Chris Matthews: Serious Senate Run or MSNBC Contract Gambit?

Chris Matthews' Senate Run:
Serious Bid or Contract Contrivance?




What's a Left Wing Talking Head to Do?

---

Chris Matthews, the Hardball Boy, is contemplating a run for the U.S. Senate.

Or not.

From Matthews inches closer to Senate run:

Chris Matthews is dead serious about running for the Senate in Pennsylvania — and is shopping for a house in the state and privately discussing quitting MSNBC as proof of his intense interest, according to NBC colleagues, political operatives and friends.

Politico's MICHAEL CALDERONE & JOSH KRAUSHAAR think it might just be a "negotiations ploy to jack up his contract" on the part of Matthews.

Matthews is receiving some pressure to step down from his "Hardball" spot if he truly is committed to making a run for the U.S. Senate seat currently held by Arlen Specter (R-PA).

If Matthews is serious about running, some within the network hope he commits to the Pennsylvania Senate race sooner rather than later. Otherwise, his nightly presence on “Hardball” provides easy fodder to critics fueling the narrative that MSNBC is in the tank for the Democratic party. After NBC News was stung by criticism during the presidential campaign — charged with bias resulting from the antics of more outspoken personalities on MSNBC — staffers worry the situation will be repeated over the next six months.

Reactions are mostly skeptical.

Sister Toldjah, Chris Matthews sets example other partisan journalists should follow:

I applaud Matthews for taking into serious consideration the possibility he’d need to leave the network in order to run for Senate (of course, he should have left it much, much earlier - but then again he wouldn’t have been able to help his fellow mediots with getting Obama elected, would he?). In fact, I encourage every other journalist out there who has a strong bias for one party or the other - who thinks it’s their “job” to help that party - to please follow Matthews’ example, retire from your profession and start pursuing your dream of officially working to advance that party’s principles - whether it be as a politico, an advisor or aide, or working for an advocacy group, or starting your own. Make your biases known upfront instead of continuing to hide behind a phony banner of “objectivity.”

Alex Paranee--Gawker--Chris Matthews to Hold Breath

Until He Becomes a Senator (or Gets a Raise):
There's no doubt that Chris wants to be a Senator—it's been his dream since he was a little boy, to join that undemocratic and increasingly deadlocked and feeble deliberative body—but the guy is also smart about the realities of politics, if not the realities of reality. Running against a five-term senior Senator would be tough for any Democrat, but "any Democrat" would probably have better luck against Specter than a man who's been on the world's craziest cable news network saying some of the craziest things on that network for years.

Jules Crittenden, Jackass-A-Palooza takes the long view:

Full disclosure: As a professional tabloid newspaperman and frothing rightwing blogger, I have a vested interest in chaotic hilarity, if that is what the American people in their wisdom and through their political processes determine is what will best serve their interests.

Other reactions to the Matthews' bid-maybe-not at Memeorandum.

Is this a serious story? Is this a contract gambit?

Who knows--other than Chris Matthews?

It might be hard slogging it out every night on MSNBC for an audience that approaches the number of people on Friday night at Denny's.

It might be hard playing second banana to the Olberdude.

It might be hard getting anyone outside the DailyKOS to take him seriously.

But it's still easier money than actually having to convince people to vote for him in order to get the job of Chris Matthews' dreams.


by Mondo Frazier
image: jossip

Sarah Palin Hacked Email: Hacker Is a Lone Wolf Phisher

Sarah Palin's Email Account was Neither Hacked nor was "Hacker" a Member of the Group Known as 'Anonymous'

"Hacker" a Lone Wolf





Did the group known only as "Anonymous" hack Sarah Palin's email account?

If not, who did?


DBKP has learned that the Anonymous hacker was neither a hacker--at least, in this instance--nor representing the group known as "Anonymous". Anonymous is most famous for its fight against the Church of Scientology and its worldwide protests over the last year.

The "hacker", who is a 20-year-old male, actually didn't hack Palin's email. He guessed the password question on the Yahoo account (Where did you meet your partner?) and changed Palin's password to one that allowed him access.

So was Palin's hacker acting alone?

The "hacker" is NOT an active Anonymous member and describes himself as a "lurker". He's posted his reports of 'phishing' on various sites and "is probably thinking he can make anon his personal army for his partisan purposes," according to one source.

Anonymous has no partisan purposes, other than the portion of the group that has declared "war on the Church of Scientology".

No one 'speaks for Anonymous' might be a good way to describe the non-organization of the group.






Anonymous doesn't issue press releases because "they want complete anonymity, no press releases or counter statements, or anything that smacks of organization or leaderfagging."

DBKP will have more on this later today, with a in-depth report later this evening.

by Mondo

Sarah Palin, Australia: Impressions from Down Under

Sarah Palin:
Impressions from the Land Down Under





Recently returned from Australia, a DBKP writer had the opportunity to gauge the feelings of the Aussies towards Governor Palin's selection as McCain's Vice-President. The impressions--and that is what they are--were extraordinary.

For context, a little background is necessary. While Australia has the persona of a wilderness, in fact, the vast majority of people are urban--much more so than America.

Nevertheless, they are extremely proud, as well they should be, of their humble, rough-and-tumble beginnings. This continent made early American and Canadian wilderness look hospitable. The Aussies have carved for themselves a wonderful and worthy nation in spite of those beginnings.

But they are Unionists and Socialists for the most part. The Aussies dislike America, despise Bush and Cheney, and the museums hang art ridiculing Reagan and Nixon as if they were still presidents. In fact 30% of Australians under 30 recently selected America as the most dangerous country in the world...to Australians.(huh?)

This bizarre belief is a reflection of academia, Labour politicians and the Aussie MainStream Media, where being anti-American is taken as a sign of intelligence. These challenged souls are convinced the film On The Beach actually happened.

But Aussies have no problem with individual Americans. American companies, or culture, are everywhere. In fact it appears that Americans are emulated--far more than Brits, for example. TV is replete with American shows and (good) copycat shows. Americans are welcomed wherever they go. It is not hard for an American to make friends with the Aussies.

So. How was Palin received?

Incredibly.

At first, the major newspapers were curious. A few stories on how Americans chose someone from the American "outback". The subtext was that Palin "really was not of the political class" and lacked "polish". Then she gave her speech at the RNC, and a few editorialists opined that they were intrigued. But it did not end there. These were in widely read papers. And the population seemed to mull over her selection. And a sort of consensus was reached--primarily, over the attacks on her family and kids.

It was a "hmmmmm" moment. Then it was apparent.

The women liked her. A lot.

Editorials in The Sydney Telegraph (a gossip sheet), The Australian (the NYT of Aussie land), The Financial Times, The Wall Street Journal, started speaking favorably.




They liked her. They really liked her. They voiced the liberal criticism and ridiculed it. Sort of on the order of: 'When was Obama mayor of a 'small' town? And BTW, can Obama make a campfire?, Shoot a Moose? Cook?'

