Sid's Id - Blumenthal on the Clintons [Andrew Sullivan ain't no conservative, folks]

The New York Observer via andrewsullivan.com ^ | May 15, 2003 | Andrew Sullivan

[SlickWillard]

What a shame; I think we were all holding out some hope for Sullivan, but it just goes to show that you can NEVER trust these people.

[SlickWillard]

Bump.

[wideawake]

The man's free time is spent sodomizing other men he meets on the internet.

What did anyone expect?

[Arkie2]

'I belong here,' he remarked to me as he left Hyde Park."


Better than Ft Marcy park I guess.

[I_Love_My_Husband]

Good article except for the last bit.

Sully is still mad about the Santorum affair, and the fact that Bush backed Santorum. He's unsure of where to go now, because Sully loves his HIV+, gay orgies and baths lifestyle. Spreading his disease to others.

Most Republicans (though not all!) have condemned his lifestyle.

[don'tbedenied]

We must keep the Republican tent as small as possible and not tolerate dissent! It is the way to electoral victory!

[MEG33]

I say we should only allow those who never sin.

[wideawake]

Reagan didn't get elected in back-to-back contests by allowing indiscipline in the party.

Should the Republican Party open its tent so wide that we allow in Communists?

Of course not, since Communism is radically opposed to the market economics the Republican Party stands for?

Why then should the Republicans welcome in sodomites who oppose the traditional values the Republican Party stands for.

People vote for people who stand for something, not a mishmash that stands for nothing except counting votes.

[don'tbedenied]

Good idea. Let's appoint a Republican Monitor of sin and ideological purity and keep out the riff-raff, the a** goblins and the fur traders.
BTW what's a fur trader?

[SlickWillard]

...you can NEVER trust these people.

You mean queers?

I was thinking more along the lines of liberals in general, but particularly the elitist-facist tyrants who edit copy at places like the New Republic. Once you've traveled with that crowd, your soul is doomed.

From that point of view, the sodomy is just kinda ancillary.

[SlickWillard]

elitist-facist = elitist-fascist

[section9]

What a shame; I think we were all holding out some hope for Sullivan, but it just goes to show that you can NEVER trust these people.

No, no, no. You don't understand.

Sullivan is half-right here. Some of our people were nuts. The entire Trixie-Tripp-Monica triumvirate was tailor-made for people like Blumenthal to exploit. But Sullivan's disparagement of Starr is misplaced.; Kenneth Starr was attempting to follow the law to its logical conclusion-something Democrats find amusing and contemptible. If Starr looked at the Constitution as his lodestar, then his actions make sense: he saw in Clinton a man trying to break the law, and he was relentless in his prosecution. But he was gunning for a President who sat on top of a Tulip bubble economy.

People never run Presidents out of town during good times. But it is the great saving grace of conservatism that we recognize when our people go overboard, and most conservatives recognize that we were outwitted manfully.

But if Ken Starr saw the law as his lodestar, then what Sullivan's critique reaffirms is that Clinton and the Democrats looked at the Constitution the way a German looks at a speed limit on the Autobahn. Understand something here: I'm in agreement with Sullivan, but for different reasons.

I'm glad Ken Starr failed in his quest. Had he succeeded, Clinton would have resigned. Al Gore would have become President sometime in 1999, giving him enough time to "unify the country" and assemble his campaign team with all the powers of the Presidency at his disposal. Gore's entire approach to domestic policy would have been just as partisan as Clinton's, and would have divided the country even more than it is today.

Gore's approach to foreign policy would have had baleful consequences. It is instructive that Clinton/Gore made only fitful, half-hearted attempts to attack Al Qaeda. Bin Laden rightly never took Bill Clinton seriously. It is doubtful that Gore would have done anything to commend him to bin Laden's patheon of People to Be Respected.

I do not believe that Gore would have responded as ruthlessly and as singlemindedly as Bush and his team has. Saddam would still be in Baghdad. And God knows what might have been done to us now, in addition to the attacks on New York and Washington.

No, it is best that history took the course that it did. After all, did not Bush speak in his First Inaugural about an "Angel in the Whirlwind" that directs our affairs? We cannot know God's direction, but we can know that it His will is there.

As to Blumenthal? The imagery of the torchlight parade is condemnation enough, and Sullivan rightly makes the comparison. Given Blumenthal's fanaticism, no comparison save this one is more apt...

Those who forget the lessons of History are doomed to repeat their mistakes.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[SlickWillard]

I was thinking more along the lines of liberals in general, but particularly the elitist-fascist tyrants who edit copy at places like the New Republic.

Boy, am I prescient, or what? Not more than a minute or two after I posted this, I glanced at another Sullivan piece:

Not-So-Gray Lady
The New York Times' Evolution

As a newspaper, it's still a marvel: fantastically expansive foreign coverage, reporting depth unrivalled in any other paper, a superb magazine, and a place in every elite American's Sunday morning bedroom.

http://www.andrewsullivan.com/print.php?artnum=20030518

[mabelkitty]

Never thought he was. He just hated the Clintons.

[Helms]

LOL,what allot of folks on FR do not realize is that this train left the station along time ago and besides, on what other grounds other than religion (and the fact that we have helped create the gay stereotype) and the need to propagate the species, do some folks have to stand on once homosexuality is acknowledged as occurring, often genetically, throughout human history.

I have a number of gay acquaintances and I respect their right to life, liberty and happiness, responsibly exercised.

[Hildy]

Out of that whole article..THAT'S what you came away with...how sad.