Comments on: CBS and Internet Fisking

CBS and Internet Fisking

alethe — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 14:55:27 -0800

For Shame.

By: donth

donth — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:00:37 -0800

This was debunked by FARK for fuck's sake. anyway, look here

By: Mick

Mick — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:03:55 -0800

Oh, FARK. That sets the record straight

By: smackfu

smackfu — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:07:10 -0800

"Some Question Authenticity of Papers on Bush" is the WaPo headline, and I think that summaries the issue nicely. No document expert will say it's definitely a forgery without having access to the originals, and no one does.

By: jca

jca — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:08:31 -0800

It's a win for the GOP either way. The economy? War in Iraq? Health care? Forget discussing any of that. Everyone is talking about monospaced fonts and 13pt leading instead!

By: Postroad

Postroad — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:10:10 -0800

Why not go to the origianls since they were obtained by use of Freedom of Information. Why would Rather put his rep on the line by using forged documents? Seems but another attempt by the White House to dismiss that which they dislike, much as they are now busy at work trying to keep Kitty Lelley from discussing her book on the talk show next week. As for the remark about Fark: it often posts worthwhile items that have been gathered. Much as tere is every once in a while a decent post at this site. Or even a decent comment. (such as this one.)

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:10:55 -0800

Right wing blows load too early, news at eleven. Atrios has this covered

Little Green Silly People

One of the new words the right wingers have seized on is "kerning." They're obsessed that the "kerning" on the CBS memo is exactly the same as the "kerning" on an identical version typed into Word. The idea is that typewriters of the time which used proportional fonts still didn't have any kind of kerning mechanism. That might be somewhat interesting, except for the fact that by default kerning is not turned on in Microsoft Word, and not used in the Word Document made by Charles Johnson of LGF (I won't link, you can find it yourself. He'll likely just set up a redirect if I do. The basic info is here at Tech Shill Station.)is not created with the kerning turned on.

Word Doc is here.

To see the difference kerning makes - and it does make a small difference - highlight all of the text, go to format, font, character spacing, and click the kerning box. More Forgeries Wow! It appears that a lot of these documents (not all) from 1963 must be forgeries! Executive I'm not going to spend the day arguing about fonts and typewriters, because the whole thing is so goddamn stupid, but what kind of "experts" in this are are unable to do a google search in 5 seconds and discover that IBM had been marketing a basic typewriter with proportional spacing since ~~the late 1940s~~ 1941 (thanks Melic!). And, here's the Selectric Composer. ...more

By: Kwantsar

Kwantsar — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:15:45 -0800

Well, 60 Minutes and the truth have parted ways before.

By: jammer

jammer — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:18:57 -0800

As long as we're playing "dueling quotes" over this bullshit:

Kos also never addresses any of the substantive issues: the absurdity, on its face, of writing a memo whose subject heading is "CYA;" the memos' inconsistency with various military usages of the early 1970's; and, most of all, the anachronism in the August 18, 1973 memo, where Killian allegedly writes: "Staudt has obviously pressured Hodges more about Bush." Brigadier General "Buck" Staudt retired in 1972. Kos never mentions any of these facts. Nor does Kos mention the fact that Killian's widow, his son, and the personnel chief of his National Guard unit are all on record saying that they think the documents are forged, and do not reflect Killian's views. Or the fact that Killian's own evaluations of Bush contradict the memos. Or the fact that Killian's signature on the faked memos doesn't match his real signature, as shown on documents that are indisputably authentic. Kos also exhibits no curiousity about the provenance of these documents. If they didn't come from Killian's family, where did they come from? Who ostensibly squirrelled away a handful of papers thirty-one years ago, apparently on the off chance that Lt. Bush might be President some day? Inquiring minds want to know, but CBS won't say.

By: punishinglemur

punishinglemur — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:23:29 -0800

FTR, Powerline is wrong when it attributes that post to Kos. It was written by "Hunter" and published as a diary on the Daily Kos website. Anyone with a Daily Kos account can publish a diary.

By: punishinglemur

punishinglemur — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:26:29 -0800

CBS will apparently be addressing this issue on their 6:30 (eastern) news broadcast. Which starts in four minutes.

By: reklaw

reklaw — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:31:02 -0800

I can't believe the sheer scale of the denial here. For fuck's sake. I'm Old Europe, Old Labour, a fucking socialist, but it's easy to see that the memo in question is faked. Just try opening MS Word and typing it yourself. It's exactly the same. The font, the kerning, the leading -- everything. Do you really think that could have happened by chance? The odds must be one in billions. Anyone who does not believe the memo is faked is an ideologue beyond redemption at this point, and I absolutely despair to see it happening at so many of my normal liberal hangouts. Daily Kos, Atrios and friends are leading you completely the wrong way. This is the time to renounce their idiocy. This is the time to let yourself see the truth, regardless of which side of the election you've chosen. Would someone else who isn't right-wing but sees how insane denying the obvious is please back me up on this? I'd put money, at this point, on CBS being forced to apologise.

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:31:34 -0800

"Friday afternoon, CBS News addressed one of the authenticity issues raised, whether typewriters in the 1960s had the "th" superscript key. "CBS News states with absolute certainty that the ability to produce the "th" superscript mentioned in reports about the documents did exist on typewriters as early as 1968, and in fact is in President Bush's official military records released by the White House, CBS said in a statement. The issue will be addressed in Friday's Evening News broadcast, 6:30 p.m. ET. "

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:37:20 -0800

I'm Old Europe, Old Labour, a fucking socialist, but it's easy to see that the memo in question is faked. Just try opening MS Word and typing it yourself. It's exactly the same. The font, the kerning, the leading -- everything. Once again- for one of the memos. The unsigned, private memo. This doesn't work, and is therefore no proof of forgery- for the memo indicating Bush had diobeyed a direct order. Again, you can replicate the memo on Word. And the documents, like most other documents, could of course be faked. But a website raised a question. No one on the internet in the last 24 hours has "proved" anything as fake, and the condescending attitude of many of the right-wing blogs claiming this proves just how far from "the new form of journalism" they actually are.

By: reklaw

reklaw — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:41:06 -0800

In CBS' own article (that XQUZYPHYR linked to):

Independent document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines said the memos looked like they had been produced on a computer using Microsoft Word software. Lines, a document expert and fellow of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, pointed to a superscript -- a smaller, raised "th" in "111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron" -- as evidence indicating forgery. "I'm virtually certain these were computer generated," Lines said to the Associated Press after reviewing copies of the documents at her office in Paradise Valley, Ariz. She produced a nearly identical document using her computer's Microsoft Word software.

