Posted on 08/06/2007 6:15:49 AM PDT by SueRae
Read the start and finish of the article again - I do not believe that this author actually dug into this to determine that the carrier thought his job was at risk. I think it is much more likely that he took an existing story and “revised” it a bit to provide a springboard to his story.
Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in saying that I was on a tangent. The CIA leak information may be solid, but the author detracts credibility for the sake of an interresting, but argueably incorrect lead in. Now then, what facts about the USPS am I woefully ignorant about? (btw - you woe way too easily if this is all it takes)
Like you, I value honesty and feel that when people lie about even small things, it can be an indication to make their views on other things suspect. Even if Hoekstra (sp?) is playing loose with the mailman thing (maybe, maybe not), that's inconsequential compared to the larger point -- that CIA leakers face less punishment than people who get caught downloading music, littering, or driving 72 in a 65 zone.
If you truly believe the author lied, write to him about it and report his reply on FR.
True enough - I would have preferred the opportunity to slam some liberal tripe article, but this was an easy example for me. There are readers who absorb information without ever considering what the writer’s approach to the article was. I think the writer threw together a hook - entertaining, but errant. In other cases writers warp whatever is necessary to crank out entire articles. There are plenty of instances where the goal is to produce clever writing that gets in by deadline. In other instances the object is to produce an interesting story that gets the president scrutinized (or would that be screwtinized? - How is Dan Rather doing these days?).
Soooo, I went another route I figured if he made statements with specific references they must have come from somewhere. I found the article. He didnt lie; the people at the USPS did, at least that is the most logical conclusion I can draw. The company that mailed the books sent them too early, and the boxes were not marked so that it was obvious what they were (as were the boxes from Amazon). No one in the USPS was going to loose their job over it, but those involved said they may in order to get the books back and execute a cya on behalf of the book seller (it was their error).
I sit corrected. Had I only done my fact checking before I published
“Bush’s refusal to pursue the Clintons’ traitorous actions is a mystery to me.”
I would say it was much more of a clue than a mystery. If anyone could point out to me how one of our political parties could survive without the cooperation of the other, I would be will to listen and be amazed. The things that have come out of Washington in the last 40 years, would totally eliminate the party that was resonsible, if the other party could, and would, be willing to assign them the blame, AMEN.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.