Police reacting to the, "poor little white girl beaten up by one of Obama's big, black bucks," story that much of the hard right gobbled up like candy:

"The backwards 'B' was the obvious thing to us when we first saw her. Something just didn't seem right," Assistant Chief Bryant said. "And, first of all, with our local robbers, they take the money [and flee]. They're in and out. They're not stopping to do artwork."

Additionally, said Lt. Kevin Kraus, investigators were struck "that it was a superficial, pristine 'B,' which seemed highly inconsistent with the story she reported that it was a violent attack, basically in which she was fighting for her life."

And yet, over at StubbornFacts, they are still defending a decision to instantly take down my skeptical comment.

Here's the comment in question, along with the lame explanation appended by an SF editor:

It's a hoax.

The scar was not made by a knife. And it's a mirror image. So either the robber was remarkably careful with his blade and dyslexic, or it's a hoax.

Update by Pat: Michael's post was originally removed because at the time he posted it, there was insufficient evidence to determine whether the young woman was lying or not. A comment to the effect that there were inconsistencies would have been fine. When it turned out to in fact be a hoax, I decided it was appropriate to show for the record that Michael accurately predicted what subsequently turned out to be the case... however unsupported by the evidence it was at the time he made the comment.

So by the standards of the inaptly-named "Stubborn Facts," there was sufficient evidence to allege that a political hate crime had been committed.

And there was sufficient evidence that the failure of the MSM to be fooled was itself evidence of media bias.

But there was insufficient evidence for me to question the story. Right. Even though I was correct. And even though my suspicions were precisely those of the police. And even some right-wing blogs. Uh huh.

I note that some of the less party-blind editors at SF are now trying to walk this debacle back.

Here's a suggestion: stop trying to convince people you were right all along, somehow, in some inexplicable way. Start by saying: we screwed up. We fell for a hoax. On the basis of that hoax we made various accusations and generalizations. When we were warned it was a hoax we refused even to consider the possibility and made sure no one else visiting our site could consider it, either. And now we're justifying our actions with specious logic.

One more genuine and heartfelt piece of advice: don't be McCains. He had integrity and threw it away. You all have intelligence and talent, so don't pervert your reason in the service of partisanship. You are better than this.

This entry was posted by Michael Reynolds, on Saturday, October 25, 2008. You can leave your response.