Beauchump Recants?
The Weekly Standard claims that Scott Thomas Beauchamp Beauchump, that intrepid mocker of disfigured women, has largely recanted the stories told in his articles:
THE WEEKLY STANDARD has learned from a military source close to the investigation that Pvt. Scott Thomas Beauchamp–author of the much-disputed “Shock Troops” article in the New Republic’s July 23 issue as well as two previous “Baghdad Diarist” columns–signed a sworn statement admitting that all three articles he published in the New Republic were exaggerations and falsehoods–fabrications containing only “a smidgen of truth,” in the words of our source.
Separately, we received this statement from Major Steven F. Lamb, the deputy Public Affairs Officer for Multi National Division-Baghdad:
An investigation has been completed and the allegations made by PVT Beauchamp were found to be false. His platoon and company were interviewed and no one could substantiate the claims.
According to the military source, Beauchamp’s recantation was volunteered on the first day of the military’s investigation. So as Beauchamp was in Iraq signing an affidavit denying the truth of his stories, the New Republic was publishing a statement from him on its website on July 26, in which Beauchamp said, “I’m willing to stand by the entirety of my articles for the New Republic using my real name.”
It’s an anonymous source; I’ll believe it for sure when I see proof.
I’ve already seen proof that the guy is a dishonest jerk, though. I don’t need more proof to be certain of that.
(Thanks to a flurry of commenters.)
Will those liberal defenders of truthiness, justice, and the American way bother to admit they were wrong?
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 6:45 pmHey, wanna be the editor of The New Republic?
Sorry, you’re overqualified.
Pablo (99243e) — 8/6/2007 @ 6:49 pmBeauchump should get to go to Newport and make big rocks into little ones. Except that Jimmy closed that “cruel” brig down 30 years ago.
Rodney A Stanton (d33ee0) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:01 pmIf they need volunteers for a firing squad Pat Send ’em my name and address (assuming you still have it).
Or give me K-bar an put the two or us in a very small room. I may be old but I still love America.
an old exJarhead
The little jerk deserves a bad conduct discharge; which is probably a good thing for his own personal safety. He’s going to have a shadow looking over his shoulder, he’s going to be minus e-mail and phone privileges, and he probably ought not to go out drinking alone. On the other hand he could be sent to some nice Stateside base and assigned to creative writing classes for the remainder of his enlistment term. He’s not likely to do much damage there.
I met a whiny little SOB like him during my AIT training period; the dude was outraged that he’d been snatched from a “management career” as assistant third level night manager at a White Castle burger stand somewhere in Indiana. He spent so much time whining that he was a safety hazard during live fire courses–not paying attention and such. I doubt that he made it through Viet Nam. He was probably still whining when an infiltrator cut him down. When folks are seriously dedicated to killing you, you have to pay attention all the time, or you’re a hazard to yourself and to the troops around you.
Beauchamp was/is playing mental pocket pool with his fantasies. He’s bad news.
Mike Myers (2e43f5) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:06 pmWas it Bill Maher that called Lyndie England low-hanging fruit? Well, it looks like TNR picked itself some, too.
nk (173e2a) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:07 pmI suspect he is outprocessing right now with his “convenience of the government discharge with less than honorable conditions.” The sooner the better. That way, he can be testifying before Waxman’s committee when the August recess is over. I’m sure he was abused. Aren’t they all ?
MIke K (86bddb) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:09 pmGeneral Discharge under Less than Honorable Conditions ? I could see that, as I suspect that a Dishonorable discharge requires more than can be done via Article 15 proceedings.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:10 pmHow long until the NY or LA Times offers him a job, as their military expert?
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:14 pmHere’s what I think will happen. They won’t discharge him and they won’t move him. He’ll finish out his rotation and then be offered an administrative separation under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 5-13 for Personality Disorder. It will be (as required by regs) an Honorable Discharge and he’ll be able to keep his Montgomery GI Bill benefits (if he’s paid his money in), but not much else.
Otherwise, they’ll just continue to document his screwups (he’ll have them, he can’t help it) and discharge him for patterns of misconduct with an Other Than Honorable discharge. He’d be smart to take the chapter 5-13, but I’ve seen stupider people who thought they were smarter than the Army.
Stashiu3 (f9262c) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:23 pm#7 – Bad Conduct and Dishonorable requires an Article 15.
“Under Less Than Honorable”, however, works.
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:24 pmPvt. Scott Thomas Beauchamp. May your reputation RIP.
I’ve known more than a few people like him.
Some did themselves in early in their careers.
For others, it took more time. Sometimes a LOT of time.
