Rocco Buttiglione, the recently rejected Italian nominee for the European Commission was in Washington last week for whatever is the opposite of a victory lap. He was rejected from the Commission for his Catholic beliefs on abortion and homosexual marriage. The traditional defense of the believer who applies for office—that he will uphold the laws, even those that contravene his faith—proved insufficient.

While in town, Buttiglione visited the offices of the Weekly Standard for a conversation with the staff, so I was lucky enough to meet and hear him out. (As a matter of fact, it was like Bring-Your-European-Intellectual-to-Work Day at the Standard offices. I didn’t see him, but later, Bernard Henri Levy also stopped by—with entourage.)

A sociologist and philosopher, Buttiglione is the author of the major work on the philosophical thought of Karol Wotja, the current pope, Pope John Paul II. I highly recommend Christopher Caldwell’s article on the Buttiglione affair and the EU’s showdown with Catholicism.

Anyway, here are some of my notes and thoughts on Buttiglione’s stimulating comments.

He opened by contrasting what he described as the two main democratic traditions vying for dominance in Europe. One, the liberal tradition is rooted in respect for the dignity of the individual. The other is fascist, “not liberal, but in the end totalitarian.” Fascism Buttiglione described as the “consequence of the most modern ideas of liberalism”—what one might call a triumph of subjectivism and the absence of those overarching beliefs that distinguish and humanize the other democratic tradition.

As he spoke, I thought maybe I was listening to a sophisticated, European version of Jonah Goldberg, whose coming book sounds rather like it is founded on the same idea (modern liberalism=facism).

Buttiglione said he doesn’t believe in homosexual rights because, he asked, how can homosexuality have rights. Only human beings can have rights. But his own position of non-discrimination of homosexuals, he said, is inadequate by the standards of the EU’s governing class. Yet, he pointed out, popular sentiment in Italy and Germany supports his position on these issues and opposes the EU’s.

For me the most striking aspect of his conversation concerned the Church and falling birthrates in Europe. The modern European state is not just explicitly anti-Catholic in its positions on aboriton and homosexuality, according to Buttiglione; it is structurally anti-Catholic. You cannot, he said, have a flourishing church where the state claims over 50 percent of your income. People cannot, under such conditions, afford to—and they are not in the habit of—supporting religion. This Buttiglione called “a connection between tax caps and religious freedom.”

But Buttiglione is optimistic and believes a correction may be in the works, though it’s many years off. This correction would lead to rising birthrates and a return to religiosity. Europe—said this man from Italy which has the lowest birthrate in the world according a late ‘90s UN report—was “fifteen to twenty years behind the United States.”

This is radical stuff. American and European political thought sometimes does but mostly does not see America as the definition of what’s modern. If you were to check most social science textbooks for a definition of modernization, you’d learn about a spectrum of political and cultural development with poor tribal, religious African dictatorships at one end and the secular Scandinavian welfare state at the other. Political liberalization, secularization, and the coming of the non-traditional family all seem to go hand in hand in the broad strokes of contemporary social science.

Buttiglione was saying that it’s America instead that is modern. And that is why Europe reacted so hysterically to Bush’s victory—because to them it meant the modern might also be religious. That the modern might coexist comfortably—even necessarily if it’s not to be undermined by Islamic fundamentalism—with religiosity and Western tradition.

“The hard thing to talk about is how involved I was in the Kerry campaign. . . . It was a little bit painful. Not just to get beaten, but to be beaten so badly.”

Endquote Moby, speaking of his debut in backing presidential wannabes, during a live in-studio session at KCRW’s Morning becomes Eclectic on Monday.

The producer-musician-songwriter talks of his involvement with MoveOn and Americans Coming Together—a relationship that continues, even after Election Day apparently. Laura Dawn, the “creative director” of MoveOn, in fact, sings on several tracks of Moby’s new album, Hotel.

Which is funny, of course, but less ironic than it seems. Moby knew Laura Dawn as a musician and fellow activist before she went to work for MoveOn to become event and cultural director, a job the MoveOn website says involves organizing artists, musicians, and filmmakers—work in which Moby seems to have been intimately involved.

Laura Dawn, Moby also says, was once a member of a New York underground (Moby’s word) band called Fluffer (I don’t want to know who’s word that is).