How can they put that in their own report and then go on and say they stand by the memos? Serious cognitive dissonance. I'm no fan of warblogs, but defending an obvious forgery just makes liberals look stupid.

By: elwoodwiles

elwoodwiles — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:41:25 -0800

Well, we need to know where these documents came from. Does CBS have original copies that experts can examine? Is there record of these records? It seems like the documents are both too mundane and too consistent with the general understanding that W did not serve a full and honorable tour of duty while defending the skies of East Texas from the Viet-Cong. Rove must be laughing, watching people discussing the history of Times New Roman rather than the deaths of American's in Iraq. The right wing says it's ok to attack Kerry's service history because it's part of his platform. W, on the other hand, should be given a pass on his past failures merely for being a "War President." Of a war he started.

By: cedar

cedar — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:42:08 -0800

And we're off. I knew this would be irresistable and someone was bound to post it. Nice start, we have Atrios, LGF and some guy on Kos referenced in the first dozen posts of a thread I'd be surprised not to see hit two hundred. Hell, this thing has something for everyone. Conspiracy, weblogs vs. mainstream media, kerning, typewriter history and fonts. We, along with the rest of the country, can now devote ourselves to discussing esoteric IBM typewriters that may have been in use thirty years ago rather than those awkward issues of substance; little things like the assault weapons ban expiring, the clusterfuck in Fallujah, Dick Cheney going batshit insane and health care reform. No wonder the entire world is laughing at us -- well, at least those who aren't trembling in terror.

By: togdon

togdon — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:42:40 -0800

I like this forged memo better... YMMV

By: scarabic

scarabic — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:44:37 -0800

what jca said

By: Jimbob

Jimbob — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:45:17 -0800

So this is how the land of the free, the world's only superpower, the global policeman, the eagle of democracy spends its fridays...

By: jammer

jammer — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:49:16 -0800

Daily Kos, Atrios and friends are leading you completely the wrong way. This is the time to renounce their idiocy. This is the time to let yourself see the truth, regardless of which side of the election you've chosen. Would someone else who isn't right-wing but sees how insane denying the obvious is please back me up on this? It's worse than that. I was with one of my more, er, vocally liberal friends last night, who was raving about how the "latest memos vindicating Bush's service record" were forged, what an evil fuck Bush is, and so on. He had no clue what the tempest was really about. All he'd heard was "Bush" and "forgery" in the same breath and, of course, he knew that it had to be "the Shrub" himself doing the devious acts. That's the kind of bat-shit crazy willful ignorance that's made me a 9/11 Republican.

By: darukaru

darukaru — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:49:52 -0800

Does CBS have original copies that experts can examine? According to them: Nope.

By: destro

destro — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:50:41 -0800

Don't forget that the memos are backed up by the author's commander who agreed that this was his sentiment at the time. And I don't know if CBS is considered liberal just because they run something that's anti-Bush

By: xmutex

xmutex — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:53:38 -0800

What the fuck does any of this have to do with the world in 2004, anyway? Who gives a flying fucking hooha whether or not Kerry shot himself in the goddamned throat to win a ribbon and whether or not Bush bothered to show up for what would have been pathetically easy service anyway? Who cares? What the crap does any of it have to do with either man's ability to lead the country today? Goddamn, high school never ends, does it? We're living in 2004, not 1968 or 1971 or 1973, right? Fuck it. I'm voting for Nader.

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:55:50 -0800

"If any new evidence to the contrary is unconvered, we will report it. So far, there is none." -Dan Rather, 6:40 PM ...wow, that only took seconds. How come it took LGF and Powerline about 24 hours to reach the same point?

By: reklaw

reklaw — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:56:30 -0800

That's the kind of bat-shit crazy willful ignorance that's made me a 9/11 Republican. Oh, the same willful ignorance exists in Republicans. American politics seems to have come down to the ignorant arguing with the ignorant. It's LGF vs Atrios, Instapundit vs DailyKos, DemocraticUnderground vs Freerepublic in a tragic race to the bottom. Both sides believe only things that back up their particular dogma. Neither side will admit when they are wrong, or even that they might be wrong. It's all about scoring points, cheering for the home team. It's absolutely sickening. If I was living in the US, at this point, I'd have no idea what the fuck to do. Bush and Kerry are both awful candidates. And Nader's a fool, too, come to that.

By: dhoyt

dhoyt — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:57:14 -0800

Insistence that it's A-OK for the alleged forgers to play dirty since the GOP plays dirty in 5...4...3...

By: punishinglemur

punishinglemur — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:58:30 -0800

jammer, if you want to get away from bat-shit crazy willlful ignorance, you're going to have to start your own party and live in the woods. I hate to break it to you, but bat-shit craziness extends all the way across the political spectrum.

By: HTuttle

HTuttle — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:59:13 -0800

So many are SO biased they keep denying as the TRUTH glares into their face. What a way to live life folks!

By: Wulfgar!

Wulfgar! — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:59:28 -0800

So this is how the land of the free, the world's only superpower, the global policeman, the eagle of democracy spends its fridays... H'yup. Depressing, isn't it? And you forgot "home of the ~~shit_stained fearful~~ brave". You know what tomorrow is, don't you? NEVER FORGET!!! Whatever the fuck that means.

By: obfusciatrist

obfusciatrist — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:01:19 -0800

I just want to say that it is amazing to me that it took this long for this to show up on Metafilter. Who knew such restraint was possible.

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:02:46 -0800

So many are SO biased they keep denying as the TRUTH glares into their face. What a way to live life folks! Generic insults against the other side's partisanship... how convenient!

By: elwoodwiles

elwoodwiles — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:02:51 -0800

What does CBS have? Where did it come from? Do other sources support these allegations? By playing font-games people are removing the context that makes these documents so damning. Bravo. To me it seems like there is enough anecdotal evidence that Bush did not fulfill his duties to his country during war time. These documents only further this position; they add another layer to the assertion that Bush shirked his duty and is now lying about it. The righties are really brilliant on this one. Even if the documents are shown not to be forged, enough people will believe they are and the divisive politics will continue. And me, well I'm voting for Hugo Chavez.

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:10:54 -0800

elwoodwiles: exactly. Remember: these are the people who will triumph over "old media!" Just like when Matt Drudge destroyed all the news networks in 1997! Remember? Remember when there used to be TV news programs and newspapers, but some guy on the internet made an accusation that turned out to be true and destroyed all that? Man, this is some good crack.

