29 Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

1. Did they really have color cameras back then? I think the picture is forged.

   Comment by Beetle — 2/22/2006 @ 6:58 pm

2. Like those forged Bush military documents? Lol! He hates Repubs. Lol.

   Comment by what — 2/22/2006 @ 8:36 pm

3. Look at those hotties standing next to a putrefied/petrified statue. Hehe.

   Comment by what — 2/22/2006 @ 9:43 pm

4. Hey, I *read* the Patriot - Dan Rather just has his picture taken holding it. Or at least that’s the only conclusion strictly justified by this picture.

   Comment by Stefano — 2/23/2006 @ 9:57 am

5. hahahahah. one of my favorite all time quotes on free markets is from former house speaker newt gingrich when said: “If Thomas Edison invented electric light today, Dan Rather would report it on CBS News as ‘candle making industry threatened.’”

   Comment by Fresh Prince — 2/23/2006 @ 10:02 am

6. Fresh Prince,

   That’s actually not very funny. At all. Then again, Newt-Boy isn’t exactly know as the paradigm of humor.

   Nor political sense, for that matter. ha.

   Comment by Archangel — 2/23/2006 @ 10:22 am

7. That’s a nice un-circular arguemnt you’ve made there

   Comment by Fresh Prince — 2/23/2006 @ 1:17 pm

8. One: It’s not funny. Go ahead, try that on random people on campus and see how many laugh. Probably not too many. Probably not even very many so-called conservatives.

   Two: It’s not even remotely true, as in some things are funny because they are true sort of way.

   Third, and finally, Newt Gingrich calling anyone else a partisan is the shining example of the pot calling the kettle black.

   PS. No political sense. But, I sure would LOVE to see him run (and win) for the Republican Presidential nomination. Love it.

   Comment by Archangel — 2/23/2006 @ 3:20 pm

9. I don’t know which is more circular, your first argument or your second. It’s amusing to see someone state the same conculsions on the basis of them being his initial assumption.

   Comment by Fresh Prince — 2/23/2006 @ 3:23 pm

10. I actually thought that was funny. It’s sad to see that this blog has so many commenters with such bad senses of humor.

    Comment by Kerry — 2/23/2006 @ 4:52 pm

11. The difference between a politician representing a party and a news broadcaster is the fact that one is supposed to be partisan and the other is supposed to tell the news. To accuse New Gingrich of being partisan is retarded. It’s like accusing the UC Berkeley of having students.

    Comment by cw — 2/23/2006 @ 10:20 pm

12. To be a politician is NOT the same as being a partisan. Indeed, we applaud politicians who “rise above partisanship” and “get the people’s work done.” That said, I can see how one would want the leader of the party to be more partisan. Nonetheless, I think our ideals for elected leaders are not partisans, but people who are more interested in doing good for the country, and not just their party.

    My real point was that NG is a partisan hack of gargantuan proportions, much more so than his predecessors, or even his successors, for that matter. Still, love to see him run!

    Comment by Archangel — 2/24/2006 @ 4:28 pm

13. “I don’t know which is more circular, your first argument or your second. It’s amusing to see someone state the same conculsions on the basis of them being his initial assumption.”

    You see Kerry, I AM Amusing to someone! So there!

    To FP, my answer is this. I’ll go ahead and try that joke on various people and see if they think it’s funny. You can do the same. We’ll what the results are, eh?

    “I actually thought that was funny. It’s sad to see that this blog has so many commenters with such bad senses of humor.

    Comment by Kerry” - Why doesn’t that surprise me? Are you really sad? I should say not. But know that a single tear was shed (by me), because you do not think I have a bad sense of humor. Woe is me. Woe is me.

    Comment by Archangel — 2/24/2006 @ 4:31 pm

14. Newt Gingrich is best known for his contribution to the REPUBLICAN revolution in Congress where he was the Speaker for the first Republican majority in over 40 years. If he were to appear on TV while in office, it would read “Newt Gingrich (R. GA).” The “R” stands for Republican. He is a hero to his particular PARTY.

    “Partisan” means you support a particular political PARTY.

    Dan Rather is a journalist. His job is too present the news and let people draw their own conclusions. His party affiliations have nothing to do with his job (in fact, they took away from his success). Newt Gingrich’s career depends on the fact that he is a partisan and has a party that supports him. His lifeblood is that fact that he is a partisan; Rather’s is the fact that he is not a partisan.

    Come on, you knew that.

    Comment by The Captain — 2/24/2006 @ 5:19 pm

15. Well,

    If you want to run an experiment to see if this joke is funny, you’ll need to get a random sample of people. Considering the narrow-mindedness of most people in Berkeley, I doubt you’ll be able to get one.

