Redstate

and we'll be waiting. Godspeed, Ben and our prayers and thoughts are with you.  Much love.

As I posted before, Mr. Domenech's writing showed an abundance of original and creative thought that articulately advanced a way of thinking shared by many of us but so aptly express by few.  The works for which he is most known, to my knowledge, is unimpeachably original.  The questionable ones will rightfully deal him a set back but I believe he can bounce back.  His talent is his equity in a career that, if handled properly, should be a very successful one.

I hope he will continue to post at Redstate.org and over time the questions and accusations will attenuate under the weight of his new material.

I for one will not allow a moment's victory to those that threw the most scurrilous charges over the past week hoping something would stick.  Those were wrong and betrayed the true hate and prejudice that many on the left were trying to pin on him.  

I being about the same age group as Ben when he is claimed to have made said mistakes, I can empathize with him in his current situation.

I hope that everyone can move past this and learn from it. But Ben can also be heartened in the knowledge that he is better than his critcs because he never stooped to their level of personal hatred.

It was Ben's own behavior that brought him down, not the supposed incivility of his critics.

Bye.

actions as a teenager and young man, he did not deserve the vitriol that has been thrown at him and his family the past few days.  If you want to challenge his behavior, that's fine, but do not excuse the absolutely abhorrent behavior of those that brought him down.  Remember, they started with attacks on his very being, not his work.  That is inexcusable.

Hopefully, this experience will provide think-tank and blog Conservatives with a more tolerant understanding of why public sector journalists and politicians appear to be less militant than they should be. It is much easier to talk tough when one is 30,000 ft. over the battle-field,or enjoying the Green Zone safety of blog anonymity. It is the much more difficult for the enemy to stalk one and one's relatives while interviewing her/his former grade school class-mates. "Going public", as all Republican politicians have learned will result in publication of every secret in one's life. Perhaps these public Conservative politicians and journalists who are surviving earned some slack from their orthodox critics.

They, the vicious people who celebrate and seek to benefit from Ben Domenech's mistakes, work under a false assumption.  They think that people can be perfect.

It's why they make such a ridiculously big deal over their own definition of hypocrisy, and why they take such delight in pointing out what we on the right are flawed.

They don't seem to think that they themselves are flawed, too, so while they point our our flaws, their mistakes will continue to go uncorrected.  Their self-delusion of perfection will persist, and that will allow their mistakes to grow.

It never serves as much comfort to watch the wrong people celebrating, but knowing that the victory will be short-lived could help a little.

I must disagree with this: "And for his failing, his career is in ruins."

Let's not give this whole ordeal more weight than it deserves.  I predict that within a year, he'll be back writing for a major media outlet, whether as a blogger or columnist.  Ben is far too talented to just fall by the wayside.

with that sentiment.  How he handles himself in the weeks to come will be very telling.

And my hunch is that he will get back on the horse with an even more powerful voice.

And I personally can't wait to see Markos wet himself when it happens.

Whatever Ben's behavior entailed, nothing justifies the "supposed incivility" of his critics.

only if the right allows that to happen.  Plagiarism hasn't stopped Joseph Ellis from getting published and you can't seem to get "Hairplugs" Biden off your tv set.  He's already paid a price, will conservatives in their zeal to prove themselves to liberals exact another pound of flesh?  

We all have these bumps in the road.  It's called Life.

For what it is worth; I wish you well, Ben.

I think young men can make many worse mistakes.  It is hard to think much of his or RedState's initial response but I have never been in such a position.

Tom

This is the piece that should have been written 24 hours earlier.

Politics is a lot like poker. Winning every hand isn't important, winning overall is. The local assembled intelligencia kept raising with a losing hand for way too long. Lots of hands were played in this side where our side won -- racist, homeschooler, etc. However on the one hand where the other guy had the cards way too many people were willing to keep raising. Ben was the loser of every raise, no matter whether he made that raise or not.

It's not doing a favor for somebody to back them when they're wrong, indeed, it's a huge disservice. Being a friend sometimes means being able to tell somebody that they're wrong. In this case a good part of the conservative blogosphere got behind a very young man for no reasons of idealogy and the fact that he had been picked upon by earlier spurious charges. Neither were relevant to the plaigerism charges.

As to friendship: There was a fair amount of condemnation leveled at Michelle Malkin on these pages. However I would say she was the best friend Ben had during this episode. Despite a business (possibly personal) relationship she was willing to say that he had to resign. That didn't win any her any friends here, but it won her my admiration. Her advice to not let it drag out -- cut the losses -- was what a friend would say. It was the best for Ben, though I don't doubt it may spell trouble for that friendship. But in the end for her it was about the person, not the relationship.  Thanks Michelle.

consider piling onto friends as a sign of moral strength.

When my friends are in trouble I do just like Malkin. I don't call them. I don't email them. I don't even care what there story is. I just jump. That's what friends are for, right. To abuse so you can make yourself look better.

The issue with Malkin and others is not that they were ultimately right about the issue, it is that they were so quick to jump on the bandwagon and accuse.  

Would it have killed anyone to wait a few hours or a day so that Ben had some time to think?  The conservative web was pushing things just as fast as the left.  Bloggers have a compulsion to get a position down so they can be seen as on the cutting edge of opinion or whatever.

This may be the path to success on the web, but it is not the path of friendship.

