Right on Red took offense to Andrew Sullivan's calling Zell Miller a racist (9/2/04, second post) and posted a response which others then took offense to. Later he asked, "Have I gone too far?" To me, the answer is essentially no. Jeff noted in ROR's comments that "limp-wristed" could have been left out. Maybe so. Maybe snotty could have been substituted instead, as it would have fit better into the character of the Sullie's post. But Sullie tossed the racist remark into the ring without basis while RoR's "limp-wristed" was a parried response for comparative value. Sullivan asked for it and everyone should have seen it coming.

What I find so sad about Sullie's post is that it is so superficial. The best he could do is notice that of the two keynote speakers, Obama's was warm and cuddly and Miller's was fiery? Well duhhhh!!! Obama's speech was almost entirely about domestic policy with scant reference to the war and even that was redirected to domestic issues for the military forces. Miller's was a fiery call to arms with regard to foreign policy as it relates to the war with special emphasis on the war staying foreign and never becoming domestic. It is interesting that Obama's speech included Kerry's line of reasoning that "... war must be an option sometimes, but it should never be the first option."

The Parties are an ocean apart on what each sees as the priority. I'm not going to phrase this as well as I'd like but here it is. The Republicans see the war as needing the greatest attention with the domestic issues running the course as is usual. The Democrats see it in the reverse. Clearly, Sullivan has bought into the latter and now he's let loose with slurs regularly used by the Party he supports.

One last point. RoR came back and asked, "Have I gone too far?" Heartfelt and reflective. I, for one, appreciate that. What's Andrew Sullivan doing.