Click for Main Weblog

   
The Weblog at The View from the Core - Monday, September 13, 2004
   
   

The Latest on CBSgate

The saga of Daniel Milhous Rather.

The Internet is aswarming with the latest commentary on the Killdan Memos. Here's some of it:

I don't have much to add, except to note that I'm proud to be one of the Pajama People. :-)

Oh, here's Charles Johnson's famous animated GIF; I wouldn't want to be the only blogger on Earth to not have posted it.

One More CBS Document Example

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Mon. 09/13/04 08:28:21 PM
Categorized as Media.


   
   

If You Would Still Like to Pray Again

That I can get my mortgage refinanced — right now would probably be another really good time. Things are still moving along, but they might have hit a snag. Thanks again.

See If You Would Like to Pray Again.

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Mon. 09/13/04 05:35:22 PM
Categorized as Religious.


   
   

Pseudo-Kerning

Here's a very thorough explanation of certain aspects of the Killdan Memos, by Dr. Joseph M. Newcomer. It seems that the documents are not kerned, but only give the "illusion" of kerning. This, however, does not help their advocates:

.... Some have argued that the documents are forgeries because the characters are “kerned”. Kerning is an operation which tucks characters together to compact space. However, Microsoft Word by default does not kern text. The text of the memo is not kerned. Kerning is a pairwise operation between characters, and each character pair that can be kerned has a specified kerning value. Microsoft fonts and many others come with accompanying kerning data. But kerning is complex, and computationally expensive, and therefore would have slowed down redisplay in a WYSIWYG editor. However, Times New Roman uses a characteristic of Microsoft TrueType fonts called the ABC dimensions, where the C dimension is the offset from the right edge of the bounding box of the character to the next character. If this offset is negative, the character with the negative C offset will overlap the character which follows (in some technologies, the distance from the start of one character to the start of another is called the “escapement”, so a negative C offset gives an escapement which is less than the character width). This gives the illusion of kerning, or what I sometimes call “pseudo-kerning”. I discuss the ABC width mechanism in some detail in a book I wrote in 1997.... ALL technologies I am aware of in 1972 that would have been available for office work (not, say, the sort of production book typesetters that major publishers might have had) could only advance an integral number of units, and could not “tuck in” the characters like Microsoft’s Times New Roman font under Microsoft Word does, by using a negative partial-character offset. Examine carefully the “fr” in the word “from” in the 18-August-1973 memo. The “r” is tucked under the “f” in the same way a Microsoft font does it. In 1972, technology available in the office, including proportional typewriters, could not do this. So it is clear that the only way this document could have been done is using a modern computer font, and the placement is pixelwise identical to Microsoft’s Times New Roman....
All I can say is that the technology that produced this document was not possible in 1972 in the sort of equipment that would have been available outside publishing houses, and which required substantial training and expertise to use, and it replicates exactly the technologies of Microsoft Word and Microsoft TrueType Fonts.
It is therefore my expert opinion that these documents are modern forgeries....

(Thanks, Charles.)

P.S. Updated version.

P.P.S. Another updated version.

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Mon. 09/13/04 05:29:44 PM
Categorized as Media.


   
   

The Secret History of the "CBS" Eye

The draft versions of four Eyes.

In 2001, the "CBS" Eye was 50 years old.

Over the years, the Eye has gone through quite a few redesigns. Through the extensive network of insider contacts we've developed over the past two years here at The Blog from the Core, we are actually able to reveal the draft design of four of these Eyes.

None of these Eyes have ever before been seen outside of "CBS".

The Draft Versions of Four Eyes
The Blog from the Core Exclusive

We are proud to be able to say that The Blog from the Core has conducted the same kind of extensive verification of these "CBS" Eyes that "CBS" employed before the recent publication of the Killdan... er... Killian memos.

Shockingly, when these original drafts were first presented by the designers, "pressure" was applied by upper management to change them to conform to the expected "CBS".

And that's the way it is........

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Mon. 09/13/04 08:28:22 AM
Categorized as Media.


