Redstate

that this is happening.  Your writing has meant so much to countless people, myself included.  You are a tireless, powerful advocate for prolife causes and your voice will continue to make an impact, and make a real difference.

Thank you, Ben.

It's a sad day when digital thuggery wins.

count my wife and me as supporters.  Take heart and take care.

The DeFreese's from Calera, AL

to this discussion.  Our hearts go out to you during your time of trial (gosh, I bet I just plagerized someone else's thoughts or ideas... learned that from Dan Brown.)

I, for one, really appreciate your rebuttal to these asinine remarks.  The battle for the hearts and minds will continue, even if the viatrol that is spewed by the koskoolaid kids, and truth will win out over rhetoric.

While this is undoubtly a rough time for you professionally and personally, I hope you will continue to hang with us and fight the good fight.  I'd hate to think the blood thirsty kossacks will succeed in silencing you from now on.

Take some time, add another layer of skin and come back ready to impart your wisdom on all of us again.

You are young and have a bright future ahead of you.  And, you are effective.  That is why you find yourself on the receiving end of such vitriol.  Don't give up, or they win.  And America can't afford to let that happen.

You have made a bigger impact than you probably realize.  What does not kill you will make you stronger (and in this case, others as well).  Your next step will be an even greater opportunity.

Search for it.

I am sorry that you had to go through all that. I imagine that elections in coming years will have this kind of poo-flinging.

On a lighter note, glad to have you all to ourselves again!

I repeat: Should the entire American Left fall over dead tomorrow, I would rejoice, and order pizza to celebrate. They are not my countrymen; they are animals who happen to walk upright and make noises that approximate speech. They are below human. I look forward to seeing each and every one in Hell.

To those conservatives who couldn't wait to find wrongdoing where none existed: Gee, funny you didn't get all hyped up about this with Bob Bork. Or Sam Alito. I guess maybe your common sense detector -- or decency reserve -- only kicks in when it gets you something you want?

You're all dead to me, as well. Too bad: One lady in particular was a favorite writer of mine. Ah, well.

Love, Dad.

Glad to know we can still count on you to be our resident fire-breather.  Even in the face of such nastiness.  Keep it up.  We need you.  :>)

Awww, the poor widdle major media columnist got a prank call? How awful that must be for him!

Ben, maybe it's time for you to go softly into the dark night, instead of continuing to dig a hole deep enough to fit all your buddies in it with you. Blaming the liberals for your ethical lapses must be a lot of fun, but think about what it does to the credibility of anyone who believes you.

I know, it sucks to get fired, but you did kind of stick your head in the cannon.

Your online corpse is its next pickup.

The left threw everything rotten thing they have at you, in the hopes that something would stick. In other words, you've been "Bushed". Stand strong and don't let them get to you, in the end you'll triumph. Wishing you lots of luck.

JPH

Your post is a testament to the class and decency you obviously possess.  Just as the vitriol unleashed against you from critics on the left is a testament to theirs.

I do not know you, like some of the diarists here might, but it is clear to me that you have arrived at this decision to resign with the best of intentions.  That said, I wish you would not have done so.  Maybe it is easy to say when you are not the subject of threatening e-mails and phone calls, but the only way to prevent mobs of enraged and deranged critics from bringing down the next person in your position is to fight against them and expose them for what they are.

Please understand that I am not criticizing you, but would it have been possible to produce the editor of The Flat Hat, or contact P.J. O'Rourke?  While I am glad that washingtonpost.com's editorial staff was convinced by your explanations, it is a shame that the readership of Red America was not able to evaluate the evidence themselves and in the process, make their own judgements on the nature of your critics.

I became a diarist here at RedState because of the intelligent, informative, and insightful posts by bloggers like yourself and Erick, whom I understand is the next target of those who took after you.  It is a shame that the readers of the Washington Post's online edition will not have the same experience.

I look forward reading future posts of yours here at RedState.

Sincerely,

Mark I.

IN the end I think it is the effectiveness of your voice that made them hate you.

The left hates the conservative voice, but even more so they hate the persuasive conservative voice.

I've already seen this comment pop up on CT as proof of conservative wackiness.  I know you're emotional right now, but this doesn't help at all.  There's still a serious problem here, and you're just making inflammatory comments that will be quoted three or four flamewars hence.

