From the National Review

[tahnan]

Don't ask me why I keep reading the Corner on the National Review, a collection of conservative bloggers. Humor, perhaps. But sometimes the humor turns ugly:

The other day I was lunching with an actress pal in London and she started going on about the "gay mafia" allegedly in control of "Doctor Who" at the BBC. And I involuntarily rolled my eyes, because showbiz types are always going on about this or that field of endeavor being sewn up by some gay clique.

But I must say this is impressive: Last week in this space, I made a jocular reference to a global economy "so vulnerable that only the stalwart action of Barney Frank stands between it and ten years of soup kitchens". I tittered too soon. It turns out the entire planetary meltdown is due to Congressman Frank's sex life:

followed by a fair and balanced article from FoxNews abot how it's all the fault of Frank's partner Herb Moses. (Disclosure: before correcting the typo, I wrote "fairy and balanced". How much better would Fox be if its news reporting were fairy and balanced?)

Suppose, just suppose, that somehow Barney Frank and his partner really are to blame for the entire mess. (Bill O'Reilly certainly thought so: "You still went out in July and said everything was great. And off that, a lot of people bought stock and lost everything they had"—i.e., investors just hang on Frank's every word.) Even if that's true: introducing the fact, and the Fox story, by talking about a "gay mafia" being in charge is just...despicable. Cut that first paragraph, and you've got a statement that Barney Frank and his sex life are responsible for the collapse of the economy; with it, you've got a statement that Barney Frank and his gay sex life are responsible. It's...words fail me.

Incidentally, the Corner does make clear that things are much better in heterosexualland:

I'm sure I'm not the only male in America who, when Palin dropped her first wink, sat up a little straighter on the couch and said, "Hey, I think she just winked at me." And her smile. By the end, when she clearly knew she was doing well, it was so sparkling it was almost mesmerizing. It sent little starbursts through the screen and ricocheting around the living rooms of America.

Comments

[srl.livejournal.com]

I'm sure I'm not the only male in America who, when Palin dropped her first wink, sat up a little straighter on the couch

I've never heard a better explanation of why I'm not straight.

[selinker.livejournal.com]

My thought was, "Oh, you did not just wink at me!" One more reason for women to hate her.

But the Barney Frank criticism is spot-on. I don't think it's a root cause, but it's totally fair criticism. Yes, they handle it in their usual ham-fisted way, but seriously, why the heck are you reading the Corner if you don't want this kind of tone?

[tahnan.livejournal.com]

What, it's a fair criticism to say "Because he's gay and has this lover..." (as opposed to "Because he has this lover....")?

I don't know if you watch the new Doctor Who. The "gay mafia" complaint of that actress isn't just "there's this clique; and, just as a way of distinguishing them, they're gay"; it's "there's this clique of people who, because they're gay, influence the show's writing/casting/etc. against us straight people". (Disclaimer: I don't know anything about the actual production system behind Doctor Who; I do know that (a) Russell T. Davies is gay, and (b) some people have complained that there's way too much gay content on the show, apparently because there's any.)

I have no opinion on Barney Frank; I have to believe that blaming "the entire planetary meltdown" on him is a little bit hyperbolic, but insofar as I can't even pretend to understand the financial issues here, I have no idea the extent to which he is responsible. But what I refuse to believe is that "because he's gay" figures anywhere into the explanation.

[selinker.livejournal.com]

No need to react like you've never met me, Lance. I know you don't believe I think "because he's gay" is fair criticism of Frank's actions. That's the ham-fisted part, and typical of The Corner, which is why I don't read it.

I do think that an analysis that intentionally leaves out "Frank's partner was an executive for an organization Frank had regulatory power over" is incomplete. Imagine it was Alan Greenspan and Andrea Mitchell. You'd have to mention it if Mitchell was assigned to report on the Fed.

I do watch the new Doctor Who. There's quite a bit of pro-gay content, which I happen to like. Others don't. There probably is a large number of gay people in the creation process of that show, and if someone objects to the content, they can point a possible origin of that content. Whether the term "gay mafia" is an okay term to use is open to debate.

[tahnan.livejournal.com]

I was pretty darned sure you didn't think "because he's gay" was a fair criticism. But I read the dialogue as:

Me: the NRO was including "because he's gay" as part of their criticism, which is loathsome.

You: It's ham-fisted, but fair and accurate.

I think the problem was in the antecedent of the pronoun there. What you were saying, I believe, was, "But the gay-mafia implications aside, the underlying Barney Frank criticism is spot-on"; unfortunately, since I was thinking of my post as being specifically about the "gay mafia" lead-in, I read your saying "the criticism" was spot-on as a statement about the "gay mafia" thing I was focusing on. ("Ham-fisted", to me, suggested "clumsy", and I found nothing clumsy in their post, but rather a very careful and specific accusation.)

A vicious, underhanded, unfair tone is what I expect from the NRO. What I didn't expect was outright open bigotry, though I suppose after the reference to WaMu going under after hiring minorities as "cause and effect" (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDQzYjA4ZWYyZDYyNjY0ODZjZmE1NzRkMWI3MWZiZGU=), I should have expected it.

Anyway, as I said, or at least meant: if the statement is "that Barney Frank and his sex life are responsible for the collapse of the economy", that's fine; it's the statement with "AND OMG GAY" that I object to.

[selinker.livejournal.com]

Right. Mean people will be mean. That's what they do. Not worth your time.

[mildmannered.livejournal.com]

It sent little starbursts through the screen and ricocheting around the living rooms of America.

Just like McCain's tie!

[cramerica.livejournal.com]

When I worked in Boston, I picked up a copy of the National Review by mistake, thinking it was The Nation. I ended up reading it for humor value (this was before Y2K), but was a little alarmed when the two biggest jerks in my office were like, "Hey, I didn't know you were one of us!"

[rdansky.livejournal.com]

Actually, the starbursts were fruit-flavored candy. She was flinging them to the audience to distract them.