   
   

TownHall Catches Up With The Blog from the Core

Them: What Did Rather Know, and When Did He Know It?

Us: What Did Dan Rather Know? And When Did He Know It?

Friday, I mentioned mainstream media covering this story as a forged-documents story:

.... Frankly, I think that MM is starting to cover this as a forged-documents story because they realize how very damaging this attempted fraud on the American public could be to both the Kerry campaign and to themselves. (Pardon the redundancy.) So, they want to get it out in the open and out of the way as soon as they can....

Bryant provides his own observations as to how unusual this is:

.... For decades, I have wondered why, if the three network news organizations were truly in competition with one another, they didn't act like they were. Eventually, I decided my sense of competition had been warped because of having learned it in the political game.
In politics, a major part of the competition is exposing your opponent's miscues. But that never seems to happen in the news business. Why, I often asked myself, don't the networks spend some investigative effort on one another, debunking the others' stories whenever possible? Wouldn't that be in the public interest, convenience and necessity? But they never do. Night after night, they simply report on the same news, with virtually the same lineup of stories, and it's been like that since the very beginning.
The only reasonable explanation is that none of the organizations wants to call the kettle black, for fear that they are equally pot-worthy. I think that's pretty close to the definition of what might be termed oligarchic monopolistic behavior, where a few companies have divvied up the market and are all getting fat and happy and don't want to risk anything....

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Mon. 09/13/04 07:50:32 AM
Categorized as Media.


   
   

Bring on the White Men! Or Something Like That

Democrats in Self-Destruct Mode CCCLXXIV

A twofer!

First, thanks to a fellow blogger for bringing Democrats in disarray to our attention.

+ + + + +

Of course, things can still go dreadfully wrong for President Bush. The economy could tank, Iraq could explode, terrorists could attack, Mr. Bush could have an embarrassing, deer-in-the-headlights stammering pause during the debates, the sky might fall. Crossing the street is fraught with lethal possibilities, too. But only professional political pundits would refuse to predict a successful street crossing based on random and not-too-likely events.

So it is none too soon to suggest that Mr. Bush is likely to win the Novemberelection rather handily. True, Republicans must take nothing for granted and campaign as if they were down ten points. I'm sure they will do exactly that.

But what deserves remarking on is the truly desperate state of the John Kerry candidacy. Being a Bush supporter, I try to guard against conflating my hopes with my expectations. So I have looked to objective criteria, such as the behavior of professional Kerry operatives and advocates. If they appear to be in agony, things must be looking good for Mr. Bush.

I first noticed a couple of weeks ago that one of the shrewdest, coolest, most rational of Mr. Kerry's television advocates — with strong professional ties to the Boston-based Democratic players — was going nuts on TV shows with me. Normally polite and well-bred, he suddenly started shouting and interrupting on air. Normally astute, he put forward the risible assertion about a week ago that Kerry had Bush exactly where he wanted him, that the Swift boat matter was playing into Kerry's hands. He maintained this charming idiocy even in the green room before and after the show. This put a spring in my step (no small accomplishment, as I have regretfully put on 20 pounds in the last year.)

Next came the flood of leading Democrats going on the record with their searing advice to Mr. Kerry. It is worth noting that such major players would never go on the record (or even in print on background) if they hadn't first failed to get Mr. Kerry's attention in private. Basically, they said he should bring on Bill Clinton's men to replace, functionally, Kerry's current mob.

One unfortunately sexist Democrat put Mr. Kerry's female chief of staff in the same category as the failed female c.o.s.'s of Michael Dukakis and Al Gore. In other words, the Democratic Party honchos are violating their own sensibilities and telling Mr. Kerry to bring on the white men. They must be desperate. They have also suggested that Mr. Kerry get an "adult" on the campaign plane with him. Someone who can talk back to him. Thus, enters John Sasso — the smartest Democratic Party gunslinger north of Bill Clinton.