First, this is hardly the first time I've written something that "as proof of conservative wackiness." I'd prefer they took it "as proof of Thomas's near bloodthirsty rage," but whatever works, works.

Second, I have no idea what CT is.

There's still a serious problem here

Yes, that a friend of mine has been smeared out of a job by gibbering cretins with the mental wherewithal of retarded orangutans. Did you have a different problem in mind?

you're just making inflammatory comments that will be quoted three or four flamewars hence

I can but dream.

that you have entirely too refined mores and manners to fit in here.

Catsy: Advocating or expressing approval of harassment, arrest, immprisonment, torture, or death of liberals and Democrats. Really, there's just no defense whatsoever for this, and yet it's not at all uncommon for me to see people joke about it. Guess what? My family's armed, and it's not funny. [emphasis added for clarity]

Thomas: That's a bannable offense, and I'm quite serious. If you know somewhere that's happened, I'm more than interested.

Just wanted to know which statement of yours you stand by: the desire to see me dead, or the affirmation that saying so is a bannable offense.

Well, I suppose that's pretty likely.  I don't think I have delicate sensibilities -- heck, I'd swear a lot more if this site would allow me, for instance.  

Look, whether or not you're satisfied with Ben's defense (my guess: you guys will be, most others won't be), you have to admit that something entirely bizarre about one of this site's editors claiming that he would rejoice in the deaths of about half of America.  (To be fair, I'm not sure what he means by the American left -- I take it to be Kerry voters, but even on a more restricted reading, we're still talking about many millions of Americans).  Doesn't this set of loud, piercing alarm bells to you?  

I think I'm gonna stay away from this site for a week or so.  I really do like it here -- it's good to hear from people whose views are different from yours, but express them reasonably.  Obviously, this site won't be like that for a little while.

Augustine...take up your cross...dance on their heads.

I am really amazed at your graciousness to Jim Brady. He has participated in your lynching and thanked the mob that did it. Quoth:

"We appreciate the speed and thoroughness with which our readers and media outlets surfaced these allegations. Despite the turn this has taken, we believe this event, among other things, testifies to the positive and powerful role that the Internet can play in the the practice of journalism."

Anyone that thinks the scrutiny that produced these accusations was motivated by other than partisanship is a fool. And the regular scrutiny our side of the tracks places on journalists is swiftly dismissed as partisanship, not awarded with grateful action.

If you are anything like what you have been accused of then JB was an incompetent fool to hire you and did both of you a great disservice.

Your graciousness proves your worth and contrasts to the hypocrisy of the piranhanic mob.

They are stained with your blood. Rise! and Redeem! You need not champion yourself for yourself but there is a triumph that awaits you.

[I don't really know what I am saying here, but I have some poetic instinct about justice arising from injustice,and the birth of a champion. At any rate...may you meet with good fortune].

I am sure you already know that but it needs repeating.

It is a shame you had to resign but there is definitely a bright side. Take heart in knowing that you scare them. The vitreol and vile displayed is a testament to that.

It also showed the true face of the opposition. We will never convice the truly brainwashed at Kos but those democrats that are "on the fence" had a pretty eye-opening view of their brethren this week. And, in the "any publicity is good publicity" category, these same folks, having learned of RedState, may come to see what its all about. They may show up misinformed and angry, looking to see what kind of greedy racist homophobes lurk here but will find out what we already know...

its not true.

Good Luck.

He looks forward to seeing you in Hell.  A place that Thomas fully expects to end up in, himself, along with quite a number of people.

At any rate: your faction won.  Congratulations.  Now please go back to your own site for a while, and leave us to ours.

In combat great people (we call them heros) sometimes get injured and have to be withdrawn.  Before you (and your family and the Post) were further injured you were able to drag yourself away from the battlefield.

In Christendom great people (we call them martyrs) stand for truth and get killed for it.  Your voice in a dark world was a threat to the darkness and it felt compelled to silence you.

At RedState we have great people (we call them family) who yearn for truth, love of country, and a philosophy that we are all in this epic struggle together.

I am proud to have you as a RedState brother.  Your RedState family is with you while you pick yourself up, brush of the dirt, and ready yourself to get back to battle.  If you could forgive me for offering you advice in such a rough time; consider a vacation.  The rest would do you some good.

