With Dan Rather's recent announcement of retirement from the CBS news anchor desk will come a great deal of discussion, reminiscing about and examination of his career. The bulk of that talk should rightly focus on the job he performed in following Walter Cronkite as "America's most respected newsman".
Just as there should be plenty of room for accolades from his supporters, so to should Mr. Rather's detractors have an opportunity to discuss his many short comings in the performance of his job. Central to that might be the puff piece interview he did with Bill Clinton as well as the confrontation less face to face interview with the mass murderer Saddam Hussein. Additionally from an industry standpoint and business perspective a complete analysis would include why Rather's program has dropped the "Tiffany" network into a distant third place in news ratings.
Most importantly however from an historical standpoint the country needs to know what if any involvement Mr. Rather had in what might have been the crime of the century. That crime could have unfolded this way. The country is involved in an extremely close race to determine the next leader of the nation. In an attempt to alter the course of history a person knowingly forges government documents to portray one of the candidates in a way which would embarrass the candidate. That person then conspires with others to release that information through a national media outlet with huge exposure to the electorate hoping to do maximum damage to the candidate.
The implications for such an event would be multitudinous. The fundamental foundation of American democracy would be severely undermined. The press as an independent institution of governmental over sight and accountability would be forever tarnished.
This of course didn't happen because the results were not affected but just as if a bank robbery had been attempted but the bandits got away without any money wouldn't there be an investigation and prosecution? Where is the public outcry over the memogate documents? A crime of some sort is at the heart of this matter. Are we all satisfied that an industry self examination is going to be sufficient to expose what if any wrong doing was done here?
This isn't about red states or blue states or any of the other myriad of social, religious, economic or foreign policy issues which divide us as a people across the street or across the nation. This is about fundamental fair play in how we go about selecting the person to lead our nation. Only a full investigation of the events will act as a deterrent to others who might attempt these shenanigans in the future
