She's Right, I'm Wrong

Michelle Malkin writes of this post: "Notice how in defending his criticism that my blogging on this topic has been 'ludicrous' this supposedly 'reasonable' conservative doesn't bother to link a single one of my posts."

She's absolutely right. While talking to Chait, I thought that I had encountered the (ludicrous) claim that TNR handpicked Scott Thomas Beauchamp as part of a deliberate campaign to smear our troops and undermine our military operations in Iraq on her blog; in fact, I had encountered that (ludicrous) claim here and here on her blog, but in the form of extended quotations from Dean Barnett and Bryan Preston, not in her own words. And I apologize for suggesting otherwise.

Comments

Doh!

Posted by mesablue | August 7, 2007 12:49 PM

Maybe the reasonable course of action is to ignore her. (It works for me.)

Posted by alwsdad | August 7, 2007 1:17 PM

(ludicrous) claim that TNR handpicked Scott Thomas Beauchamp as part of a deliberate campaign to smear our troops and undermine our military operations in Iraq on her blog

How ludicrous is that, really? Why, of all the military folks who've been in Iraq did they choose to publish Beauchamp? OK, so he was Reeve's fiance - do you think they would have published his stories if they had been tales of bravery and sacrifice by American soldiers? What is the likelihood that the one "Diarist" they publish from Iraq would describe tales of heartless cruelty if they weren't interested in at least implicitly denigrating the war?

The point Barnett and Preston were making wasn't simply that they "handpicked" Beauchamp - it's that he was picked (and his stories published) precisely because they reinforced the stereotypes that journalists have about soldiers and war, at least since Vietnam. Besides, even if their intent wasn't to "smear" US soldiers, it is gross negligence to publish the kind of stories they published without verifying them in any way. It's hardly "ludicrous" to change an accusation from "gross negligence" to "intentional smearing".

Posted by Mike S. | August 7, 2007 1:36 PM

Watching Bloggingheads Mr. Chait asserted just going in the Military changes you,even before seeing combat. Inferring everyone in the Military has been dehuminized.What was really sad ,you nodded in agreement.

Posted by mymy | August 7, 2007 1:52 PM

MyMy- of course going into the military is dehuminizing. You are trained to kill people. I'm not saying that you become an inhuman killer, But a pretty major moral switch gets turned off and thats not nothing.

Posted by TheCraig | August 7, 2007 2:58 PM

"MyMy- of course going into the military is dehuminizing. You are trained to kill people. I'm not saying that you become an inhuman killer, But a pretty major moral switch gets turned off and thats not nothing. "

Horsewash. So cops, who enforce our society's moral code (read "laws") have a moral switch turned off? I mean, they are trained to kill people too! They must be dehumanized/have that moral switch turned off too.

Our military is trained to fight for our country, to defend it, and its interests. It is only in this context that they are trained to kill.

Posted by Yashmak | August 7, 2007 3:19 PM

I think there are things most of us would kill for.As a mother if I Knew you were going to harm my children.Yeah I would do you in any way I could.The people in the Military are willing to defend this country as I would defend my children. For this I'm very grateful.

Posted by mymy | August 7, 2007 4:07 PM

You are trained to kill people.

But which people? It's not as if our soldiers are randomly shooting people in Iraq.

Posted by Mike S. | August 7, 2007 5:18 PM

This is as hilarious (and devasting) an apology as I've read since this morning.

Posted by keatssycamore | August 7, 2007 5:47 PM

TNR handpicked Scott Thomas Beauchamp as part of a deliberate campaign to smear our troops and undermine our military operations in Iraq

What part of that assertion is so ludicrous? Beauchamp is not a journalist. He's a wannabe novelist. Judging from his own blog postings, he joined the Army for the specific purpose of gathering material for an Apocalypse Now/Full Metal Jacket type of anti-war book.

Assuming that Beauchamp's sweetie who works at TNR was aware of his general anti-war attitudes, under what plausible scenario would TNR have expected him to write a patriotic, pro-military, let's-stick-it-out story about Iraq?

There are, and have been, many rank-and-file GIs and embeds who've blogged or written about Iraq from a grunt's-eye perspective. We don't see TNR throwing commissions at Jeff Emanuel of Red State, do we?

Eliminate all of TNR's self-serving B.S., and what's left is the truth: Franklin Foer is an incompetent douchebag.

Posted by Not Ace of Spades | August 7, 2007 9:06 PM

Oopsie doodles.

Looks like Michelle was right about other things, too.

NY Times just busted Beauchamp and NR.

I think I'll go read her blog instead.

Posted by Tom C | August 8, 2007 3:37 AM

Isn't it obvious? Ross has carefully crafted his comments on l'affaire Beauchamps because he's gunning for the TNR editorship after they can Foer. He can't afford to bash that rag too much, and yet can't very well look to be leaping to Foer's defense if he has any hope of being brought in to be the housecleaning white knight in the wake of the scandal.

Ross would be perfect: he's young (the average age of a new TNR editor-in-chief has been around 29 or 30 for some time now), he's been very adeptly playing the role of The Thoughtful Conservative Who Badly Wants To Be Liked By Liberals (a schtick pioneered by David Brooks and Christopher Caldwell), and he's ready for a promotion.

Posted by The Man From K Street | August 8, 2007 10:09 AM

Ross is, in fact, Well Liked By Liberals. Despite all the talk about Ramesh Ponnuru, Douthat is the most intellectually honest social conservative in the blogosphere. Full stop. Adeptness at playing any role has little to do with it.

But why would TNR can Foer only to move rightward? The magazine has been trending leftward along with the nation as a whole. I'm thinking they'll phone the bullpen and call up Chait.

Posted by Sangfroid826 | August 8, 2007 2:52 PM

Gear up for grub with a tripleheader of pigskin, including a meeting of brothers in Dallas. Everybody knows it's been a rough year for her, but find out who else had issues

Posted by Iris | November 24, 2007 8:38 PM

Contrary to popular belief, the end of the year is one of the best times to look for, awesome descion

Posted by sasha brinkova | December 10, 2007 10:21 PM

tzamhcnk szrowb wsmdekpui mwtq yglxt thdr sqgdfv

Posted by ueikmnz favomj | June 21, 2008 5:34 AM