…post something, go away for a week, and watch how the world has changed.
So the documents ain’t real. And the blame, of course, is clearly on CBS.
STEPHEN COLBERT, Daily Show Senior Media Correspondent: Jon, there’s got to be some accountability. Dan Rather is the head, the commander in chief if you will of his organization. He’s someone in the ultimate position of power who made a harmful decision based upon questionable evidence. Then, to make things worse, he stubbornly refused to admit his mistake, choosing instead to stay the course and essentially occupy this story for too long. This man has got to go!
STEWART: Uh … we’re talking about Dan Rather…?
COLBERT: Yes Jon, Dan Rather. CBS is in chaos, it’s unsafe, riven by internal rivalries. If you ask me, respected, reputable outsiders need to be brought in to help the rebuilding effort.
STEWART: … at CBS News?
COLBERT: Yeah, at CBS news! What possible other unrelated situation could my words be equally applicable to?! Now people need to be held accountable. The commander in chief, the vice president, the secretary of defense, the national security adviser — everyone at CBS News needs to go!
Yet somehow, we still don’t know what Bush was doing during all that time. And it’s not like it would be hard for Bush to clear this up and say what he was doing during that time.
But, Glenn, I hear you cry, Bush’s service was 30 years ago. Why should we care if he showed up then?
Well, there’s this: 40 percent of Army reservists fail to report to Fort Jackson
And really, why should they? After all, if GWB can blow off his commitments to the armed forces when he’s not at risk of being sent overseas for a year and shot at, why shouldn’t these folks do it when they are at definite risk for that?
Bush has a hard time showing moral authority on this one. Why, it would be like GWB advocating tougher sentences for drug offenders after it was shown that he used drugs and his wife sold them. Or if you were revealed to be gay after advocating against gay marriages. Or… wait, you don’t think I’m implying anything there, do you?
I don’t understand the implication about being gay, and being against gay marriage. Why would that go against moral authority? If anything, it sounds like it would enhance it.
“I’m gay, and I’m against gay marriage! It’s just not right to do that.”
It’s one of those no win scenarios I guess. If you’ve never done drugs, then you can’t talk to anyone because you don’t know how tough it is. If you have done drugs then you can’t talk, cause you did it too.