More about the Bush tapes here. Given how savaged (justifiably) the guy taper has gotten, my link to the Lileks' Linda Tripp reference was singularly inapt.
(In today's news/blog nexus, if something seems dead obvious to you but nobody else seems to be saying it, just wait a day or two and if it's that obvious, it'll have become the conventional wisdom.)
I have to say that E.M. Forster et al badly overvalue what they describe as friendship. It's also a false dichotomy: If your country is persecuting your friend wrongly, then of course you choose your friend. But if your friend is doing something perfidious enough that there's a valid reason why the dilemma came up, then perhaps he or she isn't behaving as a friend after all. Come to think of it, see this week's Savage Love for an example.
(That's also why The English Patient can't be taken seriously.)
In the grand scheme of things I still have to say that Wead is worse than Tripp. She gained nothing from her actions and was motivated to tape to begin with because Bob Bennett, Bill Clinton's lawyer, publicly called her out as a liar.
Neither of them, of course, is nearly as reprehensible as people who leak grand jury testimony. (Remember that next time you see some hack sportswriter claiming that Jason Giambi needs to apologize more sincerely or that Barry Bonds doesn't "get it.")
Posted by Matt Bruce at February 24, 2005 12:59 PMI wouldn't say Linda Tripp didn't gain anything for her actions. Let's not forget the $30,000 worth of plastic surgery paid for by an "anonymous benefactor," who I think we can safely assume would never have heard of her if it weren't for her taping Lewinsky. Her website is pretty aggressive about passing the hat, too.
On a political note, do you agree with John Hinderaker, the second-most-popular conservative blogber, that "The whole mainstream of the [Democratic] party is engaged in an effort that is a betrayal of America"? The only conservative blog I know that condemned this statement was Qand0 (which prefers to call itself neolibertarian rather than conservative), while the National Review agreed with it.
Is this now conservative orthodoxy? Let me know if it is, since, as a basically mainstream Democrat, I may have to apply for political asylum before I get hauled before a tribunal for treason during wartime. Fortunately, my office is convenient to the Canadian embassy.
Posted by: David V. at February 25, 2005 07:45 AM