[QUOTE=New York Times]
Dan Rather, whose career at CBS News ground to an inglorious end 15 months ago over his role in an unsubstantiated report questioning President Bush’s Vietnam-era National Guard service, filed a $70 million lawsuit this afternoon against the network, its corporate parent and three of his former superiors.
Mr. Rather, 75, asserts that the network violated his contract by giving him insufficient airtime on “60 Minutes” after forcing him to step down as anchor of the “CBS Evening News” in March 2005. He also contends that the network committed fraud by commissioning a “biased” and incomplete investigation of the flawed Guard broadcast and, in the process, “seriously damaged his reputation.” As plaintiffs, the suit names CBS and its chief executive, Leslie Moonves; Viacom and its executive chairman, Sumner Redstone; and Andrew Heyward, the former president of CBS News.
[/QUOTE]
I remember the wisdom Dan gave me just like it was yesterday. He told me "They say California’s the big burrito; Texas is a big taco right now. We want to follow that through. Florida is a big tamale.” Fine wisdom that.
Regarding the case, I told 'em “Don’t taunt the alligator until after you’ve crossed the creek”, but he’s gone and got himself in water “hotter than a time square Rolex”. “But again maybe not, but again that’s like if a frog had side pockets he’d probably wear a handgun.”
*Actual Dan Rather quotes
Well, he doesn’t seem to be actually alleging that . . . IOW, it’s probably not something he has to prove in order to win the suit. (I’m sure the LAPD is guilty-as-sin of framing O.J. Simpson by planting evidence – which does not mean he did not do the murders.)
Oh, now, BG, let them have their fun, they haven’t won one in such a long time, they deserve the opportunity to gloat over the crushing defeat of the Liberal Media. Don’t be a Grinch!
The odd thing about this lawsuit is the level of ingratitude Rather displays towards CBS which, in its investigation, had deliberately declined to declare the documents the obvious forgeries that they were but came up instead with some wishy washy statement about their authenticity not having been established.
As to whether Rather really believes the documents were authentic, the sad part about it is he almost certainly does. As does one of his equally deluded former colleagues, Mary Mapes, of whom CBS said in the linked 2005 article:
In a statement CBS News said: “Mary Mapes’ actions damaged CBS News as an organization and brought pain to many colleagues with whom she worked. As always, revisionist history must be tested against the facts.”
[QUOTE=Aquila Be]
Are delusional truther type beliefs based on insanity or stupidity?
[/QUOTE]
I’ve forgotten the difference. Ever since 2002, that line has gotten blurrier and blurrier.
[QUOTE=Aquila Be]
The odd thing about this lawsuit is the level of ingratitude Rather displays towards CBS…<snip>
[/QUOTE]
Which dutifully and doggedly kept his biased (Hi, luci! ), overwrought (“Courage!”), nonsense-spouting ass on the air all these years since Cronkite, despite the fact that he perennially drew a last-place audience among the big three networks. I have no love for CBS, but my opinion of Rather has sunk even lower than before. Didn’t think it would be possible, that.
[QUOTE=Aquila Be]
The odd thing about this lawsuit is the level of ingratitude Rather displays towards CBS which, in its investigation, had deliberately declined to declare the documents the obvious forgeries that they were but came up instead with some wishy washy statement about their authenticity not having been established.
[/QUOTE]
This is what I was thinking…they backed him beyond what was reasonable, in my opinion. He ought to be grateful they didn’t hang him out to dry on this one.
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena]
This is what I was thinking…they backed him beyond what was reasonable, in my opinion. He ought to be grateful they didn’t hang him out to dry on this one.
[/QUOTE]
Didn’t he insist, at the time, over and over again, that the reporting wasn’t biased and that he wasn’t leaving because of the “scandal?” Sure, I understand the politics of the situation and personal dignity would require him to say something like that, but isn’t it a little hollow to say, “I was lying then, but this time, I mean it?”
[QUOTE=ArizonaTeach]
Didn’t he insist, at the time, over and over again, that the reporting wasn’t biased and that he wasn’t leaving because of the “scandal?”
[/QUOTE]
I think he meant only that his reporting wasn’t biased; doesn’t forestall him from casting blame on the network as a whole.
Hey, everybody! The tighty righties are partying! Getting down! Wearing their drab. colorless native garb and flinging shredded spreadsheets into the air with marginal abandon. Doggies!
A little disconcerting though, like watching Al Gore do the Funky Chicken.
), overwrought (“Courage!”), nonsense-spouting ass on the air all these years since Cronkite, despite the fact that he perennially drew a last-place audience among the big three networks. I have no love for CBS, but my opinion of Rather has sunk even lower than before. Didn’t think it would be possible, that.