I think a friend would have called him up and told him what she thought, maybe talk to him first, rather than go for the media interview and blog post.

As to the left, I can't say that I have much respect for them.  At this point they will just pretend like it was all about plagiarism from the beginning, but I saw what happened and the whole thing just leaves a sour taste in my stomach.

Her advice to not let it drag out -- cut the losses -- was what a friend would say. It was the best for Ben, though I don't doubt it may spell trouble for that friendship

That IS what a friend would say, IN PRIVATE. Not on the front page of a newspaper!

When my friend is accused of something, the first thing I do is lecture them publicly without getting their side first. I definitely do it just before getting on a plane, so I can stay ahead of the pack.

One would hope, for the sake of your friends and Michelle's, that they don't fall on their faces while either of you have a knife close at hand.

Wait, wait, wait.. did you PERSONALLY mail Michelle Malkin before criticizing her like this?

Did you give her a chance to write a reply?

No, you just  did exactly the same thing she did: You looked at the facts, and dashed out a judgement on a website devoted to that purpose.

Settle down, please.  Try to calm down.  If an Internet full of opinions really gets to you that strongly, maybe you should take some time off from opinion-oriented websites, instead of trying to rewrite their whole structure to delete the opinions.

I'm sure mine is one of the last voices you'll want to hear ring in on this...I've been mostly MIA on the political blogosphere, but I wanted to chime in and note how impressed I am with this post. I haven't read the comments elsewhere of those you consider past redemption (er...uh...some other time, perhaps), but I do feel for Augustine and wish him well.

With a friend like Michelle Malkin, will have no need for enemies.

If we can take one thing from this I hope it is that many of us here do not simply fly off the handle in the future and be quick to yell 'conspiracy' or 'attack' or 'bias'.   Many here were perfectly willing ot overlook facts and simply defend  ...using more name calling and attacks ...without really finding out what was going on.

I think this is important because many are doing the same things for our guys in D.C.   That is defending them without getting all the facts.

I see lack of movement in Washington on social issues (when will the fetus be recognized by the House and Senate!?), I see a lack of movement in immigration and border security, I see a lack of movement on spending cuts, and I see a growing federal government that is growing more intrusive, and all I mostly hear rants against the left, and the media, with nothing bewing done to hold our side to account.

You've had it in for Malkin on this site before today.

While not excusing the crime, "all have sinned."  I'll not be casting any stones.

The P word is not a fatal offense.  As I recall, Joe Biden was nailed for it in the presidential primaries a few elections back.  Now he's everybody's favorite Sunday Morning Talk Shows guest.

Looking forward to your comeback, Augustine.

I'll chose here to utter my first and only words on the great Plagiarism Kerfuffle...

The only lesson I've learned is that we have, once again, come to a knife fight late and with dull blades.

You might have a point were it for the fact that we all had to endure nearly 72-hours of vicious, slanderous, disgusting attacks on Augustine's character, sexual proclivities, upbringing, and family before the left-blogland landed on something that had a kernel of truth to it.  Given that, I am more than happy to cut a great deal of slack those who, in bunker mode, shot-back with equal force "without really finding out what was going on".

Given the veracity of previous charges, I would have done precisely the same for a friend and fellow-traveler.

And dor the record, I am rather confident those of whom you speak knew perfectly well "what was going on" - and that it was only so much rubbish, designed to perpetuate the notion that all the rules apply to conservatives and conservatives only.

Bottom line for me: Ben Domenich lost his job - resigning less than 3-days after he started.  When will Joe Biden lose his?  Or Sherrod Brown, for that matter?  How long were we forced to listen to the tisted notions that Jayson Blair was being set-up?  And how long again did it take for See-BS to hold anyone to account for a phony "news" story that was designed solely to sway a national election?

So please - spare us the self-righteousness, Max.  We're in a knife fight here.  The time for niceties has long since come and gone.

Finally, If you see or hear nothing from here and elsewhere that "hold(s) our side to account" then I can only say you are simply not paying attention.

Flame away - I harbor no desire to respond.

is that none of us (that I have seen so far, and boy is it hard to keep up!) have called for Michelle to stop blogging, resign her columnist positions, etc.

Had Michelle's statement been something along the lines of "I see plagiarism, and I want to hear Ben explain himself", I wouldn't have thought a thing of it (well, that's not entirely true -- but I wouldn't be writing diaries about it).  She said, based soley on what the left put forward as evidence, that he should resign.

Am I jumping to the conclusion that she did so without talking to Ben?  Yep.  Is there a difference?  I think so...I'm doing so based on HER direct writings and the timing of those writings.  I'm not basing it on attacks from the left or the statements of someone else.  I read it myself on her blog.  Also, as I just said -- I'm not calling for her to resign or stop blogging.  I wouldn't mind hearing her explain, but given that she turned out to be right, I don't see her doing so.

I'll add something else -- if this was the first time she'd ever done something like this, I probably wouldn't be reacting this way.  But this was the "straw that broke the camel's back" for me.  I was already questioning her place on my blogroll for a few days before this happened.

All I'm saying is that she disappointed me, and has lost some respect in my book.  In the grand scheme of things, I'm a peon to her and I doubt she cares.

Go ahead, give a group hug to the plagiarist who libeled his college editor, and lied to us all about it, but burn the witch who just told a hard truth.