Then there was the female issue. That simmered slowly. The girls loved that anyone who would break into this gal's rec room had made a mistake; that she was not only a mother, but was fully-sexed; that her love for children and family was clearly not faked.

That she would kick an abusive brother-in-law right in the ass.

But it hit a peak with Obama's lipstick comment.

Until then Palin was a fun, chat-worthy, element to the American campaign for President: an Obama given. The Obama lipstick comment struck a note. While most did not assume that Obama meant it personally, no one could believe he was so stupid as to think it was not personal. It was replayed over and over again.

Invariably, by women newscasters who laughed on TV--at Obama.

Palin was their gal. And as far as her family's sex life, touch it at your death. As far as the women was concerned, Palin was made of steel. No doubt about it. And if the MSM wanted to call it a shot gun wedding, so be it. And if they feel Trig should not have been carried to term, let them kill their newborn. The Aussie women were firm.

So DBKP went to the local pub to survey.

It was not easy.

Liberalism and such causes are deeply embedded. But after 3 hours or so of hard drinking and general discussions of America's faults , the poll was held. Time to speak up or be silent.

"Do you like Palin as the VP choice or not?"

Unanimous. A slow start transcended into...."we love her."

Did I say 100%? Because that is what it was--and not a coat, tie or brief in sight.


"Awesome"
"Her 17 year old? Hands off."
"I was discussing her with my parents last night."
"I love American Democracy. I want you to know that."
"A breath of fresh air"
"Wish she were here"
"Change"

And as the ice broke, so did the damn.


by pat
images: dbkp file

Underwhelming: Reactions to Gore Endorsement of Obama

Al Gore: Chicken Little or Just Chicken?



Reactions on yesterday's endorsement of Barack Obama by Al Gore was underwhelming. They ranged from "Yawn" to "timid" to complaints of Gore's "lousy timing".

Perhaps one day someone will write a chapter about Al Gore in a new book titled “Profiles In Uncourage.”

Democratic presumptive Presidential nominee Barack Obama finally got what he and former rival Senator Hillary Clinton had pined for all these months — THE endorsement from former Vice President Al Gore.

But it came so late in the game that the person who’ll be most impressed with it will be Tipper Gore.
--Joe Gandelman, The Moderate Voice:
Obama Gets “The” Endorsement: The Lousy Timing of Al Gore

Al Gore unquestionably has taken to heart his role as an elder statesman -- he stayed so far above the fray of the Democratic presidential race that the fray was fast becoming an afterthought when he finally bestowed his imprimatur on Barack Obama today.
--Don Frederick, LA Times Blogs:
Al Gore Wraps His Arms Around Barack Obama

Much the same reactions were, seemingly, everywhere on the Net.

And this a guy who could have ended the Democratic race in April if he wanted to. The fact that he stood on the sidelines and said nothing shows the absurdity in calling Al Gore a “leader.”
--Doug Mataconis, Below the Beltway:
Al Gore's Portrait in Timidity

Exactly what Gore was waiting for in the past two weeks since Obama sewed up his party's nomination is unclear. Maybe he just wanted to go to Michigan where his prize-winning environmental pitch is so very less welcome than other places that don't make so many large cars.

The belated endorsement of Barack Obama by former vice president Al Gore seems to have underwhelmed a number of early writers.

Or maybe he was waiting until his endorsement meant absolutely nothing.

Anyway, as The Ticket reported, Gore said all the right things in his endorsement speech, except he noticeably left out the last Democratic president, the one who chose to elevate Gore from has-been senator to his running mate and has been the only Democrat elected president twice since World War II, which is like the Middle Ages for today's voters.
--Andrew Malcolm, LA Times Blogs:
Early reaction to Al Gore's Obama endorsement: Yawn

One fact wasn't mentioned by the above writers.

Al Gore has had so much practice the last 8 years playing Chicken Little, he might just have morphed into a chicken.

by Mondoreb
images:
* vegetarianorganicblog
* Cerrco

Fightthesmears.com: Only Straw Man Obama Rumors Need Apply

"What you won't hear from this campaign or this party is the kind of politics that uses religion as a wedge, and patriotism as a bludgeon--that sees our opponents not as competitors to challenge, but enemies to demonize. Because we may call ourselves Democrats and Republicans, but we are Americans first. We are always Americans first." ~ Barack Obmama, June 3, 2008"
--from the header at Obama's Fight the Smears.com

ALSO at DBKP.com: FighttheSmears.com: Obama Site Another Attempt to Limit Discussion

A round-up of predictable headlines from the (largely) usual WWW suspects.

* Ben Smith notes in "Fighting smears, gaming Google" an email by Wired's Thomas Goetz:

By putting their own website out there front-and-center, and then getting everybody to link to it (starting with all the media covering the launch of the site), the result will be to drive fightthesmears.com towards the top of a Google search on, say, "obama muslim" or "michelle obama whitey". Ideally, if enough of the pro-Obama network links to fightthesmears.com, it'll drive the sites that peddle in the rumor-mongering, which are now the first results on said searches, off the top of the results list. Ideal long term result: any curious low-information voter who eventually bothers to google these pesky rumors will immediately be led to the debunking rather than the rumor.

My take: Did the Obama campaign create fightthesmears.com to game Google? If so, they're even more net-savvy than folks give them credit for.

Excellent tech-savvy observation!

* The same Brave New Folks ask "Can Sunshine Help Obama Fight the Slime?" New Republic is certainly an expert on slime: it was the home Baghdad Diarist, Thomas Scott Beauchamp. TNR's Michelle Cottle gushes:

The fabulous Karen Tumulty has a piece up over at Time.com today (sorry, for some reason can't get our blog's link function to work; go to Time.com's home page and you'll see it) about Obama's rumor-fighting initiative, a web site called fightthesmears.com that seeks to confront head on all those nasty flasehoods being whispered--and emailed--about him and his family. In addition to debunking the more pernicious tales, the site asks Obama supporters to, with a click of a button, "Spread the Word" about the truth (or, rather, the lack thereof) behind such rumors.

Too bad about that link function.

* MSNBC chips in with "OBAMA CAMP TRIES TO 'FIGHT THE SMEARS'", where NBC/NJ's Athena Jones also does her bit to add to the Obama fluffery.

Obama's campaign has mastered the use of the Internet for fundraising. His backers have used viral videos like the "Yes we can" mash-up and the 'Empire Strikes Barack'-style videos to rev up supporters. But there have also been instances where the Web has hurt Obama, like the Rev. Wright playing on a loop on YouTube. There have also been numerous emails about Obama being a Muslim and a man who refuses to say the Pledge of Allegiance and most recently messages accusing his wife Michelle of uttering a racial epithet at Obama's former church. (The first two are demonstrably untrue, and Michelle has denied the latter and Obama himself has challenged anyone with video of his wife making the remarks to produce it.)

Rather, Obama is challenging anyone to produce a video he first said doesn't exist.

And Time is commenting on its own story, with "TIME: Obama Fights the Smears".

