·
About Archives (Old Archives) Contact Search PoliticalxRay/PoliSat.Com News Troops
Nov. 29, 2004 #01: Political
Satire/Commentary where satire is always commentary but commentary isn't always satire™ (but
we're confident you'll know the difference) Search
PoliSat.Com Home Tell
a friend about PoliSat.Com Subscribe
Permanent link to this installment in PoliSat.Com's
Archives Google-News
list of recent updates About
author, Jim Wrenn.
Bill
O'Reilly claims Dan Rather is being "smeared" for smearing George W. Bush in "RatherGate"
a.k.a. "MemoGate"; The factor O'Reilly ignores when critics of Dan he deplores-- So wryly
O'Reilly.
Bill O'Reilly's commentary on November 29, 2004 (here), claims Dan Rather is being "smeared" by critics accusing him of having partisan motives in participating in a pre-election 60-Minutes smear of George Bush founded on forged documents and axe-grinding sources described by Rather as "highly reliable." O'Reilly contends that Rather's "right wing" critics are unfairly refusing to accord Rather a "presumption of innocence." He equates Rather's hatchet job on Bush with sincere criticisms of John Kerry by SwiftBoat Veterans and former Prisoners of War in Vietnam. When, where and how has Dan Rather earned greater credibility than those SwiftBoat Veterans and former Prisoners of War? Rather's partisan bias is not a right-wing myth-- for an example from August, 2000, see RatherBlather (here).
O'Reilly says "Rather was smeared" without the "presumption" most dear-- i.e.,
presume aims were "innocent" aims unless and until guilt is clear. In fact, it was
Dan, not his critics, who skipped such "presumed" analytics when "facts" for a
smear of Bush were unclear and cluttered with flaws quite prolific. The factor O'Reilly
ignores when critics of Dan he deplores? The flaws in his smear of Bush made it clear such
flaws did Dan Rather ignore. Despite Bill's attempt as
comparer, the critics of Rather are fairer t'ward Rather than he attempted to be
t'ward Bush as a uniform wearer.
Defenders of Dan might retort "A free press should never abort the Fourth Estate gumption
eschewing presumptions of innocent government warts." But likewise, consumers of
news from Dan and his ilk should eschew
the same type presumption to judge when they function as sources of views 'stead of
news.
It ought not, say I, be a myst'ry to Bill, who taught civics and hist'ry,
that we who peruse reporting of "news" should view such presumption as risky.
Designed to induce peers' respect, his swipes at the right and the left
imply with ambivalence a moral equivalence between acts of Dan and the Vets. The viewpoints
I've hereby opined are not just for prose, but designed in lyrical ways for views to convey the
truth in both rhythm and rhyme:
So
Wryly O'Reilly.
O'Reilly
says "Rather was smeared"
without the "presumption" most dear--
i.e., presume aims
were "innocent" aims
unless and until guilt is clear.
In
fact, it was Dan, not his critics,
who skipped such "presumed" analytics
when "facts" for a smear
of Bush were unclear
and cluttered with flaws quite prolific.
The
factor O'Reilly ignores
when critics of Dan he deplores?
The flaws in his smear
of Bush made it clear
such flaws did Dan Rather ignore.
Despite
Bill's attempt as comparer,
the critics of Rather are fairer
t'ward Rather than he
attempted to be
t'ward Bush as a uniform wearer.
Defenders
of Dan might retort
"A free press should never abort
the Fourth Estate gumption
eschewing presumptions
of innocent government warts."
But
likewise, consumers of news
from Dan and his ilk should eschew
the same type presumption
to judge when they function
as sources of views 'stead of news.
It
ought not, say I, be a myst'ry
to Bill, who taught civics and hist'ry,
that we who peruse
reporting of "news"
should view such presumption as risky.
Designed
to induce peers' respect,
his swipes at the right and the left
imply with ambivalence
a moral equivalence
between acts of Dan and the Vets.
Too often O'Reilly's attempts to portray himself as a centrist are too contrived. This is an example. On some issues he's obviously left of center and on others he's obviously right of center. Contrivances such as this fatuous defense of Rather's patently partisan motivations in embracing a hit-piece founded on flaws that would be obvious to all but the ideologically blind are unnecessary to illustrate what's already obvious-- i.e., that O'Reilly occupies positions on both sides of the political center.
--Jim Wrenn, Editor@PoliSat.Com.
Donate your frequent-flier
miles to military personnel to return home from port of reentry on leave:
www.HeroMiles.Org.
|
·support our troops, support Bush, support Cheney, support victory in Iraq, support victory in Afghanistan, Clinton Liebrary, http://PoliSat.Com , PoliSatDOTcom, Salute America's Heroes, Fallen Heroes Fund, oppose Gore's Global Warming theory, support milblogs, Michael Yon, Pat Dollard, BlackFive, MilBlogs, MilBlogging, Michael Yon, Mudville Gazette, HotAir.Com, JawaReport, PajamasMedia , VictoryCaucus , VetsForFreedom , FreedomsWatch , DayByDayCartoon , WrennCom.Com , Video , Political Satire, Politics, News, oppose MoveOn.Org, oppose Code Pink, oppose DailyKos, oppose ANSWER, support PoliSat.Com, support WrennCom.Com, ·
|
|
 |
First Things First: Salute America's Heroes · Fallen Heroes Fund · Frequent-Flyer-Miles for Troops · Thanks to Troops · Military News ·· MilBlogs · Home · Posts: Current /Recent · Videos/Toons/Songs: Latest · Embed-Codes · Text Index · Images Index · Archives: Old · New · About · Contact · Syndication · Affiliates · News Sources/Papers/Magazines Pundits Blogs ThinkTanks What is "property"? Pantheopians Global Climate Asteroids/Comets Hitting Earth--Risks/Predictions Science GlobalWeb
|
 |
Other sites that feature
PoliSat.Com's Political Satire/Commentary-- Click
here to view our Affiliates page.