Dan Rather and Mary Mapes, the producer for 60 Minutes, had zero evidence about Bush' flawed service record then; they fabricated the evidence they wanted the nation to hear. They wanted the story to be true. Rather has no more evidence today. That is precisely why he got canned by an organization that was itself hell-bent on defeating Bush. AND WAS ON RATHER'S SIDE ALL THE WAY!

He fabricated a phony story backed by phony documents that he'd like to be true, and now it is he who talks about credibility. THE FIRST RULE OF JOURNALISM IS THE FIRST RULE OF EVIDENCE. PROVIDE PROOF. Rather did not; could not.

Rather's source was a con man; the story was full of inconsistencies; he was fanatic about hurting the President -- that was his sole guiding light, and the people who were Bush's superiors in the Guard refuted Rather on all counts. His lawsuit will wind up a dead end and Rather can't save the reputation that he himself is at fault for shredding.

In his capitulation Rather apologized and said that he cannot verify the documents' authenticity. Meaning he had no proof for anything at all. Now he is retracting pushing documents that experts have verified to be frauds and fabrications. If forensic experts have concluded that the documents were fabricated, which will be proved again in court, will the passage of time make them authentic?

In Rather's fantasy world-view Bush is an Idiot; Nixon a Dummy; Ford a Moron; Ike a Geek, Reagan a Dunce; and Carter, Gore, Kerry and Clinton Geniuses. Amazing huh, how all these Republican morons beat Rather's genius candidates not just once, but often twice!

In early 2004 the Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and professor of psychiatry Charles Krauthammer said: "After the first election the Democrats needed sympathy. If Bush wins again they'll need therapy!"

Well, Bush won again.

Dan Rather, as most of the left, has gone off the deep end....in need of therapy, a pathetic sympathy-seeking creature...but most of us would "rather" not go there, do we?