I have meticulously followed the Soldier Beauchamp scandal. There is little I have not read on this matter. Franklin Foer’s arguments on behalf of this scoundrel reminds me of the attorneys representing O.J. Simpson during his infamous murder trial. An adversarial approach to truth may be effective in a court of law—but it usually proves to be a disaster in the court of public opinion. Only hard-core leftists seem to buy into Beauchamp’s fantasies. Everyone else has concluded TNR is still defending the indefensible.
Why does TNR continuously have this problem? Why don’t these incidents ever seem to occur in more conservative publications? This is a very simple question to answer: left-wing writers are far more inclined to lie and slime. These individuals subconsciously, if not even consciously, subscribe to the post modernist credo that everyone is entitled to their own truth. They are moral relativists to the core. Why would one expect anything else?
