Pathetic, but working, unfortunately

What happens when it's proven, again, that Bush is a gutless, AWOL prick? The Right screams that the documents must be forgeries, saying that they were produced in Microsoft Word.

Earth to dipshits: if somebody wanted to forge documents and say they were from 1972, don't you think they would have been smart about it and whipped out a typewriter so there's less to question? Or are we supposed to believe that these documents were written in Word, printed on new paper, maybe they got crumbled up a bit to make them look old, and then sent to CBS and the rest of the world? Is anybody really stupid enough to attempt such a thing and not think they would be caught. Please. Why can't these people ever admit to being wrong?

BoingBoing has more on this farce.

Someone posted the two images (White House released and Word generated), so I fired up an image editor and had a look. While the font character spacing are very similar, most typography experts in the threads agreed that the original had type-write like characteristics (number 8 slightly high on the line, etc.) that would be hard to reproduce in Word. More importantly, the superscript "th" which caused most of the interest is not in the same position in the two images (see attached superimposed comparison).

But an article asking if the documents were forged will be on page A01 of today's Washington Post. You have to admit that the right wing spin machine works wonders, because they've successfully placed doubt about the authenticity of these documents in everyone's mind. Now instead of people talking about the actual story, which is probably true, they'll talk about the documents. For the next two weeks, we'll be inundated with every sleezy fuckwad on the right screaming that the documents were forged and the Democrats are playing dirty tricks, the media is too goddamn liberal, blah blah blah. And then, as a lie repeated ad nauseum suddenly becomes the truth, the story will go away.

As much as I hate it, you have to admire the beauty of the Republicans strategy: Place the other side on the defensive at all costs, even if the charges you do such with at blatant lies. And we're always on the defensive, fighting an uphill battle. How do we reverse this? How do we take a knockout story like this and use it to knokout Bush, like it very well should?

...Ken Layne points out that if these documents were so fucking forged, then how come the White House released copies of them after the 60 Minutes interview? Further, how come the White House hasn't officially claimed that they are fake? Even further, knowing these facts, why in fuck is this even a story, nevermind a front page one?