« While We Were Distracted... | Main | The Amish Are Better Than Us »
October 5, 2006
Again, David Brooks disappoints... but not George Will
Rational Conservatives Watch:
Brooks column in today's Times: I feel, strongly, that it is always dangerous to equate art and real life to explain a greater point. What's even stranger is to use "The Vagina Monologues" to somehow explain how a "tear in our moral factor" lead to the Mark Foley affair. One thing I know about the Foleygate: there was no vagina involved.
Still, I think Brooks misses one of the main reasons his party is in trouble by saying that whatever party addresses our society's moral problems will be a winner. First, the GOP (and Brooks) has a very wishy-washy standard when it comes to torture. And that's saying it politely. What's more immoral: sex or torture? I tend to think torture. Then again, it's not Americans we're torturing, so why would we care? (sarcasm) It's Americans who are having dirty, naughty sex, thinking about dirty, naughty sex or allowing the Vagina Monologues to be published.
But I lose my point. Second problem with trying to get GOP their trademark moral sheen back: it was never really there. And this is what (I think) George Will is pointing out so beautifully. The GOP made a big mistake painting themselves as consistantly "more moral" than the Dems. When you have a big tent, you can't always control who comes in. You can't equate belief in a political philosophy with being a more moral party than the other side. To our eternal credit, we Dems don't generally do this (maybe we do with things like torture, but I digress.) We know we're pot smoking, sex-having, gay-loving hippie heathens. But maybe we can get a balanced budget.
Let's elect leaders who run g'vts effectively, not moralizers who are going to "restore the moral tear." The best moral examples for a culture are probably dead ones... they can't IM 16-year-olds from beyond the grave and thus disappoint. And what do you do to restore a moral tear? Get sodomy laws back on the book? Ban "Brokeback" and the "Vagina Monologues" and Todd Soldtz (spelling?)'s "Happiness" and Proust and "Madame Bovary" and "Tropic of Cancer"....
Whose morality? What sex is wrong? There's some we can all agree on, but I've heard rightie-rightie-righties (that's three "righties", so we're talking real zealous crusaders) say shit like sex only for procreation. You want that law on the books? WHO makes the line? I thought consentual adults was a good line to draw.
Today's column in the Post: As I've commented before, it used to be disturbing to agree with George Will. But yet again, he comes out looking way wiser than Brooks on this. I think Will is probably just as disturbed that he's been agreeing with Dems on some things recently.
And the true fact: if the Dems can't win this time, we need to implode the party, go our seperate ways, and find another line of work. I'm suggesting circus work.
Posted by emily at October 5, 2006 2:01 PM