Rather Round-up

Via Power Line, the Wash Times's Bill Sammon writes that the White House is voicing anger at CBS for their continued stonewalling on Rathergate. WH spokesman Scott McClellan:

"[F]ired back at Mr. Rather for challenging the president to 'answer the questions' raised in his widely discredited report, which aired Sept. 8 on '60 Minutes II.' The anchorman told an interviewer on Tuesday that such presidential candor would help Bush win re-election.
"'It's always best for journalists to stick to reporting the facts and not try to dispense campaign advice,' Mr. McClellan said."

Of course, that's premised upon a reporter's decision to deal with facts rather than faked documents. And they took note that CBS source Marion Knox's biases weren't stated by Rather, as they should have been:

"White House aides were furious that Mr. Rather did not disclose to viewers that Mrs. Knox told the Dallas Morning News that she opposed the president's re-election, calling him 'unfit for office' and 'selected, not elected.' Bush advisers were also incredulous that Mr. Rather gave such credence to a woman who openly admitted that much of what she was telling the newsman was 'conjecture' and 'gossip.'"

Bernard Goldberg penned an op-ed in today's WSJ recalling his objections to Rather and CBS. I found the piece weak, not because I disagreed with it, but because it contained nothing new. He does note that it's increasingly likely that the source (i.e. Burkett) worked with the Kerry campaign or the DNC and that CBS's reputation is toast; that's obvious, but it's probably good to see it in the WSJ, both because of the paper's weight and because many of its older readers are probably not on the Net.

Jonah Goldberg (via RCP) nails another weakness in Dan's position: "Here's the problem: Rather isn't standing up to partisan political forces. Indeed, among the forces that have been most energetic in making Rather look ridiculous are the Washington Post and ABC News. The New York Times and NPR haven't been as good, but they have hardly ignored the fact that Rather shot himself in the foot and kept holding down the trigger as he worked his way up his body. Indeed, even CBS News has adopted the position that the memos are fakes but the story is true."

And, echoing Wilfred McClay's blog from yesterday, Goldberg says:

"Indeed, Rather's thinking has become axiomatic: Good reporting offends conservatives. I am a good reporter. Therefore, anyone who objects to my work is a conservative. And, of course, conservative objections are, by definition, illegitimate objections. After all, liberal media bias is a myth.

"The fact is, good reporting isn't liberal or conservative - though it can be either. What good reporting does is expose those who would lie for a 'higher truth.' Which, ironically, is why so much of the criticism of Rather is not really 'partisan' at all - it's good reporting."

The Manchester Union-Leader (also via RCP) picks up the nihilism of Rather's defense with the title of its editorial: "In Rather’s World, Reality Is What Dan Says It Is."

Prestopundit has a typically excellent pile of links to Rathergate stories from all over (and welcome Presto readers!), including Van Os for the Supreme Court (of Texas), a rather bizzare and hyper-partisan page by Bill Burkett's attorney, David Van Os. There you'll learn that, "Getting David Van Os elected to the Texas Supreme Court is not just about winning one race. It is about charging straight at the heart of Karl Rove's master plan." Master Karl, what's the frequency?

UPDATE: Michael Hedges of the Houston Chronicle further uncovers Bill Burkett's past:

"Even Burkett has admitted some of his allegations are false.

"Burkett wrote a long indictment against Bush for a Web site in 2003 in which he said he personally was ordered to 'alter personnel records of George W. Bush.' In that article, Burkett said that when he refused he was sent to Panama as punishment, where he contracted a disabling disease.

"But when asked about that charge by the Houston Chronicle in February, Burkett said, 'That statement was not accurate, that is overstated.'"

And: "If Burkett is the source of the CBS documents he must have recently obtained them. In earlier interviews, he described years of fruitless searching.

"One month ago, in an essay posted on a progressive Web site, Burkett theorized that Killian would have been a likely person to know more about Bush's service. But, he conceded, 'I have found no documentation from LTC Killian's hand or staff that indicate that this unit was involved in any complicit way to ... cover for the failures of 1Lt. Bush ... ' Burkett went on to say, 'On the contrary, LTC Killian's remarks are rare.'"

He also compared Bush to Hitler:

"In an article Burkett wrote for the Internet last year he compared Bush to Hitler and Napoleon as one of "the three small men" who sought to rule through tyranny. 'Three small men who wanted to conquer and vanquish,' Burkett wrote. Burkett confirmed authorship of that article in the February Chronicle interview."