Thursday, June 29, 2006

A PYY Correction

On Sunday June 25, I posted this piece about the Sun-Sentinels' article quoting Jack Murtha as saying, American presence in Iraq is more dangerous to world peace than nuclear threats from North Korea or Iran.

The blogosphere and some mainstream pundits have written about it. But yesterday, after much scrutiny of the article, the Sun-Sentinel posted a correction. It turns out that was not Murtha's comment, at all.

Therefore, it is imperative that I post a correction. PYY wants to be as accurate as possible when dealing with these kinds of things. I am very committed to that principle and apologize for the misinformation.

I will say further that I still stand by much of the commentary that resulted from that erroneous information. It is still the opinion of PYY that Jack Murtha is wrong on this issue and needs to re-think the repercussions of other irresponsible statements, he has made in the past.

Thanks to all of you that read PYY.

(HT to Info Zone for the correction page.)

14 comments:

superfrenchie said...

LA: //I will say further that I still stand by much of the commentary that resulted from that erroneous information. It is still the opinion of PYY that Jack Murtha is wrong on this issue//

Doesn't that sound a little too much like the "fake but accurate" statement of rathergate fame, and so decried (with good reason, I might add) on your side of the political spectrum?

G_in_AL said...

Thats it LA, I'm never reading your blog again... cant trust it ;)

Oh well, we've all made that mistake of over reporting something you read, just to find out it's bogus.

kev said...

frenchie--I disagree. PYY clearly apologized for posting the incorrect information, not his information and not his mistake. Then he is simply saying that, still, it produced good dialogue. PYY then states that he still believes murtha to be wrong regarding this issue. Rather, in spite of everything to the contrary, never really admitted that he did anything wrong. Now I'm going to say something, and you can criticize and nitpick all you want. murtha, whose salary I'm paying, and whose benefits I'm paying, and for whom I've been paying for too many years, is despicable in the statements that he does make, and doubly so because his rhetoric is transparently aimed at his own political hunger for a shot at speaker of the house. Before he started talking (at least publicly) as he now does, he was a nobody, with absolutely no chance at such a position. He has put his dirty little finger in the air, he feels he has judged the direction of the wind, and he is slogging toward his goal, over the backs of our military men and women. He embarassed me once before, during a sting known as "ABSCAM," and the dishonest, greedy guy should have been gone then.

LASunsett said...

SF,

Doesn't that sound a little too much like the "fake but accurate" statement of rathergate fame, and so decried (with good reason, I might add) on your side of the political spectrum?


Au contraire. (Sp?)

Just because the article was wrong, doesn't mean I have changed my opinion of Murtha. I have had a year to assess what I feel about him. My opinion of him was not purely based on just that one article. I thoroughly disagree with him on this Iraq issue.

Dan Rather was an anchor that had a hell of a lot more influence than I do, with PYY. Therefore, you cannot compare a sleepy little blog like mine to CBS and assign the same jounalistic responsibility to it.

Rather admitted that the documents were false, but also said that they did bear out what we all knew was true. (NOTE-there's that backward working again) Now, if Dan had said that the documents were false, but I believe it was still true that Bush was AWOL. That would have been different.

He dug himself in. I did not. I didn't set out to slam Murtha, I found the article and posted it. My opinion was already formed but I wasn't looking to prove that Murtha was wrong, because I already thought he was.

So let me review.

The article was wrong, but my OPINION of Murtha remains the same, based on many prior statements he has made in the past.

Better?

;)

LASunsett said...

Well G,

I am sorry I let you down. I am a dying cockroach and not worthy of your readership. The only thing left for me, is to resign and find Katie Couric to replace me.

;)

superfrenchie said...

LA, I understand what you're saying.

As kev would say, I was just nitpicking... ;)

LASunsett said...

SF,

LA, I understand what you're saying.

As kev would say, I was just nitpicking... ;)


Well?

Did I spell au contraire right, or not?


;)

LASunsett said...

kev,

Is Murtha going to have trouble getting re-elected? What's the take form where you are?

superfrenchie said...

LA: Yes, you did!

Très bien!

Always On Watch said...

This is the first I've heard of the error cited here. But I've been tied up lately, with flood control and invading ants, which were seeking higher and drier ground; so I might have missed the correction.

Thank you for your integrity, LA.

LASunsett said...

AOW,

Thank you for your integrity, LA.

My dad always said, if you have your integrity you have everything.

He didn't really say that.

What he did say was, "If I catch you in a lie, I will kick your ass!!". He was 6'4" 260 pounds and I was in my wiry thin teenage days. He was a veteran of Korea and Vietnam and was a POW in Korea. He was definitely rock hard.

That was a deterrent, if there ever was one.

kev said...

LA--I hope he has trouble with his re-election. There is a woman running against him, and she's relatively unknown. People in murtha's area, generally speaking, are not scholars where it comes to politiics. You're either a democrat or a republican, and many times your party depends on what party your parents belonged to. Very sad, but that's probably what has kept this bum in office all these years. I think there's at least a 50-50 chance of unseating him.

Always On Watch said...

LA,
What he did say was, "If I catch you in a lie, I will kick your ass!!".

Definitely an effective and no-nonsense approach! :)

The Infozone said...

How John Murtha was 'Framed'.

This article outlines what I see as the 'culprits' in this story.

TIZ