3
“I Believe This Only Strengthens My Point,” Pt. Infinity
Confederate Yankee has been doing some more of that bizarre right-wing blameshifting and self-justification that we love so well, this time over the Scott Thomas Beauchamp contretemps.
And so it is that “this whole thing”—the claim that conservative bloggers said Thomas didn’t exist or wasn’t a soldier—comes squarely back onto the shoulders of liberal bloggers who created the meme themselves.
When pressed to provide a specific quote from any conservative blog stating that Scott Thomas didn’t really exist, was fabricated, or was an imposter, these and other liberal bloggers have utterly failed to do so.
Why they failed should now be obvious: they made up these claims themselves.
That tone of voice is like a tonic to us. It’s like a glass of fresh-squeezed orange juice in the morning. “Why, friends,” Mr. Yankee essais, “Can you believe the utter failure of these liberals? Accusing us of saying what we said, when they, yes they, are truly the ones to blame for actually saying what they said we said?”
You don’t need to actually parse that, by the way. Message: Confederate Yankee is so crooked, he has to butter his legs to screw his pants on in the morning.
Let’s go to the instant replay.
Regarding the human remains story, the “soldier” describes digging through a mass grave and coming upon artifacts in more or less
The story of the woman in the DFAC makes no sense for the simple reason that the soldier claims not to know whether she was civilian or military. A real soldier ought to know at a glance whether she was one or the other if he was as close to her as he claims to have been
the bottom line is that the New Republic was damnably irresponsible for publishing that “soldier’s” tales without verifying them and without giving NR’s readers enough of a basis to fact check them for ourselves.
From Little Green Footballs:
Recently, The New Republic published an extremely far-fetched article titled “Shock Troops,” with disgusting tales of brutality and heartless behavior by US troops, purported to be written by a soldier serving in Iraq.
From Ace of Spades:
The New Republic has had a long and troubled past with too-ideologically-good-to-be-true, too-difficult-to-verify but too-juicy-not-to-run stories in the past. Now an anonymous “soldier” is reporting for them (illegally, one presumes) from Iraq, and is telling implausible stories that just so happen to portray his “fellow soldiers” as vicious monsters.
Let me make one thing clear at the outset: To question the veracity of a soldier’s accounts of war atrocities in Iraq is not to question that such atrocities ever happen. They do. But when such accusations are made pseudonymously, punctuated with red flags and adorned with incredible embellishment, the only responsible thing to do is to raise questions about his identity and agenda without fear or apology–and demand answers.
For the past few days, debate has bubbled on the right side of the blogosphere about “Scott Thomas,” an alleged soldier serving in Baghdad who penned a piece for The New Republic about war atrocities he allegedly witnessed.
Perhaps next there will be a treatise on the use of scare-quotes, and how they merely emphasize the words they bracket.
We “look forward” to Mr. Yankee’s “intelligent” “thoughts” on this “important matter.”
Rufus said,
August 3, 2007 at 0:52
If only “Liberal Bloggers” would stop refuting “Conservative Bloggers” with “Facts” and “Figures,” the “world” would be a “better place.”
Simba B. said,
August 3, 2007 at 0:59
Your “reality” frightens me. I’m just a simple caveman.
blowback said,
August 3, 2007 at 1:03
Gavin, you left out the tearful ex-Mrs Oshry. I know she is not in the same league at Ace of Spades, Malkin et al. but it is so good to kick a wingnut when they are down.
mikey said,
August 3, 2007 at 1:10
The only reliable source of information on the coalition’s ongoing operations in Iraq is the US Military Press Office. As they have remained mum on the issue of the “existence” of alleged American soldier Scott Thomas, it would be irresponsible to make the assumption that he exists.
I personally doubted my own existence until reading about me in Stars and Stripes…
mikey
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
August 3, 2007 at 1:16
We “look forward” to Mr. Yankee’s “intelligent” “thoughts” on this “important matter.”
“Sadly” “,” “No” “!1one11!!”
Jay B. said,
August 3, 2007 at 1:16
Didn’t some douchebag actually “test” and “debunk” Beauchamp’s Bradley-ran-over-a-dog claim in his sandbox?
Ripley said,
August 3, 2007 at 1:18
Is there any way that Confederate Yankee could sorta just zonk me out so that, like, I don’t know that I’m at work, in here? Could I come home and think that I’ve been fishing all day or something?
