I don't mind a heated debate, but I look down on lies, sloppy reading, and careless writing.
There's a winger website that has apparently taken to specializing in lying about what I write - unless they just don't know what they're doing. To paraphrase Jimi Hendix, is it hate ... or just confusion?
Here's an example: Read this piece in the Huffington Post, and then this one by the self-described Gateway Pundit. Then, find the lies.
I'll get you started:
- The victim in my piece is innocent. They claim that I characterized the victim in my piece as a terrorist.
- There's no mention of Abu Ghraib, or of the United States, in my piece.
- I never called terrorists "freedom fighters." They're claiming Cindy Sheehan did, although even if their transcript is correct her meaning isn't clear. What's that got to do with my piece?
(UPDATE: As they did once before, they deleted something to cover their tracks -- their claim that I called the victim a terrorist -- rather than do the right thing and 'fess up.)
Despite having written about me before by name, they get my name wrong. "E. J. Escrow" seems to be a conflation of E. J. Dionne and their tax problems. Not that it bothers me - "RJ" isn't the name my mother gave me. It certainly exemplifies their level of quality control.
But then, fact checking isn't the Right's specialty, is it?
Ands they've said false things about me before over there, so it must be standard practice for them. (continued )
