Wonkette's unsurprising take...

Well this one does not surprise me one bit. This comes from Newsweek (via Power Line):

Q. What did you think of the bloggers' role in the Dan Rather affair?

A. I think they did a disservice to the debate because they made the debate about the documents and not about the president of the United States. There was another half to that story that had to do with verifiable events of what Bush may have been up to.

Yeah, par for the course, huh?

The point that she has missed is that the "other" information in the story has been picked over and repackaged many times in the President's political career, and it has never really stuck. The documents were supposed to the ace in the hole, and when they turned out to be forgeries it blew the whole story apart. It's not that the blogosphere shifted the debate, we simply destroyed the "big shocker" in the story, and without that the story was nothing but a rehash of what we in 2000.

UPDATE: Looks like Bill at INDC Journal has a similar opinion. Heh.