Everyone needs an editor.
Leon rants on the topic. It's plain that this is just an intentional blindspot, for him. I'm on the border of refusing to read another long, long and winding churn and an interest to see what the rukus is about, if it is more than just to call Andrew 'excitable' in a provocative way.
On the other hand, I don't know exactly what Andrew Sullivan is trying to do with his own response.
I suspect he would not write what he did, how he did, if it were anyone but Leon.
What am I to make of that? There are parts that read like AS is trying to explain himself, not to his readers but to Leon.
If that is true, then let me say this: Andrew, you're all grown up. You are the master father now. It's okay to cut the threads.
Now, with that liberation, as your editor, go back, cut it in half, tighten up what you really need to say about this and stop brooding.
If you want to make counter charges and outline why this is cheap characterization, lead with that. If you want to make this about Leon's confused and hurtful rants, do that. If you want to point out that defining "Jew", for Leon or in general, is about as hard as understanding the Trinity, then do that. If you have to take some licks, do that. But get off the fence.
And for pity's sake, use "antisemitism".
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Do two rants make a wrong or a right?
