![]() |
|
October 27, 2006
You have to give Andrew Sullivan credit for coming on Hugh Hewitt's show, though in the end he provided little more than comic relief. At the outset of the interview, Sullivan objected to being asked whether he's a Catholic, suggesting that the question threatened to convert the interview into an inquisition. However, I've seen Sullivan willingly answer questions about his faith during other interviews. I guess it's fine to ask Sullivan about his Catholicism if he can use it to establish his credentials through softball questioning, but unfair if the questioner is a critic who actually knows much about Catholicism. Notice also the quick resort to name-calling ("inquisition") which his become Sullivan's trademark and often his only form of argument. In his book "The Conservative Soul: How We Lost It, How To Get It Back," Sullivan writes: A conservative will also eschew any grand notions of history or great crusades. He would never state that his goal is to end tyranny on earth or other such utopian fantasies. Compare Sullivan's pronouncement with the following statements by Ronald Reagan: While we must be cautious about forcing the pace of change, we must not hesitate to declare our ultimate objectives and to take concrete actions to move toward them. We must be staunch in our conviction that freedom is not the sole prerogative of a lucky few, but the inalienable and universal right of all human beings... What I am describing now is a plan and a hope for the long term -- the march of freedom and democracy which will leave Marxism-Leninism on the ash-heap of history as it has left other tyrannies which stifle the freedom and muzzle the self-expression of the people. ... Let us be shy no longer. Let us go to our strength. Let us offer hope. Let us tell the world that a new age is not only possible but probable… [T]he task I've set forth will long outlive our own generation. But together, we too have come through the worst. Let us now begin a major effort to secure the best -- a crusade for freedom that will engage the faith and fortitude of the next generation. For the sake of peace and justice, let us move toward a world in which all people are at last free to determine their own destiny. -- Address to Members of the British Parliament, Palace of Westminster, June 8, 1982. But why would one look to Reagan for an understanding of conservatism when we can rely on a former New Republic editor who wants judges radically to redefine what is perhaps our most fundamental and longstanding human institution? Posted by at 8:38 AM
|