Moron Marvin Kalb
I take a seven-iron to his latest column over at Lifelike
. Dan Rather's recent interview
on C-Span is getting a lot of attention--especially for his fatheaded comments that the documents he presented on 60 Minutes II have not been proven bogus--but how many realize it was Moron Marv who did that interview?KALB: Every now and then it even looks as if the new media is at war with the old media. I want to go back to the National Guard story of last year. It was the blogger, the internet blogger who instantly went after you and CBS with an effect that was very damaging all the way around. And played an impact, indeed, on the presidential campaign.
I have always been astonished that even before the program ended, it was still on. A blog site called FreeRepublic.com run by an active air force officer blasted the program. Four hours later, another website called Buckhead ran a detailed critique of the document that you used in the report.
You get the feeling that Moron Marv really doesn't understand the blogs, and doesn't have a clue about Rath
ergate? Buckhead made his comment on Free Republic, he didn't do a detailed critique, just noted that the memos seemed suspicious. And the damaging part was not the criticism of Rather's report, but the fact that Rather had run with documents that were fraudulent in a clear and partisan attempt to sabotage the president.Now, I have always wondered to myself. That's an amazingly swift bit of research. You watch something on air, four hours later, you are prepared to run pages and pages of detailed criticism of the document. How does somebody do that that quickly?
Uh, maybe because they didn't run pages and pages of detailed criticism four hours later?
Here's Buckhead's post
as it appeared in its entirety:To: Howlin
Howlin, every single one of these memos to file is in a proportionally spaced font, probably Palatino or Times New Roman.
In 1972 people used typewriters for this sort of thing, and typewriters used monospaced fonts.
The use of proportionally spaced fonts did not come into common use for office memos until the introduction of laser printers, word processing software, and personal computers. They were not widespread until the mid to late 90's. Before then, you needed typesetting equipment, and that wasn't used for personal memos to file. Even the Wang systems that were dominant in the mid 80's used monospaced fonts.
I am saying these documents are forgeries, run through a copier for 15 generations to make them look old.
This should be pursued aggressively.
47 posted on 09/08/2004 11:59:43 PM EDT by Buckhead
Terrific post, no doubt about it, and the one that started the ball rolling. But as you can see, it hardly constitutes "pages and pages of detailed criticism of the document".