Massie: The Trouble With Andrew

Sullivan seems to believe that a foolish inconsistency is the hobgoblin of heads that are littler than his own.

He's changed his mind about nothing fundamental in the past 7 years.

Sullivan the scourge of Islamists on behalf of George W. Bush is precisely the same as Sullivan the scourge of Christianists on behalf of Obamessiah the Latter Day Saint.

And he still has nothing to say that a grown-up ought to hear except as a reminder of what it is not to be grown-up.

The ferocity of his Palin hatred is bizarre. He seems to have taken upon himself the job of saving America from Sarah Palin.
Perhaps it stems from an ancient childhood memory?
Or perhaps he sees what he dislikes about himself in her?
OK, enough armchair psycho-analysis. It is much too much though and has turned me off reading him.

I guess this is the part where 100 people comment to blast A.S. for one reason for another, calling him crazy, evil, etc. Me, I think he is the most interesting blogger around. His high energy gets him off track at times, but I'll take him over any obediently-partisan blog any day.

Rod: "I will defend her to the hilt as a culture-war Rohrshach test..."

Please do, starting with this article from NewsHerald, Florida:

GOP flip-flops on morals
http://www.newsherald.com/articles/beach_68202___article.html/city_panama.html

Excerpt:
You might ask, "Why are you so critical of our Sarah, our diamond in the rough and tough-as-fake-nails heroine?" Well, for the better part of 12 years, I have been in the trenches, teaching high school students sex education, which was limited to abstinence-only curriculum in the states of Indiana and Florida. Simply put, the abstinence curriculum mandate is not working and here are the "eye-popping" statistics of teenage pregnancies that underscore the point:

* Like Bristol, one in three teen mothers drops out of high school.
* Eighty percent of females who become mothers before the age of 18 don't finish high school.
* Of the top 10 disciplinary problems confronting public school teachers, pregnancy is third.
* Three in 10 teen mothers go on welfare within three years of the birth of their first child.
* The cost to our government for teen pregnancy is estimated by several different agencies. Approximately $5 billion-$7 billion in state and federal money is spent each year on services related to teen parents...

I can't wait to forget about Sarah Palin entirely -- when she reassumes her normal duties as governor of Alaska in November. I can't wait, too, for Barack Obama to be merely the freshman senator of Illinois again. Obviously, I'm in a bit of quandary, aren't? But what can you do when both major parties are running visceral identity campaigns and/or to promote failed orthodoxies?

I didn't stop reading Sullivan after his disgraceful flogging of the Trig smear -- mainly because I feel like I am watching a train wreck and can't look away.

It's not just the anti-Palin screeds and hate. The man is generally unhinged on any given day of the week on any number of topics and individuals.

I think that Sullivan is fast carving out his niche as the Walter Winchell of 21st century journalism. I don't think it will end well for him.

Yesterday, he puffed up a YouTube video of Romney criticizing McCain, claiming it was a recent video. In fact, it was at the height of the primary. He later retracted it, but I think it simply demonstrates how unreliable and hysterical Sullivan is.

He's desperately hoping against hope for Obama. He's put his chips "all in" and that's making him do bizarre, outrageous, unethical and despicable things.

I don't blame Rod for not "de-linking" him. It's tough to watch a former associate self-destruct in the way Sullivan is doing.

I do think Sullivan deserves reprobation and disdain from the journalistic community at large, but given the mainstream media's track record the past decade, I won't hold my breath.

Recognizing Palin's incompetence and inability to lead isn't hatred. While I appreciate occasional fits of schizophrenia where Mr. Dreher recognizes that there are legitimate reasons to believe Palin isn't the best thing since sliced bread, the general course of his own commentary and that of many others, particularly the soc-con wing, has been to demonize anyone who says she isn't qualified or even the best advocate for social conservatism.

Rod, it seems to me that you are no more balanced re: Palin than Andrew is. Your imbalance is Palin-philic rather than Palin-phobic, but that's just the opposite side of the same coin. Why conservatives object to Andrew's imbalance but not yours is left as an exercise for the reader.

That Palin is ridiculously unqualified for the VP position is blindingly obvious to everyone not already committed to the R ticket, and even a few who are, like Mrs. Fiorina. But I have also stopped reading Andrew, because I just don't feel the need to be reminded of it every eight seconds.

That Obama is ridiculously unqualified for the President position is blindingly obvious to everyone not already committed to the D ticket, and even a few who are.

This just in:

Clinton Backer Endorses McCain
Wednesday, September 17, 2008 11:44 AM
By: Jim Meyers

Lynn Forester de Rothschild, a prominent Hillary Clinton supporter and member of the Democratic National Committee’s Platform Committee, is crossing the political aisle to endorse Republican presidential nominee John McCain. Forester, CEO of the holding company EL Rothschild and wife of international banker Sir Evelyn de Rothschild, will "campaign and help him through the election," a spokesman told CNN about her plans to help McCain. Forester was a major donor for Hillary, and earned the title of "Hillraiser" for helping to bring in at least $100,000 for Clinton’s failed White House bid. Forester expressed her distaste for eventual Democratic nominee Barack Obama in a CNN interview this summer, saying: "Frankly I don't like him. I feel like he is an elitist. I feel like he has not given me reason to trust him."

