I have no comment on what Dan said last night, and the reference as I would have to see the context it was said in, and whether or not it was a gotcha type

but as to the memo-Dan never waivered, dan did not roll over

they took him down, and no one but a few defended Dan.
It was the end of the news biz.
He was the last man standing and he was taken down by everyone.

His info was true

the memo was NEVER proven untrue.

but Janet's nipplegate was more important to CBS and especially the traitors at 60 minutes
who stabbed dan in the back out of pure, pure, ego and greed.

on what is there anyways...

stated his opinion, and he did NOT call the President a coward. He said the president did not want to fight this battle.

they believe he can be "rolled" like a drunk in an alley and that he'll give up his wallet and his watch. That might not be a verbatim quote, but it's pretty damn close. I found it disrespectful and distasteful.

I saw him on either the eve of the election or on election night, as someone upthread mentioned, and he did say that he thought "Rmoney was going to have a pretty good night," and the implication was that he was going to win the damn thing. He was wrong. I think a lot of oldtimers like Rather have been drinking the corporate koolaid too long. He's no political sage, that's for sure, and I think he spends too much time other old newshounds whose relevance has gotten too long in the tooth. The corporate news game is pretty much a joke. I'm not talking about the likes of the Maddows or O'Donnells or Olbermanns. I'm talking about the David Gregory, Norah O'Donnell, Chuck Todd kind of so-called journalists. They're nothing but a bunch of well-coiffed, corporate shills. They don't report the news so much as pontificate about their interpretation of the it. Bullshit is what it is. Just a bunch of people spewing their opinions and gossipy tidbits like a bunch of highschoolers.

Rather did say that right after President Obama came out and let the rethugs have it with both barrels, he should have double-downed on his defense of Rice, and that this should have been the time he actually affirmed that she was his choice and not let her twist in the wind for the next three weeks. I happen to agree with part of his statement. The problem is, I'm not convinced that he'd actually made a decision at that point. It certainly seems as if she was, based on ever thing I've read. I do agree with Rather about the fact that he's backed into some deals that favor the rethugs enough times that they probably like their chances on standing their grounds about the fights to come. The thing is, I think the President looked at the situation and made the determination that the political calculus to continue the Rice discussion was, in the final analysis, not the hill that he wanted to ride and die on that particular day.

regard to this one instance, the republicans have said extremely vile things, and from the republicans hate fest smear I have no doubt at a minimum they are thinking that

Does that mean the President asked her to step aside or she didn't want to put up with this garbage herself, it is all speculation

Regardless, of what we think, I do suspect that the republicans come out far worse on this. They look like mad dogs

say that the President did not want to fight this battle. He said that it demonstrates that he can be taken advantage of by letting the republicans know that they can get their way.

You know something, Rather is right about that. You may disagree, however, Rather did not call the President a coward

mentioned the link sucked. Also shows how Rather’s comments play into their world..
I just omitted the link.....Didn’t realize by clicking on to it,helps them.

Hopefully not too many will actually come in here to agree with you.

All those years of real journalism. He stood up to and stood alone against Bush**.

Dan Rather has more guts and integrity than 95% of those in the media and those officials we call our elected government.

I agree with one of the posters above, he did not say that. Nevertheless I totally agree with him on his evaluation of Obama. Rather is under no obligation to support Obama or not to criticize him.

To call him a piece of shit after all the years he stood in front of the camera and gave us real news says more about you than it ever will say about him of course you too are allowed your opinion.

Last night he inferred that our President is weak and isn’t willing to finish the fight.
Exactly what he did, not finish the fight! Talk about Hypocrisy.

I took down the link. But when you find it on your own you might notice a comment on
how Maddow had a confused look on her.

Also I didn’t call him a piece of shit! Get your facts correct. Crap is at least 2 degrees
softer than shit... Figure it out!

Don't think any of the rest of what I just erased is going to make a dent in your thoughts here so I am not going to bother.

the more time we give them the more they try to hog with sensationalism to enhanced their own self-worth. Besides why Rather.

She looked the same way on election night when Rather said he had a feeling in his "gut that Romney was gonna have a pretty good night." I was taken aback by both his appearances on her show. As I said upthread, he's spent too much time talking to the news junkies within the ranks of the corporate news machine and around the Beltway. There's too much gossip and opining about what they think is going on as opposed to what's actually happening behind the scenes, because they like to believe they know more than they actually do or ever will. Maybe Rachel should just keep Rather off her show. I had a lot of respect for Rather before he made appearances on her program. Now I just think he's too far removed from the scene to have any real inside dope or sage bits of wisdom to impart.

he feels.

I think Rachel Maddow respects him as a journalist icon and on her show he states his opinion. I get the feeling he really doesn't care for Pres. Obama but on the other hand as a journalist he was able to stay to factual reporting. I always assumed he was a liberal but maybe he just was a really good reporter.

I respect your comments, but I don't agree entirely that Rather is a POS. He generally has his head on straight IMHO, and he is certainly not a repuke tool. I don't agree with him all the time, but there are more mainstream journalists I certainly think LESS of than Dan Rather-- i.e. Luke Russert et al-- but I know THAT bar is pretty low!