The Illinois Senator launches a “Web-based rumor clearinghouse” to counter the online rumors about his faith, family and connections with controversial figures.

Obama adviser Anita Dunn: “We will not allow Michelle—or, for that matter, Barack—to be defined by rumors.”

Does this mean that anything Obama doesn't want discussed will end up on FighttheSmears.com?

Or do only straw man rumors need apply?

by Mondoreb
images: fightthesmears.com

John McCain: Reactions Heat Up

The Thought Crime of Pointing Out
That John McCain is No Conservative


One can group almost all John McCain media stories into a few categories.

What?

The media is not very original?

Take the DBKP John McCain Media Taste Taste: see if the next McCain story you read can't be filed under one of the following.

LIBERAL:

1 John McCain--Maverick Conservative--Upsets Ugly Conservatives

2 John McCain--The Candidate the Democrats Fear

REPUBLICAN

1 Come on Guys! Get Behind McCain, Please! We Can't let Hillary Win!

2 Come on Guys! You're Nuts! You're Just Going to Let a Democrat Win!

CONSERVATIVE

1 McCain is no Conservative

2 Look at McCain's Record

3 McCain's Animosity Toward Conservatives and Republicans

LIBERAL MSM PRESS

The liberal MSM keeps trying to paint John McCain as a "conservative", Republican party poobahs just want a winner, and conservatives keep pointing to McCain's record, assembled over years of votes and quotes.

For their trouble in documenting the antagonism of John McCain toward most conservative ideas, Rush Limbaugh and other have been labeled as "hysterical", "unreasoning" and worse by, not only the MSM, but others in and out of the blogosphere.

Sounds like McCain describing conservatives whenever they disagree with him.

All they left out is "racist" and "stupid": two descriptions McCain used this past summer for conservative opponents who disagreed with him on his Immigration bill.

The liberal Mainstream Media's wet dream is a McCain vs. Obama or Hillary showdown. It's a win-win situation for them. On issue after issue, McCain's position is almost identical to Hillary Clinton's position.

The only difference is that McCain will have an "R" by his name, Clinton, a "D".

This may concern those who feel that they are part of a "team" when they vote and like to be on the winning side.

Screw that.

Join a bowling league.

McCain-Clinton: Many Similarities, Few Differences



An appeal by John McCain for conservative support would be similar--not quite, but almost exactly--to an appeal by Hillary Clinton.

Both have shown animus over the years to almost all parts of the Republican coalition at one time or another.

Both have disdain for social conservatives--families--and the issues which matter more to them.

Both are almost completely, philosophically vapid; tacking with the wind. McCain's only exception has been on national defense, though he still doesn't have a spotless record, even there. Clinton has been steadfast on national healthcare coverage.

Both are politicians first.



Republican "Get on Board" Reaction

Somebody named Glenn Sacks wrote a piece on Blogger's News Network today that is somewhat representative of the second strain of media stories concerning John McCain.

It's one of the "Republican first" mindset.

The biggest reason why people on the far right hate McCain is that McCain, unlike many conservatives, talks sense on immigration. Sorry, but anybody who thinks that we are going to round up 12 million people–people who are an important part of our economy and who often have deep ties to this country as well as children who are US citizens–is living in a dream world. There will be another amnesty. The only question is when.

Mr. Sacks packs quite an innuendo punch.

In one paragraph, he has determined that those who disagree with McCain's record are "far right".

And, that "hate" is the motivating factor in their disagreement. How tiresome to read that from someone who is not a liberal writer.

Mr. Sacks has a promising career as a MSM commentator in front of him.

One needn't have "hate" to point out McCain's record and quotes: only a desire for accuracy.

Mr. Sacks also trots out the weary nag of an idea: that of "rounding up 12 million people". What is it about wanting to enforce the security of borders which drives Mr. Sacks to construct this straw man?

Anyone who thinks that America will be a safer place by our continuing to play that game of Russian Roulette by allowing our southern border to remain porous and inviting, will have to explain how this is so.

Wanting to know this constitutes "intellectual curiosity", not "hate".

Countries either stop bad situations from getting worse, or they suffer the consequences.

One can appreciate Senator McCain's service to his country 30+ years ago without equating that service with the idea that McCain should be in the White House.

The lack of enthusiasm from conservatives concerning McCain should be understandable: he is no conservative. The attempt to label McCain as a "conservative" has been what has created the problem.

McCain is a Republican.

And that is fine. He can run as a Republican, win or lose as a Republican, govern or fade away as a Republican.

But he is simply no conservative, never has been and, unless he is stricken by a "on the road to Damascus" conversion moment with an Angel of the Lord, he will never be a conservative.

So, John McCain: run as a Republican and quit trying to paint yourself as a conservative.

That's all conservative pundits are asking for: just some straight talk from John McCain.

Just this time, for once.

by Mondoreb
image: freaking news
Sources:
* Far Right's Hysterics over John McCain & Immigration



Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

Psychotic Reactions

Pixelaneous #24



Everyone has different reactions to different events. Pictured above, one obviously hen-pecked husband's reaction to his marital situation. Click on pictures to enlarge.



One umpire's reaction to stress.



The human skin's reaction to too much sun.



The reaction to the new step-mom.



Too much fun.



Traditional reaction to the roller-coaster.



Reaction to bath time.



One reaction to a messy desk?



Everyone reacts differently to the excitement of a football game. Check out the guy in the cast's reaction to this exciting moment.



Reaction to a friendly shout-out.



Reaction to a chew.



Reaction to fuzz.



More reaction to fuzz.



Reaction to infidelity.



Reaction to an unexpected bump on water.



Reaction to an unexpected bump on land.



Reaction to someone getting in my desk.


by Mondoreb
[hat tip & compilation: vickie, the goth chick]
Pixelaneous #23: Party Time! These people are going to hell!



Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

Where's the Liberal Love? Pope Comes Out in Favor of Science

Benedict calls for science, not dogmatic hysteria

Pope Benedict XVI called for more science and less dogma.

Normally, corks would be popping off champagne bottles wherever "Christian" and "science" are are seen as mutually exclusive terms.

Maybe next time.

Pope Benedict XVI has launched a surprise attack on climate change prophets of doom, warning them that any solutions to global warming must be based on firm evidence and not on dubious ideology.

The leader of more than a billion Roman Catholics suggested that fears over man-made emissions melting the ice caps and causing a wave of unprecedented disasters were nothing more than scare-mongering.

The German-born Pontiff said that while some concerns may be valid it was vital that the international community based its policies on science rather than the dogma of the environmentalist movement.[1]

Sounds reasonable.

Reaction from a rival faith, Worldwide Church of Man-made Climate Disasters, is expected to answer the Pope's call for more science with calls for more dogma--their own.

One adherent of WCMCD thought, Oliver Willis, said one factor in the climate change debate not often mentioned, was child rapists.

Conservatives are trumpeting this attack on climate science from Pope Benedict saying we should slow down on dealing with the problem. The Pope is free to say what he wishes, but people like myself are also free to note that the Pope also thought the Catholic church should slow down on rooting out child rapists. So, there's that.[2]

More from the Pope.