    Otherwise your results will be even more misleading than the paper you cited about there being no bias in journalism, when the experiment was conducted by journalism schools.

    Comment by Fresh Prince — 2/24/2006 @ 5:32 pm

16. Thanks, Archangel. I officially quit this blog, which has done nothing except depress me and give me headaches.

    Comment by Kerry — 2/24/2006 @ 7:38 pm

17. fervent, sometimes militant supporter or proponent of a party, cause, faction, person, or idea. - The dictionary.com definition of partisan. I’d say that’s a bit more than support for your party.

    No other objections. But come, you knew that too.

    FP - “Considering the narrow-mindedness of most people in Berkeley, I doubt you’ll be able to get one.” Now you’re just getting mean! haha…seriously though, A few people I’ve talked to (3) have said it’s slightly funny. So far though, the verdict isn’t looking good. Any luck on your part?

    Would it really be misleading? Certainly we could get a representative sample of Berkeley students who find it funny.

    Oh, and by the way, the paper I cited wasn’t done by a journalism school, but by a Communication school. But nice try anyway.

    Comment by Archangel — 2/24/2006 @ 11:48 pm

18. “Thanks, Archangel. I officially quit this blog, which has done nothing except depress me and give me headaches.

    Comment by Kerry”

    I do hope your joking! It’d be too bad otherwise.

    If not, I’d get that checked out!

    Comment by Archangel — 2/24/2006 @ 11:49 pm

19. “Dan Rather is a journalist.” -The Captain

    Are ya sure there feller? Panning-off fake military records to try to incite a rancor to impeach the president is not my non-partisan cup-of-tea, ya dig! They, the CBS team received their ‘fakes’ at a rock concert delivered in a manila envelope – ya that’s a place to pick up your ‘sources’ then try to tell the US public that the president is a liar. Yep, Mr. Danny Boy knew it all along he was reporting filth. Sad state of affirms of American journalism for yas all.

    Comment by what — 2/25/2006 @ 12:09 am

20. What an ‘affaire’ that was?

    Comment by what — 2/25/2006 @ 12:11 am

21. Good point about Dan Rather not being a journalist; but I am pretty sure he still thinks of himself as one.

    Also, there are several definitions of “partisan,” the first of which is a weapon from the 16th century. FYI, using dictionary definitions can get you in a lot of trouble in debates.

    In congress, when people refer to a “partisan bill,” they are talking about a bill that is supported by one particular party.

    Comment by The Captain — 2/25/2006 @ 12:33 am

22. Just another note - I find it dissappointing that the Patriot would publicize itself with Dan Rather of all people?

    Would they publicize a picture with Michael Moore if they also had the opprtunity?

    Comment by Fresh Prince — 2/25/2006 @ 12:45 pm

23. I would hope so. Irony is the best.

    Comment by patr — 2/25/2006 @ 1:14 pm

24. Ok, how about this, Do you, Captain (or anyone else) consider Newt Gingrich the shining example of what a politician should strive to become?

    And I think we are all agreed, Dan Rather and CBS News screwed up that story. But that certainly doesn’t mean his entire career is worthless.

    Comment by Archangel — 2/25/2006 @ 4:21 pm

25. How do we know that this picture wasn’t taken with one of those cardboard cut-outs of Rather? Sure looks like one.

    Comment by Mace — 2/25/2006 @ 9:48 pm

26. So does Dan Rather.

    Comment by Beetle — 2/25/2006 @ 10:56 pm

27. Newt’s a political legacy has its negatives, his contributions to the countries prosperity in the 1990s were easily as valuable as Bill Clinton’s, if not more. He is not a man of impeccable character, but he is an intelligent and articulate representative of conservative politics. He can really turn a phrase!

    Regardless, the issue here is that he is supposed to be partisan, while Rather is not.

    Comment by The Captain — 2/26/2006 @ 1:55 am

28. Again, I take issue whether being partisan is a good thing. I say that it is not what we should value in a politician, because I understand partisan with its negative connotations. But, if you take a more neutral stance of partisan, then absolutely, NG is supposed to be partisan where Rather is not.

    Again I ask you though, do you think NG is the kind of ideal politician that other politicians should strive to emulate?

    As a side note, what sort of “prosperity enhancers” do you think NG contributed? I’m not saying I don’t agree, but I just want to know what sort of things you have in mind.

    Comment by Archangel — 2/26/2006 @ 10:06 am

29. The AP Katrina Briefing Story - Rathergate Connection.

    lol.

    Somehow CBS and RaTHer cannot escape their bias history.

    http://wizbangblog.com/2006/03/02/the-ap-katrina-briefing-story-rathergate-connection.php

    Comment by what — 3/4/2006 @ 1:32 am

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.