By: mrgrimm

mrgrimm — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:10:56 -0800

What the fuck does any of this have to do with the world in 2004, anyway? it may have an effect on the 2004 U.S. presidential election. Who gives a flying fucking hooha whether or not Kerry shot himself in the goddamned throat to win a ribbon and whether or not Bush bothered to show up for what would have been pathetically easy service anyway? Who cares? i do. i care that Kerry committed some rather inhumane acts during the war, and i care that GWB took a rather unprincipled stance in order to avoid it. What the crap does any of it have to do with either man's ability to lead the country today? well, if either man is lying about his service, it indicates the type of deceitful behavior that either might engage in while president. but, hey, i'm probably voting for Nader too. now we both don't matter! yay for America! i'm not sure how anyone could be so convinced they were real/forgeries from secondhand evidence. i don't know much of anything about document forensics, but matching signatures is a strong piece of evidence in the case of someone who's been dead for 20 years.

By: raysmj

raysmj — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:15:27 -0800

This is the silliest controversy. The number of newfound typewriter experts is bewildering. For heaven's sakes, it's so supid. It's beyond stupid, and into a whole 'nother realm. It's devolution. (Reklaw: the CBS News website is probably put together somewhat independently of the news broadcast. Even then, I remember working at a newspaper where charges were made against us by some non-unionized strikers, and we printed what they were. Most newspapers will let readers know when libel suits have been filed against them, etc.)

By: thomcatspike

thomcatspike — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:32:17 -0800

it is amazing to me that it took this long This happens a lot and was commented on in an earlier thread: "Yes, but the font is proportional, and there are superscripts." posted by quonsar at 12:23 AM CST on September 10 . I wondered after reading the comment it if it was fully understood

By: quonsar

quonsar — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:40:20 -0800

*daydreams about feeling pretty*

By: rks404

rks404 — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:41:47 -0800

quonsar, those ribbons look so beautiful in your long blonde hair!

By: rushmc

rushmc — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:42:42 -0800

Does anyone really believe that it was impossible to do superscripting on typewriters?? You people are SO young. I used to do it all the time. There may be more to the claims than that, but that's just ignorant.

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:44:20 -0800

Jesus, rushmc, are you an idiot? We have weblogs! We know everything!

By: reklaw

reklaw — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:47:35 -0800

I can't believe Dan Rather spent about ten minutes defending the documents on air (I watched it on Sky News). And someone even used the word "blogosphere". Amazing. Anyway, I'm not even slightly convinced by CBS' response to this. So CBS' two experts and an author say they're genuine. What about all the other experts interviewed elsewhere who've said they're not? Anyway, all the debate about what was and wasn't possible on typewriters misses the point. The clincher is still the way that the memo matches up exactly with MS Word's default settings. Even if we assume that a typewriter was available with proportional Times New Roman (or "New Times Roman" as Rather called it) that was capable of superscript, and we assume that such a typewriter would ever have been used for Air National Guard memos, the fact remains that the Word version and supposedly typewrtier-produced version are identical. There's no way you'll ever convince me that's a coincidence. No way.

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:47:40 -0800

/shows the youngin's what a platten knob was.

By: AstroGuy

AstroGuy — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:50:49 -0800

elwoodwiles: Rove must be laughing, watching people discussing the history of Times New Roman rather than the deaths of American's in Iraq. cedar: We, along with the rest of the country, can now devote ourselves to discussing esoteric IBM typewriters that may have been in use thirty years ago rather than those awkward issues of substance; little things like the assault weapons ban expiring, the clusterfuck in Fallujah, Dick Cheney going batshit insane and health care reform. Fuckin' A Bubbas. This is precisely the point I was trying to make in that other thread.

By: destro

destro — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:57:12 -0800

They're not identical. There's a number of minor differences having to do with placement of the superscript, alignment of the "e", and ink bleeding. Although the spacing is really coincidental, mostly due to the same spacing, there's enough variation to believe their legitimacy. Still, this could all be solved by somebody finding a likely typewriter candidate and duplicating the letter. Then we could move on.

By: scody

scody — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:59:10 -0800

Rove must be laughing, watching people discussing the history of Times New Roman rather than the deaths of American's in Iraq. Oh my god, is that the Reichstag? On fire?

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:59:38 -0800

Could someone summarize what's going on here? I can't follow anymore.

By: destro

destro — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:59:55 -0800

I guess there's already an award *roots through attic for old typewriter

By: AstroGuy

AstroGuy — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:01:14 -0800

Would someone else who isn't right-wing but sees how insane denying the obvious is please back me up on this? I will reklaw. I'm a card carrying liberal democrat and I can see this will do nothing to help get Kerry elected. In the end it will only help shrub.

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:02:53 -0800

Why do typewriters have Times Roman on them anyway? Doesn't everyone use ' New Roman? Was that the case 30 years ago?

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:05:33 -0800

Could someone summarize what's going on here? I can't follow anymore. Al Gore said he invented the internet.

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:06:38 -0800

Didn't he also invent Verdana?

By: solistrato

solistrato — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:08:16 -0800

And then he rode in a tank with a funny hat shortly after marveling at a supermarket scanner.

By: AstroGuy

AstroGuy — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:12:03 -0800

Does anyone really believe that it was impossible to do superscripting on typewriters?? You people are SO young. I used to do it all the time. rushmc: You did superscripts in smaller type? Wow, you are awesome. I'm not that young--I remember typewriters just fine. I still have two of them.

By: davidmsc

davidmsc — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:15:52 -0800

Century Gothic. 'Nuff said.

By: solistrato

solistrato — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:16:25 -0800

Actually, I can hear the siren song of Rove behind this, his dulcet voice singing, "join us, Democrats, join us...join us in the sweet slumber of pure, unadulterated zealotry." I don't know if this document was forged, and frankly, I don't care. My reasons for voting for Bush have absolutely nothing to do with memos or National Guard service and everything to do with the miserable record he's accumulated over the last four years. Of course, now that both sides can foam at the mouth over whatever. For a campaign that claims to hate lawyers, they sure do love that reasonable doubt, don't they? This is the O.J. moment of the 2004 campaign, and the fact that this might blow back on Kerry is sad, sad indeed. Off on a technicality.

By: gwint

gwint — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:18:12 -0800

$10 for the first one to match the document exactly using only CSS. Go!

By: inksyndicate

inksyndicate — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:26:05 -0800

You know, after about 18 months using Metafilter I'm just starting to grasp why people find political posts so annoying. New evidence reveals that the document was created on Apple ][ Bank Street Writer...

By: solistrato

solistrato — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:28:24 -0800

Actually, it was forged by Kaycee Nicole.

