/* trackback code -- i added this */

Tuesday, October 03, 2006


Josh Marshall excerpted the following graf from today's WSJ Editorial (helpfully subtitled: "Could a gay Congressman be quarantined?"):
But in today's politically correct culture, it's easy to understand how senior Republicans might well have decided they had no grounds to doubt Mr. Foley merely because he was gay and a little too friendly in emails. Some of those liberals now shouting the loudest for Mr. Hastert's head are the same voices who tell us that the larger society must be tolerant of private lifestyle choices, and certainly must never leap to conclusions about gay men and young boys. Are these Democratic critics of Mr. Hastert saying that they now have more sympathy for the Boy Scouts' decision to ban gay scoutmasters? Where's Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on that one?
So there you have it. Gays=Bad. Boy Scouts=right to worry about whether gays are "clean" and "morally straight".

I knew that the WSJ ed board was nutty in its support for up-the-ladder redistributive fiscal policy and beat-them-down policies for military/CIA prisoners. But I hadn't realized they challenged Dobson, Perkins, et al in their bigotry.

For shame.

By contrast, in its editorial calling for Hastert to resign as speaker the Wash Times somehow manages to avoid using either the word "homosexual" or "gay". (And as for the Wash Times, this is what brings them to call for Denny's head? The corruption, failure of oversight on the war and everything else, fracture of House rules, and all the rest -- none of that was enough, but this is? The Foley issue is bad, no doubt. But it pales by comparison to the rest of Denny's sins, be they of omission or commision.) This is one of those moments when it really feels like our nation's politics has simply jumped the shark. Calling Henry Winkler, we have a job for you.....


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home