"Humanity today is rightly concerned about the ecological balance of tomorrow," he said in the message entitled "The Human Family, A Community of Peace".

"It is important for assessments in this regard to be carried out prudently, in dialogue with experts and people of wisdom, uninhibited by ideological pressure to draw hasty conclusions, and above all with the aim of reaching agreement on a model of sustainable development capable of ensuring the well-being of all while respecting environmental balances.

"If the protection of the environment involves costs, they should be justly distributed, taking due account of the different levels of development of various countries and the need for solidarity with future generations.

"Prudence does not mean failing to accept responsibilities and postponing decisions; it means being committed to making joint decisions after pondering responsibly the road to be taken."

Efforts to protect the environment should seek "agreement on a model of sustainable development capable of ensuring the well-being of all while respecting environmental balances", the Pope said.

He added that to further the cause of world peace it was sensible for nations to "choose the path of dialogue rather than the path of unilateral decisions" in how to cooperate responsibly on conserving the planet.[1]

The Pope isn't the only official in the Catholic Church to notice the missionary zeal of the WCMCD.

In October, the Australian Cardinal George Pell, the Archbishop of Sydney, caused an outcry when he noted that the atmospheric temperature of Mars had risen by 0.5 degrees celsius.

"The industrial-military complex up on Mars can't be blamed for that," he said in a criticism of Australian scientists who had claimed that carbon emissions would force temperatures on earth to rise by almost five degrees by 2070 unless drastic solutions were enforced.

Reaction from white trash skeptics was succinct.

Jebediah Murphy at Pirates Cove: "Well, I reckon the Pope is correct. It does need to based on science, rather then hysteria, hypocrisy, junk science, and a need create a world wide socialist paradise. Oh, and let’s not forget getting lots and lots of moola out of gullible climahysterics."

"Why else promote carbon offsets rather then just, ya know, advocating stopping the problem? I reckon we can’t say that all liberals are idiots, since a few, such as Michael Moore and The Goracle, know how to siphon money out of moonbat pockets."[2]

No More Mr. Nice Blog was even-handed about the papal assessment, questioning the Daily Mail's interpretation of what the Pope actually said.

A Reuters story on this papal message bears the headline "Pope Urges Prudence in Environmental Decisions." That's accurate. AFP's story is called "Environmental Policies Must Respect Needs of the Poor: Pope." That's accurate as well -- he does say that. But the Daily Mail has a vested interest in making you think that the Pope is an environmental skeptic. So it lied about his message.[4]

The Pope cautions against hysteria.

Expect more hysterical reactions to follow.

by Mondoreb
[image:dailymail]
Sources:
1-The Pope Condemns the Climate Change Prophets
2-The Pope's Judgement
3-WTW: The Pope Now a Climate Change Denier
4-Why is Britain's Daily Mail Lying about what the Pope's Environmentalism?



Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

NBC Generates 'Schlock and Awww'

30 Rockefeller Plaza--headquarters of NBC-- was the scene of shlock and "Awww!" earlier this month.

NBC's schlock--the network initially refused to air a "Salute to the Troops"--and a collective "Awwww" by NBC when it was realized a sizable portion of their audience and others were shocked and upset at their decision.

NBC's initial refusal to air Freedom Watch's 'Salute to the Troops' only highlighted the perception problems surrounding the network known in some quarters as "Nothing But Crap".

NBC quietly announced this week that it was refunding an average of $500,000 per advertiser for failing to hit minimum ratings in their contracts. The unprecedented move, along with MSNBC's perennial basement-dwelling status in both the ratings and the evening TV watching habits of Americans, has generated some other calls--for NBC parent, General Electric, to either fix the low performing network or dump it.

NBC earlier had announced that it had reconsidered airing the MAF tribute.

The cartoon above, Red Planet Cartoons' "NBC Strikes Again", graphically illustrates some reasons why NBC has alienated large segments of the once-robust network's viewers.

Red Planet has gathered some interesting information on the NBC lawyer who refused the FW spot.

The NBC lawyer who refused to allow a non-profit group to air an advertisement thanking American troops for their service has donated at least $45,000 to a host of Congressional Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, New York Senator Hillary Clinton and the campaign committees of House and Senate Democrats, research by the Majority Accountability Project has found.

Red Planet also has an amusing quote from NBC's Brian Williams, as well as featuring "The Worst Liberal Bumper Stickers".

Get the whole package at RP's "NBC Strikes Again".

"Nothing But Crap" is what viewers, advertisers and, perhaps soon, stockholders believe.

by Mondoreb
[image:redplanetcartoons]




Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

Lori Drew, Megan Meier: Megan Had it Coming Blog Watch

Some times to keep in mind and ponder for 'Megan Had it Coming' blog-watchers.

Time Elapsed Sine the Megan Had it Coming Blog published its first post on November 18, 2007 at 1:01 pm.



Time Elapsed since the following post appeared on the "Megan Had it Coming" blog.

[at 4:53 am EST December 7, 2007]: 11 hours 30 minutes]


K said...

FOR ALL OF YOU OUT HERE THAT THINKS THIS ISN'T LORI DREW,I HATE TO BREAK THE NEWS TO YOU BUT IT IS.I TALKED TO A FAMILY MEMBER WHO SAID THAT WHEN LORI WROTE THIS SHE THOUGHT PEOPLE WOULD BE UNDERSTANDING ONCE THEY HEARD HER SIDE OF THE STORY,SHE DIDN'T EXPECT TO GET THE BACK LASH THAT CAME AND IS STILL COMING.SHE HAS DECIDED TO LET PEOPLE VENT AND IF ANYTHING HAPPENS TO HER FAMILY THEY WILL HAVE SOMEWHERE TO START(THIS BLOG LIST).

December 6, 2007 5:24 PM

NUMBER OF COMMENTS on 'Megan Had it Coming' BLOG [4:35 am EST 12-07-07]: 2845

Blogger.com, which houses the blog and lists "impersonation" as one of the things banned from the site, said it has no information that would call into question the authenticity of the "Megan Had It Coming" site.

"We take violations of Blogger's policy very seriously as such activities diminish the experience for our users," a spokesman for Google, Blogger's parent company, told FOXNews.com.

"Once we are notified about a blog that impersonates a person, we act quickly to remove it. We have not received an impersonation claim to date from the individual allegedly being impersonated."

As we said before, we'll wait and see what happens.

Meanwhile, the numbers accumulate.

by Mondoreb
[image:dkimages]
Sources:
Megan Had it Coming, Lori Drew: What Her Lawyer Says, What Google Says
Megan Had it Coming Blog Still Going Strong

Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

Megan Meier, Lori Drew: St. L P-D Believes Bloggers Are the Real Culprits

Post Dispatch tackles important issue

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch has fingered a culprit in the Megan Meier story.

And the guilty parties are--surprise!--bloggers.

The traditional press, ever mindful of mouthing ethics that fall far short of what they actually practice, is again pointing a finger at their Internet brethren.

