Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Current Events' started by MacDawg, Nov 23, 2004.
It was inevitable
Link to story
I won't miss him at all, it has been years since I've watched him in any capacity. At his age he should have stepped down a long time ago. I just don't understand the wait till March, the longer he stays the more viewers that CBS will loose. Why have the long goodbyes become so popular?
he had a great and distinguished career
i wish him all the best
i concur. I've disliked him ever since his coverage on 9-11.
It's about time. He really should have stepped down after that mess on 60 Minutes and the huge pack of pro-Kerry lies he told in front of a national audience. I won't miss his liberal mug on my picture tube at all.
not surprising... though interesting that he will retain his 60minutes gig... any word on his replacements?
Brian Williams has been mentioned. It really doesn't matter, the power of the evening news has been minimized.
When a newsperson uses their position to further their opinions rather than report the facts, they loose all credibility.
Rather lost his many years ago. And his slanted news reporting continued throughout his career culminating with this most recent fiasco.
He was no Walter Cronkite.
His exit from his vaulted position is quite indicative of his personal character as well.
Oh, absolutely not. Walter Cronkite was a great anchor. His greatest moments, IMHO, were when he was practically the communication link to the world during the space race. Cronkite was a one-man wonder during those years. Probably Rather's biggest claim to fame is his coverage of September 11th, which he did do a fairly good job with. Still, not even close to Cronkite's caliber.
Dan's waiting for....
Dan's just waiting for the memo to arrive on his desk. Then he has to authenticate it and check all the facts.
This should take until March, hence the reason for his delay in stepping down
PS And I haven't watched these pompous, arrogant, hypocritical talking heads since I hooked up to the internet.
Isn't this the same Walter Cronkite (liberal environmentalist etc) who threatened to sue his neighbor because he wanted to install solar heating on his roof and Walter didn't want the unsightly panels obstructing the view of his million dollar yacht anchored in the bay???
In other words, uncle Walter is all for the environment - but not in my back yard!
Does anyone under the age of 35 watch the evening news anymore? If it's not on NPR on the way home and/or significant enough to turn to CNN or FOX, I'll catch on the web tomorrow at work.
I can remember my parents watching the news (when it was good) but lately it seems to me to be untimely.
I would submit that forty years of distiguished service out-does the Kerry mess by orders of magnitude. I guess it's easy for me since I don't listen to the like of Limbaugh who have brainwashed the weak-minded into actually believing the media is "leftist". Minimalize and/or attack... no matter the facts... The credo of the right.
But that's another thread, and no offense to our brothers on the right.
"Quite indicative"? Tell me exactly how this is so. No partisanship, no screaming. Just the truth, exactly. You evidently have some rationale for judging this man's character, and some here might like to hear it.
Spending my life as a conservative (until recently, see signature), I can't buy into assasination from either side without air-tight, logical analysis. To kowtow to propaganda is lazy and not worth the bandwidth.
I'm not defending Rather, and I think his fax fiasco was a tragedy. But it was a tragedy for all of us. With that in mind, I find it beyond incredible that what really threatens us is not the occasional or even more than occasional screw-up/partisan agenda, but rather the growing masses of knee-jerk citizens that are fueled by growing and questionable corporate control of the media. Where are the checks and balances? There are none. Rather's story was "outed", as it should have been. But tell me where is the outrage on more important stories that can truly affect the US?
And they shouldn't watch. For someone with a true moderate, analytical mind, getting real info from the glass teat is not possible. For all the right-wing attacks on NPR, they are a national treasure. And the Internet, if used properly, can be used to have an HONEST look at the issues.
Oh LORD! Then why are "patriots" like Novak, Limbaugh, Hannity, Scarbourough and their ilk allowed to call themselves newspeople? Do they have credibility? (Did you know that Fox news reports to... the ENTERTAINMENT division? Talk about credibility) Well? Is it because that's what news has become? Feed the masses. And keep feeding them. Feed them some more. Meme. Meme. Meme.
My favorite recent story concerns the "vote" they took because of a possible DeLay indictment. What were the EXACT words out of the mouths of Fox MSNBC and even Peter Jennings? "Mr. Earle, the PARTISAN DEMOCRATIC district attorney...."
Deeper in the story you find that district attorney Earle, while now being attacked by the right, not only has 30 YEARS of exemplary service and his district ranked in the top 10 in the country, has indicted a total of 14 people, 12 democrats.
The right has the power now, and will destroy anyone who gets in their way. Rather was smart to get out now.
WHAT? Well, that's an "interesting" statement. Or do you have some insight you can share?
I found myself flipping around so much I never got a clear picture on how "well" anyone was doing... the news itself held my attention.
Our media at work?
Can't believe this hasn't been corrected yet...Brian Williams is set to take over for Tom Brokaw at NBC in a matter days. It was announced about a year ago, and Williams has since been preparing to take over for the position. While CBS has not yet named a successor to Rather, John Roberts and Scott Pelley are the leading candidates.
BTW, I've never watched the Evening News, on any of the three networks.
Oops, sorry, thank you for the correction.
I haven't watched the evening news in several years either. The networks have lost credibility because of their bias. There is just so many more sources of news now. I'm sure that they miss the nostalgic days of just three networks.
you are comparing apples to oranges... all of the names mentioned are on talk shows, where THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO GIVE AN OPINION. none of them are news anchors. they are pundits, with shows.
dan rather was a reporter. very, very different.
hey, calm down.
I dont have the transcipts of the 9-11 coverage that day, but i do remember Dan Rather blaming George W. for what happend instead of calling for any investigation.
Besides, Dan Rather is Ugly.
I've heard Tim Russert mentioned as a possible replacement. I would definitely be interested in CBS again with Tim as anchor.
The only thing I will miss about Rather are his nutty one liners. I think the dementia has set in with ole Danny boy.