John Hinderaker, a.k.a. "Hindrocket", has this to say at Powerline (I won't link, you can find it yourself) about Newsweek and Abu Ghraib:
I really think that calling Newsweek's blunder "the press's Abu Ghraib" is unfair to the low-lifes who carried out the Abu Ghraib abuses. After all, they didn't even hurt anyone, let alone kill them. And the people they abused were almost certainly terrorists.
Yes, that's right. According to John Hinderaker and the good folks at Powerline, the Time Magazine Blog of the Year(TM)(R)(C)(ASS)... nobody was hurt at Abu Ghraib! So quit picking on them!
[Link]
[Link]
Hinderaker wants us all to know that nothing cheeses him off more than anonymous leakers:
It should be obvious by now that nearly all mainstream news outlets--the New York Times and Washington Post, most notoriously, like Newsweek in this instance--rely on a steady stream of anonymous leakers (nearly always hostile to the Bush administration) for their front-page stories. These news outlets are happy to publish anonymous allegations because the stories leaked by their sources fit the reporters' political preconceptions.
He's right. Relying on anonymous leakers to give you stories that fit your political preconceptions is wrong. The right way to do it, if you're a very, very self-important blogger with a persecution complex, is to simply make up facts wholesale, and stick to them like that Spiderman comic book you accidentally superglued to your head in grade school! Woo-hoo! Truth is for losers, ya bitches!
Sigh. You win, John. Even Novak can't compete with that. Even Rush himself bows down before your spectacular commitment to whatever-the-hell-it-is-you're-going-for. And so, we salute you. I invite everyone in singing a hearty rendition of the John Hinderaker official theme song.
There he iiiiis... the biggest douche in the uuuuuniverse...
