| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Harry Hope" |
| Date: |
12 Jan 2005 03:00:35 PM |
| Object: |
The ethics of Dan Rather vs. the ethics of George W. Bush |
From The Idaho Mountain Express, 1/12/05:
http://www.mtexpress.com/index2.php?issue_date=01-12-2005&ID=2005100846
High standards for some, low for others
By PAT MURPHY
No matter that longtime CBS news anchorman Dan Rather and his network
have distinguished records in broadcast journalism that have served
the nation well.
And no matter that questions still remain about the mysterious gap in
George W. Bush's actual whereabouts while on leave from an Air
National Guard squadron composed of the privileged.
Rather, his producers and CBS committed the unpardonable for news
professionals--failing to absolutely confirm beyond any doubt the
legitimacy and authenticity of documents alleging favoritism to Bush
before broadcasting them.
These top-notch professionals now will pay with their jobs for falling
short of the higher standards to which journalists are ruthlessly
held.
(How amusing that Rather's and CBS' humiliation is being exploited
with relish and disdaining tut-tuts by broadcasting's premiere
patronizing demagogue, Rush Limbaugh, whose idea of professionalism is
to titillate with flippantly mangled "facts.")
The most compelling irony in all this is the high standards that
Rather & Company should've honored in their "60 Minutes Wednesday"
report on Bush are standards that President Bush wasn't held to before
going to war in Iraq.
Compare the curious parallels:
· Rather and CBS misled millions of viewers by using bogus documents
to make their case against Bush.
· To justify war by misleading Congress and the public, President Bush
used bogus information about doomsday weapons of mass destruction that
he told the nation and the world posed an "imminent" threat to the
safety of the United States.
At worst, Rather's television report might well have groundlessly
accused Bush of something yet to be confirmed and invited public scorn
of CBS News.
But President Bush's false report to the nation and Congress is
catastrophically worse--more than 1,300 American troops killed, 15,000
wounded or injured, $4 billion per month in war costs to U.S.
taxpayers, other thousands of Iraqi nationals dead and wounded,
billions of dollars in U.S. aid to rebuild whole cities turned to
rubble by shelling, millions of Muslims agitated about U.S. intentions
in the Islamic world and traditional admiration lost for the U.S.
abroad.
For some, such as journalists, higher standards are a code of honor.
For others, who abuse trust and truth for political self-interests,
standards are low or non-existent.
Which brings us to memories of a recent president whose lies about
sexual philandering led to such partisan political outrage and
moralizing he was impeached (but later acquitted) as a menace to the
national good.
We also now know that declaring a war leading to thousands of deaths
and mountainous debt is without penalty because of a new politically
preferential code that is neither honorable nor of high standards.
______________________________________________________________
Harry
.
|
|
| User: "James E. Morrow" |
|
| Title: Re: The ethics of Dan Rather vs. the ethics of George W. Bush |
19 Jan 2005 10:14:49 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 21:00:35 GMT, Harry Hope wrote:
From The Idaho Mountain Express, 1/12/05:
http://www.mtexpress.com/index2.php?issue_date=01-12-2005&ID=2005100846
High standards for some, low for others
By PAT MURPHY
No matter that longtime CBS news anchorman Dan Rather and his network
have distinguished records in broadcast journalism that have served
the nation well.
And no matter that questions still remain about the mysterious gap in
George W. Bush's actual whereabouts while on leave from an Air
National Guard squadron composed of the privileged.
http://www.rathergate.com/
We dare liberals to look upon the truth.
--
James E. Morrow Email to:
" We need not worry so much about what man descends from - it's what
he descends to that shames the human race."--
Mark Twain
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
