Not a satisfactory article. 1) Let's stop maligning Gunga Din; 2)what, pray, is the "Republican" media as differentiated from "Conservative" media? Hegel & McCain & Lugar? 3)we need a bit of expansion on Bush's reaction to documents he'd have absolutely NO way of disproving (they were personal, never part of HIS file, and they were opinions--even if they WEREN'T forgeries); 4)absolutely no hint of CBS "expert-shopping"; 5) it isn't as though CBS were ignorant of Burkett's attempts to smear Bush with "documents;" 6) no, the font used in the forgeries was NOT available in 1973 (never mind 72) even on the horrendously expensive IBM Selectric Composer which used Times Roman, not Times NEW Roman; and in ANY case would not have been available to TANG; 7) no mention of the use of an "unimpeachable source," one of the most damning of Rather's defenses. There are probably more . . .
I found the article more than satisfactory, and your criticisms juvenile and false, but hey, I posted an e-mail link to the man. Tell him what you think. He's been known to respond to his hate mail.
I think the more would have to include Martha Mapes, who had been pursuing this story for 5 years, who also broke the "Abu Ghraib" story, and who almost went to jail in re the Byrd dragging case (if it weren't for her professionalism and objectivity, there's no telling what nonsense she might report)