Another odd thing from the interview: Moby played a track called “Spiders,” which he wrote when he heard that his idol David Bowie had suffered a heart attack. “I wrote this song thinking he was possibly going to die,” said Moby.

So nice of him to release it then, considering Bowie didn’t die.

In light of GS reader Grady’s comments, I ought to point out that one of the chief spokesmen for the Sikorsky VH-92 (what would become the next Marine One) is the furthest thing from a Bush fan and yes, he is a hulking figure who was shot at as a helicopter pilot in Vietnam. So no, strong men (or the American flag for that matter) are not solely symbols for the GOP. As another reader pointed out, you do have Jack Germond (and he should count for at least two).

But while we’re on the subject of what’s known as the VXX competition, a member of the Lockheed team called me today, saying he knew everything discussed on our trip to Stratford. (He even knew of the Sikorsky rep who, after explaining that part of the Lockheed aircraft would be assembled in Italy, proceeded to call Berlusconi a socialist. This reminded me of John Belushi’s speech in Animal House when his character asks, “Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?” In other words, he was on a roll.) And based on the meetings with Sikorsky, the Lockheed rep gave a strong rebuttal to each of the opposing arguments. He also said he hadn’t dealt with such a “disingenuous” competitor until now. The other side’s feeling is no doubt mutual.

With a month to go before the Pentagon makes its final decision (actually the Navy Office of Procurement), the mudslinging has only just begun.

This story isn’t getting much attention, but it represents a seismic shift in sports merchandising. There will be unintended consequences. Will they be for good, or ill?

Having already weighed in on the grand potential of blogs, I hereby introduce a new recurring feature, where readers can send in examples of the most self-indulgent writing in the blogosphere. While naming the award was a very tough call indeed (there were two chaps in the running, can you guess who the other one was?), Andrew Sullivan has run away with the honors thanks to this morning’s seminal post:

“CPAP UPDATE: I have a little piece in this week’s Time special on sleep about my apnea diagnosis and treatment. But there have been some subsequent developments. In general, I haven’t had the amazing burst of energy I had after my night in the hospital. Maybe the psychosomatic explanation holds up. But my sleep has been better; and longer; and deeper. I’m told it takes time to feel the cumulative effects; I do feel more rested; and sleeping itself has been much easier than I anticipated. But one side-effect has surprised me. It probably shouldn’t have. It makes sense, after all. I’ll give you a subtle hint: when you have air being pumped into you with a face mask for eight hours a night, and when there’s nowhere for it to escape, except some small holes in the top of the mask, then the air finds other outlets. So now, I officially have hot air coming out of both ends. The boyfriend has to choose between being deafened or fumigated. But my sleep is heavenly.”

I encourage readers to send in their own nominees. There’s certainly no shortage.

One last thought: Can you imagine what the blogosphere’s reaction would be if one of those Big Bad Old Media types–say E.J. Dionne or Robert Fisk–published something like this? The entire internet might collapse under the harrumphing.

Update, 6:32 p.m.: I should say, in light of Sullivan’s Self-Parody Watch item from yesterday, that I don’t mean this to be any way negative. Andrew Sullivan is, objectively speaking, a blog hero, too!

I’ve long been impressed by how arrogant and stupid Blockbuster has behaved as an institution. They had a near monopoly on the video rental business and a chance to extend that monopoly as the market changed, first with the DVD, then with the internet, and finally with the supremacy of sales over rentals. And at every step, instead of innovating and adapting, Blockbuster sought to fight the future and maintain the status quo.

Today Blockbuster announces that it is dropping late fees. Instead, after a week of being late, they’ll simply automatically charge you for the sale of the DVD let you keep it. It’s a fine idea, but too little, too late.

P.S.: If you follow these things, look for Netflix to be bought by Amazon in the coming months.

Yes, the picture is crazy, but don’t miss the caption: It “took off towing the 42 foot fishing boat backwards through the water at about 7 knots. . . “

While I’ve got my annoying, artsy-fartsy writer’s hat on, let me hollar about Maureen Dowd’s unbelievable excuse for a column yesterday. Again, this has nothing to do with politics: But Gail Collins should be ashamed of herself for letting this see the light of day.

As penance, Dowd should get the May 1999 issue of Esquire and read Tom Junod’s profile of Lil’ Bow Wow, which is written–all several thousands words of it–in verse. It might shame her into actually trying.