Michelle Malkin » Private Beauchamp’s shame

Private Beauchamp’s shame

By Michelle Malkin • August 6, 2007 02:21 PM

Father Paul McNellis at the Democracy Project lays out the choices for Scott Thomas Beauchamp. Matt at Blackfive calls it the “best word on Beauchamp.” The conclusion:

When it comes to being a good man or something else, there is no middle ground. You’re either trying to become a better man, or you’re not; you’re moving in one direction or the other.

Pvt. Beauchamp has two choices.

He can await his discharge and then return to testify before Congress as the victim veteran in the “proud of being ashamed” mode. He might even run for Congress himself. He wouldn’t be the first.

Or, he can use his remaining time in the military to earn an honorable discharge. He could try to leave the military as a better man than when he entered. There are hints from his blog that he was already moving in that direction.

I would urge Pvt. Beauchamp to look at those in his unit, some of whom he surely respects and admires. Imitate them, and in the process you will become a better soldier, a better friend, a better husband, one day a better father, and…in the end, a better writer.

That will also leave you with something far better than the anemic sense of shame you describe; it will leave you with a sense of honor. And though TNR may no longer be interested in what you write, you will surely have become a better man.

Don’t hold your breath.

Meantime, Bob Owens has a new update from U.S. Army Public Affairs Chief PAO for US ARCENT Kuwait LTC Andy Sams…still looking for confirmation of the female civilian contract with a half-melted face.

Posted in: Scott Thomas Beauchamp, They don't support the troops

Regular View

comments (18)

trackbacks (3)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments

#113309

On August 6th, 2007 at 2:31 pm, josetheguerilla said:

MM, thankyou for covering this story. It seems to have disappeared from the news.
#113319

On August 6th, 2007 at 2:53 pm, vermontaigne said:

Jose–
The story hasn’t gone away. It’s just gone on vacation.
#113326

On August 6th, 2007 at 3:02 pm, jah said:

There is a line in one of my favorite movies, “People Will Talk.” In it The Hume Cronyn character tries to destroy the reputation of the Cary Grant character. He fails because none of his allegations are true. Near the end a friend of the Grant character confronts Cronyn and says the following: (paraphrasing)

“You’re a small man. I don’t mean in size, I mean in heart and mind. Tonight you tried to make small a man whose boot heels you could not touch if you stood tiptoe on top of the highest mountain in the world, and in the end you have just made yourself an even smaller man.”

Somehow I think it applies to Private Beauchamp.
#113341

On August 6th, 2007 at 3:20 pm, NeoConNews said:

It certainly is a powerful post, but I think that it will fall on deaf ears.

So is there confirmation of more falsehoods now, or is this story still in the asking around phase? I feel like I’ve missed something.
#113362

On August 6th, 2007 at 3:51 pm, twoninerkilo said:

Jah#3 I like you style, and agree 100% The sorry S.O.B. is not fit to kiss the mud splattered boots of a real soldier.Thats my style.
#113372

On August 6th, 2007 at 4:09 pm, Laree said:

I do like that satire blog, A Somewhat Popular Soldier. Scott should read that blog, he might improve his writing style. I think he is somekind of literalist trying to be surrealist.
#113373

On August 6th, 2007 at 4:12 pm, Gil Maness said:

I am a 69 year old USAF veteran and take great offense to the accusations made by Pvt. Beauchamp. For shame, Pvt. Beauchamp.
#113378

On August 6th, 2007 at 4:14 pm, Regulus said:

On August 6th, 2007 at 3:20 pm, NeoConNews said:

It certainly is a powerful post, but I think that it will fall on deaf ears.

Concur. Beauchamp may be a shameful character, but I doubt he has any sense of shame. Check of proof: if he were capable of feeling shame, he wouldn’t have penned those maliciously dishonest accounts in TNR.
#113385

On August 6th, 2007 at 4:33 pm, jrlingreenbay said:

Does anyone doubt that if Pvt. Beauchamp were a pro-war writer, gaining article space in a nationwide publication, articulating the spectacular feats of bravery and military prowess he and his comrades accomplished, and he was found to be a fraud – this story would be all over the MSM as a right-wing, war-mongering nutcase?

And for that matter – does anyone doubt that the MSM would be hounding every possible source to verify each bit of his pro-military stance?
#113404

On August 6th, 2007 at 5:24 pm, lgm said:

If someone writes something Malkin doesn’t like, just have a huff and puff little tantrum and make it feel better. Never mind that nothing said against him on this site has held water. Just move on to the next equally bogus point.
#113412

On August 6th, 2007 at 5:46 pm, Armigerous said:

Oh,really,??….well he managed to get himself busted from PFC to buck ass private….or does that not ‘hold water’either,lgm?
#113413

On August 6th, 2007 at 5:52 pm, NeoConNews said:

Does anyone doubt that if Pvt. Beauchamp were a pro-war writer, gaining article space in a nationwide publication…

Sorry to burst your bubble but it stops right there, unfortunately. There won’t be much space for a pro-war writer in the MSM in the foreseeable future. Especially a grunt.
#113425

On August 6th, 2007 at 6:43 pm, swj719AWG said:

If someone writes something Malkin doesn’t like, just have a huff and puff little tantrum and make it feel better. Never mind that nothing said against him on this site has held water. Just move on to the next equally bogus point.

Well, besides the fact that no one in his chain of command can coroborate his tales?

Dude, the burn victim thing now took place 9 months earlier, and hundreds of miles away. Before he got to Iraq.

He didn’t make a tiny error. He didn’t see here “Every day while in Iraq”.

Seriously, you were just DESPERATE for his stories to be true, weren’t you?
#113426

On August 6th, 2007 at 6:46 pm, PBoilermaker said:

Regulus:Concur. Beauchamp may be a shameful character, but I doubt he has any sense of shame. Check of proof: if he were capable of feeling shame, he wouldn’t have penned those maliciously dishonest accounts in TNR.

Exactly.
#113453

On August 6th, 2007 at 9:26 pm, corona said:

Don’t feed the troll.
#113530

On August 7th, 2007 at 5:11 am, gunslingerpatriot said:

Ban the troll…
#113606

On August 7th, 2007 at 10:54 am, pressto said:

I have a line from a science fiction book I read that is so true in todays world. When I look at some of the people posting I find it describes them exactly.

“People are stupid; given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe it’s true, or because they are afraid it might be true.”

Micheal Moore uses this well with his movies.
#113631

On August 7th, 2007 at 11:49 am, Yashmak said:

“Never mind that nothing said against him on this site has held water.” – lgm

You mean nothing said BY Beauchamp has held water, right? I mean, this site did say that his story was suspect. . .then he admitted part of it occurred in a different place and time then he said it did. That’s holding water.

Now the military has found nothing to corroborate his claims. . .that’s holding water (although it seems like you’d be quicker to believe an admitted liar than our troops on the ground in this case).

Now there’s this supposed recantation. If it’s true, that’s holding water.

Now, there are some things on this site that DON’T hold any water. They leak it like a sieve, obviously, and continuously. Those would be your comments on the matter lgm. Look no further.