She was perfectly within her rights to read the evidence and come to a personal conclusion.  I'm not "burning" her for that, and although I have said negative things I have not called her anything resembling "witch".  Others may have...I take no responsibility for the opinions of others.

It's not her conculsion that concerns me (although I wonder what we'd be saying now if it had turned out to be something other than what it appeared to be).  It's not the fact that she "told a hard truth".  To that point, she did what was reasonable for a blogger with a large audience and a strong voice.  It is her next steps that concern me.

I have no personal loyalties or friendships with anyone involved in this situation.  I'm simply a conservative who wishes this had never happened, but more realistically that it had been handled differently by many of the participants.

Yes, Mike wrote this statement on behalf of the Directors and thought posting it under his own name would be more appropriate.  Mike has known Ben longer than Clayton or I.

Mike, Josh Trevino, and Ben are the founders of RedState.  Mike and Josh worked together to put this together.  Their efforts are appreciated.

Above and beyond anything else, Ben is our friend and friendship is more importanat than any of this.

But then again, I neither know her from Adam, nor does she know me. There is a mutuality of obligation lacking here, that was not lacking there.

She's dead to me.

Above and beyond anything else, Ben is our friend and friendship is more importanat than any of this.

True.  And thanks for all of your work Erick.

Well, "personal attacks" are just one side of what has been for many years a "battle of symbols" between the left and the right, instead of a battle of substantive policy.

The reason that issues with Mr. Domenech's originality resonated so strongly with the left blogosphere is because there it fit so strongly into a very powerful narrative regarding veracity and honesty that the left already believes.  The left things that the right has a problem with honesty, with the truth and with reality.  Mr. Domenech's problems -- however precisely the accusations fit them -- slotted into the existing narrrative way too perfectly.

It was the perfect alignment of signs and symbols ...  The left blogosphere swarmed and, really, with a million people googling you for 72 hours straight ... who could escape that kind of scrutiny?  I couldn't.

This being said, I'm not sorry that this particular victory was won.  Don't ban me for saying this!  The reason that I am commenting is that I believe that a point of clarity can be reached from entering the dialogue like this now.  Otherwise, I would just keep mum.

Remember Matt Drudge's "Clinton Aide Beats Wife" postings regarding Sidney Blumenthal?  Remember the "Swift Boat Veterans?"  Remember Dan Rather?  The left has learned something.  The lesson is not a particularly nice one, but what it has learned is to take the massive swarming mentality of "media" -- in this case, the Internet -- and use it to exact symbolic victories from the other side that far exceed their actual importance.

I'm not sorry about this, but I'm not thrilled either ...  And I certainly took part in the battle.  I took a certain delight in calling Mr. Domenech a turd, just as "Thomas" took a certain delighting in wishing a violent death upon me and roughly half of Americans.  :)  I wish we were playing a different kind of game, however.

Lost long ago were substantive discussions about policy.  Why aren't we discussing the economy?  Why aren't we discussing foreign policy?  Why aren't we discussing immigration?  This is really too bad.

The "radical Socialists" of Daily Kos want free enterprise, balanced budgets and responsible government as much as Red Staters do.  The "crazed lunatics" of Daily Kos want immigration reform as much as Red Staters do.

There are so many opportunities to learn from each other, debate healthily and create synergies around issues.

Look at FEC regulation of blogs and political speech!  Instead of talking about this, we are talking about Mr. Domenech.

Both sides of this issue are trapped in a symbolic battle where it's all light vs. darkness.  I'm certainly not willing to unilaterally disarm, but how do we get from here to there?

What Ben did strikes me as serious, but in the scheme of things, a fairly minor event in the life of a young talented man.

I appreciate your comments, but you should focus on your statement of what the "left" believes: that the right is dishonest or out of touch.  I work with many very highly educated people . . . nearly all of whom are on the left.  They lecture me constantly about how stupid and mean and dishonest the right is.  At the same time, they lecture me on the need for tolerance and understanding and the need for listening.

Your comments are noted.  But, you should spend your efforts trying to get your friends to recognize that Republicans and Conservatives are often nice people, with feelings, and families, and logic.  RedState has been very good about stopping ugly attacks on the left.  

If you seek better communication and discourse . . . and I want to believe you do . . .then start at your home base.

Are completely out of bounds...and you know what, they weaken the legitimate arguments.

Further, they don't have didly to do with the direction our contry should go in.  Ben is, apparently, 24.  He and I probably wouldn't agree on much politically.  Were we to discuss our differences, his prior sins would have no more bearing on the conversation than mine would.

We've lost the ability to civilly discuss issues in this country.  Both sides are more interested in distorting the other sides views to make them seem rediculous, or unpatriotic.  This episode is but another example of this.

As a liberal, I'll say this to Ben:  I don't know what the truth is, but this doesn't have to define you.  You obviously have a lot of friends on this site, and elsewhere.  Give it time, and you'll be back.

Best of luck, and God Bless.

Personally or professionally, there are few pains greater than standing up for someone only to find out that they were wrong.  It impugns your own credibility and in a business where integrity is everything it can cost dearly.  I took exception to the tenor of Malkin's piece, but the emotions that informed it are understandable.  

> "Charges of racism were born of poor reading comprehension. Threats of violence. Obscene commentary about his mother, his sister, his father."

