?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

More More unsuprising responses to the Guardian's misguided campaign.

One of the funniest things about these responses is how many of the conservative Americans seem to think the Guardian is some sort of socialist rabble-rousing publication. I mean, I suppose by Fox news standards it's ultra-leftie, but really, the Independent is more left than the Guardian these days.

I was befuddled by the letter which said:

A letter-writing campaign to American voters proves that Britain has one more thing in common with the U.S.: intellectual elitism. That is why Bill Clinton was so popular: because you adored his intellect wrapped in charm. The fact he was a serial adulterer, a liar and a man of no morals did not matter -- because he was CLEVER. How inconvenient for the leftists that Bush loves and is faithful to his wife, loves God, and loves his country. How quaint, n'est-ce-pas?

Um, yeah, or maybe not everyone cares quite so much about adultery as we do about, say, medical care? Great priorities there, mister.

Comments

( 6 comments — Leave a comment )
cangetmad
Oct. 19th, 2004 09:21 am (UTC)
I have never understood this need for people to have political representatives who are moral paragons. As long as they're not advocating the death penalty for adutery and then committing it and not dying, then, whatever. Hypocrisy bothers me, but other than that, I'd rather a clever randy git than a moralistic idiot. I honestly do think it's important for people running countries to be clever - can't quite get to the mindset where that's snobbery. Seems a bit like asking for qualifications for the job, to me.
zoje_george
Oct. 19th, 2004 09:27 am (UTC)
But you know... we kind of do have that. What with all the closeted queers in our government who actively work against their own best interests!
cangetmad
Oct. 19th, 2004 09:33 am (UTC)
Except that I do know queers who don't believe in equal rights for queers - some who don't think we should have equal adoption rights, some who supported the retention of Section 28, some who think same-sex sex ed in schools isn't appropriate. I think they're completely stupid and self-hating, but if they're genuine about those beliefs, they're not hypocrites just because of who they have sex with. If they're actually getting rights they say others shouldn't have, or if they're saying queers shouldn't be having sex and they are, then by all means out them, shame them, boot them out - but not just because they're queer.

I mean, I don't have to work for my own personal interests politically - what if I owned a small business and I supported higher small business taxes, or something?
zoje_george
Oct. 19th, 2004 09:44 am (UTC)
Yet, higher small business taxes might not, depending upon the circumstances, be against your own best interest as a small business owner.

If they're actually getting rights they say others shouldn't have, or if they're saying queers shouldn't be having sex and they are, then by all means out them, shame them, boot them out - but not just because they're queer.

It's instances like these I'm talking about.
stellanova
Oct. 19th, 2004 10:01 am (UTC)
I honestly do think it's important for people running countries to be clever - can't quite get to the mindset where that's snobbery. Seems a bit like asking for qualifications for the job, to me.

I know! Or at least, one would hope it was a qualification.
anglaisepaon
Oct. 19th, 2004 12:41 pm (UTC)
No, no, no! Have you learned nothing from our lovely system yet? Qualifications include money, a dumpy, uninteresting wife, and being a born-again-Christian. The clever and intelligent need not apply. They're not wanted in this country that's rapidly becoming a theocracy.

( 6 comments — Leave a comment )

Profile

fat pony like thunder
stellanova
The Monkey Princess

Latest Month

July 2009
S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Tags

Page Summary

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Cindy S.