We see the difference between Glenn Reynolds and Glenn Greenwald very clearly in this post.

In an update, Glenn Greenwald got the date of Snow’s remark wrong and he immediately corrected it.

Glenn Reynolds, on the other hand, got everything about this story wrong, yet he refuses to acknowledge a mistake, issue a correction, or make an any sort of an apology insisting that’s only done for “original reporting” not commenting on “news stories.”

But commenting on “news stories” is what bloggers do. That’s what Reynolds does every single day. But he insists that when his comments are proven “wrong” and what he insisted was a “fact” is proven wrong, that there is no need for him to correct that false perception or even acknowledge that his comments were wrong because he didn’t file the “original” report.

He is claiming, in effect, “rightwing blogger infallibility” - how utterly pathetic.

If I caught Glenn Greenwald compromising his integrity like that I’d stop paying attention to what he wrote, I’d stop taking him seriously. I’d be disappointed in him if he didn’t correct a minor error in a post, let alone got every single thing wrong about a story. I expect his comments on “news stories” to be accurate and factual. Nothing less.

That’s the difference between these two bloggers. One has integrity, one doesn’t; one has readers who expect integrity and one doesn’t.

Greenwald readers expect honest factual comments on “new stories” whether or not it coincides with their views; Reynolds readers, in contrast, expect reporting and comments on “news stories” that coincides with their views, regardless of whether or not it is factual or honest.

That’s a very big difference.

Are we missing the bigger story here?

To what extent did the outing of Valerie Plame destroy our intelligence capabilities about Iranian WMDs? If it did destroy our intelligence gathering capabilities wouldn’t that be to Dick Cheney’s benefit? Was this a godsend for those advocating war with Iran?

This isn’t that complicated. Since Cheney wants to hype Iran’s WMD capabilities (like with Iraq) then “real” intelligence (that they are actually years away from the possible fear-mongering scenarios he wants to spread) would be an obstacle for pushing for war with Iran.

If you want to go to war with Iran no matter what, then it doesn’t matter what they’re really doing does it? Then, from that point of view, intentionally destroying our intelligence gathering capabilities is very beneficial – since there are no experts with evidence to contradict you.

If this is the case, then outing Plame was not only payback for Wilson telling the truth about our bogus evidence used to go to war with Iraq, it also “cleared the runway” (intelligence-wise) for making false accusations against Iran by limiting what we know about them.

If this wasn’t so mind-boggling stupid, I’d almost be tempted to say, “too clever by half.”

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2006/05/01/764/68446

After linking to Tom Maquire who is “unconvinced” that Plame was covert, Glenn Reynolds says, “I’d just like to see this kind of outrage generated on behalf of leaks that actually hurt the war effort.”

No admission of error or apology on Reynolds part, he plays coy as usual, not saying much of anything. And then he cites the only prism to view events that matters: whether or not it “hurt the war effort.”

He doesn’t even consider whether this leak (Plame’s identity) hurt our national security or comprised what she and others were working on, or revealed the identities of other CIA operatives that were using the same “agency” as a front for their covert careers in the CIA. Nope, “does this help us promote the war?” is the only question that matters.

That same standard applied to the intelligence for the wingosphere. Does it help promote the war in Iraq or our next war in Iran? It doesn’t matter to them whether the intelligence is good or bad, true or false – does it help promote their warmongering is the only yardstick by which all intelligence is measured.

They’ve built up their fantasy world, and their sticking to it, reality be damned. Anything that helps them prop up their fantasies and their war(s) is good and will be embraced while everything else will be condemned as false, laughable, or treasonous and evil.

That’s how they view everything. And it’s why facts (like Plame’s true status) simply don’t matter.

http://instapundit.com/archives2/005766.php

Will the press ask Tony Snow about his previous statements on this matter?

I’m not holding my breath.

SNOW: Very quickly -- very quickly, you got this Valerie Plame case. Now, it turns out that [special counsel] Peter (sic: Patrick) Fitzgerald doesn't -- can't even identify any harm. She wasn't a covert agent. She wasn't compromised.

As a result, what you're doing is possibly sending a senior administration official off about a faulty memory over something that wasn't a crime.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200602060009