Smotes Durston said,
August 3, 2007 at 1:49
If you really want to see a lunatic clutching goalposts tightly to his breast and sprinting as fast as his stubby legs will move him, check out Ace.
On second thought, don’t.
J— said,
August 3, 2007 at 1:49
Bryan at Hot Air:
From the post “Come clean, New Republic” (7/20/07).
Doodle Bean said,
August 3, 2007 at 1:57
Silly Gavin! Because those fine bloggers never actually used the words “he doesn’t exist”, they weren’t questioning his existence. Period. Not at all!
It’s just of like how there is no separation of church and state because the phrase “separation of church and state” doesn’t exist in the Constitution of our fair nation.
Do you understand now?
a different brad said,
August 3, 2007 at 2:05
I still say this is all Reagan’s fault.
If he hadn’t closed and emptied our nation’s institutions for the batshit insane the rightwing blogosphere would consist of about 5 people, readers included. SN! would be a place where shrinks come to laugh about the crazy versions of reality their patients live in. tbogg would be a boring blog about his daughter’s soccer games. Wolcott would spend even more words mocking John from Cincinnati (none wasted), and Hullabaloo would be a book club blog about historical texts and old movies.
And I would never have heard a bum tell me “I’ll let you blow smoke up my ass for a cheeseburger” while walking by a McDonald’s in midtown years ago.
Just imagine.
Kathleen said,
August 3, 2007 at 2:05
I predict that CY/Malkin et al’s definition of “exist”, “fabricated”, or “imposter” will be along the lines of mosque “destruction”.
Kathleen said,
August 3, 2007 at 2:06
sounds like Ripley has a case of the Mondays
Hysterical Woman said,
August 3, 2007 at 2:11
I never said your mother was a prostitute. I merely pointed out that she often walked the streets looking for customers.
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
August 3, 2007 at 2:16
[redacted] Work related whining and crying [/redacted]
I guess it’s time to stop drinking and hit the highway. Ready or not, Detroit, here I come.
Smiling Mortician said,
August 3, 2007 at 2:16
And as for that whole “suck the chrome off a tailpipe” thing, I meant that as a compliment. Jeez.
Marq said,
August 3, 2007 at 2:29
Who cares what CY said? I’m about to watch the opening keynote at YKos featuring Howard Dean and Dick Durbin. CY can eat it (cobag!).
Otto Man said,
August 3, 2007 at 2:34
Gun Counter Gomer making an ass out of himself?
Pfft. Let me know when something surprising happens.
a different brad said,
August 3, 2007 at 3:13
CY commenter daleyrocks sez,
“TR – Has that famous research lab over at SadlyNoonehome proved the Troofiness of Beauchamp’s stories from their reporters on the ground or other means yet? Are they good for anything other than snark? I guess that was a rhetorical question. Most of their snark sucks, involves bathroom humor, and is written at the third grade level in honor of their readership.”
…..
he’s a KAKAPEEPEE head
Legalize said,
August 3, 2007 at 3:13
To be fair, those quotes don’t necessarily state that the guy wasn’t who he said he was; rather they tend hedge, while strongly implying that they didn’t think he was who he said he was. On the other hand this is the “mealy mouth” thing they whine about so constantly, because it’s what lawyers do. And it is what lawyers do.
mikey said,
August 3, 2007 at 3:23
On what basis would the Sadly, No! Research Labs DOUBT the honesty of the NR article? I don’t believe they make assumptions based on no data at all.
Do they?
Oh, dear….
mikey
noen said,
August 3, 2007 at 3:32
Maybe so Legalize but an objective reader would have clearly understood that they doubted the existence of Scott Thomas. That was their intent and it’s obvious what they wished to imply.
kobie said,
August 3, 2007 at 3:35
“SadlyNoonehome”
———————
That’s the best they can come up with?
mikey said,
August 3, 2007 at 3:56
Hell, I’d have gone with SadlyNobodyreadsyourstupidwebsiteanywayyoubunchalibtardassholes…
But that’s just me…
mikey
Some Guy said,
August 3, 2007 at 4:04
““TR – Has that famous research lab over at SadlyNoonehome proved the Troofiness of Beauchamp’s stories…Most of their snark sucks,… and is written at the third grade level in honor of their readership.”
In sadder news, Irony suddenly passed away today, at the age of 84.