It is always bad news when there is no one around who the candidate will listen to. This problem became evident last Thursday at midnight when Mr. Kerry, with a Nixonian 5 o'clock shadow, growled in the dark about the vice president's deferments. That seemed to have broken the cone of silence. By Sunday afternoon, as Bill Clinton was only hours from being put on the gurney for his heart operation, he had time both to give Mr. Kerry some confidential campaign advice — and to leak the advice to the press for emphasis.

Mr. Clinton's advice: Stop talking about Vietnam and focus on jobs and the economy. Herein is the heart of Mr. Kerry's problem: The dynamics of the election are turning against Mr. Kerry. Since the beginning of the primary campaign, he has boldly premised his strategy on the assertion that he will be a better commander in chief during wartime than President Bush.

Yes, he has also talked about jobs, the economy, health care, the environment, etc. But as his convention demonstrated with his band of brothers on stage and his medals and heroics constantly praised and his opening salute to the nation that he was reporting for duty, it was his fitness for command that was to be the reason for his election.

Now, with his heroics credibly questioned, his 18-year Senate record of voting against a strong defense and a fully funded intelligence revealed and with the polls showing more than a 20-point negative gap for Mr. Kerry on that very issue of fitness for command — the smartest Democratic strategists, including Bill Clinton, are urging him to drop the topic and run on jobs and the economy.

I suppose it is possible to make the case. But with unemployment at 5.4 percent (lower than when Bill Clinton rode to re-election in 1996), inflation and mortgage rates low, over a million jobs created in recent months — and with the public telling pollsters that the war on terrorism is the most important issue — only a world-class politician would be likely to be able to pull it off. John Forbes Kerry would not seem to be such a candidate.

Twice married to heiresses, his mansions scattered about America and Europe, windsurfing off fashionable Nantucket, riding a $5,000 bicycle, speeding around in a six figure or higher racing boat, flying his hairdresser cross country for a trim, served by a butler — John Kerry might have been able to pull off the role of aristocratic military officer on a white horse.

But he surely doesn't look like the kind of demagogue who could turn a 5.4 percent unemployment rate into a cause for rebellion. What he looks like is someone who, two months from now, will have many sneering words to say to his filthy rich liberal hangers-on about a benighted electorate that didn't even have the common sense to elect him president.

+ + + + +

Now, as for "appearing to be in agony", the view from the opposite side: ATTACK! (Emphasis and quoted ellipses in original.)

+ + + + +

If John Kerry wants to win he's going to have to adopt George W. Bush's campaign tactics — that means fighting dirty, Senator. Filthy f**king dirty.

The second night of the Republican National Convention, I turned on Fox News. I enjoy watching Fox about as much as I enjoy eating my own turds for brunch. But if you want to understand why this country is rotting from within, you need to stare into the oozing mouth of the monster.

Bill O'Reilly was interviewing Terry McAuliffe, head of the Democratic National Committee. McAuliffe was saying, sanely, that the War on Terror was something that Democrats could fight as well as Republicans. In fact, he said, the Democrats could probably fight it better. This was right after President Bush had made contradictory statements, first saying that we could never win the War, then saying we could.

I don't have a transcript of that interview, but I don't need one. Just like the Republicans, I'll make a statement, and you can sort out whether or not it's true. O'Reilly said "Oh, you think you can win, do you?" McAuliffe responded "I do."

"I'm gonna hold you to that," O'Reilly says. "And if your guy wins — which he won't — and then we don't win the War on Terror, I know where you live. I'm gonna send some people over to your house."

McAuliffe looked at him and said, "Fair enough."

I thought, fair enough? The man just threatened your life! On television! What's fair about that, you dumbass? Here's what the "fair" response would have been: "Oh, yeah, you cut-rate Father Coughlin knockoff sleazeball? Well, I'm sending people over to your house right now. Screw you and your whore of a mother!" But no. "Fair enough," is what Terry McAuliffe said, and then he disappeared into the ether.

That was the moment when I knew that we were going to lose.

* * *

A note to the leadership of the Democratic Party: Wake the f**k up, you pathetic wuss-bags! They're kicking your ass!

