>The annoying BuzzFlash.com interviews David Brock:
><http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/2002/03/David_Brock_031802.html>.
>So Matt Drudge "had a crush" on Brock? Is Drudge, you know...?
I'll probably read Brock's book and find it interesting, but you can't embrace an admitted liar just because he suddenly agrees with you-- it always raises the issue of "are you lying now or lying then?" O'Reilley said his view of Brock in the past was that his motivation was "Cha-ching" all the way along the way. That may be a self-serving view by conservatives, but it's pretty viable to note that Brock hasn't suffered for his apostacy from the Right but rather has florished with good writing gigs and now a book.
Horowitz is hard to take seriously on the same basis-- he admits doing terrible things when he was a leftist and then wants credibility for reporting on everyone else who lied and cheated like he did back then, when the suspicion is that his own marginal tactics created the cesspool where his vision was shaped. Brock chose to hang out in the most rancid swamp on the Right, the American Spectator of the early 90s, and then tries to be taken seriously as a credible convert to decency. Yeah, that Ted Olsen hung out in the same swamp is interesting but everyone already knew that-- and Brock doesn't have the credibility to make any juicier details stick.
Oh yeah-- that Drudge is gay has been out on the rumor mill for years; FreeRepublic discussed it endlessly when Drudge somewhat broke his relationship with them.
-- Nathan Newman