Some Guy said,
August 3, 2007 at 4:11
Oh, and the tepid level of CYA-brand non-allegation allegation of the existence(non) of one Mr. Beauchamp is clearly due to the media source from whence it came. The loud, disturbing noise, with blinding flash of light, coming from one of their perceived own stunned the herd, driving them into a confused, un-focused state of anxiety and doubt. Lost without the omnipresent “fear and hatred of The Other”, they resort to all they know, “deny deny deny”, but could not properly co-ordinate their efforts to the usual effectiveness their training permits.
Had this article been published in, oh, I dunno…. the New York Times, you can bet… something…. that their accusations would have been far more solid.
Djur said,
August 3, 2007 at 4:18
Some Guy: What’s funny is that wingers try to play TNR both ways. They claim it to their bosom when it agrees with them, but they decry it as an ancient moonbat enemy when it doesn’t. I saw lots of “who’s surprised that the lie-brul New Dhimmicrat would insult the troops!!” kind of babbling recently.
agrippa_cash said,
August 3, 2007 at 4:58
In their frenzied parsing, one of the Freeps actually accused TNR of antisemitism.
These people live in a world of preconception and reflex.
Alec said,
August 3, 2007 at 5:09
In their frenzied parsing, one of the Freeps actually accused TNR of antisemitism.
America is Israel’s closest ally.
Jews are only worthwhile when in Israel.
Freepers are America.
TNR offended Freepers.
.:. TNR affronted America.
.:. TNR weakened support for Israel.
.:. TNR rendered the Jews less useful.
.:. TNR is antisemitic.
QED.
Sophist, FCD said,
August 3, 2007 at 5:12
Hey, you’d hedge too if every time you made an unambiguous claim you ended being wronger than anyone has ever been wrong in the history of wrongness.
Sophist, FCD said,
August 3, 2007 at 5:19
Also:
Of course they did.Claims don’t exist out there somewhere in the luminiferous aether — all claims are made up by their original claimant.
Principal Blackman said,
August 3, 2007 at 5:35
he’s a KAKAPEEPEE head
And a doodyface!
Mr. Horrible said,
August 3, 2007 at 6:03
I think SadlyNoonanHome actually works.
BTW, I found some video of CY and friends at the latest Gathering of Eagles rally.
Alec said,
August 3, 2007 at 6:06
The funny thing is, Nevada being fairly conservative and pro-military, a disproportionate number of people at Dem/antiwar functions and rallies tend to be veterans or related to them. If we ever attracted the Gathering of Eagles, the chickenhawks’d have to deal with a crowd where maybe one in four participants had seen action in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, or Iraq.
I don’t think I’ll ever see anyone from the Gathering of Eagles. Pity. They’re hilarious.
Ed Marshall said,
August 3, 2007 at 6:31
In their frenzied parsing, one of the Freeps actually accused TNR of antisemitism.
I’d have to see the context. I’ve seen Marty Peretz get called out as a ghetto dreamer/crypto-anti-semite by Jews who understood his positions.
This wasn’t on ALEF (an Israeli left academic mailing list), but I read ALEF for years and the thing that finally made me unable to read anymore was the way they would all turn to the next most dovish one and call them out on hating the Jews. Israel Shamir is the ultimate villian, he probably is the archetype Jewish anti-semite (if he is Jewish) so everyone slams on him to distance themselves. Then you have Ilan Pappe, everone has to hiss at him because he’s an anti-zionist, traitor teaching his children Arabic, and on up the line, Ran HaCohen hates Ilan Pappe, Kimmerling hates HaCohen, (all of them representing themselves as “real” zionists doing whatever they propose as the only way to save the Jewish Israelis from their demographic concerns) until you get some Avigdor Lieberman clone hating Marty Peretz and calling him out on his Jew hating.
MrWonderful said,
August 3, 2007 at 6:41
And finally, this: whenever a wingnut uses the fancy-shmancy word “utterly,” reach for your skepticism.
God, these people are such parodies of themselves.
What is it? Seriously. The straining for absolutes? The panting adoration of the legitimacy of the antique? If it’s old-fashioned, it’s “stood the test of time”? Like phlogiston, yeah.
Idiots. Idiots with a pretentious vocabulary.
sanitas said,
August 3, 2007 at 7:51
you mean like this, Mr. Wonderful?
We could indeed! Or (and how about this) we could utterly destroy countries that treat their people (especially their women) like garbage.
owlbear1 said,
August 3, 2007 at 8:00
And so it is that “this whole thing”—the claim that conservative bloggers said Thomas didn’t exist or wasn’t a soldier—comes squarely back onto the shoulders of liberal bloggers who created the meme themselves.