By: Mick

Mick — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:33:00 -0800

I just want to say that it is amazing to me that it took this long for this to show up on Metafilter. Who knew such restraint was possible. It's not that amazing at all. It doesn't fit the agenda of the majority (and my fiance said I wasn't allowed to post it myself ; ). Two things about Dan Rather on CBS: 1)What was up with his voice, was it his nerves or had he been yelling at interns all day? 2) When they showed the example of superscript from another Killian document that was not questioned did anyone else notice that they were completely different? How many typewriters does a guy who doesn't know how to type (according to Killian's son and wife) need?

By: Krrrlson

Krrrlson — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:35:30 -0800

Could someone summarize what's going on here? I can't follow anymore. $10 for the first one to match the document exactly using only CSS. Go! To merge the concepts - one GMail invitation to whoever can summarize this in a single, brief, nonpartisan sentence. And eleventy billion invitations to someone who can make me care.

By: SweetJesus

SweetJesus — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:35:47 -0800

Say what you will about the authenticity of the documents, at least everyone can get one good laugh out of the situation. Here's my favorite Bob Novak quote of all time

All I say is, all CBS has to say is where do these documents come from. - Bob Novak, 09/10/04

Ohhh, the irony is killing me!

By: Krrrlson

Krrrlson — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:37:25 -0800

Only the first acceptable response will be credited.

By: lord_wolf

lord_wolf — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:42:02 -0800

i've always thought of karl rove as somone you could summon after reading the ars goetia, but i gotta say the mufuh does well that which he's been summoned to do. i'd live a life of sin without fear if i knew karl rove was going to organize and run the campaign to get me into heaven.

By: raysmj

raysmj — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:53:36 -0800

reklaw is convinced it's a fake due to something he saw a blog. Does it for me! I need to get to the grocery store now. I really need some lemon juice for a recipe.

By: rushmc

rushmc — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:56:24 -0800

You did superscripts in smaller type? I'm pretty sure at least one of the balls for my IBM Selectric had smaller "th"s and "st"s, so yes.

By: reklaw

reklaw — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:59:28 -0800

raysmj: Take a look at this charming animated gif. Pretty convincing, no?

By: SweetJesus

SweetJesus — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:00:19 -0800

What, no "nd"'s? What in god's name do you do if you have a 2!!

By: Joey Michaels

Joey Michaels — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:01:39 -0800

ParisParamus: Didn't he also invent Verdana? I think PP wins this thread.

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:05:10 -0800

"I'm pretty sure at least one of the balls for my IBM Selectric had smaller "th"s and "st"s, so yes." Like, someone in the National Guard would take the time to change font balls--how realistic is that?

By: iamck

iamck — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:12:47 -0800

"Umm...guess what everybody? I don't give a fuck about the Vietnam War."

By: Mick

Mick — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:12:58 -0800

Here's a screen cap of the two "th"s CBS claims are identical: Critics claim typewriters didn't have that ability in the 1970s. But some models did. In fact, other Bush military records already released by the White House itself show the same superscript – including one from 1968.

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:16:40 -0800

Like, someone in the National Guard would take the time to change font balls--how realistic is that? No, tool, he means that the ball had the 'th' on it as one of the keys, not te special 'th' ball that had just one key on it.

By: solistrato

solistrato — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:17:20 -0800

I love how this has become such a Rorschach test. (DId I spell that right?) It's completely quantum. Wouldn't it be great if the idiosyncratic whim of one National Guard secretary could decide an election 32 years later? I think PP wins this thread. Oh, fine. I can't stay mad at him. Take a look at this charming animated gif. Pretty convincing, no? Well, now that you mention it...er, no. I'm no expert, obviously, but the memo part looks irregular, pushed apart, and generally what one would expect from a typewriter. The MS word graphic is just way too precise. And I promise, I'm trying to be objective, but just from that? I'm seeing similarity, sure, but not enough to convict. Sorry.

By: mr.marx

mr.marx — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:17:45 -0800

Like, someone in the National Guard would take the time to change font balls--how realistic is that? Bush could've changed them, I hear he had much free time.

By: AstroGuy

AstroGuy — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:18:18 -0800

reklaw: Actually, after viewing that gif, I am less convinced than I was before. Using the "blink comparator" here I see lots of differences now, and the superscript really sticks out.

By: solistrato

solistrato — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:25:33 -0800

and the superscript really sticks out. Yeah, after looking at that again, that superscript really does punch out -- it's much higher up on the memo than in the MS Word version.

By: reklaw

reklaw — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:32:15 -0800

Yeah, the superscript difference is the one big difference. But it goes away, for some reason, when you print the document (yes, I actually tried this). The differences in quality are down to CBS' document being, apparently, a scan of a photocopy, or perhaps even further removed. I'm just convinced by the sheer similarity. As an experiment, try typing a document in Times New Roman with the default settings using OpenOffice. Try it with AbiWord. Try it with any other word processor you can think of (yes, I went to great lengths before actually accepting something that came from LGF as the truth). It just doesn't match up at all. The Word version matches up to a degree that just couldn't possibly be fluke.

By: Ynoxas

Ynoxas — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:38:26 -0800

Why wasn't the military using Courier? How many lives were lost due to our military's extravagant usage of Times? HOW MANY MR. PRESIDENT?!?!?!?!

By: AstroGuy

AstroGuy — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:40:02 -0800

Is that a screen shot of Word or a scan of a printed document done in Word? On screen and printed won't be exactly the same. Well, I just tried it and printed it out on the LaserJet 4200 here in the lab. The superscript is set quite a bit higher when printed than when viewed on screen. It appears to be just as high as on the "original" doc. (The corner of the "7" points at the "t" between the crossbar and the bottom of the letter, not above it as it appears onscreen. Even zooming in 400% on screen shows it much lower than it actually prints.)

By: madamjujujive

madamjujujive — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:40:09 -0800

What an incredible bunch of forensic experts the far right has suddenly proven themselves to be as they keenly embrace the task of analyzing typographic esoterica like kerning and superscripts. We haven't seen such detective work since the good old days discussing bodily fluids on dresses and the president's penile peculiarities. Too bad the same effort wasn't expended on trying to determine the veracity of some dodgy dossiers and forged uranium reports...had it been, we might not be quagmired in Iraq with no strategy for peace or for exit, and a thousand fewer soldier's families would be in mourning.

By: substrate

substrate — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:40:32 -0800

Wait, I thought that the wrong-wing brigade was opposed to all these political posts regardless of which side they take? Ahh, it's so obvious. They are full of shit.

