Rotating Header Image



“It’s Hurricane ‘Retirement’! And it’s windy!”

(PARODY) [09/13 06:13 PM]

NEW YORK – In a stunning development, the flagship news program of CBS, 60 Minutes, has decided to investigate its Wednesday night counterpart, “60 Minutes II.”

60 Minutes producer Don Hewitt came out of retirement in order to investigate the spinoff program, which, he pointed out, was an idea he had always hated and opposed anyway.

“This story has all the classic ingredients parts of a archetypal 60 Minutes story,” Hewitt said. “Forgeries and lies. A brazen attempt to influence a presidential election. Shadowy political operatives. A powerful institution that is hiding behind short, defiant statements. The whole situation just screamed a need for a hard-hitting reporter to hold the powerful guys in suits accountable. It just happens that in this case, we?re interviewing the powerful guys in suits down the hall.”

The media world is abuzz with excitement about the shocking interview of CBS Evening News host Dan Rather by Mike Wallace. CBS has released one particularly tense exchange:

(Wallace and Rather sit opposite each other, eye to eye, almost mirror images.)

Wallace: Expert, after expert, after expert has declared these documents (dramatically holding up four sheets of paper) to be forgeries. What is your response to them?

Rather: We have solid sources.

Wallace: Who are they?

Rather: I’m not going to say.

Wallace: Why should people trust you?

Rather: Do you know who I am? I’ve been in the news business for 42 years!

Wallace: Do you know who I am? I’ve been in the news business for 53 years! And Christopher Plummer played me in the movie!

Rather: I am 100 percent certain that the chances of this document being real are almost 51 percent.

Wallace: You’re being evasive.

Rather: I’m not being evasive, I’m just being more nimble than a one-legged Texas bullfrog before a prairie thunderstorm!

Wallace: That doesn’t even make sense.

Rather: I’m tired of this criticism coming up with regular frequency, Kenneth.

Wallace: What frequency? And who’s Kenneth?

60 Minutes will present its report, “The Great CBS News Civil War of 2004” on Sunday.

WARNING: The above statement is a parody. So far.


[…Read the rest…]

3 C O M M E N T S

  1. justaguy says:

    I was forwarded this today…interesting…

    Facts about Bush’s guard service:

    1. F-102 squadrons had been stationed in Vietnam since March of 1962.

    2. The 147th Fighter Interceptor Group were conducting missions in Vietnam at the time Bush enlisted.

    3. Though there was a waiting list for various other positions within the National Guard…there was not a waiting list to become an aviator within the Air Texas National Guard. The 147th Fighter Interceptor Group, based in Houston, Texas, had 156 openings among its authorized staff of 925 military personnel. Source: Tom Hail, Texas Air National Guard Historian.

    4. Bush took his AFOQT while still attending Yale. Source: Col. Earl Lively, Director of Air National Guard Operations for the State Headquarters.

    5. Bush requested to take part in the Vietnam “Palace Alert” program but was turned down by Major Maurice Udell because he didn’t have enough flight hours. Source(s): Fred Bradley, Texas Air National guard pilot; Albert C. Lloyd, Head of Personnel, Texas Air National Guard.

    6. Bush’s Guard record:

    The Guard required 50 points to satisfy the annual requirement.

    Bush’s service was measured on a May-to-May basis because he first joined the Guard in May of 1968.

    First year — 253

    Second year — 340

    Third year — 137

    Fourth year — 112

    Fifth year (May 1972 to May 1973) — 56

    Sixth year (June and July of 1973) — 56

    “It clearly shows that First Lieutenant George W. Bush has satisfactory years for both ’72-’73 and ’73-’74, which proves that he completed his military obligation in a satisfactory manner…” Source: Albert C. Lloyd, Head of Personnel, Texas Air National Guard.

    7. Bush was discharged honorably after having served five years, four months, and five days of his original six-year commitment.


    Dallas Morning News; July 4, 1999; Author(s) Pete Slover, George Kuempel

    National Review Online; August 26, 2004; Author(s) Byron York

  2. -S- says:

    Like nearly any individual with bias, and usually an egotistical need to denigrate anyone who “questions” their perceptions, the Left has a compulsory NEED to insist that George Bush has some problem of one sort or another in his military service record. If they can’t find facts, they then start insisting on subjective “bias,” such as accusations of “special treatment” and such — nearly impossible to prove and always impossible to prove whan applied to Liberal social causes by comparison.

    ANY human who has influential parents of one type or another is going to be treated a tad differently than someone who is obscure or otherwise less socially emergent…that’s noticable even at a local market from the checkout people, for Heaven’s sake.

    I have faith and did in President Bush (I) and he seems to have provided a steady and firm parenting approach with George, who seems to have needed that at times of his younger life. I know that I did. Most people do, of all classes and intelligence and abilities, given certain challenges and social conditions.

    So, I’m sure that the fact that George Bush had the father that he did made SOME sort of impression on others but I don’t see any flagrant or horrible abuse of achievements because of that, but actually, seems that the son has worked extra hard to establish himself apart from his father. Meaning, probably George Bush, the son, had a need to NOT engage or accept social helps based upon who his father was, not the other way around.

    I was also reading, yesterday, some “news” about the idea that there exists a Left bias among media and university faculty. D’oh. Interestingly, most either flagrantly admit to a Left bias (always based upon the “I hate Bush” line of reasoning, pretty stupid when coming from someone who considers themselves “smarter” than everyone else and opts to teach at a university because of how “smart” they are…never ceases to amaze me, that stupidity of hubris), or else deny that they are a part of any bias, while denigrating the question itself (that response from certain media outlets).

    What it is, to most people who can easily observe that sort of Left bias, is that those involved in Left bias, and who are also among those insisting that George Bush “received special treatment” somewhere/anywhere in his past, is that the Left IS biased and promotes bias. That they are so bling to their own characteristics just reinforces the presence of bias.

    That they’re now trying to promote a person such as is John Kerry for the Presidency, why, that is just completely…well…stupid. Look at that guy’s history. Now THERE is “special treatment” if ever that occurred…no reprimand for his defiance of his military honor code, his behavior while enlisted even. List goes on…

  3. Anonymous says:

    Really, it wouldn’t surprise me to find out 60 Minutes was going to investigate 60 Minutes II- such a kangaroo court would be not unlike behavior by CBS in the past. Of course the big difference from your parody is that it would be a huge love-fest between the host and Rather, with lots of camera shots of him walking through the hard-working halls of the network’s offices.

    Speaking of retirement, I think that’s precisely what Dan Rather will be doing in the next six months, if not right after the election- provided his “source” doesn’t get revealed and provided that “source” isn’t somehow linked feloniously to the DNC.