Dean Barnett sends this e-mail along:
I had Glenn Greenwald on the show on Thursday, and asked him if he thought Craig’s offense metis resignation. He said no, under the theory that private behavior doesn’t count. I then asked him if a Senator confessed to having relations with a farm animal, he again said no, under the same theory that private behavior doesn’t matter unless it’s blended with hypocrisy.
I sort of wish I were making this up, but I’m not.
And a very sharp friend of mine passes this along:
If there’s a hole in your argument, [Kirchick] certainly hasn’t found it. The argument of his post turns entirely on the assumptions (1) that anyone who has had sex with men a few times is, by nature, gay, and that that’s the end of the story—a moral and political assertion as much as a biological or psychological one—and (2) that it is somehow worse for someone who has that nature to be “anti-gay” than it is for a straight person to be. (So do straight guys get a pass from Kirchick for being anti-gay?) Now of course a lot of people believe (1), and it’s not an inherently silly proposition. But since it is denied by most of the people that Kirchick means to flay, assuming its truth does not go very far to showing what’s wrong with their point of view.