By: AstroGuy

AstroGuy — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:49:50 -0800

madamjujujive: Not all of us are on the right. Watch the generalizations. Do I need to post a disclaimer with every post I make questioning this? If it's fake, it's fake. This sounds like the right questioning the patriotism of anyone that questions Bush.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:00:04 -0800

destro ... your award link has an incredible amount of ignorance on it about what a ibm selectric composer was capable of ... font sizes could be changed by changing the type element ... and i saw in the daily kos thread that some remember ibm executive typewriters for the military having superscript "th" etc on their elements look at the baselines ... they're not even ... some letters are higher than others in the word document, they're perfect i used to typeset in the early 80s with a selectric composer ... they're a lot more capable than the critics realize ... but ... that's not an argument that the documents are genuine ... in fact, i think a selectric composer may have been used to forge them

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:13:22 -0800

Careful America -- you're lurching from amusing to pathetic, now.

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:13:27 -0800

So, has Kerry been elected yet? Selected yet? Selectric'd yet?

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:17:53 -0800

Have you noticed how the Drudge Report is now all in Times Roman? No one can accuse Drudge of lacking a sense of humor. Question: Will tomorrow's anniversary supercede this debate, or vice versa; and if the latter, does that mean that Kerry gains points?

By: darukaru

darukaru — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:20:25 -0800

This is beyond the Vietnam crap now. If these are faked, then we have two possibilities: 1) Someone faked these documents to damage CBS's reputation. This is bad. 2) Someone faked these documents to influence the outcome of a Presidential election. This is worse.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:22:56 -0800

3) someone faked these documents to further disgust the american people with the voting process

By: weston

weston — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:24:03 -0800

Oh, the same willful ignorance exists in Republicans. American politics seems to have come down to the ignorant arguing with the ignorant. It's LGF vs Atrios, Instapundit vs DailyKos, DemocraticUnderground vs Freerepublic in a tragic race to the bottom. Both sides believe only things that back up their particular dogma. Neither side will admit when they are wrong, or even that they might be wrong. It's all about scoring points, cheering for the home team. It's absolutely sickening. No, reklaw won the thread many, many comments up. Although anyone who wanted to post a link to some actual investigative journalism that doesn't contain phrases like "How stupid do they think we are?" or "The left/right is at it again!" or anything like that could really win.

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:25:53 -0800

What's sort of telling (if pathetic) is that this polemic makes you think about Bush being treated unfairly, but it doesn't make you think of Kerry at all--he get entirely crowded out. It sort of goes to show that Kerry remains "Brand X," an amorphous alternative; not so much a candidate, but a repository for dissatisfaction with Bush. And amorphous repositories don't defeat Presidents. And their poll numbers decline as the election approaches.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:36:44 -0800

parisparamus ... one gets the feeling that kerry's the political equivalent of the tuba player in that infamous stanford game ... "him? ... yeah ... he's the guy that got ran over"

By: eatitlive

eatitlive — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:42:46 -0800

PP: *thwacka thwacka thwacka* Still it's good to see that hear from the Republican extremists too every once in awhile, eh? This is their biggest break since Janet Reno rode off into the Elian Gonzalez sunsets of Miami in a UN Black Helicopter supplied at the American Taxpayer's Expense. madamjujujive: We haven't seen such detective work since the good old days discussing bodily fluids on dresses and the president's penile peculiarities. Which is why you just know that some CBS programing executive has already ordered a pilot for C.S.I. New Roman.

By: eatitlive

eatitlive — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:43:24 -0800

~~see that~~

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:44:39 -0800

"Century Gothic" Could you explain this remark, please?

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:50:29 -0800

So, what do we know? We know that the letters don't line up, but they do in the Word version. We know that the Selectric Executive typewriters had a matching font. We know that other documents in Bush's records also contain superscripts. We know that the Selectric could make the 'th'. We know that this is one document out of many, all of which paint a fairly consistent picture of Bush's lack of service. We know that Bush has never explained the gaps in his record. We know that some other kid got sent to Vietnam in Bush's place.

By: Armitage Shanks

Armitage Shanks — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:04:57 -0800

but it doesn't make you think of Kerry at all--he get entirely crowded out. Why should it? Unlike the Swift Boat Liars, there's no evidence of one of campaigns having close connections to it.

By: namespan

namespan — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:09:09 -0800

We know that some other kid got sent to Vietnam in Bush's place. And now. *fast cut fades between action scenes* That Kid. *fast cut fades between other scenes* Must Save Our Nation. *slow leaping scene* *explosion* *title* coming soon to a theater near you.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:09:12 -0800

And amorphous repositories don't defeat President Yes, but Bush is kind of an amorphous repository himself, don't cha think? A first among presidents at the very least.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:09:19 -0800

What's truly amazing is that at 72dpi (Mac) or 96dpi (Windows), people can make such absolute claims as to the letterforms and alignment of type.

By: republican

republican — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:09:34 -0800

...There's a number of minor differences having to do with placement of the superscript, alignment of the "e", and ink bleeding. I have to admit I'm getting a bit aroused.

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:11:34 -0800

Armitage, I don't think that matters. The origin of the story doesn't matter, it's just that one story is more capitvating that the other, and so it goes. PS: How often is the word "Kerry" even mentioned here (As compared to "Bush," shurub, etc?

By: Steve_at_Linnwood

Steve_at_Linnwood — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:12:40 -0800

Wait, I thought that the wrong-wing brigade was opposed to all these political posts regardless of which side they take? Ahh, it's so obvious. They are full of shit. Well I can only assume that you are referring to me? I'm am opposed to all these political posts regardless of which side they take. You didn't see me making a front page post yesterday. So, fuck off.

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:32:18 -0800

PS: How often is the word "Kerry" even mentioned here (As compared to "Bush," shurub, etc? Bush is the president.

By: soyjoy

soyjoy — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:36:13 -0800

I knew this would be irresistable and someone was bound to post it. Yes... someone who apparently missed the thread where we've been discussing it since the story broke. I'm tired of the whole thing by now and, as I said there, don't really care whether they're forged or not because everyone knows - and the WH doesn't deny - that the history they depict is accurate. But I do want to say this: togdon's memo way upthread is the funniest thing I've seen all week, and finally made this Friday seem like Friday. Thanks.

By: fleener

fleener — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 21:03:17 -0800

IGNORING FOR A MOMENT that this was debunked -- the White House itself accepts the documents as real. Damn, conservatives will grasp at any straw, won't they?

By: Mick

Mick — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 21:17:45 -0800

The White House has made no comment one way or the other. Damn, liberals will stick their heads up their ass, won't the? Stick a fork in Dan Rather, he's done: ABC Reports HODGES SAID HE WAS MISLED BY CBS: Retired Maj. General Hodges, Killian's supervisor at the Grd, tells ABC News that he feels CBS misled him about the documents they uncovered. According to Hodges, CBS told him the documents were "handwritten" and after CBS read him excerpts he said, "well if he wrote them that's what he felt." Hodges also said he did not see the documents in the 70's and he cannot authenticate the documents or the contents. His personal belief is that the documents have been "computer generated" and are a "fraud".