Joel Currier, the P-D writer seems upset that readers, upon reading Megan's story, became upset. The Post-Dispatch can hardly direct their ire at readers, having lost over 10,000 of them over the last year, so bloggers are not only handy, but also a logical target.[1]

Besides, bloggers most likely don't read the Post-Dispatch anyway.

Why's Joel so upset? We'll let him explain.

Rage against Curt and Lori Drew of Dardenne Prairie continues to explode on the Internet — targeting the couple and people who did business with them.

Bloggers want justice for Megan Meier, 13, and vengeance against the Drews, whom they blame for Megan's suicide last year.

Dozens of names and phone numbers of businesses that advertised in Lori Drew's coupon book have been posted online with demands to boycott their establishments.

Many of the companies have canceled their advertising contracts with Drew and received letters saying Drew is folding her coupon business.[2]

So: there are people upset with the Drews. This is unpardonable. Joel quotes a few of the merchants, who are upset at being contacted by people learning of their association with Drew's Ad Vantage advertising company.

He then moves on to Drew's lawyer to support his thesis. The reporter in Mr. Currier surely knows that someone's attorney may not be the final word in objectivity.

Doesn't he?

Jim Briscoe, the lawyer representing the Drews, told the "Today" show on Tuesday that Lori Drew has had to close her advertising business and her daughter has dropped out of school after the publicity and investigation into Megan's suicide. Briscoe also said it was not clear whether the Drews would be able to continue living in their Dardenne Prairie neighborhood, four doors down from the Meier house.

Drew "absolutely, 100 percent" did not know that Internet messages to Megan had become nasty, Briscoe said. Drew did not write any of the MySpace messages that preceded Megan Meier's suicide in October 2006.[2]

One admires Jim Briscoe. His job of presenting Lori Drew as a sympathetic figure is not an easy one. But he gets paid to do that job.

Joel Currier gets paid to do another job.

And today he earned his pay decrying the reactions of readers--of bloggers. He quotes another harried small businessman.

Stein Hunter, 49, the owner of the Crooked Tree Coffee Shop in St. Charles, says he sees irony in the way people are using the Internet to harass business owners in order to get back at the Drews.

"The issue is harassment," Hunter said. "And they are harassing people."

An expression of opinion is many things to many people. To Mr. Hunter, it's harassment; it must certainly seems like it to him. But then, Mr. Hunter brews coffee: he doesn't report the news.

Another expression of opinion in the Post-Dispatch came from Currier's colleague, Jeff Gordon, sportswriter, about the Cardinal's Scott Rolen. "Rolen's gotta go," writes Gordon today. But no piece on whether Rolen agrees with that opinion or feels harassed. Or whether his livelihood might be affected.

And Rolen didn't conduct a six-week hoax on a 13-year-old girl; all he's apparently guilty of is pouting and frowning.

There's more of the same from Joel Currier in his story; anyone wanting to read it can check out the article; it's listed at the end of this post.

One could do a simple check--we did--to find that most of the phone numbers, personal information and posting of advertisers came from readers of blogs, not the blogs themselves. Whether in comments tagged onto the end of posts, in forums or in emails, readers were almost universally outraged.

Why were readers outraged?

That was simple enough to check also. They were upset that a 46-year-old woman would concoct an elaborate scam on a 13-year-old girl suffering from depression. They were upset that, in Drew's own words, "she, with the help of a temporary employee named "Ashley", constructed a profile of 'good-looking' male on 'myspace'".

They are upset that when "the communication became 'sexual for a 13-year-old', Drew--again in her own words--continued the fake male profile despite this development.[3]

They became upset at a traditional press, which had long published the names and personal information of anyone targeted in frivolous lawsuits or cases where people were arrested for offenses, large and small(and later the charges were dropped), clammed up when it came to an Internet hoaxer.

And now, those same readers appear to be upset when reporters attack the one vehicle they had for expressing their anger: the Internet and the bloggers who chronicle there.

This isn't the first time this has happened. It's one of the reasons that TV ratings and circulation figures continue to tumble for the gatekeepers in the traditional media: poor and unresponsive customer service.

One suspects this won't be the last time.

by Mondoreb
[image:stlbrianj]

Sources:
1-FAS-FAX Numbers from the Audit Bureau of Circulation
2-Internet Fury Mounts in Megan Case
3-What Lawyer said in 2007, What Lori Drew said in 2006



Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

MySpace Suicide: Lori Drew, Author Of "Megan Had It Coming" Blog?

Monday, December 3, 2007

I'm Lori Drew

It's time I dropped the charade. Yes, I made this blog. Yes, I'm Lori Drew. [1]

(A very chilling note posted today on the "Megan Had It Coming" Blog. Read the rest of the post below, the author claims to be Lori Drew, the woman at the center of the Megan Meier story)

---BREAKING: 12-4-07 2:00 pm EST Drew's Lawyer: Drew Knew, Didn't Stop It VIDEO REPORT

My daughter had nothing to do with this. Everyone needs to leave her alone. None of you can possibly know her involvement, and none of you can possibly know what she's gone through. She's just a kid. She doesn't deserve these brutal verbal attacks. Please stop.

Now that Mr. Banas has made public the announcement that there will be no charges filed against me or my family, I feel it is time to speak out about this tragic affair. I cannot count on any media organization to fairly represent my story, as they have grossly misrepresented and sensationalized the story so far. So, I must present my case here, on the blog that has been my only outlet.

You don't understand what the last two years have been like, living in this town, dealing with these people. When we came here, the Meiers seemed like a great family with whom we could form a friendship. Tina sold us our house and our little girls became fast friends. It was typical. Sleepovers and vacations and events in the community. The girls were inseparable.

We knew Megan and we liked having her around, at first. But as the months went on, we saw a change in our daughter. She was increasingly disturbed and defensive. We thought the effects of puberty were taking hold. But, we soon realized the negative influence was Megan. Megan had her bright and perky side, but she also had her dark side. We knew that she suffered from depression, so we tried to be supportive and patient. We talked to Ron and Tina about our concerns, but they would have none of it. Their precious Megan couldn't be the problem -- and they said we should feel bad for even suggesting it of a poor, mentally ill child.

It only got worse from there. Megan found out that we had gone to her parents and she worked to drive a wedge between our daughter and us. We fought back the only way we knew how: we supported our daughter and explained to her what we thought. She agreed with us, and that's when the fallout started.

When Sarah stopped going along with Megan's antics, Megan took it especially hard and lashed out. She called my daughter every nasty name in the book, swore to never be friends again and stormed out. Then a few days later they were friends again, Megan would try to manipulate Sarah, Sarah wouldn't buy it, and Megan would become furious again. Then came the MySpace attack. Not the one you're reading about in the news, but the one that started this whole thing.

After the final break-up in their frienship, Megan coordinated a MySpace attack on my daughter. Since she didn't have access to MySpace herself, she had to work through friends. I wasn't too surprised because I knew that Megan was grounded from MySpace the previous year after she made a fake profile with a friend to go prank and bully a classmate they didn't like.

