Although you are not required to give up your liberal values because others have aboandoned most of theirs, you may want to consider whether, for example, you really want "single-payer health care" if it is enacted, administered and run by today's Left. Which by definition it would have to be, right? These are the people who WILL be running the State if many of your preferred policies are enacted. That alone is why so many people oppose statist and socialist policies: because they have always resulted in one or another degree of tyranny. You are now experiencing one aspect of that tendency of the Left to tyranny: utter intolerance of dissent and not the slightest interest in even entertaining other views. It's not accidental, it's endemic to leftism. It's not aberrant, it's essential. Consider it, as you are forced to see what the Left has become in reality.
Lee deserves nothing but credit for his honesty and fairmindedness in these postings. But he is not intellectually required, as many posters here imagine, to review his liberal core views because he is encountering evidently unexpected hostility from those he fornerly assumed to share his broader liberal values. He is not required, for example, to change his views on gay rights because many others who share those views cannot tolerate dissent.
But Lee, you are becoming aware of something you perhaps did not know before: much of today's Left is no longer liberal in any meaningful sense. And the Democratic Party is no longer controlled by liberals, but by radical leftists, "progressives," socialists or whatever label fits. "Liberal" no longer does. They do not value dissent (unless they are doing the dissenting.) They do not value free speech of others, nor diversity of opinion. They value rigid conformity to every iota of their worldview. Diversion from it in any way requires a hostile response and purging of the heretic in question. This seems to be news to you.
Well, remember, Gandhi's recommendation for European Jews was for them all to commit suicide as a "nonviolent" protest. His reasoning was that the world would then be "appalled." He didn't mention what else he thought the world should do after being appalled.
But you're right on about this little twerp. He's playing International Man of Mystery with the U.S. because he knows the U.S. won't kill him. If he went after the real bad guys, he'd have a ricin dart between the eyes in a matter of weeks.
How anyone can look forward to any Hollywood film any more is beyond me. For one thing, every Hollywood movie today is essentially a tour of the twisted mid of Hollywood screenwriters (and producers and studio heads.) What do we find in those minds? It's bizarre, twisted and repulsive. And they all stumble over each other to see who can be the Koolist Kid, who can be the most shockingly "transgressive" and therefore ever so hip and cutting edge. They haven't known or cared how to write an actual story in decades. They pitch a "concept" and pick the actors before the script is written. The script is written to appeal to the Kool Kidz culture, not middle American audiences. In fact, the script is usually, at some point in the film, meant to insult, vilify and ridicule mainstream Americans and everything they do, say or stand for. Who cares about these people and the vile crap they produce? And how this late in the day can anyone be "disappointed" in them. It's what they are.
It happened right after Bush spoke out in support of the Defense of Marriage Act and against the trend of judges a a small handful of local officials in New York, San Francisco and Portland to force gay marriage on voters and have it sweep the country through the full force and effect doctrine. Andrew went full loony right then. He seemed to literally lose his marbles.
I don't think so. Before his psychotic break, or whatever it was, he was very interesting reading. His agonizing over the conflicts between his Catholic faith and his desire to live a gay lifestyle seemed genuoine to me. He deeply questioned his own views in those days, more than most bloggers anywhere. He was thoughtful, original, fairly fearless. And he made sense a lot of the time. I don't see that as being narcisisstic or seeking face time. Now, I'm sure narcissism plays a big role. But he also seems literally deranged.
But he forfeited his intellectual and moral integrity long ago. He is a ranting, slavering hater of anyone who he even imagines may oppose gay marriage. And he has a Foucault-esque, even De Sade-eque fascination with "toruture," real and imagined: "Remember the cruelties!" Yes, please remember them, over and over and over for me.
Denouncing Breitbart for trying to penetrate the odious significance for our nation of Journolist is standard-issue Sullivan: contemptably hypocritical. The man has permitted huimself to devolve into a l;ittle snake. But his bite isn't worth much any more. He seems to make a living, but he is preaching to a choir that doesn't need him. he influences no one any more.
Me too. He got me to reconsider my position on gay marriage. But as anyone who used to follow him back when he had intellectual relevance and personal integrity knows, he utterly flipped when Bush denounced the lawless activism in San Francisco, Massachussetts, New Paltz, New York and elsewhere where judges and mayors were trying to force gay marriage on an unwilling population. He still calls himself a conservative, I guess, and the fact he spends his time denouncing conservatives of course gives him a forum in leftist publications. They love nothing more than a "maverick" who denounces conservatism supposedly from "within."
I guess I give him a little credit for some self criticism, but this level of self aware epiphany after mere days looks a lot more like getting one's mea culpi out of the way before proceeding with more of the same, albeit in a different, as yet unspecified, venue. If he wants to actually do something important, he needs to (1) ditch the juvenile snark; unplug from the brainless group think of the media shark tank, not plug into it via things like Journolist, and (2) report. We can do without the sage observations of yet another 28-year-old J-school wonder, thank you. Grow up and get some integrity and perspective. Those of us out here in the productive world who have to actually create things, employ real people and be accountable for what we do are not impressed by snarky wonder boys.
But write a book on the inner working of Journolist and its effect on the nation, and I'm all ears.