Do you have links to any of these accusations, other than the plagiarism one, by any chance? I did a google search and couldn't find anything in the news saying such things, but maybe I didn't go back far enough.

Did the accusations come from bloggers or something, then? If so, I'd caution that bloggers on both sides are guilty of vitriolic and often baseless attacks on the other side. I'm not defending or attacking either side with that statement, I'm just saying that both sides do it, particularly in political and other emotionally charged wars of opinion.

I've had my bias against Malkin in the past - this is just another reason I don't care for her.

You are correct to highlight the things that lined up just right to get Ben borked.  The Left use that word "borked" with pride, by the way, believing that the ends justify the means.

I'm currently writing something about mob action and the end of the historical war between elitism and populism.  I think the elites have "won", by learning to use the mob to their own elitist ends.  The mob, of course, is clueless about this, and individually believe that their hatred is really moral outrage, based on advancing Good over Evil.

I am just a guest here at Red State, but sirs, your post expresses precisely that which is in my mind and heart. I hear it resonating with the music of the spheres (I am no journalist...do I need to credit Pythagorus here or is the copyright expired?).

the standard left leaning blogs.  Atrios, Kos and some others.  I think most of the accusations were occuring in comments sections, but it is still no excuse for what happened.  Also, you are going to need to look before Thursday, mostly because once they found the plagiarism, the left started to pretend like it was always about the plagiarism and as if they never flung those initial shots.

But is it that you think those accusations were never made, are you looking for a "yes, but" excuse for the behavior that occured before?

This is half the problem with political debat in this country, both sides don't just talk past each other, both sides like to go for the pitchforks and torches.  The one weakness I think of the internet, is that the anonymity often leads people to forget that there are real people behind the user names.

I'm pulling my hair out over this and am more than perplexed by the willingness to treat Ben's actions as if they're excusable.  Just a couple years ago we were rightly outraged over Rather's concocted papers pertaining to Bush's military service.  As an educator I'm particularly sensitive to issues of plaigerism and have even had to resort to having students turn in papers via turnitin.com to prevent this.  Such activities indicate a fundamental lack of respect where intellectual work is concerned.  But if I'm not mistaken, there's also evidence that Ben even fabricated quotes attributing remarks to Russert that he did not make.  Perhaps I'll get banned for saying this, but we conservatives spend a lot of time talking about values.  When we practice double standards and excuse behaviors enacted by members of our own "tribe" that we would vigorously decry in our opposition, we indicate that we lack any values at all and only act on behalf of what benefits our side.  I see this as far more corrosive to our society and values than anything Hollywood might portray.  It's not simply a matter of damage to credibility, but of walking what we talk and holding ourselves to the same standards as others.  Forgiveness is one thing, but happily excusing inexcusable behavior where truth is concerned only hurts ourselves and our country that we are trying to rescue from the depths of depravity and relativism, as this way of responding is profoundly relativistic and based on a double standard.  I hope this doesn't get me banned, but frankly I'm deeply disgusted by the sort of tribalism I've seen surrounding this entire affair.  I would like to think that real values, real integrity, allows us to rise above tribalistic thinking.  Apparently I'm wrong and it's just a matter of decrying those on the other side and defending those on our side who do one and the same thing.

plaigerize I see a fundamental contempt for any academic standards, other students (they throw off the curve) who do the work, and other people in general.  It's just yet another symptom of the rudeness, lack of regard for others, and incivility that infects our culture, where everything comes to be understood not in terms of what's right and wrong but what we can get away with.  Is this really what we want to defend?

> "This is half the problem with political debat in this country, both sides don't just talk past each other, both sides like to go for the pitchforks and torches."

I agree totally.

I'm not doubting the accusation were made. I was just wondering in what forum they were made -- e.g., news outlets, political pundits, blogs, etc. I'm guessing from what you said that they came mostly from blogs, which is probably to be expected. Political blogs are appealing to some because, in a sense, they offer a safe haven for outraged people to hurl accusations at the other side without having to defend those accusations. Individuals on both sides do it; however, those individuals don't necessarily represent the masses.

When I am feeling particularly charitable I will come back and reread this for the possibility that you and yours are actually seeking for some personal redemption.

In a less charitable mood, it seems to me as...well out of charity I will withhold the characterizations so derived.

On a personal note... I am listening to you all. And I do try to extend civil dialogue. If you want to improve me I'll invite you to dissect my posting history to tell me where I have failed and where I can do better or engage me on such terms in the future. Perhaps you will choose to apply the same scrutiny to yourself as well. But that is totally up to you.

On a philosophical note... I do believe that by taking personal responsibility for your own actions and by extending respect it is possible to bootstrap respect in dialogue. And where this fails, after due diligence on one's own part to accomplish it, one should withdraw on the basis that there is no partner in the dialogue. To serve fairness, everyone should be treated as an individual. To serve comprehension we do generalize. My suggestion is that to achieve the change for which you hope, your didacticisms are best directed toward the individual level, starting from home base and extending outward. On the general level I am quite prepared to disagree with you but perhaps we could agree that that would be a fruitless dialogue.

You might like to check out the formal statements made by MediaMatters.org which is also linked to in the first published news reports about the resignation.

Augustine in his first post about resignation personally describes the threats. Prior front page posts by the editors also reference personal attacks.