But, it’s just SO damn hard to maintain all the lies all the time.
The laws of the universe are REALLY hard to overcome.
Dan_P (883ad4) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:28 pmUnder less than honorable will be the early favorite, and one I would be willing to bet on, were I a betting man.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:29 pmWhat JD said. General discharge. An OTH would not surprise, but a BCD would. He’d have to be persistently stupid to manage a BCD. Then again, he’s indicated persistent stupidity.
He’s already been busted back to PV2 for other screwups dating from before his outing. There’s not much more demotional downside there for administrative action.
Tully (e4a26d) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:44 pmHe can’t get Bad Conduct Discharge. He isn’t getting an Article 15.
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:46 pmAllahpundit at Hot Air is postulating (11:22 PM comment) the unlikely theory that Beauchamp might – and he stresses might – have “had enough honor” to have gone to his buddies and told them to deny everything and Beauchamp would take the fall.
Ummm… I realize this is excedingly unlikely as AP stresses… but this wouldn’t be “honor” would it? Go obstruct justice and lie to IG and JAG investigators???
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:48 pmHaha,
He was already sent to Iraq for a year.
I think he’ll survive whatever kitten scratches the right “inflicts” on him just fine.
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:48 pmalphie, I’m just going to put this as plainly as possible.
You’re a liar. You claim to be conservative, but you’re a bald faced liar — and everyone here knows it.
Further, substantively, he inflicted any damage on himself with his lies (which he even managed to acknowledge at this late stage: I wish him well in reforming himself and I hope he at least makes the effort).
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:51 pmalphie has to be posing as a troll. It defies the law of averages and the law of large numbers for one person to be so tone deaf and flat out wrong on each and every point he/she/it makes. It is simply not possible.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:56 pmChanneling alphie – Just because Beauchump lied doesn’t mean your war has turned Iraq into a garden spot where you can take your family on vacation, idiots.
daleyrocks (906622) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:59 pmI am indeed a Republican conservative, Christoph, but I think religious rule is taking America along the only path it can…to poverty, ignorance and violence.
Consider me advocating for the new(old) Republican party.
Fiscal restraint and cold reason should guide us, not superstition, hatred and greed.
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:01 pmCannot get a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge w/o a Court-Martial. Special CM for bad conduct or general CM for dishonorable. A general discharge under other then honorable conditions is the worst he can get with an administrative discharge. An Article 15 does not carry a discharge option.
Gene Dickey (c3204b) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:02 pmalphie is as much of a conservative Republican as Beauchamp is a non-fiction writer.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:04 pmHow do you define conservative, alphie?
Sounds a pretty conservative way to describe a soldier being investigating by the Army for releasing operational security details regarding his deployment and also for stating he observed repeated serial criminal activity throughout his unit, when he didn’t.
Yeah the investigation and his outing are kitten scratches the “right” inflicts on him.
You’re nuts.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:06 pmalphie is Pat Robertson in drag.
I read that in TNR, so it must be true.
Pablo (99243e) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:08 pmAnd he was “sent” to Iraq for a year? As opposed to joining the army because he wanted to go to a war as part of his writing career plan?
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:10 pmalphie, you’re a liar and that’s all you are. Every single point you try to make is either a lie, disingenuous, or off-topic. Everyone here is on to you and you’re just too stupid to realize what a joke you are (or maybe you just don’t care and get your kicks that way.) Whatever. GFY, I’m tired of you.
Stashiu3 (f9262c) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:12 pmChristoph,
The U.S. Army invaded the wrong country by accident…and stuck around over four years rather than admit it.
Operational security?
Is that a joke?
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:17 pmalphie, you’re revolting.
Regardless of whether this was the right war or not, there are fellow soldiers of his there.
For him to post details of his movements is an OpSec violation that could result in casualties and damage to his mission.
It is most assuredly not a joke you disgusting lying puke.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:20 pmWrong country, on accident? What, were we supposed to go north when we got to Turkey, instead of south?
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:24 pmYou guys are the ones forcing our troops to stay in a country where the population wants them to leave and is heavily armed, Christoph.
Please don’t pretend you care about the safety of the soldiers…you just want them to act out a role in your fantasy…and speak the proper lines.
Any of them that don’t follow your script, you smear.
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:27 pmActually the recantation was pretty well implied by the Army statement that the matter was investigated and the claims were false.
If Beauchamp had not recanted, he would have been forced to swear to his claims under oath. The investigation would almost certainly still be underway. If he stood by his claims under oath and they determined that he was lying, he would not be ducking an Article 15.
