You know what? Fuck you, Sully.
[Jimmy Swaggart] then goes on about those politicians who defend gay rights and dignity: "They all ought to marry a pig, and live with it forever... And I thank God that president Bush has stated that we need a constitutional amendment that says marriage is between a man and a woman." (Swaggart also claims he has nothing against "the poor homosexual." He'll just kill one if he gets a chance.) Watch this broadcast and see the forces that this president is riding toward victory on.
Yes, this is Bush's base; yes, Jimmy Swaggart is a detestable person. But do you really think Jimmy Swaggart has ever changed or ever will? Do you think his homophobia and political allegiances have altered in the least bit in, say, the last thirty years? He's always been like that. And he's always represented the Republican base. But then you have always been until now just another crusty coprolite left behind the elephants at so many GOP homo-hating parades.
How on fucking earth could you not know that these people have always detested who you are? You came to conservatism in, what, 1984 or so? At any rate you've partaken in unqualified cheerleading for the Republican party for at least 20 years, and as such, you had to have known its true nature.
It's not like Teddy Kennedy ever tolerated professional homophobes like Anita Bryant, but Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan sure as fuck did. It's not like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Jim Bakker, Oral Roberts and Ralph Reed ever said a kind thing or offered any support for Mondale, Dukkakis, and Clinton, but they sure as fuck did for Reagan, Bush, Dole and now Bush II.
This isn't a new phenomenon. Racism and homophobia were institutionalised in the Republican Party after the Barry Goldwater schism post-'64, when the traditionally tolerant (and in some ways, liberal) Rockefeller Republicans were put out to pasture. This effect can't be blamed on Goldwater himself, who was a sort of civil libertarian, but upon his heirs Ronald Reagan (with regard to homophobia) and Richard Nixon (with regard to "Southern Strategy" racism).
Neither is the "intellectual" branch of the GOP blameless: neoconservatives have always believed that homosexuality destroys "manly" virtues like
Most, I think, are aware that Allan "Woodstock = Nuremberg" Bloom, who functioned as a bridge, as it were, from Strauss to Krauthammer, Boot, Fukuyama, Kirkpatrick, et al, died of AIDS, and the neoconservatives tried for quite a while after to hide this fact out of embarassment and --yes-- shame. Their ideology demanded that they held back from bestowing any sort of posthumous sympathy on their comrade, much less become open to any kind of reappraisal of their values.
Anyone could see then how neocons treated their own (who was admittedly closeted but who also was a notorious race-baiter, and as such had his own double-standards to ponder along with his apostacy to Straussian dogma), and so could, provided that they were not lobotomised or willfully blind, determine the extent of their sympathies for "regular" homosexuals.
You have no fucking excuse for just coming round to seeing what has been painfully obvious to everyone else for years. The Republican Party, as a rule, hates gay people. Are you really that slow on the uptake, Sully? I rather doubt it. And so I'm thinking, your tolerance for "Derbyshire award winners" is actually rather higher than most people's. So either you're stupid, or you're cynical and potentially opportunistic. Which is it?
**Update : Even disinfopedia links to a Bloom bio that still wrongly describes the nature of Bloom's final illness.
***Update 2: It should be obvious that this post is mostly just a pathetic attempt to get SullyWatch to notice me.
****Update 3: Yay! It worked!
<< Home