God bless you Ben.

. . . perhaps you could ask the WaPo to post your response on their site so that their readers can hear more about it than just "resigned under cloud of plagiarism charges."

A great deal changed when I saw folks savage a friend because they were too tired from pleasing themselves over a keyboard.

Properly, by the way, I was not "expressing approval of harassment, arrest, immprisonment, torture, or death of liberals and Democrats." I was stating preemptive joy at the sudden, accidental death of the American Left. I'm frequently told by liberals that liberal does not equal Left; I took that as a given.

However, insofar as you're inclined to take this as you'd have it; don't agree with that characterization; or identify yourself as a Leftist: Take your own guess.

This episode just furthers and strengthens my resolve to fight the left tooth and nail, with all I have, for the future of America.

Godspeed, Ben Domenech.

the specifics would be beside the point if you were admitting to youthful plagiarism. As I've stated elsewhere, I think much of this is overblown, and I for one would be more than happy to move on with such an admission. We are all much more than the sum of our college years.

Since you dispute the charges, I think it would be well worth your while to spend a little additional care describing the specifics, particularly the NRO pieces in contention. To be blunt, there's so much material in question that a more in-depth explanation would be required before I personally could extend you the benefit of the doubt on this particular point.

Looking forward to your future work, at RS and elsewhere.

Then we'll all come on there and harass you for anything we see as inconsistent.

since I can't post for 5 days!  :)

Ben, I'm proud of you too!  This household spent a good bit of the day reading blogs, following this story, and praying for you.  

Psalm 37:1-6

with love and respect,

k

raising your son. He is quite an asset at this site.

Although I read RedState and link it all the time on my blog, I never paid attention to who "Augustine" was. when I started reading about this I wondered why the left side of the blogosphere had their claws out on this one.

Now I understand.

We can't have a member of a distinguished rightwing blog be given a forum where they might actually CHANGE someone's mind or at least make them think about an issue in a different way.

The ever intolerant left goes all McCarthyism.

Do you think they even see that they have become what they claim to hate?

Hmmmm.

Yep.  Right at the head of the pack, baying for Republican blood without having taken the time to actually speak to Ben personally or communicate via email.

Condemned by proxy by Michelle Malkin.

No wonder I don't bother reading her nonsense.

Isn't his site your site too?

We never quite know where the road will lead, but I am confident that your road, Augustine, will lead to great places.  Thank you for sharing your insights with all of us.  And thank you for the graciousness of your resignation letter above.  You are truly a class act!

The Road goes ever on and on

    Down from the door where it began.

Now far ahead the Road has gone,

    And I must follow, if I can,

Pursuing it with eager feet,

    Until it joins some larger way

Where many paths and errands meet.

    And whither then? I cannot say.

               -- J.R.R. Tolkien

Catsy is from ObWings, which is Moe's site.  He may have retreated from the moonbat hordes, but some of us still dream of him reclaiming his rightful throne.

... if you knew Ben as I do... as a real flesh and blood human being... you'd feel pretty rediculous about speaking about him in this way.  It is really, really tacky.

Fact is, they couldn't stand any conservative voice at one of "their" newsrags so much, they went on a massive hunt. Honestly, ever since Dan Rather and Eason Jordan were bought low, the left has been trying to get pelts for the trophy case.

Congrats lefties! You got a guy writing an opinion blog on a WaPo website....and Jeff Gannon.

WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You all heap big game-hunters!

Let me just say that watching what happened to Moe helped crystallize a lot of my current opinions, and leave it at that.

You write:

Before that, insertions had been routinely made in my copy, which I did not question. I did not even at that time read the publications from which I am now alleged to have lifted material. When these insertions were made, I assumed, like most disgruntled writers would, that they were unnecessary but legitimate editorial additions.

One of your editors wrote in to Atrios to say this:

Hi --

This all seems to have happened really fast. I hadn't really checked the news til midday today when I saw all of this happened. It might be kind of moot now, but I was Domenech's editor at The Flat Hat when he was writing the reviews. Four people, including me, would have handled his copy, the others being my assistant section editor, the managing editor and the editor.