I don’t see any logical way that he could not have recanted.
Glen Wishard (b1987d) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:29 pmalphie, if we were in person (and I guarantee you would not be saying this if we were, which, of course, is a factor of the internet) I would knock you on your ass right about now.
Okay, I’ve given you the benefit of the doubt a million times, even tried to talk with you as if you’re a sincere person trying to understand if only because of you’re willingness to come back here after your points are demolished nonstop.
But no longer. Stashiu3 was right and I am too. You’re a liar and you are a disgusting radical leftist.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:30 pmPatterico, I apologize for losing my cool. I also understand it is pointless because it’s as much at a distance for me as it is for him.
Yet I will say alphie’s attitude and his callous disregard for his country’s soldiers’ security merely because he doesn’t support the decision to embark on this mission outrages me no end.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:34 pmAre you suggesting that a majority of Iraqis want are troops in their country, Christoph?
Or are “lies” to you just statements that conflict with your fantasy?
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:35 pmHe’s not required to self-incriminate. He could have declined to make a statement once an investigation was opened.
Pablo (99243e) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:35 pmActually I think it would be an Article 131 if he lied to investigators. Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and 5 years imprisonment.
Glen Wishard (b1987d) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:36 pmYes.
Pablo (99243e) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:36 pmI’m saying you’re a risible bastard for not caring about disclosures to operational security for your soldiers merely because you disagree with the strategic decision behind their deployment.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:36 pmAnd I agree with you, Pablo, but don’t care to attempt the impossible and explain this to alphie.
Whether true or false, it also has nothing to do with my point that popular opinion in Iraq shouldn’t make a damn bit of difference to this staunch Republican where concern for his soldiers’ lives is affected by Operational Security breaches.
What an arsehole.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:40 pmIf he had stood mute during the investigation – and if he was telling the truth and could name the many, many witnesses he claimed, why would he? – and the Army determined the stories to be false, I don’t think he would be getting off with administrative punishment.
Glen Wishard (b1987d) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:40 pmPointing out that Beauchamp simply made shit up is smearing him. Unfuckingbelievable, even for alphie.
We shall patiently await your proof, alphie, that we invaded the wrong country on accident.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:40 pmYes, I assume we meant to invade Okinawa, but somehow the navy got lost.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:41 pmHow do you feel about Bush and Patraeus announcing our troops were heading up to Diyala weeks in advance?
Think the families of these guys:
http://www.mnf-iraq.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13210&Itemid=128
will ever get to confront Bush and his pet general about their operational security breaches?
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:42 pmWe also told them we were going to Baghdad, alphie.
You really are dummer than a box of rox.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:45 pmIt would have been impossible to hide the troop moves on mass to Diyala.
It’s the President’s and certainly his extremely capable general’s call about how much information to disclose.
For Scott Beauchamp to disclose specific details at the unit level on his own and against standing orders is something else entirely. And in your callous mind it’s forgivable as long as you disagree with the mission.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:47 pmI’m pretty sure we told the press we were going to Berlin. What’s your point?
Friggin’ idiot.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:48 pmYes, alphie and his ilk really care about the troops. When I address people that have earned bi-partisan support and request. We were supposed to listen to the Generals previously. Now he is a pet General, and a mouthpiece for Bush. It is not that difficult to tell whose side you are on.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:48 pmI left out a phrase after request …
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:49 pmYou don’t seem to understand that Soldiers don’t want your concern. They want you to shut up so they can do their job.
Any soldier that disn’t know service was dangerous when they joined is dumber than you, Alphie…
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:50 pmIn Scott Beauchamp’s defense, while he’s a liar and used his military service to hurt his country’s cause, I don’t even think he’s a physical coward. Have you heard him complain about the danger? I haven’t.
He knew it was dangerous and joined wanting to see a war, albeit for his own after service career goals and partisan agenda.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:52 pmAaah,
“extremely capable general?”
Attacks in Iraq at record levels, and less than an hour of water and electricity for the 6 million citizens of Baghdad each 120 degree day?
Too funny.
These guys can do no wrong in your eyes, can they?
I think history will be a little less kind to these clowns than you true believers are.
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:54 pmAlphie – demonstrate how he is not extrememly capable. Why did Reid and his cohorts in crime overwhelmingly vote for his confirmation, if he is so undeerqualified?
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:56 pmalphie, if we had you in charge, by now we’d have surrendered to the French.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:56 pmGuys,
Sigh, alphie is quite content to be hated. Ignore and/or ridicule him but otherwise do not respond: a characteristic of narcissists is that those who don’t get good attention will be just as happy with bad attention: it feeds their self-loathing, punishes their parents by showing how bad they turned out, proves they can get a reaction, etc etc. All very adolescent, all very … well, very alphie, as you see.