Or read through the many comments left at http://blog.washingtonpost.com/washpostblog/2006/03/ben_domenech_resigns.ht
ml

It's about how this is handled.

Option One: Publicly decry your friend's (at the time, alleged) acts without so much as a call to him to get his side, or even to give him a heads up.

Option Two: Decry those acts after speaking to him.

Option Three: Keep your damned mouth shut and speak to him privately because, you know, he's your freaking friend.

This has nothing to do with Ben's behavior, and everything to do with Michelle's. Hence, my comment.

Perhaps I should reread the editor's diary and Augustine's "contrition" out of respect for you, but I took them to be upholding and insisting upon values in spite of the personal pains. I would like not to think that you are dissatisfied because they did this with humility rather than sufficient indignation.

I'll check them out.

of innocent until proven guilty, I endorse everything you've said.  This is one of the reasons I've been so upset with Delay's treatment in the public sphere, and the fact that the Dubai port deal was prevented from going through the full review process.  Malkin should have held her tongue.  But I'm not talking about the manner in which people jumped to judgment, but the quickness to excuse these actions now that we know the truth.  Rather rightly resigned from his post on 60 Minutes as he undermined his credibility.  Perhaps Rather's action was intentional, perhaps not.  We know that these actions were intentional, and therefore I think they doubly call for some sort of resignation.  Forgiveness is one thing, excusing these sorts of actions-- especially, and above all, if there was willful fabrication involved --is doubly inexcusable.

But it followed on comments about that about which I was speaking. I was trying to end the threadjack politely.

Perhaps we would do well to spread our charity around. As we extend it to Ben, we might extend it to others and so avoid the rush to judgement. Michelle's priorities may be different than mine without being in binary oposition to the honorable no matter how deeply the pain is felt (which I know you must feel much more deeply than I).

If I may interrupt here, Dan Rather allowed everybody else to take the fall, while holding himself - indignantly -- to be innocent of anything.  To this day he continues to peddle the tripe that at worst, the obviously forged documents were 'fake but accurate'.  And to my knowledge, he did not voluntarily resign from anything, but was pretty much forced out of the captain's chair.  Just saying', because your main point inre Michelle Malkin are still on target, IMHO.

It is amazing to see the out pouring of support from the same group of folks that called for Dan Rathers resignation.  Both sides, have their foibles, when will the name calling stop.  

I have read the NRO samples of his sins, and they all seem to involve movie or music reviews. Movie reviews !!!  Is this what the blogosphere has sunk to?  This is one of the stupidest tempests in a teapot (phrase sourced from I know not where) that has come down the pike in a long time.

Yes, he shouldn't have lifted the material, and he should be criticized for it, but is this the face (of plagiarism) that launched a thousand (blog) ships, and threw a man overboard? (Imagery is from Homer, in case anyone needs it sourced.)

And now, self-proclaimed saints @ NRO, you need to examine your conscience (phrase borrowed from Catholic theology).  You opted to cover your ass by publicizing Mr. Domenech's venial sins, perhaps on the advice of your lawyers, thus contributing to a calamitous assault on his reputation.  How do you formulate that sin in the confessional?  (Last phrase borrowed from William F. Buckley, Jr.)  Also, as you use algebra to compute your lawyers' fees, please give credit and compensation to the Arabs who invented it.

And now technical praise for the left.  It was a great mafioso hit, a classic, and they even got some on the right to do the dirty work.  They shut down a conservative blog on an Establishment paper, which had to be the objective.

I do now.

Michelle plays close enough to the edge that she should have had the commonsense to be a little circumspect.

She didn't. And it is unfortunate because in the past she has needed us much more than we ever needed her.

To Malkin: in the future you're on you own, babe, and I'm going to be there to join in the kicking.

Whether it would have been best to keep things private depends on lots of things -- level of relationship for one.

But the biggest thing that Michelle accomplished here was to let everybody know that this wasn't a liberal/conservative issue, it's a right/wrong issue. Not everyone wearing red would be behind him in this. That brought the inevitable end sooner.

Too many people in these pages were willing to express support publicly in the face of mounting facts. They were also willing to go after accusers no matter of the truth of the accusations. Blind support is not what he needed.

In fact the easy road here would have been for her to stick by another conservative. Indeed at least keeping quiet on the matter would have kept the acerbic comments on this site and hers at bay.

But in the end Michelle not challenging Ben wouldn't have changed anything. He would have still stepped down, but probably after a few more days of animus. It would have been harder on him and all concerned if he would have stuck it out longer.

It's easy to blame her for what happened. But her role was extremely minor. The real players were Ben, the people who were publicizing old writings, and the people who remained supportive to the end. Michelle is a convenient person to vent about, but her role was negligible. And indeed her advice was what he really needed.

can respect me, but it just infuriates me to be intentionally deceived and that's what seems to have taken place here.  In his original defense the author insinuated that the plaigerism was a result of his editors and seemed to indicate that this was all the result of a leftwing smear campaign (no doubt, none of this would have happened if the angry left hadn't begin their archeological expedition).  I was willing to sit quietly and give him the benefit of the doubt during this time because I've seen, again and again, the way the left goes after the right in this way.  Then, when it becomes apparent that he isn't going to get off the hook, he comes out and fesses up.  That sits really bad with me as it entails that he knew and that he was aware of what he had done and was willing to manipulate me, his reader, towards his own ends.  Then, in response to this confession, every acts as if everything is hunky dory, screaming more about the moonbats that did the investigation in the first place than HIS deceptions and even talking about the bright career he'll have in political writing.  

