Meanwhile, Andrew Sullivan continues to show the same easy moral elasticity which made him such a popular Conservative footstool in years gone by.
Also, I would once again ask Mr. Sullivan the same questions I have been asking (and he has been conspicuously ignoring) for years. The same fundamentalism he decries as sick and destructive today --
"To recap: fundamentalism is not the same as Christianity. It has certain psychological tropes. The first is to see sexual sin as far the worst of them and the root of all of them. The second is to see gays – whose very being represents sexual sin – as an enemy class within a society bringing about its destruction if they are not stopped or converted (see: Jews, Europe, circa 1300 – 1945). The third is to see these gays as opening the door to every other sin and evil. The fourth is to 'lose our country.'"
-- has been one of central pillars of modern American Conservatism since before Young Andy Sullivan washed up on our fair shores and went into the worshiping Ronald Reagan business.
Another one of American Conservatism's pillars is white supremacy. Another is the fetishization of guns. Another is a volcanic hatred of the federal gummit. Another is seething xenophobia. Another is homophobia. Another is an obsession with controlling women's reproduction. On and on it goes, and virtually very one of these pillars has its caisson sunk solidly into the blood and soil of modern American Conservatism's diseased nostalgia for the good old days of Jim Crow.
And yet during all the years that Mr. Sullivan was building his career as America's premier, Harvard-educated, gay, Catholic, Conservative public intellectual he somehow managed to avoid noticing the ugly reality of American Conservatism even as it was staring him -- and the rest of us -- square in the face.
How did you miss it, Andy?
Finally, given that Mr. Sullivan spends most of his life firmly cocooned in the Washington D.C./NYC elite media bubble, I tend to believe that his venomous contempt for Alec Baldwin and his detached bemusement with Mr. Robinson --
... I’d much rather have dinner with Phil Robertson than Alec Baldwin. Engaging fundamentalists on this subject is one of my favorite activities. And I’d much sooner engage than condemn.
-- come less from the details and context of either incident, and much more from Mr. Sullivan's hardwired Tory elitism. When he looks at Alec Baldwin, the Conservative Mr. Sullivan sees a successful member of the rival, Liberal upper class who must needs be brought to book in the harshest manner available. When the Conservative Mr. Sullivan looks at Mr. Robertson, Mr. Sullivan does not -- dare not -- see a fellow, card-carrying member of his Conservatism: instead, Tory to the core, Mr. Sullivan merely sees a harmless aboriginal tribesman from the furthest reaches of Darkest Louisiana, brought before him to poop adorably in his teevee cage and say outré things for Mr. Sullivan's amusement.