- BitsBlog - https://bitsblog.theconservativereader.com -

More TNR Reactions

Pete Wehner over at The Corner: [1]

It turns out, of course, that it was TNR‘s critics, and not TNR, who were vindicated, and all honor is due to them.

What The New Republic didn’t understand, and still seems unable to grasp, is that they and others saw this for what it was: an effort to use Beauchamp’s story to paint an ugly portrait of those serving in Iraq. The magazine had turned against the war, and this piece would help turn people against those serving in the war. What has happened instead is that the situation in Iraq is turning around — and the TNR piece has utterly collapsed.

Since mid-July this story was a torpedo aimed directly at the hull of TNR; the torpedo has now hit its mark. The damage is enormous and Franklin Foer’s explanation — which contains no apology to TNR‘s readers or, more significantly, to the people in Beauchamp’s unit — will only compound the damage. What Franklin Foer calls a “controversy” is really a scandal. And Scott Beauchamp will now take his place aside Stephen Glass in TNR‘s Hall of Shame.

His points are on the money, but frankly, I think the better comparison is with Jayson Blair. [2] Allow me to illustrate:

Note to Franklin Foer: In your own best interests, have a word with Blair’s former Bosses, Howell Rains and Gerald Boyd.

Addendum: I note Saint Andrew the Incontinent [3] playing defense. Still trying to maintain a little relevance, huh, Andrew?

There is all the difference in the world between turning on the war – which Wehner’s former bosses criminally bungled and he recklessly spun through years of failure – and turning on the soldiers.

No, there isn’t, Andrew. Particularly when they go with the utter crap that TNR did.  What they did was anti-troop, anti-American and arguably, treason. That’s even more true, when as even you admit, they’d already been told the guy was and is a liar. [4]
Now go and change your armor.