It makes me furious to think about because the foundation of the social relation is based on trust.  No one would ever enter into a contract or agreement with anyone else if they believed that the contract would inevitably be broken.  Moreover, no news would ever be trusted if we believed newscasters were always lying.  The net result is that everyone begins to selectively pick their information on the basis of what they like and everyone enters into agreements on the basis of personal advantage rather than truly honoring the agreement.  Speaking a bit hyperbolically, this collapse of trust in the social pact then leads to a skyrocket of divorce (after all, no one takes agreements seriously), corruption in business, a general disregard for courtesy towards other and so on and so on.  I'm not, of course, suggesting that the author is responsible for this only that it just exacerbates the general cynicism that reigns today.  I see behavior and responses like this and I begin to wonder how I can trust anything that I read here.  I wonder whether I'm getting an accurate and factually based picture or self-serving spin that's happy to conflate issues and ignore certain facts.  It all makes me want to pull my hair out.  I believe that the only way to escape these sorts of effects is to hold ourselves to the highest standards of intellectual integrity and to uncompromisingly denounce those that abuse those standards as they're abusing the social pact itself and therefore contribute to the collapse of values in this country.

I'll do my best not to say more on this issue, but I really feel tremendously betrayed in numerous ways over this whole issue.  I really do wish Ben the best in the future, but it infuriates me to no end that he didn't fess up right away as it is indicative of a profound cynicism and disrespect towards his friends (willingness to use them to get off the hook) and to the principles upon which conservativism is based.

I'm not, of course, suggesting that the author is responsible for this only that it just exacerbates the general cynicism that reigns today.  I see behavior and responses like this and I begin to wonder how I can trust anything that I read here.

go elsewhere. See how easy that was. Now you no longer have to wonder.

For someone who has contributed pathetically little to this site you sure have a firm grip on what needs to be done.

is here other than to see how far you can run this line of crap before one of us bans you.

You've made your point clearly: impressing the left with our bonafides is more important than loyalty to friends. Message received.

We know where you stand and thanks for the warning just in case in the future we might have made the mistake of asking for your help.

So drop it. I'm tired of it. Thomas is tired of it. And you aren't going to get the last word in because I have a DELETE key.

... I mean really, he has been caught to plagarism as a teenager and young man.  How many of us could stand such scrutiny?  Not me.  How many, in college since the advent of the net, would be found guilty?  After all the lies and false new stories during the election where's that outcry?  Isn't Dan Rather still working for NBC?  Biden still spewing forth drivel?  As I posted at KOS and asked Markos about his skeletons, no matter how small, would it be fair to use his past mistakes to define him?  I'd hate to think where I'd be if my past were used to define me.  There is no shame on the left anymore.  It's do whatever it takes to get what you want.  They can't get anyone elected but they were able to stop a conservative writer from getting a job....I guess everyone needs a bone once in awhile.

If not, I'll attempt a response. Which can be summarized as:I can understand the emotion generated in the hyperbolic frustration loop but crowding out charity and in the course of symbolically burning Augustine like ant under a magnifying glass is a balm of exceedingly fleeting value. I'd suggest there is a better way to overcome the malaise.

...well, twofold.  First - and by the way, I was very disappointed to hear that Ben actually had done what he had been accused of, and I hope that he learns the proper lessons from it - is that the two situations are not, in point of fact, identical.  Ben did something wrong.  He eventually admitted to it, with an emphasis on eventually.  He is our friend - well, he's my friend, at least - and so I/we are attempting to work on this entire forgiveness thing.

Dan Rather made a mistake - a rather bad one, but absent looking into his head I can't tell you whether it was anything else but one.  His problem was that he refused to admit it, even when the evidence was waved under his nose.  He still won't, in fact; if he has ever recognized or admitted to his mistake, I haven't heard it.  Such an attitude was and is completely unbecoming in a journalist, and so it was perfectly reasonable to insist that he stop doing that for a living.

Second.  I know that my mirror images among the Left absolutely loathe hearing things like this, but let's note this again: Ben's friends would have to be utterly inhuman to not show sympathy for the degraded way his political enemies incessantly attacked him for several days... with barely a word of objection from all the pious, 'reasonable' left-of-center sorts out there*.  I don't know whether that was due to cowardice, expedience or well-sublimated schradenfreude - but it's diagnostic of the decay of the Democratic Party in general, and a well-timed reminder of why I left that party several years ago*.  I'm sure that Dan Rather's friends were similarly solicitious of his feelings after his shellacking, and more power to them.

Since you asked.

Moe

*To those reading this who did have the moral courage to get their objections to the obscenities done by their fellow travelers onto the public record: my thanks.

as of this moment he is still on this side of the divide. But you should probably write fast.

me.  I'm not suggesting that I don't trust anything on Redstate.  I value Redstate deeply as a source of information and intelligent conservative points of view that often fail to be portrayed in the mainstream media.  I just worry that incidents such as this can have a cascade effect of undermining credibility.  I do agree with Johnne that Augustine shouldn't be burnt under a microscope and that there are more effective ways of dealing with this.  I also believe that we should be clear as to what we believe is acceptable and unacceptable and holding ourselves to obvious intellectual standards.