This should seem obvious, but no one on the editorial staff was going into Salon (or wherever) and pasting whole sections into his reviews. We were more concerned about getting the paper done so we could get home at 2 in the morning instead of 5. We may have put additional words in the story, but it would never have been completely foreign content. It was just editing.

Link: http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_03_19_atrios_archive.html#11432337135656037
0

Now, this is he said/she said (or perhaps he/he; I don't know the gender of the former editor), but I think this requires a response.

-dms

...why on Earth the Angry Pantsuit Left spent entire forests worth of newsprint and terabytes of information to take down little old Ben?

Understand something; they own the WaPo. The notion that the Left's sentiments aren't shared by most of the reporters and editors at MSM outlets such as the NYT and CBS is a risible joke. Why did the Kossacks and Atrios start drooling on their keyboards over Augustine?

There is the gnawing bit of doubt on the Left that they are beginning to lose the propaganda war. The great argument with Conservatism was lost during the Reagan era. The Clinton Presidency merely confirmed that. Despite Bush's low numbers, there is this tendency on the part of the American people to distrust the news they are getting. They believe that the MSM has an agenda. Anything that takes the MSM away from the control of the Left reduces the power of the Left. Ben's blog at the WaPo was a tiny foot in the door of an established liberal paper by one of our own, and probably would have been followed in due course by a Blue.

The mere existence of Ben's blog was a threat to the established order of things, and had to be eliminated. The plagiarism charges were, apparently, so much window dressing. For my part, I am satisfied with Ben's explanation.

I thought for a moment you thought I was implying that this place was Catsy's.  Didn't want that happening.  

Going back to lurker status.

I've taken heart from what Theodore Roosevelt once said about the man in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes short again and again because there is not effort without error and shortcoming, but who does actually strive to do the deed, who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself in a worthy cause, who at the best knows in the end the triumphs of high achievements and with the worst if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly.

A MESSAGE TO OUR READERS [The Editors]

As the previous links on the matter mention, at least one of the pieces Ben Domenech is accused of having plagiarized was a movie review for National Review Online. A side-by-side comparison to another review of the same film speaks for itself. There is no excuse for plagiarism and we apologize to our readers and to Steve Murray of the Cox News Service from whose piece the language was lifted. With some evidence of possible problems with other pieces, we're also looking into other articles he wrote for NRO.

Frankly, I understand the tough place they're in. I don't think that the truth has been fully aired yet.

Ben, thank you so very much for this post.  I hope everyone in the media looks carefully at what happened here, and I hope especially that they examine the spirit in which it was done.  I agree with Thorley that at the very least the WaPo should publish your response.  We have broad shoulders, Ben, and I'm proud of you for weathering this storm, and I'm even more honored to be a member of RedState.  I would have posted this sooner but access was sporadic.

It may not be any consolation to you at this moment, but I think others here are correct when they observe that what happened to you in the past few days is going to have much more important ramifications.  In the meantime, keep your chin up.    

Everyone is wrong and people are just out to sabotage you ever since you were seventeen?  Grow up.  This reminds me of how a majority of African Americans defend O.J. Simpsons simply because he is one of them rather even though it is obvious with the blood is on his hands (figuratively and literally).

Take heart Ben.  You could committ mass murder and people here would still defend you.

Sad.

Should have let them fire you.  By resigning your case is unresolved, at least in my eyes.  Had you let them investigate the matter, then you would have been absolved, as the case may be, after the investigation.  This would have lended to your credibility.

If the death threats and obscene messages you received played a part in this, I can understand the resignation.  Were I to find myself in such a position I would rather value my sanity and peace of mind knowing my loved ones were safe from the tyranny of extremists.  I would do likewise, had your motive been that.

But the issue still remains - had you allowed the investigation to ensue, all the matter would have been resolved and you'd have been a shining star in a sea of dimwitted liberals.  Yet you chose a different route and decided to embolden your enemy by allowing them to win their game too easily.

I don't think you owe anyone an explanation, I can respect that.  But you have left me wondering if you are indeed telling the truth in this matter.

Do you not understand the use of expressions?

"Dead to me" means you don't recognize the person as existing, not that you wish death on them.

Geez.

Where the investigation is still going on.

It wasn't addressed in Ben's post and I hope he does soon.

