# The verdict is in, and CBS is indeed guilty! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 10, 2005, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087 "2005-01-10T19:37:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![manhattan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manhattan/32/7_2.png) [@manhattan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/manhattan)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/101 "2005-01-13T21:06:07Z")
Perhaps you’re right – I’m thinking the success or non-success of Iraqi elections will be a big tipping point in either direction, at least in the short term. Again, all I was doing was correcting a factual error. ---
**Author:** ![annaplurabelle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/919ad9/32.png) [@annaplurabelle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/annaplurabelle)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/102 "2005-01-13T21:35:36Z")
> [@manhattan](#): > > Hey, I just posted the facts. **APB** opined that a majority of people polled opposed the president and made her usual dark hints about stolen elections. In fact, despite that a majority disagree with the direction the nation is headed and that a majority disagree with the Iraq war, a majority also support the president. **APB** ’s posted opinion is proveably factually incorrect and is now settled beyond any doubt – at least until the next approval poll, of course. You’re mischaracterising my post. Where did I say that “the majority of people polled opposed the president”? Cite or retract, as per the rules, please. As for “dark hints”, perhaps you missed my reply to John Mace: > [@](#): > > The polls taken since the very recent election that show a majority of people think the country is headed in the wrong direction, and that the invasion of Iraq wasn’t a good idea. Ironic that the majority would vote for Bush under those conditions, don’t you think? You do know what irony means, yes? > > But maybe the polls are wrong, just as the exit polls were said to be wrong. How could I know for sure, either way? **Only an opinion about an ironic occurence. Not suggesting anything else.** To be absolutely clear: I wasn’t suggesting stolen elections at all when I originally replied to Evil One. That wouldn’t be ironic, now would it? Still, I believe a retraction is in order… ---
**Author:** ![manhattan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manhattan/32/7_2.png) [@manhattan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/manhattan)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/103 "2005-01-13T22:41:00Z")
> [@annaplurabelle](#): > > You’re mischaracterising my post. Where did I say that “the majority of people polled opposed the president”? Cite or retract, as per the rules, please. > [@annaplurabelle](#): > > Polls taken since the election say otherwise. Ironically, they more or less match the exit polls **that pointed to a loss for Bush.** > [@annaplurabelle](#): > > As for “dark hints”, perhaps you missed my reply to John Mace I saw it. I just don’t believe you. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/104 "2005-01-13T22:56:21Z")
> [@manhattan](#): > > Perhaps you’re right – I’m thinking the success or non-success of Iraqi elections will be a big tipping point in either direction, at least in the short term. Again, all I was doing was correcting a factual error. Oh, the Iraqi elections will be a success, **Manny** , there is no doubt about that. If an outbreak of ergot poisoning makes 80 of the population beleive that they are Bugs Bunny, and they cast the ballots in favor of renowned statesman M. Mouse, the elections will be a success. The Bushiviks have been busily lowering expectations to limbo-bar level. Low turnout? Not a problem, hell, America has a low voter turnout, and elections here work out just fine! Some provinces too riled up to participate? Well, no one said it was going to be perfect! Just going to be an election, with ballots and stuff, just like the grown-ups! No oversight? Well, it going to be a _little_ sloppy… Wholesale horseshit, and some eager buyers, as herein demonstrated. Would that loyalty such as yours were not squandered on such unworthy men. ---
**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 13, 2005, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/105 "2005-01-13T23:11:49Z")
Yeah, and the press will just echo that upbeat analysis about the elections just like I read every day in my newspaper how \*\*\*great \*\*\*things are going in Iraq. So, no one will have any access to what the real situtation is like. ---
**Author:** ![annaplurabelle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/919ad9/32.png) [@annaplurabelle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/annaplurabelle)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/106 "2005-01-13T23:32:37Z")
> [@manhattan](#): > > > [@annaplurabelle](#): > > > > Polls taken since the election say otherwise. Ironically, they more or less match the exit polls that pointed to a loss for Bush. Was that a _factual error_, as you have claimed? I said nothing about the current or general approval ratings for Bush, which is what you used as “evidence” of my alleged _factual error_. I still want a retraction of your post that claims a correction of _factual error_. > [@](#): > > I saw it. I just don’t believe you. What you believe is irrelevant compared to what I posted - isn’t this what I was told when I didn’t believe a poster’s stated intent? You admitted that you thought I was sincere when I said I didn’t believe it. Perhaps you are sincere now as well, but that should also be irrelevant - the rules apply to what you _know_ - and you now admit you read my reply to John Mace. You _knew_ my stated intent, and in good faith, should have acted on that, rather than your own belief. But perhaps this rule applies for some, and not for others… ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/107 "2005-01-13T23:47:56Z")