Fortunately, that prank didn't go far, and neither did her latest attempted prank on my daughter. But the damage was done to my child, and I knew what kind of child Megan was, depression or not.

Now I had nothing but sympathy for Megan's condition. But my sympathy has limits. When you come after my daughter and try to hurt her like that, my patience wears out. This troubled child was no longer able to poison my baby in person, so she decided to reach out on the Internet to do it instead. Like any parent, when you see the ill-behaved child next door causing trouble for your family, you want to wring the neck of the parents who let it happen. But, as Megan's parents made it clear earlier, they were not about to come down on their precious Megan. I had no recourse with them. And, forbidding the children from seeing each other was not effective because Megan could simply harass my daughter online.

Then, my daughter heard that Megan was lobbying her parents to get her MySpace back. I was instantly terrified. That little monster was a tremendous poison for my daughter as-is. I didn't want to think about what kind of damage she would do if she had total access to the internet. I talked the situation over with people I knew and trusted, who told me to be very afraid. Teenage bullying was rampant on MySpace, and there were very few, if any, legal options for people being harassed. Everyone's advice was: if you're harassed, your only option is to delete your profile and run. It won't stop people from saying bad things about you, but at least you won't have to see it.

I wanted to hide my daughter away from all of this, and delete her MySpace, but she begged and pleaded with me to let her stay. I know it's MySpace and it's a social hub for teens today and I didn't want my daughter to be the only one without, so I relented.

Instead, I worked with a couple of people I knew to create a profile so I could keep tabs on Megan. They helped me add pictures and graphics and music so it would look like a boy that Megan would want to talk to. We didn't totally know what we were doing with the Josh Evans persona, or where it would lead, so I kept it quiet. We did our best to shmooze Megan into opening up. I complimented her pictures and said how great she was. I very gently asked her about her school life and her friends hoping that if she was planning any attack on my daughter that we would be one step ahead of her and could take this evidence to her parents, show them what their daughter is up to so they would finally take action.

A couple of weeks went by and Megan was buying it. We were surprised at how she could be so nice to "Josh" and still have an undercurrent of negativity when she talked about school friends. We wanted to make sure she wasn't going to try anything to get back at Sarah, so we kept the account going. When Megan started talking about being in love and wanting to do boyfriend/girlfriend stuff with "Josh" I got concerned. How do we keep going for information AND figure out a way to let her down gently once we were convinced nothing was going to happen? What if we let her down, and she regressed and came after my daughter anyway? I was becoming very confused and concerned then. Megan was unpredictable and I absolutely did NOT want her harassing my child. I didn't know what to do, so I kept going. I played down her innuendo. Anytime she became explicit, "Josh" backed off and kept the compliments above board.

Then I found out that Megan's parents were actively monitoring the account! Everything that had been going on, they were witness to. This troubled me deeply: were they not concerned when their 13 year old daughter wanted to have heavy duty make out sessions with a 16 year old boy? Hello!

I had "Josh" friend other people that Megan knew all the while so that if anyone else knew of anything that was going to happen, we'd have that much more chance of staying ahead of the game. One of the girls we friended even figured out that the profile was fake. We let her in on it, and asked what she wanted. Turns out, she wasn't friendly with Megan, either, so she wanted to help. I gave her access to the account.

It wasn't long after that that we saw what was being said on other accounts: Megan was still mad at Sarah and was very quiety spreading cruel rumors. She kept it off her own MySpace because she knew that kind of stuff would get her grounded off it again. I was furious! Not only was Megan obviously not going to stop until she had her revenge, but now there was no way to get any evidence about it.

That's when I decided I would have to teach Megan a lesson and give her a taste of her own medicine.

I decided that I would shut down the Josh account, and not be nice about it. Megan's feelings be damned, and to hell with her consequence! I was going to protect my daughter no matter what. So I sent the break up e-mail to Megan saying that Josh didn't want to be friends because Megan was very cruel to her friends. Naturally, Megan freaked, and I tried to keep the messages short and sweet. As a last resort bargaining chip, I figured that if she really loved Josh then maybe he could pressure her into stopping her lies. But it didn't work, and the situation devolved lightning fast.

Megan was screaming at Josh for answers on who he had been talking to: she wanted to know who ratted her out so she could take out revenge on them, too. I shared Megan's messages with everyone involved and encouraged everyone to stand up against her and not take her crap anymore.

Instead, once the word got out about Megan, so did all her romantic replies, as well as a few secrets and the MySpace crowd ganged up on her.But I didn't realize that this group would react that way. I expected a certain amount of bullying, and I was OK with it. I wanted Megan to get a taste of what she had been dishing out this whole time. But I didn't want it to go as far as it did. It's true that the slut and fat references came out of what I shared. And by the time I was done with work on that day, the bullying against Megan had progressed pretty far. I had heard about the "better off without you" message and that's when I told everyone to cool it. Megan had been punished enough, and I was satisfied that she would think twice before bullying or manipulating anyone again.

That night I saw the ambulance lights at the Meier house, and then I saw them take Megan out on a stretcher. I was stunned and horrified. I wasn't sure what had happened, and when they had said Megan tried to kill herself, I didn't believe it. Yes, Megan suffered from depression, but she was always laughing and smiling when we were on vacations, or at sleep overs. After the shock wore off, I panicked: what if Megan ended her life after what happened on MySpace? It seemed ridiculous. When kids were bullied, they went to their rooms and cried -- even the depressed ones. They didn't hang themselves.

I was distraught over the event, so I instructed the key people involved to stay quiet to protect themselves against any counter-bullying, and I deleted the Josh profile. I kept the truth from the Meier family because there was simply no reason to come forward. Their little girl died the next day at the hospital. Their lives were destroyed. What good would it do to inform them that their daughter's MySpace boyfriend was a fake? They wouldn't believe that their daughter was a MySpace bully and a real life manipulator when she was alive, so why add to their grief now? I stayed quiet. I went to the funeral to pay my respects to this troubled child who took herself to a tragic end. We mourned the loss of a girl who once was a good friend. We all tried to get on with our lives.

Little by little rumors of the cause of Megan's suicide spread. Of course the Josh break-up was mentioned, as was the MySpace bullying. People talked about the need to stop MySpace bullying. There were a couple of news reports, but it never went anywhere.

Until six weeks later when one of the girls involved decided to link me to the issue. When Megan's parents found out that the Josh account was me, they focused all of their rage and pain and guilt at me. Instantly, what had been a mysterious suicide with no definite answers became a personal vendetta.

Just like Megan, her parents showed their dark side and scared the holy hell out of me when they dumped our smashed foosball table on our driveway. Instantly I knew we were dealing with unbalanced people. Aggravated by their child's death and their own culture of anxiety, I very much feared for my family. I made sure to report the incident to the police so the Meiers would know that we would stand up for ourselves and that the police were watching, should they choose to do something rash.

