Wednesday, 1 July 2009

Remind me: Which political party is "decadent" and "sick"?

I thought this article by Joe Conason in Salon was interesting. Here's an excerpt:

Whenever the latest Republican politician is caught with his zipper undone, a predictable moment of introspection on the right inevitably ensues. Pundits, bloggers and perplexed citizens ruminate over the lessons they have learned, again and again, about human frailty, false piety and the temptations of flesh and power. They express concern for the damaged family and lament the fall of yet another promising young hypocrite. They resolve to restore the purity of their movement and always remember to remind us that this is all Bill Clinton's fault. What they never do is face up to an increasingly embarrassing fact about themselves and their leaders.

They're really just liberals in right-wing drag.

The proof is in the penance, or lack thereof, inflicted on the likes of Mark Sanford, John Ensign and David Vitter, to cite a few names from the top of a long, long list. For ideologues who value biblical morality and believe in the efficacy of punishment, modern conservatives are as tolerant of their famous sinners as the jaded libertines of the left. Even after confessing to the most flagrant and colorful fornication, the worst that a conservative must anticipate is a stern scolding, followed by warm assurances of God's forgiveness and a swift return to business as usual.

Mark Sanford may have forfeited his presidential ambitions, but the South Carolina governor seems determined to hold onto his office despite his escapade in Argentina - and if he is thrown out, the reason will be his offenses against good government rather than his betrayal of his marriage vows.

According to the Old Testament -- a text regularly cited by these worthies as the highest authority in denouncing reproductive freedom and gay rights -- the proper penalty for adultery is death by stoning. Leviticus is quite clear on this point (as any truly strict originalist could hardly deny). Fortunately for all of us, biblical law doesn't rule this country, despite the zealots on the religious right who disdain separation of church and state. Very few Americans believe that we should impose state sanctions, let alone the death penalty, on private peccadilloes. But civic tolerance doesn't excuse the limp, smiling attitude of the Republican right toward the infidelity of its leaders.

That flabby acceptance contrasts sharply with right-wing screaming about the iniquity of the opposition. As understood by conservative commentators, this is not mere rhetoric but a theory of civilization's rise and fall. Ann Coulter believes that liberals actively "seek to destroy morality" by "refusing to condemn what societies have condemned for thousands of years," including "promiscuity" and "divorce." Dinesh D'Souza once recommended sarcastically that the Democrats adopt the mantle of "moral degeneracy" by forthrightly advocating "divorce, illegitimacy, adultery, homosexuality, bestiality and pornography."

13 comments:

Lisa said...

Geez, haven't heard anyone mention D'Souza since The End of Racism years ago! I wonder if he is still at the American Enterprise Institite.

Anyway, the political parties seem to be the same financially, with only small practical differences in foreign policy (we're waiting to see about this) and only differ these days on these sexual issues. Democrats want to be able to do these things and want them to be legal, Republicans want to do these things, but have them be illegal.

Elizabeth said...

I've never heard of him. I have heard (too much) of Ann Coulter however.

mel said...

Lisa said:
"Democrats want to be able to do these things and want them to be legal, Republicans want to do these things, but have them be illegal."

That's a great quote. Did you make it up?

Steve Borthwick said...

D'Souza is a prize twerp IMO; I have listened to a couple of his debates, his strategy seems to be to overwhelm his opponents with a machine gun like prattle of inanity, until they lose the will to live.

Hitchens pwns him though.

Lisa said...

Yeah Mel, I did make it up. I sometimes get the feeling that these people want things to be illegal to give them the strength to keep from doing them.... It doesn't make sense to me: if you think homosexuality or adultery is wrong, don't do it. What's the great urge to keep everyone else from making up their own minds? But anyway, they're always getting caught engaging in these acts, looking like hypocrites and then it's natural to be inquisitive as to why it is they campaign so hard against these things in the first place.

That's not *completely* true, tho, as republicans seem to have done a lot more for gay rights, for example, in recent history than democrats.

Steve, I've never heard D'Souza speak, but I am sympathetic to the annoyance of that as a way to argue a claim. :-)

What's the story with he and Hitchens?

Steve Borthwick said...

Lisa, They have debated on religion et al a few times now; it's funny a bit like watching a child fight with an adult; d'Souza gets more and more frantic and outrageous as he is beaten down by simple statements of reality and fact, which remorselessly undermine his position.

I don't know if you like Hitchens, I do, he is a scary character though, often acerbic but incredibly well read, not someone you'd want to argue against. However I sense an underlying humanity in him, the kind of bloke that would roll his sleeves up and have a drink with the locals; unlike d'Souza who seems like a pompous know-it-all (who doesn't!) in comparison.

You can catch the debates on youtube, most of them seem to be up there.

Elizabeth said...

From what I read, Hitchens would have a drink with anyone. Isn't he drunk at some of his debates?

I used to like him when I read Vanity Fair but then when he went wild over supporting the Iraq war, I didn't like him as much. I liked his recent book about religion though.

Steve Borthwick said...

E, I think some of his critics would like us to think that, I'm not so sure it isn't just a machismo image thing.

I agree his views on Iraq are not what you expect, I'm not sure I agree with all of them either, but you can't argue that he doesn't provide a pretty good reasoned justification of them when asked, more than most pundits are able to do at least.

One of the best stories I read about him recently was that he got beaten up by a bunch of skin head thugs in Beirut because he defaced one of their posters outside the bar he was in (it had a swastika on it) - now call me old fashioned but I would say that takes some balls.

(you wouldn't see d'Souza out drinking with the locals in Beirut!)

Lisa said...

Steve,

I finally got around to going to have a look at the vids on youtube, and I have already had to stop to come and post this and say you are absolutely correct, he's a tragic little man.

It's interesting to watch; thanks for pointing this out.

Elizabeth said...

Steve's had some really good stuff on his blog recently -- he has this Homeopathy ER video now that is hysterical.

mel said...

Are you going to post a link for those of us who don't know where Steve's blog is?

Elizabeth said...

Here's a link to the homeopathic ER video that made me laugh. It's on Steve's blog so once you're there, you can roam around and see all his hyper-intelligent posts.

my resume

Lisa said...

It was hysterical. I especially loved the joke about diluting the medicine more to make it stronger. :-)