I think you're missing something here, Ace. The guy is the fucking managing editor at WaPo. I knew when I skewered him that there was a chance his commetns were edited and appeared out of context, but he's the one that agreed to be interviewed by a commie rag.

He should know better, and if he doesn't he's a fucking idiot.

So what are his possible offenses?

He's an idiot for not understanding that a communist pub might edit him, and he's managing a major US newspaper.

He's an idiot because he knows that a communist pub might edit him and he still does the interview, and he's managing a major US newspaper.

He made some very stupid statements.

No matter which it is, he's asking for it.

If you can't trust the communists, who *can* you trust?

Where is Dan Rather right now, when we need his wisdom the most?

Oh, that's right. . . smothering himself in Sex Panther and heading down to the Ben Franklin to stalk blue-hairs in the silk flower aisle.

Ain't retirement grand?

Cheers,
Dave at Garfield Ridge

John:

Ace said that he'd allow his readers to decide whether Bennett comes off better in the original statements or in the propaganda version. And that's what you just got to do.

You are entirely correct to say that the man showed poor judgment by agreeing to do the interview, but that wasn't the thrust of Ace's original post. Ace based his comments on what the Chinese paper printed. Thus, Ace is showing that it's better to put the additional information up there for us to read.

Ain't the Blogosphere grand? How else could you move that fast.

Try getting a big national newspaper (or any newspaper) to make a correction like this. They'd do a piece slandering someone on the front page, then print a tiny little correction in the next day's edition where it's hard to find. So even when the MSM gets it wrong, they have this power to diminish the significance of the mistake they made. If they were honest, they'd post the correction the same place they posted the slander (front page slander, front page correction).

I was wrong too -- but I'm not going to apologize. Why should I? No one cares what I think.

Anyway, it's nice to see that China's journalists are just as devoted to truth and accuracy as ours. I guess we have that in common.

Hey KC,

You haven't said anything I disagree with, and I know Ace is doing the responsible thing - giving us the facts as they've been presented so we can decide. No loose shit.

All I'm saying to Ace is, don't kick yourself to hard, the jackass walked right into this, whatever it is.

Yeah this is like Sean Penn complaining that Saddam Hussein misued his words.

but as Saint Dan would say i think the chinesse interview is "Fake but accurate"

Yeah, lets stop getting hungup over "facts" and "truth", its the narrative that's what's important. That's why its "true".

It seems to me in the actual transcript that he's trying to make a veiled comment about China's bullying policies towards Taiwan and China's neighbors, but trying to do it in a way where it might get past the censors. If that was the intent, it didn't work.

I must be the only one who thinks that Bennett's getting a bum rap. And that Powerline (or John Hinderaker, who I believe made the comment) is behaving somewhat churlish by saying the unedited transcript is "worse." I'm sorry, that makes Hinderaker look like a partisan asshole who's determined in advance to find fault - because Bennett's unredacted transcript is actually quite acceptable to me. You want to criticize him on the grounds of "you interview with Communist rags and this is what you should expect," then fine. But the Powerline folks are being jerks.

And I say this as an unrepentant right-wing asshole myself.

Jeff B:

I hate to split hairs, but you are the one being churlish, or vulgar (or surly, or lacking in civility) by calling Hindrocket a partisan asshole. You'll note that Powerline is by nature, partisan, and they don't allow comments, like Ace does.

Hindrocket is speculating, positing an opinion, and even prefaces his observation with "over-literal to be sure."

So he's an asshole, is he? Now aren't we being churlish? Well, Ace asked his readers to draw their own conclusions, and even induced us to look at an opinion by linking to Powerline.

So here you can post your opinion, which you did. Then you posted an opinion of Hindrocket.

So you got two zings in on one cite that welcomes comments. I'd say, if you don't like Mr. Hinderaker's observation, then send him an e-mail in addition to posting it here (which is just fine; that what I love about comment sections). Because that's the only way he'll likely see it. Unless Rocket Man goes looking around Ace's comment section.

I don't agree with Rocket Man and do agree with you that the actual quotes are fairly tame. To be more precise, I don't thnk Mr. Bennett's comments regarding America's leadership position (or should America be the leader of the world) are clear in the original version. They are rather rambling and lack substance.

And I'm being kind of petty, but I kind of like worship Rocket Man. You know, in a manly sort of way.

Like a Viking, KCTrio...Like a viking. :)

I'm sorry, that makes Hinderaker look like a partisan asshole who's determined in advance to find fault - because Bennett's unredacted transcript is actually quite acceptable to me.

There is that business of comparing American influence to Chinese influence, Dude. Do you agree they're the same?

And then he goes off on that imperialism/colonialism jag-- do you agree with that characterization?

I don't know that these comments are "worse." I think they're about in the same ballpark as the original report he was so desperate to correct.

Jack M.

More loose shit. Of course I worship Rocket Man (and doesn't the name Hindrocket sort of add to the metahpor of the love that one must not speak of?) like a Viking. How could I be so sloppy. Perhaps this correction will accord me sloppy seconds.

Ace:

Better said. I read the transcript, and I didn't go far enough. I thought it was unclear whether Bennettt was actually equating on the same moral plane American and Chinese imperialism, as well as each country's influence. One might fairly deduce the guy's an America-loathing Michael Moore "patriot," but not enough evidence to make the deduction crystal clear. It seems he was, but still left himself enough wiggle room to get out of the damn thing.

That's why I'd like to hear the taped interview. Methinks it stinks to high Heaven.

I'm still glad Hewitt and others busted his balls enought to get the little weasel to so desparately start doing the backstroke. He wouldn't have been so eager to set the record straight (if that's what you could call it) if he wasn't fearful of the impression he'd made.

The MSM is a little more on their toes these days. They still spew their spiteful little shit comments, but with each occurance, they get hammered, and one day they may just be a little more thoughtful about consequences before they open their maws. And let them whine about how conservative oversight causes them to be overly cautious. That'll be their noose.