By: mecran01

mecran01 — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 21:26:03 -0800

NPR was reporting that a post on a blog describing the memos as forged, in great detail, showed up at 8:59, moments after the broadcast briefly flashed them on the screen. So....what's up with that?

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 21:29:13 -0800

How do you flash documents on radio (NPR)?

By: eatitlive

eatitlive — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 22:15:47 -0800

Here's the NPR report. If you look closely, you can see it at the very end. Just keep looking until you see it.

By: AstroGuy

AstroGuy — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 22:20:13 -0800

The broadcast in question there was 60 Minutes, not NPR. You really couldn't follow that Paris?

By: dglynn

dglynn — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 23:21:27 -0800

In case any of you are concerned how the rest of the world sees this mess, a quick survey of the people I know seems to show that half think Kerry was in some way weaselly(maybe a new word) about his medals and his service, and no one has any idea what any of you are talking about with Bush's NG service. But feel free to continue jerking each other off. I'm going to watch practice for F1 on my Tivo, which is by definition is useless, and yet I saved it to my Tivo. Go figure. And if you advocates for the Democratic Party would like to defeat the opposing candidate in 2004 for the presidency, then why not throw the last 3.5 years of the results of their policies in their face. There is nothing in GWB's past that is as bad as his record at his current job.

By: Steve_at_Linnwood

Steve_at_Linnwood — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 23:39:16 -0800

So....what's up with that? Aparently NPR does not know how time-zones work.

Unfortunately for the tinfoil hat crowd, this nutty theory is based on a simple mistake made by ABCNEWS regarding the timezone of a time stamp on an internet site. ABCNEWS failed to note that the time stamp was Pacific time. Based on this simple mistake, ABCNEWS falsely concluded that internet posters had posted their doubts about the documents before the program had ended. Once that mistake had been made, it was a short hop to the sinister conclusion: the posters could not have seen detailed mistakes in the documents before the 60 Minutes program had even ended. They must have done the forgeries themselves! ABCNEWS has since corrected the mistake. However, the crazy theory has been picked up by the sloppy "journalists" at NPR, and is also being perpetuated by the lunatics at Media Matters, who have yet to note ABCNEWS's correction -- and indeed are even now continuing to quote the original, mistaken version.

By: Steve_at_Linnwood

Steve_at_Linnwood — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 23:39:59 -0800

Apparently, rather.

By: y2karl

y2karl — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 23:45:48 -0800

Authenticity backed on Bush documents After CBS News on Wednesday trumpeted newly discovered documents that referred to a 1973 effort to ''sugar coat" President Bush's service record in the Texas Air National Guard, the network almost immediately faced charges that the documents were forgeries, with typography that was not available on typewriters used at that time. But specialists interviewed by the Globe and some other news organizations say the specialized characters used in the documents, and the type format, were common to electric typewriters in wide use in the early 1970s, when Bush was a first lieutenant. Philip D. Bouffard, a forensic document examiner in Ohio who has analyzed typewritten samples for 30 years, had expressed suspicions about the documents in an interview with the New York Times published Thursday, one in a wave of similar media reports. But Bouffard told the Globe yesterday that after further study, he now believes the documents could have been prepared on an IBM Selectric Composer typewriter available at the time. Analysts who have examined the documents focus on several facets of their typography, among them the use of a curved apostrophe, a raised, or superscript, ''th," and the proportional spacing between the characters -- spacing which varies with the width of the letters. In older typewriters, each letter was alloted the same space. Those who doubt the documents say those typographical elements would not have been commonly available at the time of Bush's service. But such characters were common features on electric typewriters of that era, the Globe determined through interviews with specialists and examination of documents from the period. In fact, one such raised ''th," used to describe a Guard unit, the 187th, appears in a document in Bush's official record that the White House made public earlier this year.

By: solistrato

solistrato — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 23:51:05 -0800

dglynn: you see, three years ago, some maniacs flew some planes into some tall buildings, killing thousands. This occurred on the watch of a weak president who has been installed in office under questionable circumstances. Because the country was shocked and traumatized by these actions, the national media decided to zip it and throw in with the president, because in Times of Crisis, the script says The President Must Be Rallied Around. They still haven't recovered. One of the net effects of this has been to allow the president to make meaningless and vague policy statements, but mostly to mutter "terrah" every five seconds. The national discourse is now firmly entrenched in the War on Terror, and how we can make sure no more maniacs fly planes into buildings. Unfortunately, some people have capitalized on this as the only issue. So what you have is controlled cognitive dissonance. On the one hand, Joe Blow may be aware that since Bush took office, his incompetent vice-president, secretary of defense and National Security Advisor have basically looted the United States Government in order to further the income gap in America. They have also invaded another nation for its oil fields, using various flimsy rationales for this action, but they have also mangled that operation, since they tried to do it "on the cheap" (as the tax breaks they just lavished upon the wealthy and the corporate have suddenly dried up the treasury). By any standard, Joe Blow is much worse off with Bush et. al. in office. On the other hand, though, the message of "terrah" keeps going on. And fear is an effective deterrent to rational thought. Furthermore, "terrah" is much easier for broadcast media to explain to people than the intricacies of health-care reform. (If you follow Neal Postman's line, it's actually impossible.) Therefore, the national discource, which was never really that great to begin with, is dominated by news media which a) has covered for Bush since the 2000 election, b) is owned by moguls and CEOs who have made off like bandits thanks to Bush, and c) can't effectively critique anything more complicated than a snazzy soundbite or a display of attitude. In short: we are fux0red.

By: solistrato

solistrato — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 23:54:28 -0800

(which explains, I hope, why we now have to examine the illustrious history of typesetting, esp. as pertains to typewriters manufactured before 1973, which makes my designer friends thrilled, because they can finally explain to their friends and family what their job is.)

By: cell divide

cell divide — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 00:11:03 -0800

Does anyone really doubt that rich people used connections to get out of dying in the jungles of Viet Nam? And does anyone really think it makes a real difference to the country today? If I thought it would put the spotlight on how the rich can get out of things such as national service, traffic tickets, murder convictions, etc. I would be interested. But this is just pointless stuff designed by cynical news media for a credulous public who believe that Bush is either singular, or normal. He is neither.

By: dodgygeezer

dodgygeezer — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 03:43:10 -0800

You know I used to get really excited about fonts but this thread has just killed that little source of joy for me.