He’s a kid, a loser, very immature, looking to “be somebody”. Don’t feed the trolls, guys, and if you do, don’t complain when the stimulus/response is as expected.
ras (adf382) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:03 pmLooks like ras has surrendered in the typical true believer fashion,
Christoph, I thought you were Canadian.
Not from Quebec, I take it?
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:06 pmYeah, he’s doing great so far.
Jim Treacher (12ed69) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:07 pmBy we I meant allied forces in the coalition of the willing. Your country and mine are fighting together in Afghanistan and there is a much broader war affecting all of civilization.
Plus it was a joke you lame-ass.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:12 pmBut aren’t there French troops fighting along side your guys in Afghanistan, Christoph?
Support the troops and all that, eh?
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:15 pmYes. It was a joke. The point was you would find someone unlikely and unnecessary to surrender us to, great war leader that you are, not that military midget General David Petraeus.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:17 pmHaHa Alphie
Would you like your shit sandwich toasted or plain?
You lost on another lefty propaganda peddling effort. Deal with it.
daleyrocks (906622) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:21 pmAah,
ras surrenders and now daley hoists the tattered “Mission Accomplished” banner.
What thread would be complete without it?
Salute, everyone!
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:23 pmConservative propaganda peddling effort, conservative, daleyrocks. Get your facts straight.
alphie is the only true conservative in the room. He’s trying to teach us to be more truly conservative. And Republicans. Like him.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:23 pmHonesty and logic are the touchstones of Reagan Republicans, Christoph.
St. Ronnie got our troops outta Lebanon.
He didn’t squander American lives, money and dignity on a pointless effort.
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:33 pmGod damn I wish there was an internet version of dueling pistols.
Backgammon…?
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:36 pmHaHa Alphie
I think I found the smidgens of truth.
American soldiers drive Bradleys in Iraq.
There is sand in Iraq.
Alphie, I understand all you want to see is bad news out of Iraq, whether it is true or not. What you don’t understand is that the right mainly wants to see accurate news out of Iraq, which is why Jamil Hussein and Scott Beauchamp narratives that reek to hell from the start rile everyone up. Liberals are comfortable with fake but accurate as has been demonstated time and again, but the right isn’t. The want the good news reported along with the bad when there is good to report like now, but its main interest is accuracy.
You can’t handle the truth Alphie, which is why you need to manufacture and defend people like Beauchamp.
daleyrocks (906622) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:42 pmChristoph,
How about a curling duel?
I’ve never played it, but I find myself watching it whenever it’s on TV. I’m tempted to head north so I can give it a try.
Daley,
Hold on to that dream. Nobody can ever steal it from you.
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:46 pmHaHa Alphie
“daley hoists the tattered “Mission Accomplished” banner.”
Nothing but net all the way on this one baybee!
Alphie – I thought you promised to move out of the country after the 2004 election. You never stop lying, do you? It is a disease of liberalism.
Don’t ever change, the anger on this blog would have to be redirected elsewhere. Thanks for stepping up and serving as a punching bag.
daleyrocks (906622) — 8/6/2007 @ 10:59 pmFor those of you who expressed sympathy for this poor German girl Beauchamp dumped, understand whom you’re talking about first.
Here’s her myspace page.
Notice the name she chose for her page:
NIGGERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
…and, in case you missed it, “KRAMER HATES NIGGERS” underneath her name.
You can translate Scott Beauchamp’s German comments to her using babelfish.
Nothing to do with being German — half my ancestry is — but I despise elitist racists, even the ones who merely revel in it and I can’t tell whether they’re being sincere or just “pretending”.
While I have no doubt Beauchamp is a dipsh*t, and his choice of girls further illustrates that, I couldn’t care less about this elitist cow’s feelings.
Otherwise I would.
Here’s Scott Beauchamp’s myspage page (according to Michelle Malkin) if you’re interested.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 11:16 pmOh, and as this racist says in her profile:
So she can’t make any points about German culture being more accepting of the term or anything. She’s used to America culture.
She goes on to say:
Lovely girl.
Here’s her friends list. Shockingly, they’re all white.
Yes yes, I know, she’s half German… who screams NIGGER at the top of her digital lungs and was engaged to Scott Beauchamp. Great taste.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 11:24 pmWhy is Alphie still allowed commenting privileges here? He’s a confirmed troll, has been bannzored from Protein Wisdom, Michael Totten’s, and Ace’s (I think, could be wrong on this one). It’s a waste of time to even read his drivel.