For all we know, these "editors" were a bunch of liberal kooks intent on setting Ben up to tear him down later (I'm sure Ben's politics were no mystery to the rest of the Flat Hat staff, and these "editors" seem to be conveniently lurking on Atrios).  They could have easily snuck passages into Ben's original work, and stored this nugget away as ammunition against his promising future.  It's really sad what antics people will stoop to...

If a vocal minority, however fervent its cause, prevails over reason and the will of the majority, this nation has no future as a free society.

Ben Domenech says most of the alleged instances of plagiarism were the fault of his editors at his college paper.  At least one editor disagrees.  Who's right?  

Plagiarism is often a habit.  If the editors of Flat Hat were inserting copy from Salon and WaPo into Domenech's pieces, they were almost surely doing similar things to other articles in the same paper.  Domenech or his supporters could bolster their case by finding examples.

If no such examples can be found, I think the burden of proof lies with Domenech, not the Flat Top editors.

Likewise, if the Cox News bit that made its way into a National Review Online piece turns out to be a genuine case of plagiarism---and I see no defense above on this, the most troubling instance yet alleged---then Domenech's credibility to impugn his Flat Top editors takes a big hit.

This isn't over, and more evidence is going to come out to resolve the above questions.

"Success is how you bounce on the bottom."

                          Gen Geo.S Patton.

You said this:

Likewise, if the Cox News bit that made its way into a National Review Online piece turns out to be a genuine case of plagiarism---and I see no defense above on this

Is this the same article you are talking about?

The most recent accusation, is that I stole a music review from Crosswalk and passed it off at National Review Online. In fact, I wrote both lists myself; I was one of Crosswalk's music review contributors at the time.

It would seem that Ben answered your question himself. You did read Ben's piece, right?

That's a music review; the NRO piece in question is a movie review.

This was a movie review from Cox New Service, not a music review from Crosswalk.  I hadn't even heard about the latter allegation.  The Cox piece appeared under the byline Steve Murray, and can be accessed here

This raises a troubling point about Domenech post.  It devotes only a couple of paragraphs to rebutting what are now many allegations of plagiarism.  This affair is moving fast, so no one expects Domenech to have a twenty page explanation rebutting those allegations point-by-point out yet.  But that is what it is going to take.  His post just raises more questions, as far as I can see.

Google search for "Translucent and glowing, they ooze up..."

Cut it out. You've made your point all over. My kill count is now at 26. Let's not bring it to 27 with you, ok?

Ben / Augustine,

I've been following this whole unfolding saga since the day after Red America went online.  Ever since the plagarism charges surfaced, I haven't known what to think.  I have been very moved by your writing (particularly your March 22 blog entry on your own blog site).  You come across to me as a man with a lot of character.  But the charges made have been very serious, and I initially didn't see how you could dispute them.  I very much appreciate your explanation above, and now realize that all the charges made may have reasonable explanations.  However, what I've finally realized in the end is that I have no way of knowing what's true and what's not, until and unless some kind of investigation is done.  And you know what?  It doesn't really matter what I think.  Nor does it matter what all the chattering mouths on the left or the right think.  What matters is that in all of this you have integrity and a clean conscience before God.  He is the God who can summon thousands upon thousands of angels to fight for His children when we face seemingly impossible odds in our fight for good.  And He is the God, who even when we fail and do wrong, calls us back to Himself and showers us with His grace and mercy.  I have seen him pull miracles out of ashes in my own life.   I don't know the facts in all of this, and I'm not even going to pretend to judge the rights and wrongs of it.  But know that I am praying for you, and I know that whether you've done wrong or not, He is there for you.

Your sister in Christ.

the same fallacious claims made all over as well; i.e., that Ben has addressed all relevant allegations.

Allegation still bothers me.  Not everyone from CNS has been a fan of the President:  that's fine, it's their prerogative as a news outlet.  And my Internet access currently travels over Cox Cable.  They're the only game in town where I live (at least right now.)  Yes, Cox is a monopoly where I live.

But what I see here is a little weird, and it raises questions that need to be answered:  If Ben did rip off that piece from a Cox writer...WHY?  

You can't chalk it up to a lack of knowledge that these things will eventually come back to bite you.  Not anymore.  There was a time, in the early days of the Internet, before it was fast, before it was indexed, that you could get away with this kind of thing.  

