't seeking truth so much as blood. For that reason, I think that this whole thing is bad for journalism in general, no matter what yer political opinion is. Yes, there should be an inquiry. Yes, Rather is likely toast. But yer still blinded by yer assumptions, particularly regarding Rather's intent and the source (if any) of the ostensibly forged documents.

Me, I think I (karl rove) had something to do with it. Wouldn't be that far from my playbook...

Oh, and that last crack was funny, given how you've said on your own blog that you're not willing to look at this dispassionately or objectively. Yes, there is a waste of time here, but its my time that is wasted.

Bill, I apologize for even getting close to a flame war on your blog. I should have never replied to someone posting under a false name.

Well, what Robert just said was short, polite, and non-partisan.

I'll echo it, and beg off.

- Not to keep belaboring the point but these memo's were, in no sense, part of Bushes service records. Even if they had been authentic they were put up as private internal "file-to" notes/memo's. As such neither CBS nor anyone has the right to view them at all without the specific permission of Killians family and/or the TANG command. Since they are fakes this avenue isn't open. But overall the use of these documents by CBS or anyone else was improper from the very beggining. I've heard some blogED's speculate that this is the reason they were retyped in the first place. To avoid the legal aspects.

- BTW ... Among the young servicemen that were busy using influence to get in the guard...

MORE RE: MRS. KNOX [Jed Babbin]
Just spoke to another one of Dubya's squadron mates from the 111th. He passed on the Question of the Day for Mrs. Knox: You said that Mr. Bush got into the National Guard on the basis of preferential treatment "...because there were a lot of other boys in there the same way." Does that include your son, Ted, who joined the squadron in about 1972?

... "Et tu brute'" ...

Serious Business for Viacom and CBS. My personal prediction last night was that we were a mere 48 hours away from knowing who faxed those documents, and perhaps not much further away from identifying the computer on which they were created. Blogging has made the 24 hour tv news engine look slow. If CBS has any credibility left to salvage, they must tell everything NOW.

Off point I'm sure, but this whole thing is doing more to fire up the right than anything GWB could have done.

Rasmussen just gave me a hard on...big jump in the daily tracker:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm

Thursday September 16, 2004--The Rasmussen Reports Presidential Tracking Poll shows President George W. Bush with 49% of the vote and Senator John Kerry with 45%. The Tracking Poll is updated daily by noon Eastern.

Today's results match the President's largest lead since the spring. Senator Kerry has not been ahead in the Tracking Poll since August 23.

karl marx:

This whole thing the TxANG thing in general has shown a strange phenomemon. Namely the Bush-haters ( not the Bush-dislikers, but the cooky people ) think that this is a big deal, but no one else does. Yet they keep pushing it. Its like they believe that if they talk about it enough other people will believe. As if by magic.

Forget about the hypocritical nature of former Clinton supporter trying to get Bush on this. Because in the end they do this as a sort of what's good for the goose is good for the gander. They are trying to ( in their mind ) expose those of us who don't care what Bush did as hypocrites.

But from a purely practical point this is crazy. They think by simply repeating stuff to us we will some how groupthink it into truth. They think that becasue they are angry about perceived hypocrisy that it must therefore be a real issue. Its rather interesting, silly, but interesting. Their solipism is complete. It is the perfect complement to their hatred for they need no facts.

This is a turning point issue.

CBS is not only trying to defraud the American public to influence an election, but at the same time trying to invert the standards of truth, evidence, and justice.

As others have remarked, CBS is taking the "Fake...but true" argument, which in essence argues that it doesn't matter if these docs are fake, as long as they capture what CBS believes to be true in spirit. So again, as someone else has pointed out, this amounts to "It's OK to plant evidence, as long as you think the person is guilty."

Thank goodness the criminal and civil justice system doesn't operate this way...but that is why we need to take a strong stand on this issue. Our democracy is at stake. That is the issue.

CBS stands for the Communist Broadcasting System and why should we ever begin to ever beleive them? they are the liars and crooks they are the propeganda artists akin to tokyo rose and joseph gobbeles

- The documents were not part of Bushes recore, being put up as "file-to" personal notes/memos.

- Therfore no one has a right to use them without the express permission of the Killian family or TANG command.

- Since they turned out to be fake none of the above applies and the whole thing reduces to unsubstantiated charges, and the only legal recourse involves slander. The Killians could sue but it isn't going to happen.

- If illegaly obtained originals existed, the perfect way to cover your ass would be to make copies. If they weren't detected fine. If they were you're still off the hook for the above reasons. This way you can protect your source, deny the existant of originals, and pump up your claims with a little added/altered commentary.

- You have a dead guy and a live guy. The live guy isn't going to do anything. All through this campaign the Rove/Bush people have followed the old saw "When theres a trainwreck on the part of your opponent its best to stay clear of the wreckage. A lot of things can happen, some of which are not good for the home team".

- Bush is winning this one from all kinds of points of view. Why stop the DNC/DEMbulbs if they are intent to feed the party into the political wood chipper.

- The bottom line is the only retribution we the people will get out of this is as Bill said. Through the ratings/revenues/shareholders approach.

- The other bottom line is I hope that AH Rather gets it in the bottom....

I just sent out my email to all the CBS shareholders. I am very happy with it. Here's what I said:

You people should all be ashamed of yourselves for putting a bigot like Dan Rather on the air in the first place. The man is obviously unAmerican and is also Canadian. These sorts of attacks on the President's character is truly disgusting, as are all of you for allowing this to happen.

Maybe we should just pick up all the blue states and move them into the middle east where they all apparently want to be. just like all of you.

For shame.

Let's not forget that Jewish people need Isreal to exist or they will have no homeland. Therefore everyone should vote for George W. Bush, a true American.

Uh, that was NOT a good e-mail, and I'm not sure if you are kidding or not.

I'm not sure that was meant to be a good email, Bill.

Dan Rather is American not Canadian.

Peter Jennings is Canadian.

John Roberts is Canadian I believe. I seem to remember he was picked up at a lefties Toronto TV station.

Ummm....Jabba....that was....ummm....informative, yeah thats the ticket, informative or something.