A little bit after that, I decided to try to diffuse the situation and confront the parents. I would lay out everything I knew, all the intent, and everything I thought. If they didn't want to accept the truth about their daughter, then there was nothing else I could do. But I would at least try. Unfortunately, Tina & Ron would have none of it. They wouldn't talk to us, they wouldn't deal with us. Ron pretty much came unglued when we made one last attempt. They had nothing but raw hatred for us, and they wouldn't listen. That's when I realized it was hopeless.

The police investigation was especially frightening. We cooperated as best we could. I provided my statement, but I was not satisfied with the officer who took it. He got most of the details wrong, and he left out intricacies that I've explained here. When I tried to get the report corrected, an officer at the desk said she was familiar with our case, and flat out refused to allow us to amend our statement. That was the beginning of the backlash. That it came from a police officer truly shook us.

The investigators asked both us and the Meiers to remain quiet about the issue while they conducted their work. They warned us of small town mob violence and undue media attention. We agreed and went on with our lives. We heard almost nothing for nearly nine months. Our lives seemed to be getting back to normal, despite the family down the street that still grieved visibly and had devolved into fights and separation. I truly felt bad for them. They lost their baby, and now they were tearing themselves apart because the pain wasn't getting any better. I made sure to kiss and hug my Sarah every night and tell her how much I loved her. We actually grew closer from it.

Then the investigation was over. No charges would be filed. We were relieved. It felt like a weight had finally been lifted from us. But not so for Tina & Ron. They had focused their rage on us and blamed us for everything. I could understand their pain and their guilt, but I had had enough of their accusations. One day I did snap and told Tina to "give it a rest." Looking back, it was insensitive to say. But, you have to understand that for months we had been dealing with a family that didn't want to listen to our side of the story and only called for us to "be gone." Like I said, my sympathy has limits.

After the investigation, Tina made it clear she wasn't going to let this go. We weren't sure what to expect, but we had grown to be dismissive of her and her incoherent ranting. Then came the newspaper article, which instantly painted us as hoaxers who were out to make Megan kill herself.

You see, this is why I now have an extreme distrust for any media: they paint the story in whatever way gets the most readers. Everyone from Pokin to Andersoon Cooper has painted this story as if we set out to destroy Megan, as if her suicide was a foregone conclusion of our actions. But it's not. We didn't know Megan was going to do what she did. If we knew it was going to end like that, I wouldn't have started this whole thing. I had no intention for Megan to be so drastic. I wanted her to learn a lesson so she could be a better person. I didn't want her to die.

Then Sarah Wells outed me. Then the hate and harassment and threats poured in. Even against my daughter. First there were dozens of calls, then hundreds, then there was national news, and everyone went crazy.

That's why I started this blog and posted as "Kirsten." I was so angry at the world for being so unfair, especially when it came to my daughter whom I had sworn to protect from all of this. I took a low blow at Megan's memory because I desperately wanted the world to at least get a glimpse of the truth.

But that's all over now. The final word from authorities has come down that there will be no charges, so I don't have to remain silent. There's no point in hiding anymore. The internet has made it clear that mob revenge must prevail, even if there's no justice in it. So be it.

Here I am, internet. Come get me.

Posted by Megan Had It Coming at 8:02 AM

If this is true, that Lori Drew is/was "Kristen" and this post is from Lori, the mother of one of Megan's ex-friends. Then this is quite sickening.

Here is "Kristen's/Lori Drew's" first post on "Megan Had It Coming."

Sunday, November 18, 2007

Set the record straight

I want to set the record straight about Megan Meier. I'm calling myself Kristen because if i don't want to give out my real name.

Megan and I were sort of friends. I always saw her at school and sometimes on myspace when her mom would let her on. I need to talk about what she was like because everyone has this picture of this innocent girl who had this horrible thing done to her. That's sorta true but not totally.

Megan was a total drama queen. Yeah i know it was depression or whatev but it was hard to be her friend for very long because she would always lose it and turn into a psycho. That's why Lori Drew's daughter stopped being friends with Megan. Let's call her laura. Every other day Megan would have some crisis and you could see her freaking out down the hall or screaming at someone for stabbing her in the back or not listening to her or whatever then she would go cry to Laura unless it was her pissing her off. You couldn't say anything to megan without her taking it the wrong way.

Yeah she was kinda fat. But she made it seem like everyone was out to harpoon her or whatev. I saw her out with her mom one day at tri sports and she was being a total basket case complaining how all the sports gear made her look fat. You could tell that her mom had been putting up with her daughter for a looooooong time and kinda tuned her out. I would, too.

Oh one other thing about Megan is that she was soooooo shallow. She totally threw herself at any boy who would give her the time of day and then totally lose him for stupid reasons. She was hot for this one boy in our math class and she was trying to be a flirt but she was being totally slutty at him until sara this other girl she talked to said she didn't think he was very hot and boom! suddenly megan wasn't intrested in him anymore and called him a loser in front of everyone. It was that kind of stuff that made people not like Megan. Megan could be really mean and hurtful.

Oh and if you ever disagreed with her or didn't go in with whatever she was talking about she totally pulled this poor me thing and got all defensive. she was a total psycho and everyone knew it. And she knew that everyone knew it and she went even more crazy! Like when she talked about liking Usher and someone else called her a getto bitch and she screamed at the top of her lungs NO IM NOT!!!!! You couldn't help but laugh at her because she was soooooo nuts!!!

So yeah it's to bad Megan killed herself but it's not suprising. I mean if she didn't have enough to eat at dinner that could have set her off and made her kill herself. And killing yourself over a myspace boy? come on!!! I mean yeah your fat so you have to take what you can get but still nobody should kill themselves over it. Oh wait unless your Megan the psycho who goes crazy over every little thing and acts like it's the end of the world. Think about it Megan was "drove" to suicide because from her perspective a boy she liked suddenly asked her about her school reputation and said he wasn't into it? How crazy do you have to be?

Oh and I don't think Lori Drew is so evil as everyone says. Megan was a total bitch to everyone around her especially Laura so if I was her mom I would be mad at Megan too and I would check up on her to see what shit she was spreading about my daughter. And Megan totally talked shit about everyone, including Laura. After she told Laura off, she went around to all her friends to get everyone on her side as if it was this huge divorce or somethingcalling Laura a slut and a bitch so whatev. So yeah Laura's mom checked up on Megan to see what was up and give her a taste of her own medicine. And it's not like Laura's mom did this whole campaign like you see on the news. She was pretending to be this nice guy for six weeks and then said two mean things in one day and that was it. It's not like Megan thought some mean adult was coming after her. All she knew was that some boy who would totally make her think she's hot shit at school cuz she couldn't shut up about him she totally showed him off like a trophy so all the other girls would be jealous and then oops her awesome boy toy was fake!! She was like totally busted on that one. And she had it coming with all the shit she did.

So nobody in the news talks about what Megan the bitch was like so now you know. Oh and don't bother trying to figure out who I am. Unlike Megan, I DO have a boyfriend and he knows computers and he totally covered my tracks.

