Your liberal media elite may have found absolutely nothing interesting in the Democratic platform construction process, and may have found nothing interesting in boiling intra-party fights beneath the surface (other than Stephanopoulos hinting at it on the radio afterwards), but national reporters are now preparing their quadrennial promotions of the Republicans for Choice and the Log Cabin Republicans as they make their routinely pointless run on the GOP platform.
In the Los Angeles Times, they’re breaking out the I word (intolerance) to describe what Republicans are trying to avoid in embracing the “religious right.” The Los Angeles Times hasn’t yet discovered the “lifestyle left” or “libertine left.”
We’re rewarded with idiotic comparisons like this: “We are giving President Bush an opportunity for a Sister Souljah moment,” said Christopher Barron, political director of the Log Cabin Republicans. For political newbies, the Times helpfully explains: “During the 1992 campaign, Democratic candidate Bill Clinton repudiated rapper Sister Souljah, saying that her suggestion that blacks kill whites was as racist as the anti-black rhetoric of KKK leader David Duke. Clinton’s words drew reprimands from some African American leaders, but boosted his image among moderate voters as a Democrat who had support among blacks but was not beholden to special interests.”
Does comparing the Family Research Council or Concerned Women for America to the Klan or rapper advocates of racist violence sound like the work of “moderates” in the party? Or are they in fact conservative-haters?