I have a List and I'm not afraid to not Publish it!

The other day while I was asking why no one has outed David Corn for the rotten journalist that he is, Tom Maguire was asking other questions...some not so strong, others stronger:

Mr. Corn's position on outing Republicans is clear enough but he does not explicitly state a position on the merits of outing gay Democrats. However - if he had any journalistic integrity at all he would have to be opposed to "stealth advocacy". A black man arguing for "black" issues does not need to separately declare his personal stake in the discussion, nor does a woman discussing "women's issues".

But surely Mr. Corn agrees that it is unseemly to advocate for gay issues under the pretense of having been swayed by force of argument when, in fact, the advocate is touting his own self-interest. So presumably Mr. Corn, troubled as he is by closeted Republican gays, is equally troubled by closeted Democratic gays.

Or maybe not.

Let's be clear as mud - the Foley scandal is not about homosexuality but it would not be unreasonable to out gay Republicans in response to it. Can anyone follow that? I would suggest the outing of those who are abusing their power but that logic may be too linear for someone from the reality based community.

I also love this evasion of responsibility - "anytime a gay Republican is outed by events". No, David, it won't be "events" that post that list, it will be activist Democrats trying to win an election. Hope that helps your understanding. A likely candidate would be Mike Rogers of BlogActive.com, who has spent years outing gay Republicans and whose current fund raising appeal says this:

Please help me with this effort. We have five weeks to save our nation from these right wing homophobes in the closet -- and there are more in Congress!

As to "What about those GOPers who are gay and who serve a party that is anti-gay?", well, what about those GOPers who favor lower taxes (and happen to be gay), or who favored a robust national defense in the Reagan era (and happened to be gay), or who favor gun owner's rights (and happen to be gay), or for some other reason don't fit themselves neatly into the special interest group boxes drawn up by earnest Democratic strategists?

Or what about GOPers who were put off by Bill Clinton's "Don't ask, don't tell" debacle or by Clinton's signing of the "Defense of Marriage Act", or by John Kerry's insistence that his position on gay marriage did not differ from Bush's? Are they allowed to think that maybe the Dems are more talk than action, and that other issues are more important? Does David Corn really agree with 100% of the Democratic Party platform?

This is the current state of the left - sexual privacy rights for their political opponents are trumped by a desire for power.

Later on Larry and Curly join up with the other stooge with some utter ridiculousness of their own: Ahh, Plan B - Josh Marshall is pretending that it is Republicans who are going to out these gay Republican staffers, and Kevin Drum is playing along.

That is quite a working theory - a group of evangelical Reps, outraged by the gays in their midst, worked up a list of gay Republican staffers ands then leaked it to their natural ally, David Corn. Mr. Corn then choked back his abhorrence at this sexual McCarthyism and penned a few paragraphs rationalizing their effort. Uh huh. Can I guess the rest - some lefty blogger will print it "just to show us what awful tricks those crazy House Republicans are up to".

Please.

Personally, I figure that since there are Dem activists who do this routinely, my money is there. But we have nothing to fight about since we all agree this is awful. And since Josh Marshall and Kevin Drum think "The List" will be coming from Republicans, I encourage them to denounce the concept unequivocally and pre-emptively, as I am doing here.

If The List appears, they will be on record as having condemned it, and perhaps other Dems will join them. And if it is the work of crazed evangelical Republicans, condemning it should be easy, yes?

This is me holding my breath.

The best zinger is saved for last of course. TM points to an almost-but-not-quite confession of conscience at The American Spectator:

I am guided to evidence of Dems with both a brain and a conscience:

"We're getting into very dangerous territory, and I've warned my colleagues to be careful." That's what a Democrat leadership aide was saying on Wednesday, as word circulated about David Corn's blog posting that revealed that a list of gay Republicans congressional staffers was circulating through emails.Such a list has been talked about for months, if not years, by more militant homosexual activists, who have threatened to out Republican congressional staffers or even congressmen if they take positions counter to their gay lifestyle. ..."If that list is made public, all of the political gains we've made in the past 96 hours get flushed down the toilet," says the leadership aide.

I apologize - this may not be evidence of a conscience at all. just a recognition that as a pragmatic matter this is dumb idea for Dems. But one can hope.

And one can wonder - why, if the list is coming from the homophobic right, would it reflect badly on Democrats?

I've maintained this week that there are two distinct things going on in this Foley mess. First off, the disgraceful, inexcusable behavior of the Congressman is outrageous. I'm not sure I've heard or read of a single person who disagrees with that.

It is good and right that he has left the House and should it become evident that he committed actual crimes, I have no problem with seeing him prosecuted for them. Likewise, pretty much every Republican I know of agrees.

The other issue is of course the political fallout and manipulation of the matter by certain folks on the left. Mainstream Democrats are trying to make hay out of it as is of course their right to do. The questionable timing and sourcing of the information however--and as TM notes, "I figure that since there are Dem activists who do this routinely, my money is there"--is leading some to scream about rank political opportunism and a smear job of the highest order.

"The List" is no less a part of that and is equally reprehensible in my book. Corn, Marshall and Drum (the collective brainpower is truly stunning) should frankly be ashamed that they've even touched this at all.

That is though, as I said of Corn earlier, if they ever had any to begin with.