Those days are over and if anyone thinks they aren't, from either of the two big political parties in this country or any of the smaller splinter ones, you will stroll into the propellers if you think otherwise.

I don't know what Ben's answer to this one is.  But here's fair warning to everyone else:  the world is focused on you with an electron microscope, and nothing you write on the Internet will ever disappear.  Treat everything you write as though it will be read to your mother, your grandmother, and you're mother-in-law, forever and ever, amen.  End of rant.

Do you not understand the use of expressions?

I've been asked by at least two people to move on and leave this alone, which is why I haven't responded to Moe or Thomas.

In the interest of clarity, not argument, I need to point out that I wasn't referring to the "dead to me" line, I was referring to his desire to see "the entire American Left drop dead". I find his response wholly unconvincing, but pursuing it is fruitless--he's a moderator and is convinced he's right; what's the point?

I wash my hands of it. Respond if you feel the need; henceforth I will be respecting Moe's expressed wishes and taking a hiatus to let tempers abate.

Accusations on that review, if the excerpt is any indication, are crap.  I don't see any apparent plagarism there.

The next equivalent comment is me being otherwise. Understood?

Using the Internet posting "anonymous" nicknames to slander and defame people that one does not like or agree with their beliefs or a political stance should not be tolerated. There needs to be a"criteria" clause established and maintained regarding respect of persons. If a person took the approach of slandering or defaming another person in public or the workplace -- this would be considered "harassment" and liable under defamation laws resulting in lawsuits, and it should be inappropriate behavior on the computer as well.

It would be one thing to posit an innocent explanation; say, a common source.

But to suggest that the similarities between the third paragraph of Ben's piece and the first of Steve Cox's aren't suspicious? I just don't see how you can say that.

I really want there to be an innocent explanation. In fact, I went looking for an explanation: perhaps both of them pulled from a third source, say a press release or production notes from the movie itself.

Ding.

The D on my voter registration card fades a little more everyday. Good luck to you Augustine.

is based upon the concept that certain offenses against society are worthy of forfeiture of the offenders life. Unfortunately, that concept has become limited to the taking of anothers life. I, on the other hand, am quite comfortable of including acts that denigrate the society as a whole. Traitors easily are included in my parameters as are character assassins, abortion practioneers and their apologists, and those who would lie to gain power to corrupt. Consequently, be glad I'm not King or Thomas would have his wish substantially fulfilled.

That's believable.

There was a conspiracy among the editors to plant falsified incriminating evidence in Domenech's pieces, so that they could be retrieved years later to support false charges of plagiarism.

That certainly makes more sense than the simpler explanation.

Do you know how ridiculous you sound?

to be objective.

I suspect you may reconsider the fairness, appropriateness, and helpfulness of this action in the morning.  

Those who hate you don't win unless you hate them, and then you destroy yourself.

Whatsa matter, you outta your NCAA pool already? It's the weekend, let's all find that inner happy place...

I like my 1st Amendment as asterick free as possible.

An Atrios reader who somehow manages to remember specific details about some crummy movie reviews from 7 years ago?  Also, the "editor" acknowledges putting some "additional words in the story," and some "foreign content" -- just not "completely foreign content."  Reading this side-by-side with Ben's response, I don't think it's ridiculous at all to explore the possibility of a set-up (college papers being as controlled by the MSM as any publication).

Ben:

Let's forget for a moment about the accusations regarding plagiarism at your college newspaper. Let's assume you are telling the truth -- it was the editor at the newspaper who did it. Hard to believe, but ok.

And let's ignore the article you wrote for the New York Press on Frist and its close resemblance to the Washington Post article on the same subject. Maybe that was just an amazing coincidence given the fact that, as you say, you and the Washington Post writer were both at Frist's press conference.

Given all this, how do you explain the striking resemblance between parts of the moview review you wrote on Final Fantasy for the NRO in July, 2001 and Steve Murphy of Cox News Service's review of the same movie?

Or the resemblance between parts of the article you wrote on Britney Spears for NRO in July of 2000, and that of an article written on Britney Spears in May of that year on Salon?

You can find NRO current opinion on the Final Fantasy review you wrote for them here. "http://corner.nationalreview.com/"

Was an editor at NRO also lifting material from other sources and putting them in your articles against your wishes?