Poor CY, It must be hard going through life DESPERATELY afraid of your own reflection…
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
August 3, 2007 at 9:17
Holy Toledo!
I made it to Detroit.
Nite Folks!
RandomObserver said,
August 3, 2007 at 11:04
Same thing with the NYT. They decry it as a liberal rag, but when it writes something they like suddenly it’s “hey, don’t take my word for it, it was printed in the NYT!!!”
NYT – the paper of record, except when it isn’t, which is most of the time, except when politically convenient.
Catchy, no?
I also love how these guys are so good at spotting red flags and suspicious reports all of the sudden. When do I get to read a big whine-fest by them about how the 40 insurgents killed might have been 2 insurgents and 38 civilians?
Is applying the same standard to all things really that novel?
RandomObserver said,
August 3, 2007 at 11:13
MrWonderful, most Republicans are nothing if not simple-minded. Absolutes and simple black/white yes/no are reassuring for the childish mind. They essentially reject all the development of the brain that happens past age 6. We’re good so what we do is good and will work; they’re evil so what they do is evil and will fail. Of course, they can’t even figure out who “they” are…but really it’s just “not us” and nothing more complicated than that.
Pere Ubu said,
August 3, 2007 at 14:19
I think you could make a lot of money using Gun Counter Gomer as a stockbroker.
Get advice from him on what to buy/sell, and do THE EXACT OPPOSITE.
Though maybe it wouldn’t be ethical to exploit the stupid like that.
Aw, what the hell, Wal-Mart does it!
over_educated said,
August 3, 2007 at 15:15
It’s even funnier to check out Hugh Hewwitt and Ace of Spades continuing to go Batshit over this. I would like to see a “shorter” with those two with the Homer Simpson byline:
“Facts? Phhhh… Facts are meaningless. Facts can be used to prove something thats even remotely true!”
MCH said,
August 3, 2007 at 15:28
I don’t think I’ll ever see anyone from the Gathering of Eagles. Pity. They’re hilarious.
They were rather polite, though, in my one face-to-face encounter with them, a band of perhaps two to three hundred ensconced in what we called “Flagland”–a fluttering, made-in-Taiwan, leather-scented utopia from which they could defend the Vietnam Memorial from hippie moonbats such as myself and my GF. They didn’t try to stop us from traversing their territory or breaking through their line to join the far larger crowd of marching lefty traitor patchouli-stinkin types.
A few of them even broke ranks, and from snippets of conversation I overheard I got the impression that a number of those guys were essentially on the moonbat side regarding Iraq, but just weren’t admitting it to themselves due to sincerely believing that the marchers hate the troops and America. And a few managed to get themselves disabused from those notions, and were welcomed.
There were no reports of marchers defecting to the GoE.
Mr Wonderful: Big bonus points for mentioning phlogiston. I think phlogiston should be worked into conversation whenever possible.
g said,
August 3, 2007 at 15:40
Has that famous research lab over at SadlyNoonehome proved the Troofiness of Beauchamp’s stories from their reporters on the ground
Right, cuz every time someone’s personal account of their own experience appears in print, the appropriate response is to send out operatives to find out if it really happened.
But enough about that. Let me tell you about how my faith was strengthened when I heard the story of George W. Bush praying with a young person who approached him spontaneously during a visit to his town. That was inspiring for me, was it inspiring for you?
Chad Okere said,
August 3, 2007 at 16:07
You’ve got to read this great article by someone who thinks he unraveled the “scott thomas” mystery simply due to his trenchant literary analysis. Hilarious.
a different brad said,
August 3, 2007 at 17:27
Hey Gavin, CY updated his post to mock you for accurately quoting people.
And then he left a comment saying we’ve all been “punked” 4 times in this.
This feels so much like elementary school I think I might start a fight with CY at recess.
atheist said,
August 3, 2007 at 17:32
We should steal his lunchbox and smash it behind the dumpster.
stringonastick said,
August 3, 2007 at 17:43
You beat him up, I’ll depants him, and we’ll split his lunch money. Deal?
Marita said,
August 3, 2007 at 17:53
What about the swirlie? There’s a guy who could definitely use a swirlie.
