The Wall Street Journal Doesn't Understand

Do they really not understand this issue? This is so extraordinarily muddled. From the paper's lead editorial today.

[...]
But in today's politically correct culture, it's easy to understand how senior Republicans might well have decided they had no grounds to doubt Mr. Foley merely because he was gay and a little too friendly in emails. Some of those liberals now shouting the loudest for Mr. Hastert's head are the same voices who tell us that the larger society must be tolerant of private lifestyle choices, and certainly must never leap to conclusions about gay men and young boys. Are these Democratic critics of Mr. Hastert saying that they now have more sympathy for the Boy Scouts' decision to ban gay scoutmasters? Where's Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on that one?
[...]
Yes, Mr. Hastert and his staff should have done more to quarantine Mr. Foley from male pages after the first email came to light. But if that's the standard, we should all admit we are returning to a rule of conduct that our cultural elite long ago abandoned as intolerant.

No, no, and no. And if you don't understand the difference, you should hand over the writing duties to someone with a clearer head. They think they have caught someone in hypocrisy, but it's as if they're complaining that someone can be pro-soldier and anti-war.

Perhaps hard-rockin Conservative George Will can explain it to you better. He certainly seems to understand the state of our leadership.

And why doesn't someone go down to that "alcoholic treatment center" and pull that asshole out into the light?!