The rag formerly known as The New Republic keeps digging.

That guy is great XD

Wow. So the “expert” not only did NOT confirm that the Bradley could do what Beauchamp claimed, but based on what he said, it’s not possible.

Yeah I think TNR’s break needs to be permanent.

Beauchamp is not Kerry and WILL NEVER be Kerry because there will always be people to expose him as the outright scumbag liar he is.

georgej on August 9, 2007 at 3:19 PM

It’s true that Beauchamp will no longer be able to follow the path created and illuminated for Kerry and countless others by the MSM. That’s an indicator of some real progress. On the other hand, the ranks of all of our country’s most powerful institutions are populated by this viral class. Their power may have peaked, but hardly receded. And as they come to feel increasingly cornered, they’ll become more dangerous than ever. Their Tet offensive isn’t far off. Time is not on their side and they will be forced to play their hand forcefully in the immediate years ahead.
While this ideological clash is now mercifully visible to many, it is still agonizingly frustrating watching from the sidelines and not knowing how to contribute more than simply write comments, contribute $ to the right places, and vote.

Paul McLeary, a staff writer for Columbia Journalism Review who has written about the matter, said The New Republic failed to do some basic journalistic legwork, such as calling the public affairs officer for Beauchamp’s unit.

“There is a degree of trust and faith editors have to put in their writers,” McLeary said. “If you’re on a tight deadline, you have to go as far as you can. The New Republic definitely didn’t go as far as it could in terms of checking out its stories.”

Yes he has written on the matter — to attack “know-nothing Michelle Malkin’s (sic) of the world.”

I guess McLeary has decided to join the know-nothings, now that he knows what they knew all along.

Another great commentary georgej! Thank you.

Dionne, like the rest of the MSM intend to go to the wall to defend Foer, TNR, and Beauchamp. Dionne HAS no integrity himself, so the fact that he thinks he recognizes “integrity” in Foer ought not to be surprising. After all, it’s what the child molesters at NAMBLA do all the time, justify the behavior of their “peers.”

Dionne goes on: “I know the Weekly Standard posted this anonymously sourced thing saying he’d recanted. I don’t believe that’s true. And if it is true, then we’ll deal with it then.”

And when Hewitt refers to the statements of Major Stephen F. Lamb categorically denying the incidents, Dionne says: “But I’ve got to say, you know, as I say, I’ve known Frank for a long time, and I think this is a person of a lot of integrity. So watch out what you say about him, because…”

And then Dionne adds: “I think that Mr. Beauchamp should be given a chance to speak for himself, and then we can judge the whole thing.”

If you read the blog entry in it’s entirety, several things jump out: Truth is relative to Dionne and all liberals. That discrepancies with reality can be explained away by appealing to the supposed integrity of liberal editors, and if you repeat a lie long enough (i.e., that Foer has high integrity) you can defuse the issue.

I think it’s call a “bunker mentality.” Certainly, Dionne is hiding deep in denial.

If columnist Dionne wasn’t a known lying propaganda shill for the left, one could almost hear Mark Anthony’s refrain from Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar: “But Brutus is an honorable man” when he says that Foer is a person of high integrity. One could almost believe that he’s being sarcastic.

But he’s not. He means EVERY WORD of his defense of Foer and TNR. He will be the very last so-called “journalist” to ever admit that Foer used TNR to deliberately lie to his readers. And if he ever does admit that his friend Foer is a liar, he will JUSTIFY it as being necessary to bring down the Bush administration and to end the war.

This is *NOT* just E. J. Dionne’s personal failure as a human being. And the story is not about Can West’s (owner of TNR) track record of hiring deliberate liars to run their so-called “magazine.”

This is about the Associate Press printing FABRICATED stories, originating from Al Qaeda/Ba’athist stringers claiming atrocities that never happened. It’s about a Reuters story in the last two days about the massacre of 60 people — that never happened according to the MNF. It’s about using the POWER OF THE PRESS to manufacture truth out of wholesale lies, and use that to manufacture “consent” to surrender in the war against the Jihadists.

Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman wrote a piece titled “Manufacturing Consent,” that accuses the media of allowing their corporate owners to dictate truth. The irony is that the media is, indeed, dictating truth — but not at the behest of their corporate owners, but at the behest of the liberal ideologues managing the news, whose hearts are filled with hatred and treason.

One final point. My wife just bought a collection of Frank Capra movies on DVD. The other night, we watched the movie “Mr. Smith Goes To Washington.” As Senator Smith (Jimmy Stewart) filibusters to defend his honor, his corrupt enemy, played by Edward Arnold, uses his power and the media he owns to run a smear campaign that ultimately resorts to violence in preventing any “pro-Smith” reporting to reach the people back home. I had forgotten this part of the movie and that Capra was CONDEMNING the media as being corrupt special interest “gatekeepers” even before WWII.

If it wasn’t for the Internet and the two-way communications paradigm that embodies it, the “old” media would have gotten away with it, as they did in glorifying John Kerry. Well, times have changed, and the MSM no longer has a monopoly on information dissemination. Further, Beauchamp is not Kerry and WILL NEVER be Kerry because there will always be people to expose him as the outright scumbag liar he is.

Once more, we have to question the accuracy and the integrity of The New Republic’s editors, who ran an investigation apparently designed to provide merely cover instead of facts.

The above assumes they actually have some integrity to question. It’s pretty clear now that they don’t.

In order for the scenario described to have taken place, there would have to have been collaboration by the entire crew.

Mr. Coffery [communications director for the company that manufactures Bradley Fighting Vehicles]

That pretty much reveals the true intent of the stories. All three incidents were witnessed by several people so the message sent was the incidents must be “normal”.

Here at the end of the story (please, please let it be the end) the basic way to refute the story is to point out that the witnesses would not have just gone along. My fear is that in focusing on the factual errors of the story we have bought into the idea that the events are thinkable.

Beauchamp may normally be pronounced “Beecham” but in this one singular case it works better as “Boy Chump”.

I did talk to a young researcher with TNR who only asked general questions

Who might she have been?

Can I get me a fact-chucker’s license here?

Sincerely,

LMAO.

Dusty on August 9, 2007 at 11:30 AM]

Ugh …
minor accuracies = minor inaccuracies

Dusty on August 9, 2007 at 11:53 AM

I think you had it right the first time. Most AP articles are plagued with minor accuracies.

news story about the Beauchamp story last night (the man’s name is pronounced “Beecham,” btw, if the radio reader got it right).

I prefer to think of him in the original French name version.

Also,

Beau – a dandy; fop

champ – to mash; crush

I said I agree with you in my second response, Dude. Wasn’t that blunt enough for you or did you want it to be myopically so?

We are talking past each other, Blake. There is a difference between understanding something and agreeing with/approving of it.

You seem to have problems clearly calling it what it is: They did not reveal he was married to Reeves because it was a conflict of interest. To not reveal a conflict of interest is unethical. No reason to be mealy mouth about it.

Ugh …
minor accuracies = minor inaccuracies

Vacation won’t last forever, TNR.

That’s cold. heh.

Do you think that if they had said that from the get go people would not have been even more suspect of TNR’s alleged investigation? [Blake on August 9, 2007 at 11:33 AM]

We are talking past each other, Blake. There is a difference between understanding something and agreeing with/approving of it. I understand why TNR did not reveal that their anonymous source was married to “Elspeth Reeve, our new employee who first met her husband at Missouri University, which almost commuting distance from where in his later teens lived with his mother, Mrs. Beauchamp.”

…America’s imminent victory in Iraq and safety from terrorist attacks at home is driving them all crazy.

Great as usual.