I Could Give You My Opinion of the Republican Presidential Debate . . .

by Pejman Yousefzadeh on September 22, 2011

But I see that Roger Simon has beaten me to my opinion. So go read him instead.

I’ll just add that the booing of the gay soldier–and the refusal on the part of Rick Santorum to even thank him for his service–was one of the most shameful things I have seen in a long time.

UPDATE: More on this issue from Jim Geraghty, who lives up to his reputation as one of the more decent people in cyberspace, and points out that a number of people in the debate-watching crowd had an angry reaction to the boos–which appear to have been isolated to only a few (loud) members of the audience. He also reports a quasi-mea culpa from Rick Santorum.

  • Anonymous

    No more shameful, I think, than the Dan Savage crowd using the military as a shield to cower behind while spewing their venom.

    • Pejman Yousefzadeh

      Whatever Dan Savage does, it does not justify booing a soldier serving our country in a hostile theater. I once thought there was no arguing, or excusing that.

      • Anonymous

        Oh, come now — that’s a lazy and borderline disingenuous insinuation, and you know it. After having read this blog for some months, I’d expect better from you.

        Leave the “if you disagree with me, you hate America” tripe to the progressives.

        • Pejman Yousefzadeh

          I didn’t say that if you disagree with me, you hate America. I said that whatever Dan Savage did, there is no excusing booing a soldier serving our country in a hostile theater. And I meant every word.

          • Anonymous

            Including, unfortunately, the part where you deliberately conflated the service of an American soldier with the opinion of an American citizen.

            I’m not sure why you’re refusing to recognize this as the lazy tactic it is. Do the ends — demonstrating your opposition to DADT — justify the means for you in this case?

          • Pejman Yousefzadeh

            Once again, I didn’t conflate the service of an American soldier with the opinion of an American citizen. I said–I can’t believe that I have to keep repeating it–that whatever one’s disagreements with Dan Savage, there is no reason to conflate it with the booing of an American soldier. It’s an entirely banal point.

            Honestly, can’t we just say that it was wrong for people to boo the soldier? Or is that too hard?

            As for whether the ends justifying the means, I don’t think they do. But I also don’t have to claim that they do in this circumstance.

          • Anonymous

            Repeat yourself as often as you like; it won’t make your insinuation any less lazy, nor mask the fact that you’re avoiding a straightforward response by engaging in this repeated flag-draping.

            Let’s try something else. Imagine that, instead of being a DADT plant, the guy had instead been a Cain plant, saying something like “under one of your presidencies, do you intend to circumvent the progress made in stopping Sharia law by appointing Muslims to your cabinet or the federal bench?” Now, be honest; if the audience had responded to that statement with the same number of boos, what would your response have been?

          • Pejman Yousefzadeh

            First off, the contention that a soldier serving in a hostile theater was “a DADT plant,” is absurd, and without foundation. I am sure that you will consider it “flag-draping,” but thanks to your own lazy contention, I won’t care at all about your opinion.

            Secondly, any question from anyone that evinces hostility to Muslims as a class of people would be beneath contempt. But that didn’t happen here, and sticking up for gay soldiers serving our country–there I go with that “flag-draping” again!–is a far different act.

          • Anonymous

            Sigh. Yes, everyone who disagrees with you on a matter of political policy hates soldiers and wants to deprive them of their human rights. And by being on the “enlightened” side of this matter, you’ve earned yourself one rhetorical indulgence, which can be used to argue like a progressive.

            You know, if you had just answered my earlier question more honestly — “yes, this comes down to my opposition to DADT, and no, I don’t care if I’m being irrational, this is my blog” — you could have saved us both a bit of time. (I was going to add “and hey, it’s a free country, we don’t have to agree” — but, to extend from your argument, if I support DADT, I boo soldiers, so I guess we’re not as free as I thought. Too bad.)

          • Pejman Yousefzadeh

            I did answer your question honestly, but it appears that honesty was never what you were looking for. Which I guess explains your attempts to deliberately mischaracterize my arguments.

          • Anonymous

            Yes, I expected you to be honest — even with yourself. How unreasonable of me!  But I guess that’s what us boo-America-firsters do, right?

            Really, what’s the point of decrying the irrationality of progressive argument and name-calling, if you feel justified in sinking to the very same level once a Sufficiently Important ™ issue emerges?

            I really don’t understand why this is such a difficult concept for you to grasp.

          • Pejman Yousefzadeh

            Frankly, I am tired of being accused of dishonesty–with no evidence whatsoever. And I am tired of you putting words in my mouth, and misrepresenting my motives as well. I have given you every opportunity to refrain from trolldom. Too bad you chose not to take it.

          • Guest

            How very Charles Johnson of you.

  • Anonymous

    A soldier proudly proclaiming that he regularly breaks one of the oldest and most sacred credos of the religion of the majority of the citizens he is “defending” is a profoundly shameful and sorrowing sight.  We now all know what kind of a society those who support such an abomination are working toward.

    • Pejman Yousefzadeh

      That is an absurd, offensive, and entirely unwelcome comment on this blog. Just FYI.

Previous post:

Next post: