# Mary Mapes Fired Over Fake Bush Letters **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 10, 2005, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086 "2005-01-10T19:07:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/81 "2005-01-11T22:21:15Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > If I get my facts wrong, please correct me. If Bush’s appointees didn’t authorize torture, if the GOP hasn’t sponsored anti-gay legislation, if Bush didn’t start a morass of a war under false pretenses, then I humbly apologize. Yes, your facts are wrong. Bush’s appointees did not authorize torture, whcih was the topic under discussion. > [@gobear](#): > > I’m not a lefty wingnut. You are sure doing your best to sound like it. > [@gobear](#): > > You’re not the center, you’re the extreme right wing. Don’t pretend that you would have voted for anyone other than Dubya even if Jesus Christ were his opponent. You’re not reachable because no argument, no persuasion, no matter how gentle, will sway you from supporting things that I regard as thoroughly wicked. Well, given your recent history of telling outright lies about other people’s political positions, your opinions as to my convictions are not worth a whole hell of a lot. You wanna come across as another foam-flecked fundamentalist fool, that’s your look out. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/82 "2005-01-11T22:29:46Z")
**Bricker** : Didn’t you claim in the GD thread that you didn’t think political bias was involved? Here you seem to be implying the opposite. Am I missing something? > [@Bricker](#): > > [link](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5704126&postcount=29) > > I didn’t believe that before reading this report. I was convinced that partisan politics were in play. Having read the report, I now believe that political leaning was, if a factor at all, a very small one. They just wanted to be first. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/83 "2005-01-11T22:51:41Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > **Bricker** : Didn’t you claim in the GD thread that you didn’t think political bias was involved? Here you seem to be implying the opposite. Am I missing something? Yes. My reversal, after **minty green** linked to the text of the report earlier in this thread, after which I said something like: > [@](#): > > Correction noted. CBS obviously authorized the investigation, but it was an independent investigation. This does lend a bit more credibility to the conclusion that there was no overt political angle, and I’m now prepared to accept that political bias was, if a factor at all, only an indirect one… that is, Mapes was no Bush fan, and that caused her to be predisposed to believe the letters. But that’s a far cry from what I was first picturing – an active desire to use her office to assist the Kerry campaign and discredit the Bush campaign. That view is unsupported by any evidence at all. So when I started this thread, I believed partisan politics was in play. I don’t believe that now. It may seem as if I still do in my responses to **Evil Captor** , but I’m just reversing the spin he’s putting on this as a “conservative victory” - if it’s simply a conservative victory, as he implies, with little underlying merit to the firings, then it seems he’s conceding a political action which failed. I don’t buy that, but I was curious to see if he does. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/84 "2005-01-11T22:58:24Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Ah, yes, your technique of grabbing on to a little tiny piece of a problem that you feel comfortable with, pretending that that’s the entire issue, and ignoring the rest. Sorry, that shit don’t work here, and you damn well oughta know by now. You’re maintaining your fascination with and total concentration on the CBS story but have nothing whatever to say about the character of the man you’ve so gloatingly supported as President of the United States. That is utterly irresponsible of you as well as gullible. That “technique” is called STAYING ON THE TOPIC OF THE THREAD. This thread is about Mapes’ firing and the scandal surrounding it. (I know; I’m very simpatico with the guy that started it). There are many threads here on the People’s Republic of SDMB to explore the degenerate character of the man that every intelligent American should hate (meaning, of course, a minority of the electorate). > [@](#): > > Most likely the latter, with perhaps an awareness of the former derived from her knowledge that Bush had had virtually a free ride from the media on his “service” so far. Naturally, as an blindly-loyal Republican partisan, you’d think it entirely the former. True enough? Well, yes and no. Before I read the report, yes I was convinced that Mapes’ actions were politically motivated. Having read the report and seen for myself the care that went into their fact-finding, I’m now prepared to accept the conclusion that it was simple fervor to be first with a big story, not a partisan attempt to change the course of an election. > [@](#): > > Now how about addressing the question of the extensive list of rabid-partisan talking heads on TV, including the alleged “news” on Fox, that somehow seem to avoid even the lightest criticism from you, much less their firings? Can you address that problem _honestly_? Note in passing the heavy blurring of the once-serious distinction between news and commentary. I’ve criticized Limbaugh many times on these boards, and Coulter as well. I agree that both play fast and lose with underlying facts, and that both should be fired by their respective employers. O’Reilly, I don’t criticize. I’d have to ask for a cite on his lying - note the difference between that and his invitation to draw unpalatable conclusions from the facts. Novak, I don’t criticize either, and if you claim he’s a liar, I’d ask for some cites. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/85 "2005-01-11T23:22:12Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It may seem as if I still do in my responses to **Evil Captor** , but I’m just reversing the spin he’s putting on this as a “conservative victory” - if it’s simply a conservative victory, as he implies, with little underlying merit to the firings, then it seems he’s conceding a political action which failed. I don’t buy that, but I was curious to see if he does. Got it. Good luck!! ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/86 "2005-01-12T03:35:13Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Yes, your facts are wrong. Bush’s appointees did not authorize torture, which was the topic under discussion. Is Rumsfeld a Bush appointee? From _The Washington Post_: > [@](#): > > Did senior officials order torture? We know of two relevant cases so far. One was Mr. Rumsfeld’s December 2002 authorization of the use of techniques including hooding, nudity, stress positions, “fear of dogs” and physical contact with prisoners at the Guantanamo Bay base. A second was the distribution in September 2003 by the office of the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, of an interrogation policy that included these techniques as well as others, among them sleep and dietary manipulation. In both cases lawyers inside the military objected that the policies would lead to violations of international law, including the convention banning torture. Both were eventually modified, but not before they were used for the handling of prisoners. In the case of the Abu Ghraib prison, the policy apparently remained in effect for months. Was Gonzalez a Bush appointee? From [here](http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=79532): > [@](#): > > Gonzales says the “new paradigm” of the war on terrorism “renders obsolete Geneva’s strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions.” Are you going to keep lying that they didn’t authorize torture? > [@](#): > > Well, given your recent history of telling outright lies about other people’s political positions, your opinions as to my convictions are not worth a whole hell of a lot. What lies have I told? I’ve said what you’ve admitted, you’re pro-Bush. You just lack the honor and courage to admit what you signed on to. Your team authorized the torture of prisoners. > [@](#): > > You wanna come across as another foam-flecked fundamentalist fool, that’s your look out. I’ve got cites, you’ve got nothing but bluster and excuses. ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/87 "2005-01-12T03:45:37Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > ::looks around:: > > Weren’t there some goalposts here just a moment ago? > > Oh, look! There they are – way the fuck over there! > > The claim of yours that I was rebutting was a simple one: > > You now acknowledge that the issue is more complex than that. No, I acknowledged that when both candidates are matched on an issue, that issue can’t be the decision-breaker. > [@](#): > > Kerry’s support or rejection of particular procedures for handling prisoners is entirely hypothetical. He was never in a position to decide on, approve, or even recommend specifics in this area. I have no idea what Kerry would have decided were he in the Oval Office at the time such decisions were necessary, _and neither do you_. Hmm, Kerry said [Rumsfeld should have resigned after the Abu Ghraib revelations](http://blog.johnkerry.com/blog/archives/002567.html): > [@](#): > > “By failing to plan to win the peace, by failing to make sure our troops received the proper training, equipment, reinforcement and command guidance, and by failing to take corrective actions once all of this became apparent, Secretary Rumsfeld did not demonstrate the leadership required from a Secretary of Defense. > > “That is why today I am calling on Secretary Rumsfeld to resign effective immediately. In addition, I call on the President to appoint an independent investigation to review the entire decision making process that led to these abuses and provide a comprehensive set of reforms so that we can ensure that this never happens again. So maybe I might have an inkling about what Kerry might have decided if he were in charge. > [@](#): > > I don’t agree that Bush supported torture, either. I don’t agree that the prisoners were properly handled under the Geneva accords, because they were not prisoners of war. They were unlawful combatants. I don;t believe Bush authorized the specific abuses that were extant, either. Arguing about what to call the prisoners has no relation to what they suffered. And I find it hard to believe that Gonzalez and Rummy could authorize torture or prisoners without Bush being informed. Or are you suggesting Bush isn’t really running the government? > [@](#): > > All of this is secondary to the only point I was trying to forcefully make: you vote for someone based on the choices available. It is not an endorsement of each and every position they hold. I am against the death penalty - Bush favors it. My vote for Bush was _in spite of_ his death penalty stance, not in support of it. You voted for Kerry not because each and every position he held was something you supported, but because of the two candidates, he was the best choice in your mind. That’s why I voted for Bush. Don’t you dare try to turn that vote into ringing approbation of all things the man stands for. I have plenty of problems with Bush. I just had MORE with Kerry. What problems could you have had with Kerry that outweigh Bush’s lies to instigate the war, the incompetent management of the occupation, and the use of torture by US forces? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/88 "2005-01-12T04:02:04Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It may seem as if I still do in my responses to **Evil Captor** , but I’m just reversing the spin he’s putting on this as a “conservative victory” - if it’s simply a conservative victory, as he implies, with little underlying merit to the firings, then it seems he’s conceding a political action which failed. I don’t buy that, but I was curious to see if he does. The main thing that’s bugging me, Bricker, is the fact that practically everyone involved in the story quit or got fired, and you seem to want something more … jail time? Beheadings? What? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/89 "2005-01-12T04:22:06Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > The main thing that’s bugging me, Bricker, is the fact that practically everyone involved in the story quit or got fired, and you seem to want something more … jail time? Beheadings? What? To crush them, to see them driven before me, and to hear the lamentation of their women. Er… no. Seriously, where do you get that? This thread was started to convey the statisfaction I felt at this outcome. I have no desire to see any additional penalties. In fact, having previously publicly speculated that CBS would whitewash this, I felt honor-bound to start this thread acknowledging that I was wrong, and CBS took appropriate action. So - no. ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_H](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a5b964/32.png) [@Bill\_H](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_H)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 6:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/90 "2005-01-12T06:06:21Z")
Well, as long as you’re asking, it would be nice to see Rather kicked to the curb as well. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/91 "2005-01-12T15:17:38Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > Was Gonzalez a Bush appointee? From [here](http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=79532): > > Are you going to keep lying that they didn’t authorize torture? From your own fucking cite: > [@](#): > > Gonzales outlines the pros **and cons** of applying the Geneva Conventions to al Qaeda and Taliban detainees. He is prescient in his prediction that a failure to apply the Conventions across the board “could undermine U.S. military culture which emphasizes maintaining the highest standards of conduct in combat, and could introduce an element of uncertainty in the status of adversaries.” > **He rejects his own argument** , concluding that “our military remains bound to apply the principles of GPW [Geneva Conventions on Prisoners of War] \*\*because that is what you have directed them to do.” \*\* _(Emphasis added)_ > [@gobear](#): > > What lies have I told? See above. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/92 "2005-01-12T15:47:02Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That “technique” is called STAYING ON THE TOPIC OF THE THREAD. This thread is about Mapes’ firing and the scandal surrounding it. Part of the topic of the thread is the decision process by which the thread topic was chosen. The reasons for the, well, let’s call it indignation over CBS’s actions are necessary to discuss the topic fully. Those reasons include the willingness of a large part of the populace to allow their attention to be directed away from the issues directly relevant to the campaign and the process of selecting candidates. This topic wouldn’t exist if not for a sufficient quantity of blind partisans who didn’t want the true subject to be explored. People who were fascinated by what the Swifties were saying but tried to overlook their sources, because after all Kerry was the candidate, not the Swifties. People who refused to consider what Bush’s behavior was at the time but were fascinated by the sources of one of the media outlets that had been looking into it. People who still don’t realize their own willingness to be led by their party’s spinners. People like you. It most certainly matters why this is the thread topic. Do you begin to understand now? Maybe not, if your thinking is truly on the level of this: > [@](#): > > There are many threads here on the People’s Republic of SDMB to explore the degenerate character of the man that every intelligent American should hate (meaning, of course, a minority of the electorate). That did not enhance your credibility one bit. > [@](#): > > I’ve criticized Limbaugh many times on these boards, and Coulter as well. I agree that both play fast and lose with underlying facts, and that both should be fired by their respective employers. Then where are your extensive threads demanding that? Have you said boo about any of the people who support the same party you do without being called out on it? > [@](#): > > Novak, I don’t criticize either, and if you claim he’s a liar, I’d ask for some cites. Treason is okay for you, but not lying? :rolleyes: As long as he’s as effective as Zell Miller in getting your party in power, huh? ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/93 "2005-01-12T16:27:54Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > From your own fucking cite: > > See above. You really should keep reading. Gonzalez pointed refers to the POWs as “detainees,” not POWs, and his idea of “humane treatment” does not rule out torture. Read p. 3 of the memo. Moreover, read the bit you cited again: > [@](#): > > In the treatment of detainees, the U.S. will continue to be constrained by (i) its committment to treat the detainees humanely and, **to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity,** in a manner consistent with the principles of GPW. . . Those are wiggle words as wide as a barn door to let the military and CACI contractors do what they did. After all, the prisoners were detainees, not POWS, right? ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/94 "2005-01-12T17:04:15Z")
Interesting to see CBS having its feet held to the fire over their sloppy fact-checking by a bunch of people who keep insisting that false statements re: WMD were just well-intentioned mistakes, despite their being based on stuff like decade-old graduate theses and the like. Nigerian yellowcake allegations based on documents that were more obvious forgeries than these memos; aluminum tube allegations that were dismissed by technical experts; unmanned drones that were powered by rubber bands; 40 minute attack times (okay, that was the poodle across the pond said that one); ambiguous satellite pictures of trucks being unequivocably classified as mobile weapon labs. I guess since the Bush administration isn’t a news outlet, it’s not their job to verify that the stuff they say is true, and there’s no need for resignations or apologies? After all, it’s not like anyone’s lives were hanging in the balance on the WMD issue, not like memogate, which is clearly life and death, and absolutely mandatory to have right before proceeding. Me? I figure “News Organization Cuts Corners While Attempting to Scoop Opposition” isn’t much of a headline, unless you’re a news organization trying to pimp your relative lack of corner-cutting (or, to be honest, your relative lack of getting caught at it) to consumers. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/95 "2005-01-12T17:10:23Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Part of the topic of the thread is the decision process by which the thread topic was chosen. The reasons for the, well, let’s call it indignation over CBS’s actions are necessary to discuss the topic fully. Those reasons include the willingness of a large part of the populace to allow their attention to be directed away from the issues directly relevant to the campaign and the process of selecting candidates. This topic wouldn’t exist if not for a sufficient quantity of blind partisans who didn’t want the true subject to be explored. People who were fascinated by what the Swifties were saying but tried to overlook their sources, because after all Kerry was the candidate, not the Swifties. Of the two of us, you and me – which of us do you think is seen by more people on this boad as a “blind partisan?” > [@](#): > > Then where are your extensive threads demanding that? Have you said boo about any of the people who support the same party you do without being called out on it? Well, I have criticized Rush Limbaugh in the past on this board. But the truth is I don’t listen to his show, so he’s not exactly at the forefront of my attention. Indeed, I’ve never STARTED a thread criticizing him, for the simple reason that it’s nearly impossible I’d become aware of a particular transgression of his unless I read about it here. Ditto Coulter. > [@](#): > > Treason is okay for you, but not lying? :rolleyes: As long as he’s as effective as Zell Miller in getting your party in power, huh? Question: did Woodward and Bernstein commit treason? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/96 "2005-01-12T17:15:02Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > You really should keep reading. Gonzalez pointed refers to the POWs as “detainees,” not POWs, and his idea of “humane treatment” does not rule out torture. Read p. 3 of the memo. Moreover, read the bit you cited again: > > Those are wiggle words as wide as a barn door to let the military and CACI contractors do what they did. After all, the prisoners were detainees, not POWS, right? This is actually kind of unpleasant. More often than not, you are smarter than this, and it bothers me to some extent that you are willing to stoop to this kind of argument. > [@](#): > > In the treatment of **detainees** , the U.S. will continue to be constrained by (i) its committment to treat the **detainees** humanely and, to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity, **in a manner consistent with the principles of GPW. . .** So no, your argument that “detainees” are tortured and POWs are not is pretty obviously wrong. You are mischaracterizing the intent and character of the memo. We have lots of fools to do this on the SDMB. We don’t need any more. You are going from “all Mormons are Republicans” to “you are either with Kerry, or with the torturers” to “anyone who disagrees with me is a mindless Bush-bot”. This is like back when you were claiming that Bush would [cancel the elections and set up a dictatorship.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5058172&postcount=36) There comes a point where political disagreement shades over into paranoid delusions. It is unpleasantly common on the SDMB. This is not likely to appeal to the moderate middle. IMO. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/97 "2005-01-12T17:36:31Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > This is actually kind of unpleasant. More often than not, you are smarter than this, and it bothers me to some extent that you are willing to stoop to this kind of argument. > So no, your argument that “detainees” are tortured and POWs are not is pretty obviously wrong. > > You are mischaracterizing the intent and character of the memo. We have lots of fools to do this on the SDMB. We don’t need any more. > [@](#): > > You are going from “all Mormons are Republicans” to “you are either with Kerry, or with the torturers” to “anyone who disagrees with me is a mindless Bush-bot”. Talk about mischaracterizing. I never said “all Mormons are Republican”, just that it’s good odds that any given Mormon is far more likely to be a Pub than not. And I didn’t say that “you’re with Kerry or the torturers”; there were other choices than Bush or Kerry. If you voted for a candidate, then you share some responsibility for his actions. You and **Bricker** obviously shrug off said responsibility. So be it. And I’d like for you to show me where I wrote, “anyone who disagrees with me is a mindless Bush-bot”. > [@](#): > > This is like back when you were claiming that Bush would [cancel the elections and set up a dictatorship.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5058172&postcount=36) There comes a point where political disagreement shades over into paranoid delusions. Yes, I was quite wrong there. Trickery and Diebold made it unnecessary. And I repeat, you’re not the moderate middle. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/98 "2005-01-12T18:10:01Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > Yes, I was quite wrong there. Trickery and Diebold made it unnecessary. What did Diebold have to do with anything? ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/99 "2005-01-12T18:41:35Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What did Diebold have to do with anything? Nothing that can be proven. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086/100 "2005-01-12T18:54:22Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Of the two of us, you and me – which of us do you think is seen by more people on this boad as a “blind partisan?” The level of truth of a proposition is not settled by vote. We’ve been over this, and it’s puzzling why you would keep proposing such an amoral, fact-flouting philosophy. But, if you suspect that a substantial portion of those who read your work might think it blindly partisan, that should be cause for concern more than celebration - even if it’s from “The People’s Republic of the SDMB”, as you dismiss it. Consider, while you’re at it, that I’ve said nothing in any way that would excuse torture, aggressive war, lying, self-delusion, unnecessary deaths, bigotry, or even growth of government debt _at all_, much less in the service of a party. Can you say the same? > [@](#): > > I’d become aware of a particular transgression of his unless I read about it here. Ditto Coulter. Okay, change it to Fox, then. Have you deplored their accuracy and balance in such gloating depth as that which you deplore CBS’s? > [@](#): > > Question: did Woodward and Bernstein commit treason? Question: Why would you think they did? Who was the foreign enemy they were aiding? Question: Is there some substance to that question of yours other than yet another tiresome attempt at a self-excusing _tu quoque_? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mary-mapes-fired-over-fake-bush-letters/284086.md?page=6)