By: dodgygeezer

dodgygeezer — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 03:53:09 -0800

BTW, the liberals are making a total mess of this. Bush dodged the draft - sounds pretty sensible to me, so would I. Bush would rather forget about his appaling drunken behaviour and use of drugs - I'd rather forget it too (although I'm not in denial - it was fun at the time). So far I reckon a lot of voters are feeling they can relate to Bush, unlike Kerry who comes over as a career politician. And there's the issue - Bush isn't like us. He's like some lazy spoilt prince who's suddenly been handed the crown, and then has the nerve to call everyone who disagrees with him an elitist. But then I think you Yanks have always wanted a royal family of your own.

By: Dantien

Dantien — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 04:12:10 -0800

Doesnt anyone realize that Microsoft may have crafted their word processor program to adhere to basic typographic standards...which may have been set by those old typerwriters? If the leading matches up, and the fonts are similar, maybe it's not a forgery. Maybe MS designed Word to default to some simple rules most people should follow! gosh, cause it looks like a Word document doesn't make it so. The idiocy of some people makes my head hurt.

By: elpapacito

elpapacito — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 06:25:07 -0800

Please READ first post, it contains way more then you need to know about fonts and typefacing and a retraction from some "expert" who called it fake.

By: raysmj

raysmj — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 06:43:44 -0800

Please READ the article y2karl just posted.

By: nofundy

nofundy — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 06:55:50 -0800

Sandra Ramsey Lines One small bit of information to add to the discussion. This woman is employed by a right wing "think tank." Take her statements with the proverbial very large grain of salt.

By: darukaru

darukaru — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 09:11:13 -0800

So here's a guy who got his hands on a Selectric Composer and made the experiment. Of course, he links to Instapundit, which means that you may dismiss him out of hand.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 09:53:46 -0800

It's amazing how skillfully the US political & media systems prevent the discussion of actual issues.

By: gyc

gyc — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 10:29:58 -0800

Bouffard says he was misrepresented by The Globe.

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 10:38:35 -0800

It's amazing how skillfully the US political & media systems prevent the discussion of actual issues. You know, it only occured to me this morning that we've gone 72 hours without discussing the Swift Boat Liars on national media because of these documents. Simply by the nature of the right wing's own questionable allegations being sidelined, this is a net loss... and they could have just ignored it, just like they were whining to Kerry about the Swifties a week ago. I think there's some people out there who are even more skillful than you'd think.

By: raysmj

raysmj — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 10:54:23 -0800

Who is Bouffard and why's he spending his time writing to blogs? Why doesn't he call a sympathetic real journalist? He calls a conservative blog, and starts yapping away, like he'd developed a working relationship with this guy over a long period of time? Fake or no fake, it would seem to me that this Bouffard fellow is not the brightest bulb. The final answer is most certainly not going to come from him.

By: Mick

Mick — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 12:23:20 -0800

Who is Bouffard and why's he spending his time writing to blogs? Why doesn't he call a sympathetic real journalist? Because blogs broke this story about "real" journanlists screwing things up.

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 12:41:19 -0800

Because blogs broke this story about "real" journanlists screwing things up. God, this is my favorite part of the whole deal. It puts a smile on my face. Back away, everyone! The bloggers are shifting the paradigms again! Away! Away! It's LGF! Don't you know their glorious light will burn you? REPENT! I'm amazed Powerline hasn't declared itself the cure for cancer yet. Mick, "real" journalists didn't "screw up" a damn thing. A bunch of guys with websites even more partisan than any partisanship could ever be gauged in the media insisted that a story a news organization reported was untrue. They provided absolutely no tangible evidence on their accusation, have no tangible evidence, and will likely never find any tangible evidence. As a result, they have held themselves truly to a standard of respectable journalism by declaring themselves correct, because they said so. Our top online story tonight: partisan weblogs think there is a bias in the media, claim "proof" of questionable veracity. Also, General Franco is still dead. The very structure of journalism weeps at how pathetic it is that you would declare this a victory of higher standards for the sake of feeling good about yourself. Grow up, man.

By: wfrgms

wfrgms — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 14:02:23 -0800

I thought it was very telling that the memo was saved as "fake_ass_Bush_memo.doc"

By: David Dark

David Dark — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 16:37:10 -0800

No fucking way that's genuine. What a bunch of useful idiots.

By: Bag Man

Bag Man — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 18:03:52 -0800

Ratherbiased, totally biased.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 18:23:41 -0800

So the question I wanna know, is why the Republicans released this forgery.

By: Busithoth

Busithoth — Sat, 11 Sep 2004 21:50:08 -0800

No no no, five fresh fish, the republicans release forged 'opinions' and 'recalls' dealing almost exclusively with people's recollections. That way they can't get called on the facts. Kerry should take every opportunity possible to rise above this issue, andstart smashing the ghoulish record of the administration onto the airwaves. Don't run from it, but repeat a call to discuss the issues, and don't look back.

By: David Dark

David Dark — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 01:09:19 -0800

Good plan. Won't work.

By: Mick

Mick — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 08:40:08 -0800

Boston Globe now reports dociments are fake!

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 08:52:54 -0800

I would urge many, most of you to come up with a progressive candidate for 2008; I think Kerry effectively lost the election this week. Sorry.

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 09:06:15 -0800

Umm... yeah. Like how Bush lost the election after Kerry was proven to have had an affair. Or when the lies of the Swift Boat guys totally cost Bush re-election. The documents are, of course, still not proven to be false, but out of curiosity, PP, why the double standard? Why is it that an accusation from Bush supporters coming into question is merely ignored, while an accusation from Kerry supporters called into question an instant sign he's "lost the election?"

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 10:41:50 -0800

He's lost the election because (1) his numbers are dropping in key states such as Missouri and Ohio (2) the entire campaign has been, overwelmingly against Bush, but not for Kerry; (3) no one is talking about Kerry in any affirmative and positive manner. And if it feels this way here in NYC, it's a done deal. Look, don't be demoralized. The American Presidency as an eight-year term, with a recall opportunity half-way through. The case for recalling President Bush has not been made (at least in the eyes of most Americans). And in fairness, its pretty damn hard to ever make it: you need an extremely weak President, plus bad atmospherics. And I'm not talking about Hurricaines.

By: raysmj

raysmj — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 10:58:23 -0800

He's down in Missouri?

By: echolalia67

echolalia67 — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 11:01:01 -0800

A somewhat more informed opinion.

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 11:03:58 -0800

Trend, yes; and the other poll puts him ahead. I don't want to sound delusional, but as I've said before, it's more of a feeling than polls (which I don't find terribly accurate.

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 11:05:23 -0800

All politics is fonts.

