This news is not surprising at all; it was only a matter of time. The blogosphere will be awash in commentary about Rather's decision, so we will be mainly obervers. But if we see good posts we'll link to them for you here.
A couple of thoughts: I found it hard to dislike Dan Rather. He seems like a very decent man. Over time, what I found most remarkable about him was his insularity and general cluelessness about America and ordinary Americans, even though he came from ordinary America. He was so tragically blind to his own biases and those of his colleagues in the old news media.
Once Rather said that when you get to know them, you see that most news people are really "common sense moderates." Isn't that an amazing statement? Even so, I don't doubt that Rather truly believed it. And therein lies the tragic flaw in Dan Rather. Unfortunately there are many more like him in the news business.
You can follow this story as it develops at RatherBiased.com.
Scrappleface has a light take on this development, entitled "Dan Rather Scrambles to Confirm Story of His Resignation."
Andrew Sullivan notes:
Why on earth is Rather staying on full-time at Sixty Minutes, the show whose reputation he besmirched by rashness and partisanship? . . . A simple question: How can you rehire a man for Sixty Minutes when you haven't even published your own investigation into the journalistic meltdown that he presided over? Shouldn't you wait until you know what actually happened before you declare that someone will stay on full-time? And how long does such an investigation take, for pete's sake? My b******t detector just went through the roof on this one.
Meanwhile, some people are wondering where the heck that report on Rathergate is.