Indeed. If this is Lori Drew, and she is "Kristen" the author of the "Megan Had It Coming" Blog then someone needs to address this woman's mental health.

Megan was 13-years-old. Lori Drew was supposed to be the adult. Lori Drew decided to "teach Megan a lesson." By lies, fraud, and deceit. An adult versus a 13-year-old kid.

We wondered why Lori/Kristen decided the only way the "truth" could be told was through the anonymity of an internet blog?

Wading through Lori/Kristen's missive we see no remorse, none, for Megan.

If this person posting on "Megan Had It Coming" is Lori Drew then it is fairly easy to surmise, by the actions listed in her post, that "Lori Drew" is a malignant narcissist. The horrible first post from Lori/Kirsten pretending to be a classmate of Megan's. The "poor me" sob story. The utter lack of remorse for Megan's death. The attempt to continue to paint Megan as a bad person who "needed to be taught a lesson."

We are shaking our heads here. Our sympathies go to Megan's family and absolutely none for Lori Drew/Kristen.

By LBG

BREAKING:
A Conversation Between Lori Drew and Internet Commenters?, Part I
DBKP - Lori Drew Author of 'Megan Had it Coming' Blog?
DBKP - Lori Drew or Internet Troll?

MEGAN MEIER, LORI DREW, MYSPACE SUICIDE LIBRARY:
DBKP MySpace Suicide Library

Source - Megan Had It Coming
Image [photos.viczhang.com]
Hattip: Stephanie



Back to Front Page.

Scott Beauchamp: TNR Finally Confesses Left Blogosphere Silence Deafening

Franklin Foer's article finally admitting the problems over the Baghdad Diaries' Scott Beuchamp was a painful read.

TNR's behavior is perfectly understandable: after all, after their past journalistic mishaps, who'd want to yet admit to another?

I mean, come on: if TNR was a drunk and had this many relapses, they'd have signed up for Antabuse a long time ago.

THE really hilarious part of this whole sorry story is knee-jerk reaction of the usual suspects: the Fiercely-Independent, Principle-Driven Left Wing Blogosphere.

Ferocious fact-checkers to a man, they could be counted on to guard their reputation as those who check the facts and deliver the truth to their readers.

What "truth" did they deliver?

We now let you dip your toe into the left-wing pool of truth concerning TNR and Private Scott Beuchamp's Baghdad Diaries.

From Crooked Timbers: (with kudos for "Longest Introductory Sentence" on the Left.). The rightwing blogosphere, with assistance from the usual MSM types like Howard Kurtz has spent the last week or two trying to discredit a soldier, Scott Beauchamp, who wrote a “Baghdad Diary” for The New Republic, which included various examples of casually callous behavior on the part of US soldiers (nothing on the scale of Abu Ghraib or other proven cases). The Beauchamp case fits the general pattern pretty well. First, the wingers claimed that the Diary was a fabrication and that “Scott Thomas” was the creation of a writer who’d never been near Iraq. Then, when it became evident he was a real person, they rolled out the slime machine to discredit him. Then they engaged in amateur forensics to discredit particular items in his account (acres of screen space have been devoted to the question of whether the driver of a Bradley fighting vehicle can run over a dog). --One Endless Rathergate Digby thought the behavior of anyone wanting to know if a story is true or false is--well, we'll let him explain. After a tremendous amount of wingnut pressure on TNR to prove they hadn't been duped by an imposter, now that they know he does in fact exist, they are working their way into a complete frenzy going after this soldier as if he were al Qaeda and acting as though the hawkish New Republic has just endorsed Cindy Sheehan for president. It's like watching a bunch of piranhas attack some kids who accidentally fell into the water. It certainly should not have have garnered this vicious right wing attack from everyone from Bill Kristol to the lowliest denizens of the right blogosphere. They want to destroy this soldier for describing things that have been described in war reporting since Homer so they can worship "the troops" without having to admit that the whole endeavor is a bloody, horrible mess that only briefly, and rarely, offers opportunity for heroic battlefield courage (which, of course, it sometimes does as well.) --Digby: Wingnuts vs. Our Soldiers (Scott Thomas Beuchamp Edition) The ever-hopeful John Cole, at Balloon Juice, starts with no facts, but proves it's not going prevent his leaping into the fray against the lunatics attacking SCB. Let’s discuss Scott Beauchamp, who was widely regarded as not existing, but who now exists- much to the chagrin of the lunatic fringe of the right wing blogosphere. I guess we know why he didn’t put his real name on it- it is FRENCH sounding! Of course he wants us to lose! The VICHY have infilitrated the ARMY! --Open Thread July 26, 2007 Nicolle Belle at Crooks and Liars on the Weekly Standards' "besmirching": Max Blumenthal looks at the “reliable” sources that the Weekly Standard used to try to besmirch Scott Beauchamp: Matt Sanchez and Throbert McGee. And yet they still get a national platform. --Reliable Sources DailyKOS didn't fail to disappoint: their usual M.O. is up next. What fun! No facts, no problems. When short of hard info, trot out some invective--the usual substitute for facts. The RW bloggers went crazy, accusing TNR of making things up, and in their typical fashion "proving" that Scott Thomas was a fake. Scott Thomas turned out to be real, which led to the normal character assassination from the RW. --The "Scott Thomas" Affair: The Right Wing Wins Again Firedoglake couldn't really add anything about verifying Beauchamp, but they get to say "hate speech" and "Republicans" in the same paragraph, so it wasn't a total loss. The Left Trifecta is the previous two, plus "Hitler" in the same paragraph. It took them another couple paragraphs to work the Feurher into the mix. They do get partial credit for "frothing", though. The nameless fellow(s?) and good friend of Michelle Malkin's behind the right-wing blog aggregator Volunteer Opinion Journal thinks he's caught us all being naughty. Pretty mild stuff, compared to what his comrades were and are saying about Scott Thomas Beauchamp (for more, go here and here), but hey, you work with the "hate speech" you have, not the hate speech you wish you had -- such as what regularly issues from the posts and comments over at Michelle Malkin's shop. These people are the Republican base, and as TRex points out, this is precisely why the Republicans don't dare do a YouTube debate in which their base has any sort of say: It would hand the presidential election to the Democrats the same way that Pat Buchanan's Republican-pleasing froth-at-the-mouth speech at the 1992 Republican National Convention guaranteed that Bill Clinton would be our next president. --Hypocrite Much, Guys?

Okay, we could go on like this for a long time, but we've got to move on, much as I'm sure the above stalwart Left Wing Warriors will do on this particular issue.

They were noticeably absent from comment on the affair yesterday.

Probably too busy with their next piece about Hitler-like Michelle Malkin frothing hate speech about Left Wingers.

by Mondoreb
[image:devianttart]

Other sources:
The New Republic -Fog of War
Confederate Yankee - TNR Folds
The New Republic Tries to Come Clean
Hot Air - TNR: We Can No Longer Stand by Beuchamp's Stories
Patterico's Pontifications - The New Republic Retracts Beauchamp Stories



Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.