TR said,
August 3, 2007 at 18:15
Confederate Duncey is still spinning. Unbelievable.
cleek said,
August 3, 2007 at 18:40
It’s even funnier to check out Hugh Hewwitt and Ace of Spades continuing to go Batshit over this
Ace’s latest is to ‘out’ Beauchamp while tearfully decrying the left’s focus on Sanchez’s sexuality.
a different brad said,
August 3, 2007 at 19:17
Yes, truly, the left is hypocritical for questioning whether an admitted male prostitute and porn star is a reliable source.
Apparently it’s only female whores who have bad eyesight. Who knew?
mikey said,
August 3, 2007 at 19:21
WAIT! Before you smash his lunchbox, can I have the sandwich? His mom makes a righteous bologna sandwich. Uses ketchup, cuts off the crust, it’s a winner…
mikey
a different brad said,
August 3, 2007 at 19:21
Oh, wait. Sanchez is also under investigation, by the MARINE CORP (sorry for yelling), for fraud.
That’s why Ace wouldn’t link to Blumenthal.
Jesus fucking christ.
a different brad said,
August 3, 2007 at 19:39
Trying to talk to ace’s commenters about this blatant lie by omission is fun, tho, I gotta give em that.
Gentlewoman said,
August 3, 2007 at 20:12
CY commenter daleyrocks sez some incredibly dumb shit, no doubt. Because he usually does.
I wondered where that daleyrocks moran went. That guy used to be a pestilential blight on Greenwald’s old blog, but I don’t think he’s figured out how to comment at Salon yet. I hope no one tells him. Figures he’s found a home with Treason In Defense of Slavery Yankee.
I think the wingnuts are all just really disappointed that they didn’t manage to get Beauchamp (at the very least) tossed in teh brig. I’ll bet that they’d secretly prefer to have him Tillmaned, but they’d settle for solitary. I’m sure that getting his computer and phone seized by the military authorities was pretty cool for them (so much awesum!1!! another victory for citizen journamalism!!!), but not nearly as gratifying as getting another ‘non-existent’ actual person (Jamil Hussein) jailed by the Iraqi government was.
wordyeti said,
August 3, 2007 at 21:14
Jesus christ! The wingnuts are tying themselves into knots over this thing! Check out this passage from RedState of all places:
Sorry, but your massive exercise in projection is an equally massive waste of time and effort. You can now go back to your balloon (a nice symbol for the liberal cocoon you live safely within) and continue to call the Right “racist” and “homophobic,” while comforting yourself that calling us this means that those bigoted, hateful feelings inside of you are okay, because you have an outlet for projecting them, while we continue with the serious business of non-racist, non-bigoted adult affairs.
As best I can follow it, a blogger named Sanchez attacked Beauchamp, then people attacked Sanchez for being teh ghai and now Ace and everyone else is suddenly dressing themselves up as paragons of gay-friendly sexual tolerance. Wonder how well that’s going to go over with the loyal homophobic gay-hating commenters?
Truly, this is amazing. The wingnuts’ screechings and accusations are being proved wrong one by one, but they seize on the one fact – that the alleged harassment of a female soldier with a melted face occurred in Kuwait rather than Iraq – and then stand on top of their Throne of Cheetos, pound their chests and shriek “VICTORY!!!”
Just following the “Mission Accomplished’ leader, I guess.
a different brad said,
August 3, 2007 at 21:19
I highly recommend reading this comment thread; http://minx.cc/?post=235812.
I’m having an extended debate with Ace’s buds that resembles a moebius strip.
Ace supporter: You hatez de gheys.
Me: No, I don’t take whores who are investigated for fraud at their word.
Ace supporter: See? You hatez de gheys.
a different brad said,
August 3, 2007 at 22:33
Now they’re telling me to get them juice boxes, because that is putting me in my place.
I never even needed to tell them they’re acting like 10 year olds.
Arguing with Ace’s buds is the new crack.
Herr Doktor Bimler said,
August 3, 2007 at 23:18
I think phlogiston should be worked into conversation whenever possible.
Seconded. And the luminiferous æther in the same thread! All we need now is an excuse to mention caloric.
Dhalgren said,
August 3, 2007 at 23:58
And max Blumenthal has blown the doors off of the right wing attack
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-blumenthal/the-weekly-standard_b_58977.html
a different brad said,
August 4, 2007 at 6:46
Ooops. Not that anyone cares, but remove the period to get the link i posted to work properly. http://minx.cc/?post=235812
Looks like a gay man from the UK is questioning whether I know any actual conservatives, because they’re all really quite gay friendly.