As for my participation being pathetic, I've been here for over a year now and have participated quite a bit.  I'm not sure why my posting history lists only twelve remarks.

my native language is English, not gibberish. I was raised in a community where it was commonplace to assume that when a man said something he meant it.

My mistake.

I've been here for over a year now and have participated quite a bit.

Your registration data says you actually registered  2005-09-20 19:43:26. Six months.

So what do the ethically pure call this? Eh? Don't you feel just a tinge of guilt?

That Dan Rather went on TV and lied for an hour with obviously forged documents as his only "evidence" in an attempt to influence an election. I didn't realize he had just (maybe) borrowed a turn of phrase or two for a movie review.

also. I also recalled him continuing employment as a reporter for 60 Minutes. But what do I know, I just don't have the highly developed sense of ethics to figure all of this out.

as I've been reading Redstate for at least a year.  I'm not sure why you're responding to me with such hostility as I thought it was clear that my remarks indicated a desire for Redstate to flourish along with conservativism more generally.  I take it one of the reasons America began to turn around back in the nineties was due to the Gingrich revolution that promised to clean house in the wake of democrat corruption and hypocrisy.  They promised to bring integrity back to Congress, just as Bush promised to bring integrity back to the White House.  Lest we encounter the same fate as democrats, it strikes me as a no brainer that we have to practice what we preach.

your opinions on this are not much appreciated. I'd have thought that someone with your screen name would have picked up on that subliminal by now.

You are more than welcome to your opinions but we are just tired of reading them. In addition to being tired, reading your opinions is beginning to make a couple of us very cross.

Now I know it has to be fun beating up on people you don't know and being superior but you should have the common decency not to do it in their house.

Do I have to draw you a picture or something?

1. Thanks for your input.
   
   
2. This isn't your call.
   
   
3. We are confident that if 700,000 determined moonbats set to going over your life (or anybody's life, with the possible exception of John Roberts) with a fine-toothed comb, there would be lots of people wanting to throw you under a bus, too.

"You've made your point clearly: impressing the left with our bonafides is more important than loyalty to friends. Message received."

Evidently not clearly enough. As a loyal friend of yours, I now tell you:

When in a hole, the first rule is to stop digging.

Want to see where the dishonesty your prefered course of action here (loyalty over truth) leads? Check the left blogs. Please do NOT lead us down that particular road.

because now I know you are not to be trusted.  However, I probably wouldn't have anyway, I'm a pretty good judge of character and haven't liked Malkin from the start.  I love it when people show their souls.  Good call!

who is young, probably devastated right now, works hard and did the right thing.  And then I'm going to give you a spanking you half-wit twit, for being a heartless, calculated beastie.  I agree with the witch part, but the thing is that she didn't bother to wait and see what had to be said before she jumped on the burn-mobile.  We did.  We win.  

I don't want to bait you out here into the steel trap that seems waiting to close on you nor engage you while so disadvantaged.

So I'll offer my personal reflections. In my own moments of frustration I engage in infant head-banging syndrome. My trust of journalists is supplanted by antagonism due to what I consider to be unrealistic claims of objectivity. And in my personal interactions with people I find encounters far too rare where our marvelous facility of reason is the servant of truth rather than the servant of self-interest.

And unfortunately, the honorable does not seem to be the state which we all begin in. I am thankful for the events that have facilitated my redemption, to whatever limited extent it has been achieved and hopeful that it may continue. And I am hopeful for others when they encounter and demonstrate the need to seek it.

So what example will best achieve a redemption that must be achieved through choices on the individual level?

I suggest that the answer is complex and not easily captured in binary categories. The irredeemable may well need to be thrown overboard, but all is lost if there is no path to redemption for what can be redeemed. As a professor you have a powerful if small opportunity to shape the character of the future generations. As individuals and bloggers we have some similar such opportunity as well.

One day we play the role of judge, one day of judged.

you've missed a great opportunity to shut up.

I can do without "loyal friends" who consider me dishonest.

You can do without being a friend to someone you consider dishonest.

I have a question: Are you willing to take what you dish out, and tell Leon not to play 'life's not fair' and ban in response?

you've pushed the envelope as far as you're going to push it and be able to come back. Word. Your decision.

I say, let's go win an election!!  As I posted elsewhere, whoever represents the swarm that is the far left is going to be in a worse position than herding cats.  It will be more like herding hungry mountain lions.

If we'll knuckle down and do it, we might still make some conservative changes in the country, in spite of our spendthrift congress.

If Red State is a playground for that crypto-racist individual to come here under a pseudonym, spread her moronic bile of a decent person who writes under her real name, all in the defense of a lying plagiarist, and further that this individual can attack me with impunity without the targets being able to respond, then I don't care what you do.

Your call.

Come on guys, we are all on the same side here.  Let's not turn our knives to each other right now.

We are all disappointed and frustrated by this whole situation, but let's remember what our real objective is here.  We have been dealt a blow, but now is the time to recover from it and we can't do that if we are eating our own.

Both of you go back to your corners and take a time out from responding to each other.  We don't need this internal bickering.

Back up. Take a deep breath. Walk away.

Please.

This is the second time I've tried being nice in two days, and the first resulted in a friendly banning. I'd as soon this one had a different outcome.