As to my own opinion about Pvt. Beauchamp’s fate, it seems fairly obvious from the Weekly Standard piece: he’s suffered (or will suffer) NJP (non-judicial punishment), which doesn’t affect discharge status, but does prevent the awarding of the Good Conduct Medal. So if Beauchamp finishes out his enlistment he’ll get an Honorable Discharge, but no GCM.
Robert (4094dd) — 8/7/2007 @ 2:21 amI was thinking the same thing.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/7/2007 @ 2:24 amHaha,
I seem to remember I got the boot from Ace’s place about three years ago because I dared to say I didn’t think the Iraq war was going very well.
How is Ace doing these days?
Still wavin’ them Pom Poms?
alphie (015011) — 8/7/2007 @ 2:27 amGoogle search results for:
You can wade several pages deep into the results, click on each link, and see what a troll he is.
As Robert Crawford says:
This man IS a liar and IS a troll of almost unparalleled measure.
I am willing to debate any person honest about being liberal and often do.
Yet this guy’s actions are the most troll like imaginable. Why is he here?
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/7/2007 @ 2:48 amAlphie sounds like a growing chorus of those who bet against America and now that the Iraqi people are starting to take up arms against the insurgents those doubters are watching the FAT LADY looking for her Viking helmet and opera costume
EricPWJohnson (92aae0) — 8/7/2007 @ 3:39 amChristoph, Alphie has as much right to comment on U.S. politics and policy as you do. He is a U.S. citizen, after all.
Of course, Patterico can ban whomever he wants. But he might want to start with people who threaten to “knock you on your ass” just because someone has the temerity to disagree.
lc (1401be) — 8/7/2007 @ 6:13 amalphie’s a US citizen? I’d like to see some proof of that. He sounds pretty french canadian to me…
lc, our issue with alphie (and semanticleo, and AF) is their inability to grasp the salient points of an argument. Instead of debating on the merits, they take half a statement, twist it into a form it was never originally in, and hammer on that.
It’s their only trick, really…
Scott Jacobs (90eabe) — 8/7/2007 @ 6:26 amI understand that, Scott Jacobs. And many of you have refuted his statements in a very rational way.
But I just thought it was nervy of Christoph to physically threaten Alphie in one post and ask he be banned in another. Or is just supposed to be an echo chamber around here?
lc (1401be) — 8/7/2007 @ 6:33 amHeaven knows I wouldn’t try to stop him though…
Alphie has really brought the abuse on himself. Being one of the biggest liars on this blog doesn’t win him many friends.
Scott Jacobs (90eabe) — 8/7/2007 @ 6:35 amByron at HotAir analysis the “who is B. lying to” question
ArmyLawyer analyses the legal fork
LarryD (feb78b) — 8/7/2007 @ 6:37 amAnd if, in 6 months when he’s give a discharge to get the hell rid of him, and he stands up and says “I lied to the army! I really actually dide and saw those things!” the army will say “Oh really? Well then… We’re re-activating you. IRR is a bitch, kid. Enjoy your 7 years…”
Scott Jacobs (90eabe) — 8/7/2007 @ 6:45 amSomebody may already have said this earlier in the comments, but I didn’t read all the way through yet:
Bad Conduct Discharge and Dishonorable Discharge are punitive discharges that require court-martial action, and I believe you have to go all the way to General Court-Martial to get a DD (much worse than BCD.) Article 15 hearings aren’t courts-martial. As background, if you’re in the military and offered non-judicial punishment under Article 15 it’s usually in your interest to take it, since action under Article 15 doesn’t carry a criminal conviction that you would potentially have to report to future employers.
The worst administrative discharge you can get is a General Discharge under Other than Honorable conditions. It’s bad enough in and of itself.
Andy (12c077) — 8/7/2007 @ 7:29 amFor heaven’s sake, people! Why do you respond to this troll? It pollutes the thread (every thread) to no purpose. And however clever you think you are, you aren’t going to silence it with your crushing retorts. Just ostracize it, until such time as our host decides to pull the plug.
zara (e3e1aa) — 8/7/2007 @ 8:41 amWhere’s Stephen Glass when you need him?
–JRM
JRM (de6363) — 8/7/2007 @ 10:09 amYou mean, where’s Stephen Glass when the Huffington Post could use him?
Glen Wishard (b1987d) — 8/7/2007 @ 11:33 am“one of”
And his competitor is?
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/7/2007 @ 1:15 pm