By: raysmj

raysmj — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 11:06:51 -0800

Oh, whatever. If he wins, it'll be more a case of "even a broken clock being right twice a day" as far as your election predicting prowess goes.

By: darukaru

darukaru — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 11:37:02 -0800

More memos mysteriously materialize?

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 12:15:09 -0800

Darukaru (and others): is it too much to ask to indicate with links indicate whether the documents are forged or authentic I haven't the time to read all the links! I took a course in 1985 on disinformation and the media (at Boston University). If I only knew how useful it would be even after the fall of communism!

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 12:15:39 -0800

The US political system is absolutely astounding.

By: emelenjr

emelenjr — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 13:00:47 -0800

RE the animated GIF: Watch the superscript "th" change in size (slight, but not imperceptible) and position (quite obvious.) Also, the 8s in each don't match. Those two differences stand out to me immediately. I don't believe the same source (Microsoft Word) could have made both, unless shifting the size and position of letters is a documented feature of the copiers and fax machines the original memo went through.

By: drezdn

drezdn — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 16:25:49 -0800

It's amazing how much quicker some are at sniffing out forged documents when they involve Bush, instead ones that formed the basis for the Iraq invasion. If they're fake, who did it, and why?

By: raysmj

raysmj — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 16:58:33 -0800

It turns out that the US F'in A Today published the same documents, with two additional ones. But none of these online investigators looked at them ... well, probably because the report didn't involve Dan Rather? Because nobody reads USA Today, even when it comes free with a night's stay? I have no idea.

By: troutfishing

troutfishing — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:32:14 -0800

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:54:41 -0800

Boy, that graphic really shows how badly Clinton sucked, eh? Increasing jobs, decreasing unemployment, actual budget surpluses -- talk about murder on the US American people!

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 21:25:03 -0800

Darukaru (and others): is it too much to ask to indicate with links indicate whether the documents are forged or authentic I haven't the time to read all the links! How DARE you make him read something without letting him know in advance if he agrees with it or not!

By: Ynoxas

Ynoxas — Mon, 13 Sep 2004 19:43:18 -0800

Troutfishing: Can you link where you got that graphic? I'm thinking of taking that to Kinko's and making 200,000 copies and handing one to every human being I see for the next 2 months.

By: David Dark

David Dark — Tue, 14 Sep 2004 01:39:50 -0800

Good plan. Won't work. But it will cost you a lot of money.

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Tue, 14 Sep 2004 07:47:47 -0800

This thread is as good a litmus test as any regarding whether you are a pathological George W Bush hater. These documents, it is now obvious to any reasonable person, are fakes. Beware of the views of those who can't accept this reality.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Tue, 14 Sep 2004 09:36:28 -0800

Natch. Likewise, beware the views of those who can't accept the reality of the Bush administration: higher deficits, higher unemployment, lower education, lower healthcare, decreased national security, decreased global security.

By: terrapin

terrapin — Tue, 14 Sep 2004 09:42:13 -0800

Ynoxas: I found it on a weblog and linked to it in a previous thread. Someone in that thread pointed me to this: http://buzzflash.com/areyoubetteroff/

By: terrapin

terrapin — Tue, 14 Sep 2004 09:46:34 -0800

F3: It is the old pay-no-attention-to-the-man-behind-the-curtain syndrome.

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Tue, 14 Sep 2004 10:19:41 -0800

Five Fresh: most of it's in your mind. Seek out a good therapist to deal with your authority issues.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Tue, 14 Sep 2004 12:38:46 -0800

Oh. My. God. Paris, you are a wonder. Higher Deficit: The deficit hit $375 billion in 2003, the highest in dollar terms ever. Higher Unemployment: The economy has lost 2.2 million payroll jobs overall since January 2001, giving Bush the worst job creation record of any president since Herbert Hoover. Any drops in unemployment appear to be entirely due to people giving up all hope of finding work. Schooling-wise, I find a ton of contradictory information. It appears that dropout rates are on the decline, yet it also appears that many districts are fudging the numbers so as to continue receiving funding; it appears test scores are remaining flat, although again it appears there's been fudging. The US education system is a helluva mess! Healthcare worsening: Americans now spend about 15 percent of the gross national product on healthcare, almost double what they did in 1992. At the same time, the number of uninsured jumped more than 30 percent." And this despite the implementation of SCHIP. National security woes: ...the new National Security Strategy...prescribes a global security strategy based on the false belief that the best and only way to achieve U.S. security is by forcibly creating a better and safer world in America's image. A better approach would be a less interventionist foreign policy." Global security dropping: "...there were 3,646 people wounded in terrorist incidents in 2003, compared with 2,013 people wounded in 2002. Eliminate the outlier of the WTC attack, which was unusual both in taking place on US soild and in its atrocious efficiency, and the trend is solidly upward.

By: Ynoxas

Ynoxas — Tue, 14 Sep 2004 19:53:58 -0800

terrapin: thank you

By: Mick

Mick — Tue, 14 Sep 2004 21:47:24 -0800

Not only are the docs fake but 2 of the experts CBS hired told them this before they aired the segmant on 60 minutes II. If you own stock in Viacom sell it now.

By: Bag Man

Bag Man — Wed, 15 Sep 2004 09:44:41 -0800

Boy, that graphic really shows how badly Clinton sucked, eh? Increasing jobs, decreasing unemployment, actual budget surpluses -- talk about murder on the US American people! Why people have rejected that is trutly really beyond me. I guess people want to don't want peace and prosperity when they could have war and recession. It must be the God thing.

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Wed, 15 Sep 2004 11:20:10 -0800

Aww, that's adorable, Mick. We've gone from insinuating that Kerry has unabashedly lost the election to insisting that Rather will be out of a job by next week to declaring that one of the five largest media empires in the country will go bankrupt because of a story a bunch of webmasters are angry about. I'm really starting to worry about the delusional state some of these right-wing bloggers are reaching. I honestly hope none of them do anything rash when they realize next week that they're not Gods Among Men.

By: Mick

Mick — Wed, 15 Sep 2004 13:39:45 -0800

Check the stockticker, you condescending fuck

By: Ynoxas

Ynoxas — Thu, 16 Sep 2004 15:24:03 -0800

Mick: Learn what is normal variation in stock prices and not a harbinger of disaster, you condescending fuck. Advising people to sell Viacom stock because of this is at best alarmist. VIA is actually recovering from a summer sell-off. The small variation (both up and down) in the last week to two weeks looks completely normal to me. In fact, the 52-week low was back in August. Although this could just be a dead cat bounce before it falls even further. But rest assured this has nothing to do with these documents. Just as the documents turning out to be true would not cause a sudden spike upwards in the price. There is more to Viacom than the Tiffany network.