I used to read Andrew Sullivan every day, and I thought he was brilliant. It was not the Obamamania that turned me off, but the hatefulness of his attacks against the Clintons and on anyone who dared to support them. I don't hang out in places where people spew hate. I don't know the man, but if I were a friend of his I would be worried. Hate is a very destructive emotion and he seems to be addicted to it. I don't know if de-linking him will help him sober up, or increase his paranoia. I hope whatever it is will pass after the election.

Rod: I can understand. I read you and Sullivan in live time through the Palin selection, and his recap today is accurate - initially, he was very supportive. I also agree with his reasoning: considering the compressed timeframe until the election and all the unknowns about Palin, it is better to err on the side of inquiry. Personally, I think we all owe Andrew a debt of gratitude for his willingness to articulate concerns that need to be openly considered.

I've actually taken the opposite reaction, and have pretty much given up reading you and The Corner until after the election, because each of you seems so enmeshed in supporting "your side" that you've lost the ability to offer much original or interesting analysis. Maybe on November 6 NRO will untie Derb, and we'll all have a great time with the post-game analysis and guessing about the cabinet choices of the upcoming Obama or McCain administration.

Bless,
Doug

The problem with Andrew Sullivan goes way beyond his almost psychopathic reaction to the person of Sarah Palin.

For years Sullivan has been treated by journalists and bloggers with a seriousness he has done little to earn. Regardless of whether he's writing on an issue where his intuitions are broadly correct (torture) or on an issue where he doesn't know jack squat (Constitutional law and presidential authority), Andrew plays so fast and loose with the truth that it's hard to believe it's not deliberate.

It's always been my impression that bloggers link to Andrew because he drives traffic. He's the pundit version of Paris Hilton: Someone who is famous only for being famous.

There is no problem with the Republican Vice Presidental nomination, that can't be created by the press. For some reason freedom of the press has taken on a new head that has two mouths, one that shouts 'Write anything, you want, whether you have the research to back it, because someone, somewhere, is going to agree with you, that he/she can back up every word you wrote;' the other mouth says, 'Deny responsibility. I just printed what was told.'
The press, radio, television, newspaper, magazine; whether spoken and/or printed; has an awful lot of clout. As they say, they can make or break you, and depending on the stand they take they have done so to many.
The press has become plantiff, defendant, judge, jury, and executioner.
They as a collective, make decisions, and if we the unwary public are not careful, those decisions are implemented and imbedded in our minds and culture before we even realize there was a decision to be made. We can't rest on our laurel's especially when it comes to politics, because with all the politician's retoric, whether true or not, and that of the press, we need to be at the game, and even ahead of it at times, so that we are not dupted.

Andrew's current post responding to Massie is a good one. Ultimately, Andrew is one of the most talented public intellectuals on the scene. He's a great writer and he is usually ahead of the curve on important issues: gay marriage, WMD, torture, and maybe Palin. He isn't anyones lap dog and isn't about currying favor. He isn't prone to fawning and gushing.

Daniel: Andrew's current post responding to Massie is a good one. Ultimately, Andrew is one of the most talented public intellectuals on the scene. He's a great writer and he is usually ahead of the curve on important issues: gay marriage, WMD, torture, and maybe Palin. He isn't anyones lap dog and isn't about currying favor. He isn't prone to fawning and gushing.

Except his frequent fawning and gushing ("Know Hope") about the Savior of the West, Defender of the Faith, Barack the Lightbearer.

AS is currently calling Palin a pathological liar. Over and over and over again.
Good grief.

thomas tucker
AS is currently calling Palin a pathological liar. Over and over and over again.

Palin is not a pathological liar. Very few people are actually pathological liars, and none of them are in politics or, indeed, in any positions of authority.

That doesn't change the fact, however, that she and McCain have not only been repeatedly caught lying in the last few weeks, but have continued to make the same lies even after being called on them. Apparently hoping they can continue to lie straight through the election.

You should not, however believe Andrew Sullivan on that. You shouldn't believe anything he says, he just rambles unsupported nonsense all hours of the day.

lancelot lamar, the statistics in my post are excerpted from the article, and only apply to the school district where the writer has worked for the past 12 years.

I think Kevin Burke of Rachel's Vineyard is on to something about the ferocity of Palin criticism:

The very personal and often uncharitable criticism of vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin and her family evident in recent media coverage, and the lack of support from many feminist and child advocacy groups, may have a relationship to the collective grief, pain and guilt from personal involvement in the abortion of an unborn child.

Seeing the Palin family, in a very visible public forum, with an uncompromising and public pro life philosophy arouses deeply repressed feelings in post-abortive parents, as well as media members, counselors, health-care professionals, politicians and others who promote abortion rights, especially the abortion of children with challenges such as Down syndrome. These powerful repressed feelings of grief, guilt and shame can be deflected from the source of the wound (i.e., abortion) and projected onto an often uncharitable focus upon the trigger of these painful emotions ... the Palin family.

It is important to make the distinction that to affirm the value of the unborn in no way condemns those who have experienced the pain of abortion. Rather, this presents an opportunity to reach out to all who have been wounded by their participation in abortion with love and compassion