The sequence of events was: > [@Evil One](#): > > Only time will tell, but I feel like your frustration is just beginning, **elucidator**. It’s clear from the last election that people of your political persuasion are in the numerical minority. **annaplurabelle** quoted the above, and replied: > [@annaplurabelle](#): > > Polls taken since the election say otherwise. Ironically, they more or less match the exit polls that pointed to a loss for Bush. The since vehemently discredited exit polls, but I digress… Don’t you love irony? Taken in that context, I have to say that my first reading was that **annaplurabelle** was claiming a lack of majority support for the president. Standing alone, her quote doesn’t necessarily invite that conclusion; in the context of refuting a comment that people of **elucidator** ’s persuasion (opponents of the President) are in the minority, it’s certainly what I’d walk away with as a first impression. I know I’m not likely to be seen as a neutral party, given these players, but there it is. ---
**Author:** ![manhattan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manhattan/32/7_2.png) [@manhattan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/manhattan)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2005, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/108 "2005-01-14T00:06:17Z")
> [@annaplurabelle](#): > > Was that a _factual error_, as you have claimed? I said nothing about the current or general approval ratings for Bush, which is what you used as “evidence” of my alleged _factual error_. How in the wide, wide world of sports can “Polls taken since the election say otherwise. Ironically, they more or less match the exit polls that pointed to a loss for Bush” mean anything other than that you are asserting that current polls would point to a loss for Bush? Acutally, don’t answer that – see below. > [@](#): > > I still want a retraction of your post that claims a correction of _factual error_. Happily for me, a quick check of my give-a-shit-o-meter shows that I don’t care what you want. > [@](#): > > But perhaps this rule applies for some, and not for others… Darlin’, the “report this post” button it the little exclamation point at the top right of each post. You made a false assertion, which I have corrected. If you feel that comprises a rule violation of some sort I suspect you’ll find that you are once again in error, but now at least you know the correct procedure. ---
**Author:** ![annaplurabelle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/919ad9/32.png) [@annaplurabelle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/annaplurabelle)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2005, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/109 "2005-01-14T00:41:14Z")
> [@manhattan](#): > > How in the wide, wide world of sports can “Polls taken since the election say otherwise. Ironically, they more or less match the exit polls that pointed to a loss for Bush” mean anything other than that you are asserting that current polls would point to a loss for Bush? > > …You made a false assertion, which I have corrected. What was the false assertion, **manny**? Please be specific. Are you saying the exit polls did not point to a Bush loss? Are you saying there is _no difference_ between the exit polls taken _on election day_ and “polls taken _since the election_”? Did you not also say: > [@](#): > > APB’s posted opinion is proveably factually incorrect and is now settled beyond any doubt – **at least until the next approval poll, of course.** Here you admit there is no relationship between one poll and another. But don’t sweat it, Big Boy. I don’t report regular posters. I don’t expect a gracious reply. This is between you and your conscience. Good luck with that… ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2005, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/110 "2005-01-14T01:09:41Z")
> [@manhattan](#): > > Hey, I just posted the facts. **APB** opined that a majority of people polled opposed the president and made her usual dark hints about stolen elections. In fact, despite that a majority disagree with the direction the nation is headed and that a majority disagree with the Iraq war, a majority also support the president. **APB** ’s posted opinion is proveably factually incorrect and is now settled beyond any doubt – at least until the next approval poll, of course. Hope you don’t mind if I post some facts as well: [**Thursday January 13, 2005–Forty-seven percent (47%) of American adults approve of the way George W. Bush is performing his role as President. Fifty-one percent (51%) disapprove.**](http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Bush_Job_Approval.htm) Now, what about that retraction **anna** is due? Thanks in advance. PS-Say, **Sam** , since I’ve just discovored yet another talent of yours in this thread – how many is that? Truly, I’ve lost track – would it be correct for me to say I’m being rather sarcastic at the moment? ---
**Author:** ![Razorsharp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/53a042/32.png) [@Razorsharp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Razorsharp)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2005, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/111 "2005-01-14T11:47:32Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > Hope you don’t mind if I post some facts as well: > > [**Thursday January 13, 2005–Forty-seven percent (47%) of American adults approve of the way George W. Bush is performing his role as President. Fifty-one percent (51%) disapprove.**](http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Bush_Job_Approval.htm) Facts?? Perhaps that poll was as “accurate” as the previously mentioned exit polls. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2005, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/112 "2005-01-14T13:45:06Z")
Would it be wrong to suppose that the destruction of Fallujah, which took so long to prepare that it had to happen just \*after \* the election, changed at least a few minds? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Biggles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/839c29/32.png) [@Mr.Biggles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Biggles)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2005, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/113 "2005-01-14T20:30:31Z")