Because, to be honest, I really can't see any other explanation, other than that you plagiarized these other two articles.

Perhaps I am wrong. If so, please explain.

And if I am right -- please admit it. And please, stop blaming others for your misfortune.

Thanks.

Which is this:

"We may have put additional words in the story, but it would never have been completely foreign content. It was just editing."

As you can see, contrary to your false claim, there is no acknowledgement that any foreign content was put into the story.  For an editor to put additional words into a story is utterly unremarkable.

What's your explanation for the fact that Domenech's lifting of the P. J. O'Rouke piece, which Domenech said ran as "inspired by O'Rourke's original" does not in fact include any mention at all of O'Rourke.

I'm sure that your explanation will be both imaginative and entertaining, as was your last explanation.

I still think the true explanation is the simplest one.

There are respectful ways to express differences of opinions and resorting to personal attacks suggests the people in opposition are void of being able to defend their opposing views in a coherent effective manner.

What are you, twelve?

My point was that the editors did not claim to insert no "foreign content," but rather that they did not insert "completely foreign content."  Your post challenges not my suggestion of a possible theory for what happened, but rather the veracity of Ben's explanation.  What sense would it make for Ben to respond to these allegations with a personal attack against his former editors, unless it was the truth?  None.  

Perhaps a simpler explanation would be that the editors are now forensicly manufacturing certain "editorial techniques" in order to save face.  They are likely facing the same questions from their employers as Ben faced from the Washington Post -- as an editor, one of your responsibilities is to ensure that your writers use proper citations for their sources, and these editors either failed in this duty or were trying to destroy a young, politically charged young writer (CBS attempted to destroy Bush in an analogous manner, after all).  Only additional investigation will uncover the truth.

Similarly, it would make no sense at all for Ben to invent an interaction with P.J. O'Rourke that never took place.  If that was the case, O'Rourke could, and would, simply deny ever having given Ben such permission.

What I've seen thus far is a partial explanation of the plagiarism accusations, most of which seem plausible to me.   I have enjoyed reading much of your work and there is no doubt to the quality and quantity of original thinking and writing that it contains.  I will wait for a full explanation of each charge.  Where there is a good explanation I'm sure we will get it.  

For cases that may be questionable or for which culpability remains than after an appropriate mea culpa and some period of time I will once again enjoy your material and have little lingering suspicions regarding its originality.   I'm not presupposing a verdict; I'm just being open to possible outcomes.  Having said that, we have all been guilty of transgression some large and some small, most include some statute of limitations.  Since this charge would not prevent you from becoming, oh I don't know, let's say Senator from Delaware, I'm sure that, if they were proven true, they wouldn't prevent a resumption of a writing career.

For those that threw the other disgusting accusations at you, there is no excuse. bb

Which is two more than anyone else gets. I've banned for less stalking.

This stands.

Only in your world is it 42.

Why are the DailyKos thugs getting a pass?

How many false charges must be hurled against someone before I can doubt their veracity on their face?

At this point, I see no reason to trust any allegation from MyDD, Atrios, or Kos.  None.  Zip.  Ben's far more credible at this point than the left-wing character assassins at those sites.

He styles himself as "Augustine," but he's no saint, this Domenech.

The real Augustine picked the scabs of his conscience in order to discover and confess his wickedness in picking a pear from a neighbor's tree, years before as a youth.

One pear.

The pseudo Augustine, on the other hand, confesses only that he's "reached the point where there is nothing I can really do to defend myself."

St. Domenech was an endearing teenager:  "When I was 17, I was certainly sloppy,"  he recalls.  Unfortunately therefore, he became the victim of editors' sloppiness, as well as his own.  The "pear" more or less just fell into his lap.

Stuff like that has happened to the grown-up St. Domenech, too.  

Howard Kurtz reports that Domenech says a paragraph sounding a lot like one he wrote for National Review Online subsequently appeared in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.  

In other words, far from being wicked, this "saint" is the victim of a pear thief.  

Maybe he should have called himself St. Sebastian.

and acting about as mature, give me a freaking break!

Ben isn't blaming anyone for anything he actually did himself.  

