Mitch ([info]pogo101) wrote in [info]gwb_daily,
@ 2004-09-19 08:39:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
RIP: Dan Rather's Career (latest epitaphs)
(Hat tip to Jim Treacher's blog:

Washington Post:
Other questions abound: How could a program with the sterling reputation of "60 Minutes," which created the television newsmagazine during the Johnson administration, have stumbled so badly? And how could Rather, at 72 the dean of the network anchors, have risked his reputation on such a story in the heat of a presidential campaign?
New York Times:
One mystery among CBS staff members is why network officials remained so confident for so long about the documents as so many questions arose.
ABC News:
1. "The Kerry campaign had absolutely nothing to do with these documents, no ifs, ands or buts," spokesman David Wade said.

2. [Suspected document source] Bill Burkett[] said in an Aug. 21 e-mail to a list of Texas Democrats that after getting through "seven layers of bureaucratic kids" in the Democrat's campaign, he talked with former Georgia Sen. Max Cleland about information that would counter criticism of Kerry's Vietnam War service. The Associated Press obtained a copy of the e-mail Saturday. "I asked if they wanted to counterattack or ride this to ground and outlast it, not spending any money. (Cleland) said counterattack. So I gave them the information to do it with," Burkett wrote.
(Emphasis added.)




(Post a new comment)

Man who speaks out against Rather gets fired
[info]kctech88
2004-09-19 09:37 am UTC (link)
http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/entertainment/9701134.htm

As CBS affilliates basically throttle criticism.

(Reply to this)


[info]supertigerbabe
2004-09-19 10:30 am UTC (link)
That cat picture disturbs me. What is it?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]korean_guy_01
2004-09-19 10:33 am UTC (link)
OWN3D is a way of saying that someone just really got shown up. Like the following:



(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]supertigerbabe
2004-09-19 10:50 am UTC (link)
Oh, haha! Gotcha.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]bloody_keri
2004-09-19 02:43 pm UTC (link)
You got it? Because I sure didn't. I'm still VERY disturbed by the image of a man swinging a cat by its legs. I volunteer one day a week in an animal shelter and have seen firsthand the results of such cruelty. I'd really like to know where this picture came from, because it sure doesn't look fake.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]supertigerbabe
2004-09-19 05:51 pm UTC (link)
Oh no, I didn't like the cat swinging, but I did think the Justin Timberlake picture was funny. I have two dogs and two cats of my own. I'm still disturbed by the picture itself.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]ice_angel12
2004-09-19 06:43 pm UTC (link)
I'm close to tears looking at that picture, I can;t handle animal cruelty...expecialy towards cats, they're so little...

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]bloody_keri
2004-09-19 02:44 pm UTC (link)
That doesn't explain the picture. Where did it come from? I'm very, very upset about what it's displaying. Animal cruelty is nothing to laugh about, as I'm sure you'll agree.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]korean_guy_01
2004-09-19 02:47 pm UTC (link)
1] The picture is obviously fake (look at the cat's legs)

2] CBS made up a story, got caught in a lie by multiple sources, so it has indeed been Owned by just about everyone out there.

3] The pic, although cruel (and yes fake), depicts the cat getting Owned by the man.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]bloody_keri
2004-09-19 03:03 pm UTC (link)
I get the 'owned' point; I just don't care about it. Not trying to be a bitch here; I'm just concerned about the picture. Are you SURE it's fake? You say to look at the cat's legs, but I don't see anything about its legs that signals it as a fake. ?? I'm sure I come across as a little overzealous here, but I work with animals who've been through truly horrific cruelty - being set on fire, skinned alive, etc. - so images like that really bother me...

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]pogo101
2004-09-19 03:09 pm UTC (link)
It's fairly obvious to me that it's fake. (If it weren't, I wouldn't have been comfortable with it myself.) As a matter of physics, of inertia, the cat is too high (too far forward) vs. the situation in a real picture. If it were real, the cat would still be hanging further back (counterclockwise to where it is shown), and with a greater arch in its back -- and probably blurred, as would be the throwing arm/hand.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]bloody_keri
2004-09-19 03:33 pm UTC (link)
Well, okay. I'm still skeptical, and I guess I'm equally disturbed by the mindset of whoever would doctor a picture in such a way in the name of humor, but I appreciate your taking the time to explain all that. Thanks.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]kctech88
2004-09-19 04:39 pm UTC (link)
The cat is transposed and flipped via photoshop. Should the cat have been on an upward swing such as this, it's legs would not be evenly spaced. There was a long thread about this photo somewhere else. It's not even particularly good photoshop work, as there is a lot of tearing and greyscale innacuracies between what is transposed.

*shrug*

But I understand your thought :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]ice_angel12
2004-09-19 06:44 pm UTC (link)
Agreed, it doesn't look fake. I'm not looking at it any more than I have to, I'm already near crying over it... ::runs to hug her precious kitty::

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]kimikokai
2004-09-19 05:35 pm UTC (link)
Personally I agree with the others and I'm offended by the cat picture. I really don't care if its a fake or not. . . I still think it is in poor taste. . .

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]rockstar
2004-09-20 09:58 pm UTC (link)
total agreement here.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]deadkennedys101
2004-09-19 07:32 pm UTC (link)
I prefer it to be spelled "pwned"

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]rockstar
2004-09-20 09:51 pm UTC (link)
agreed.. from one of the warcrafts or starcrafts wasn't it?

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]_untold_truth_
2004-09-19 08:04 pm UTC (link)
Geez none of u ppl can take a joke. Ur Politically Anal. If its fake who gives a sh%&?

I wonder how many of u, who find this offensive, go and watch Rated "R" movies? Or even PG13 for that matter. Thats Hollywood, ppl getting their brains blown out, ppl getting the crap beat out of them, etc.

And for those of u who voltuneer in an animal shelter and therefore find this offensive; did u go and volunteer for the Red Cross after 911? Thats the problem I have with people, and this happens ALL the time, people die in wrecks, or in absolutely terrible ways and people just accept it as "thats life", yet a dog gets thrown out of a car or something of that sort and people are throwing their money at the family to help pay for funeral expenses ect. Look, if u do both then good, but if ur so sensitive over animal violence and not that of humans (u get teary eyed about 911 for example, but dont go to same lengths you do for animals) then u have serious problems.

(Reply to this)


[info]ex_daywalker696
2004-09-19 09:18 pm UTC (link)
Perhaps this will be more pleasing to our friends of the animals. Animal on human cruelty:

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Bwahahaha
[info]_conundrum_
2004-09-19 09:49 pm UTC (link)
Yes. That's much better.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…