You disagree? You think you're "talking tough?" Here's a quote from your candidate, John Kerry, drawn from his "tough-talking" midnight rally after the RNC: "I'm not going to have my commitment to defend this country questioned by those who refused to serve when they could have and by those who have misled the nation into Iraq."

Good lord, by the standards of this year's Bush campaign, Kerry's statement was equivalent to "Bush is a great president and a vote for him wouldn't be wasted." Compare that to Zell Miller's yawp from the ur-depths of the American subconscious: "... today's Democratic leaders see America as an occupier, not a liberator. And nothing makes this Marine madder than someone calling American troops occupiers rather than liberators."

Do you understand the difference, Democrats? Kerry's statement is critical. Miller's statement is pure, slanderous evil. As much as the RNC may have tried to distance itself from Georgia's cornpone Mussolini after the fact, don't think the speech wasn't planned. Democrats had better realize that people buy this s**t. While they're saying that President Bush has failed to "provide jobs and healthcare to working Americans," the Republicans are saying that Kerry faked his war wounds. Sorry to burst your bubble, readers of the Nation, but Americans respond to lies, and the more vicious the lie, the more effective.

Unlike you Stranger readers, who walk through your days in a haze of permanent dissent from the mainstream, I own property in Texas, the Reddest State of them all. Admittedly, I live Austin, which is like Berkeley for carnivores, but the rest of Texas slithers through the cracks. News flash: The Republicans' efforts to smear Kerry are working. My wife has a friend who, despite the fact that she and her husband are both marginally employed, considers herself a Republican. Here's a direct quote: "My aunt told me the other day that she heard John Kerry killed babies and raped women in Vietnam." A rural letter carrier in Louisiana started to tell another friend an anti-Kerry joke the other day. "I asked her what a union member was doing voting for a f**king Republican," my friend reported in an email. "She said she could not vote for a man who was 'soft on war.'"

Do you see what's happened here? Stranger readers may find Zell Miller repulsive and retrograde. We may see with x-ray eyes through the insane mendacity of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. But that stuff's not meant for our ears. Americans may well be "good, hard-working people," as the Democrats claim, but they're also "easily manipulated farm animals."

Democrats! In the name of God, attack! Here's what you need to say: Thousands of people are dead because of Bush! Bush is a traitor to America! And so are his supporters!

Attack! Attack! Attack!

Being critical isn't enough. Being "tough" isn't enough. Taking the high ground won't work. There is no high ground! You can't let Michael Moore and that Eli from Moveon.org guy who sends too many e-mails do your dirty work. Attack! Get dirty! Dick Cheney s**ks c**ks in hell!

Senator Kerry, you are all that stands between us and the theocratic fascism. I don't care if it diminishes you. You have to stoop to their level. You HAVE to f**king win. You HAVE to. Do you understand? Attack!

Attack!

Attack!

ATTACK!

+ + + + +

The Blog from the Core asserts Fair Use for non-commercial, non-profit educational purposes.

Hey, Neal. Here's the moment I knew the Democrats were going to lose: when the chairman of the national committee and the chairman of the state committee of California actually dared to try to spin the ouster of Democrat Gray Davis, to be replaced by Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger, as bad news for George W. Bush:

.... The idea that Davis's defeat spells trouble for George W. Bush next year — because an "anti-incumbent" mood got him — is simply risible. I don't think that folks like McAuliffe and Mulholland really believe it, but it does indicate that they think they can win by spinning things any way they want — never mind that they've been losing more and more elections by doing the same old spin thing....

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Mon. 09/13/04 07:15:08 AM
Categorized as Democrats in Self-Destruct Mode.


   
   

Thanks to Bloggers

Thanks to Fidelis, Flos Carmeli, HerbEly, Irish Elk, Quenta Nârwenion, and Summa Minutiae for notice of Five Sonnets In Memoriam September Eleventh.

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Mon. 09/13/04 06:50:20 AM
Categorized as Blogosphere Stuff.


   

The Blog from the Core © 2002-2008 E. L. Core. All rights reserved.