> [@Starving Artist](#): > > Rather comes out and says in effect that it doesn’t matter because Bush got preferential treatment anyway and that is the real story. > > If it’s a simple fact that Bush got preferential treatment, why the great necessity of of vetting the documents and verifying their authenticity? Because to make a claim, you need proof. If the proof is bogus, nothing is proven! What it purports to be proof of may or may not actually be the case, but you can’t just dismiss purported proof when it turns out to be false and then claim that what it purports to prove exists anyway and that the proof itself isn’t really even necessary anyway. Your reasoning is flawed. The story **is** Bush’s preferential treatment. The documents were a means to make the claim stick…however, regardless of their authenticity, people have said that the claims have validity. See, the right wing noise machine focuses all the attention on possible bogus documents. “Fake! Fake! Fake!” It deflects the facts that were meat of the story–his preferential treatment. When other’s in the story (the secretary) basically said such a situation existed, why weren’t the righties asking for her head? Because it’s easier to focus on an inanimate object rather than somebody who can define the facts. Rather’s frustration was in dealing with this noise machine. On a personal level, when the people who validated the preferential treatment was addressed, the typical Bush supporter did nothing but bellow about the documents. They refused to address the “eyewitnesses.” > [@](#): > > And this hooey about their hastiness to get the story out due to competitive pressures is absolute bullshit in my opinion. Has anyone heard of any other news source about to break the story? No, this malarkey is just to provide CBS and Rather’s newsroom with cover when the very obvious question is asked about why, if they weren’t out to get Bush, there was such a driving passion to forgo proper vetting and broadcast a report that hadn’t been fully investigated. > > They are still lying and covering up to this day. And in the news today, the CBS review, headed by former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh (an appointee of Bush’s father) and former Associated Press president Louis Boccardi, was not able to state conclusively whether the documents were forgeries or not. The report also found no evidence that political bias was a factor in the network’s journalism. Of course, I’m sure the righties are up in arms all over the internet. They are probably already making claims that Thornburgh is involved in a lefty conspiracy. ---
**Author:** ![annaplurabelle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/919ad9/32.png) [@annaplurabelle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/annaplurabelle)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2005, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/114 "2005-01-15T02:43:19Z")
> [@Razorsharp](#): > > Facts?? Perhaps that poll was as “accurate” as the previously mentioned exit polls. So what are we to do if we can no longer take polls as accurate? It’s a big country, after all. Any other way to get a grip on what’s really going on beyond our own enclaves? I mean, without making funny hats out of tinfoil, however fashionable… ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2005, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/115 "2005-01-15T05:14:02Z")
> [@Razorsharp](#): > > Facts?? Perhaps that poll was as “accurate” as the previously mentioned exit polls. Or **manhattan’s** for that matter. Point being, contrary to his objections, **anna’s** original comment _stands up to scrutiny_ when looking at most polls for the month of December – hell, even Faux had him under the 50% threshold at the time. And although he’s climbed up a bit in the latest releases, why shouldn’t we apply your same standard of “accuracy” to the ones that have him _up_? Thus by that very standard, I am also able to claim, as **manhattan** did, that “all I was doing was correcting a factual error.” So, what about that retraction that’s due… ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2005, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/116 "2005-01-15T05:16:30Z")
Missing from above post:[**Link to assorted polls**](http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm) ---
**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 15, 2005, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087/117 "2005-01-15T18:38:24Z")
> [@Mr. Biggles](#): > > Your reasoning is flawed. The story **is** Bush’s preferential treatment. The documents were a means to make the claim stick…however, regardless of their authenticity, people have said that the claims have validity. Is there anyone who doesn’t think that a Senator’s son is going to get some sort of preferential treatment? That’s not a story. A story, as these docuements claimed to show, would be \*\*specific \*\*actions taken by \*\*specific \*\*people. Problem is, the specific person in the memos, [Walter Staudt, said he never applied any pressure to Killian to give Bush preferential treatment.](http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2004/story?id=123458&page=1) That’s the problem. The “proof” offered up was bogus. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-verdict-is-in-and-cbs-is-indeed-guilty/284087.md?page=5)