However, I am almost 100% certain that I blame myself for not being harder on you in this comment. You certainly deserve it.  I'll be polite and say that you need to do some maturing and some research before making comments like this in the future.

In my semi-professional opinion, let me say this.  If you felt the need to call him a "major media columnist" and then mock it, it does point to the fact that you are are having some type of envy there.  I'll let you determine which kind it is.

nothing to see here.

Clayton, I thought you said they had to wait 5 days.  WTF?

...with appropriate apology.  I went back to the parent post and reviewed it, but "dead to me" stuck out far more than any other comment made.

That said, I think it's clear that those who care for Ben, and specifically those who have ownership of this site, need time.  They have made their positions clear and a fair number of regular RedStaters stand by them.

At least this whole espisode give RS a chance to do a little spring cleaning with those who had previously signed up and just lurked.

say it right.  It's not go softly, it's go gentle into that good night.  Go to school and learn about Dylan Thomas, fool.

...I've been a loyal RedState poster for a good six months.  A quick check of my past posts (2006 predictions notwithstanding) will show me to be pretty solidly right of center on most issues.

"The truth is, no conservative could write for the Post without being subject to the gauntlet of the liberal attack machine. There is no question in my mind that any RedState contributor writing for this blog would have found leftists delving through his high school yearbooks and grade school book reports in an effort to discredit and defame him. And if you too were a sloppy teenage writer, your errors or

the errors of others would've been exploded."

I don't buy this defense.  Ben, if you were really a teenager when these bylines occured, then you should produce your birth cert along with proof of the date of publication.  If you were REALLY under 20 when you wrote this, and you stuck to your guns, it would have blown over.

This leads me to two conclusions: either you are a liar or you are a pussy who runs away at the first sign of attack from the left.  For your sake, I hope it's the former.

Nick, Leon, Bueller, anyone?

This post can not stand.

I know you have been around for a while. You should know better than to have profanity in a comment.

First of all, it is a matter that precisely no one is contesting that Ben is currently 24. You do the math.

Second, the language is out of line.

What a bunch of whining.  Do you think that you can win the war against the leftists by giving in?  Well that's what it looks like here.  I don't care what they think. I don't want them to like me.  I don't want to convince them of anyting...I want to defeat them so that they can't come back and ruin my grandchildren's lives.  Ben's resignation is just that....resigning to the left.  if he can't carry the banner...then he needs to get out of the way so that someone else can.  Okay, he's hurt.  So what. Sticks and stone.  If Paul had given up we wouldn't have the conversion of the gentiles.  Washington would not have rallied the troups at Valley Forge.  Linclon wouldn't have freed the slaves.

I don't care what Ben did in his past...get over it and let's get on with it. There's too much to do and too little time.  Am I callous and non-caring..darn right.  I'll rest and care when I get the job done, not until then.

NOW GET A GRIP AND COWBOY UP!

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."

Gen. George S. Patton, June 1944

Take all the other kos-trolls with you.

Your jealousy is just plain ugly.

Some of us are friendly lurkers.  I've been registered on Redstate for more than a year (IIRC) and post irregularly due to a fairly demanding job (surgical resident).  I gotta say that I logged on today because I was so hopping mad at some of the other, unfriendly lurkers who, like me, have benefitted on the sly from Augustine's incisive commentary--but who are now oh-so-righteously demanding that:

a) he explain himself more than the two extensive posts today and

b) that his friends among the editorial staff take him aside and chastise him "for his own good."  

I have been fortunate enough to sit in on some wonderful conversations here at redstate, and I remember that I'm a guest in this house.  I encourage all other lurkers here to remember that we are in a forum bought, designed and run by Augustine, among others--and to show some sense of proportion.  It's just tacky to come in today of all days and pee on the rug.  Especially when it's your first time commenting here at all.

Not only proud, but awed by your dignity and grace.

You sir are a moron. If you wish to cite the historical Augustine...better go back and read of what you cite. His mother, Monica, prayed for 37 years for his conversion.  37 years of depravity before salvation. That did not make him a teenager you imbecile.  The pear picking had to do with guilt, which you obviously know nothing of.

I don't mind people going after others in the context of argument.  I just can't abide some backwards, pseudo intellectual who is a mental midget citing history incorrectly.  You must be a Berkley grad.