At least for me.

It started on Friday as a story about whether or not the memos were forged. That part didn’t last very long, as it quickly became clear to all but the koolaid drinkers that they were. Ignoring the next question of whodunnit, it has now evolved into something much more fascinating–just how far in the tank will some people (particularly some people who are long-time anchors for a major network news organization) go to continue, absurdly, to defend the authenticity of the documents?

Dan, of course, now has two motives to try to defend his story–to continue his original goal of damaging (hopefully fatally) the president’s chances for reelection, but now also to maintain whatever vestiges of respect for him exist among the American public, too many of whom have taken him too seriously for too long. As others have pointed out, the demographic that pays any attention to him is dying off, and younger people are getting their news from cable and the net, so perhaps he feels he has little to lose at this point, and still hopes to convince enough simpletons that there really is substance to his new take on the “Bush AWOL” story.

“Hindrocket” over at Powerline makes an interesting, and dismaying analogy of CBS and other partisan news organizations as suicide bombers. There used to be a time when, regardless of how clearly biased people like Dan Rather were, we could count on some sense of self-preservation on their part to keep them ultimately in line. This episode makes him (and me) wonder if that is no longer the case, with a number of disturbing implications.

Just as our newfound knowledge that some people were willing to kill themselves in order to kill us led us to have to change our tactics in airport and other security, the thought that some news organizations are willing to destroy their credibility in pursuit of their political objectives should cause us to rethink our relationship with them as well.