Is, or is not, MrsNachos free to use this site to go around personally attacking and namecalling whomever she feels like?

Is this a public Republican community site, or a personal site for the friends and family of the few who run it?

Rereading your post, I can internally link to a strong sense of sympathy for much of what you say. I'd simply ask you to come back after your emotions have settled down a bit, and after rereading the original editor's diary reflect on the precision of some of your characterizations regarding their failure to condemn the act. Ping me if you think I should do the same.

Whether they should also condemn the actor is the more philosophical question posed above. And probably best not discussed further here, but has been offered as a point for philosophical contemplation.

If Red State is a playground for that crypto-racist individual to come here under a pseudonym, spread her moronic bile of a decent person who writes under her real name, all in the defense of a lying plagiarist

That's from your parent comment.

Is, or is not, MrsNachos free to use this site to go around personally attacking and namecalling whomever she feels like?

Is this a public Republican community site, or a personal site for the friends and family of the few who run it?

This is your present comment.

She's stopping. You're stopping. Tempers are high. Please back up. She already has. I'm not asking you to retract a word; just stop.

Ok?

I'll take you on your word, and not press it any more, under the assumption that she is in fact stopping.

I'd just finished a reply to her diary, though.  If you delete #65 on her diary in this spirit, I'll understand.

 Albeit for strictly selfish reasons, insofar as I enjoy Neil's contributions and comments here. I missed all the fireworks but if things spiral away and guys like him get banned then it's going to be a real shame.

 Why not take a break for a day, come back, and start fresh on some continued insightful writing on topics that that aren't regarding the Domenech situation. I can't see what good is going to result in continued back and forth over who jumped to what conclusion too soon, particularly when there are going to be new matters in the future that will benefit from every valuable participant sticking around to discuss.

I think she was giving an opinion of Malkin.  One that is shared by many here.  

It is a Republican community, but not all of us are happy with Malkin and this is kind of the final straw for some of us.

You can disagree with Mrs. Nachos, but don't call her a racist because she has a different opinion of Malkin.  And I think you  way over stepped your bounds in your characterization of Ben.  He's been to the woodshed.  Now it's time to patch him up and get ready for the next round.  Because rest assured, there will be one.

That's all.

To Mike Krempasky: don't pretend that you or anyone else is invulnerable.  Everyone makes mistakes.

What amazes me is that they had to find a five-year-old movie review to have ANY evidence that Ben plagiarized.

Who are these guys?  What motivates them to go after a great guy like Ben?  Jealousy?

Is their real concern some altruistic motivation that justice be served or DO THEY HATE ALL CONSERVATIVES?

They didn't tear Ben down.  I'd hire Ben in a second if I owned a news company.

All of the other editors at Red State can breathe a sigh of relief that it wasn't one of them who was offered the job at the Post.  Everyone has made mistakes.

It is uber-hypocritical for the same people who lionize abortion doctors, anti-semites, frauds, and perverts to accuse Ben of wrong-doing.

They ought to sniff their own armpits first.

He's one of their heroes.

    I know that what he did is wrong and that the libs will make it out as if it were a capital offense.  In a world of degrees am I correct in seeing that what he allegedly plagiarized were phrases used in movie reviews?  I know that this is still wrong but was that the extent of it?

I'm not addressing MrsNachos at this time, because I am given assurance that she's going to tone it down.

As for Ben, I think my characterization was accurate.  He got in a stupid habit, and when caught, dug himself deeper before giving in.  I have loads of compassion for him, not only because his original 'crime' was minor, but because I really do get the impression that he really is a decent guy.

However he played us all for fools on the front page, and I don't think that should be whitewashed.  For him to get nothing but kind words on these pages, while Malkin gets harsh scorn for politely but strongly telling him to take the fall for his misdeeds, is to me the sign of extreme emotional irrationality.

I hope you will chill rather than be a martyr here. For what it is worth I take rather strong exception to MrsNachos current diaries and current insults. I suspect there are others who have not been vocal about it who do as well, but have some faith in the power of the truth rather than effectiveness of emotion.

I hope your voice will not become a casualty to ...

you and I have been down this road before with regards to a discussion of heroes, Lance Armstrong and some such.  You got under my skin because of your apparent callousness and I got under yours with my emotional take on the situation.  Welcome to the world of differences between men and women.

Malkin pisses me off for a variety of reasons.  I'm done beating that horse though.

I am disappointed in Ben, but I think he has been subjected to enough public humiliation.  I have no doubt that Mike and others are probably jack slapping him around in private, as they should be.  But we as a movement need to lift him up. dust him off, and get him back in the ring.  He is a brilliant conservative voice.  Given the "graying" of our movement, we can ill afford to let the public scouring continue.

Neil, you and I are on the same side.  We need each other.  And sometimes we aren't going to see eye to eye.  When that happens, it is best to take a step back and regroup, not just keep swinging.

That's all I'm saying.

And now I'm off to taxi service duty.

And Ben, you are already forgiven in my eyes, for whatever it's worth.  You had a ton of stuff on your lap for a 24 year old. My take is that you're guilty mostly of taking inappropriate shortcuts to meet deadlines.

Hopefully a lesson learned. I can't see any lasting harm here.

The good news for you and for RedState is that this mattered to so many.  It was a bit of a wake-up call, I think. This stuff is becoming increasingly important in the public's eye.  That's a good thing.