[To be clear, this is Paul writing, not Kevin. He had his say, now it’s my turn.]
I have an overwhelming urge to simply write, “You are an idiot” and sign my name. That level of response would be commensurate with your effort put forth to understand both the original Rathergate issues as well as the issues surrounding Dr. Hailey and his “research.”
As the person who first discovered and documented the problems with Dr. Hailey’s report, I feel obligated to respond. You have made any number of laughable errors but perhaps none greater (or at least funnier) than the first thing you said about Haileygate.
In order to understand Memogate, you need to understand Haileygate.
You then proceed to prove -to anyone knowledgeable of the topic- that you did not understand Haileygate. What does that say about the rest of your assertions?
You incorrectly stated, “Someone found a draft of his work on a publicly accessible university Web site, and it wound up on a conservative blog, Wizbang.”
That is simply, factually wrong. It is not a matter of opinion, it is not up for debate. It is a statement of fact that is wrong. Your inability (or unwillingness) to get your facts correct speaks volumes of your effort and dare a say it, of your motives.
It was Dr. Hailey himself, who, 8 days after the 60 Minutes piece aired, began promoting his report on liberals websites. If you had taken the time to actually read many of the posts here you would have also seen the “DRAFT” issue was addressed. It did not become a “draft” until after I first posted the problems with his work. You don’t have to take my word for it… His original PDF is available here had you only taken 10 minutes of the “weeks” you claim to have spent on this story reading it.
Further, it was such common knowledge (to everyone except you) that he put the word draft on it later, that it became a running joke here at Wizbang. Certainly someone who claimed to “understand” Haileygate should have gotten that right.
Then you, quite bizarrely, say, “The blog, citing evidence that it had misinterpreted…”
Excuse me? You have stated that I misinterpreted something. What exactly?
You are simply throwing nonsense up against the wall and hoping it will stick. I misinterpreted nothing. I have over a dozen years of experience working with raster graphics. You have no clue (by your own admission) what you are looking at. There has been a ton of misinterpreting lately about Haileygate, but it has not been from me. You made the accusation that I misinterpreted something and the ignorant reader might believe you. It was either irresponsible or dishonest of you to do that. -or perhaps both.
In your (rather weak) attempt to defend your horrifically inaccurate report you say, “To prove that Hailey’s study was “debunked,” [Jonathan] Last cites the very bloggers who hounded Hailey “
To show your complete ineptitude, Mr. Last did not reference me, Wizbang or even the topic of Haileygate in his article. You did claim to be a reporter right?
This is another in a long list of things you could not bother to get right. But for the record, I never once spoke to Dr. Hailey or even emailed him. To say he was “hounded” by me (or anyone at Wizbang) is patently incorrect.
You claim to have spent “weeks” on this story but your lack of knowledge surrounding the basic facts belies that claim. If I were your employer, I’d want to know what you were doing for all those weeks. 20 minutes at Wizbang could have disabused you of many of your misconceptions. Lastly, as someone who has been intimately involved with this story since it broke, I’d guess I have have less than 20 hours into it… And you spent weeks?
In short Mr. Pein, you are guilty of exactly what you accuse the bloggers of. You started with a premiss and simply put random words on paper to support it. I have news for you. Any one of the bloogers involved in this story have been far more accurate and far more responsible than you have in your reporting.
And they get to work in their pajamas.