I don’t like to admit it, but in late 2001 and for most of 2002, I was a fairly consistent visitor to Andrew Sullivan’s Daily Dish. Hell, I even used to email tips to Andrew, and got a couple of acknowledgments back from him.
Well, Andrew went off the rails some time ago, and because he did, he’s been rewarded with a couple of nice mainstream gigs. Unhinged caterwauling sells, I suppose, more is the pity.
After today, however, Andrew has dropped all pretense at being a serious thinker in any other vein than what thinking is required to destroy George W. Bush and his administration. Here he goes, at 3:44PM:
Previous war-presidents have gathered opponents into their cabinets, reached out to estranged former allies, engaged in aggressive diplomacy to maximize effectiveness and rallied the whole country for the fight. What does this one do? Gets a bunch of right-wing “journalists” into the White House to spread some partisan talking points. What a fucking disgrace this man and his journalistic lackeys are.
Excuse my language. But I can’t take this any longer. We’re at war; and he’s still playing Rove’s game.
Indeed we are at war, Andrew. It doesn’t seem to disturb you these days, however, when the Democratic leadership takes steps to undermine progress in Iraq in order to position themselves for the next election — Certainly not to the point where you curse like a drunken sailor. Playing “Rove’s game” bothers you quite a bit it seems, but you are happy to play Joe Trippi’s, or Ron Paul’s game.
Andrew has an excuse, of course:
My intemperate language earlier today is informed by my seeing “No End In Sight” last night. Day after day of observing the inexcusable can render one numb after a while. You can forget the trajectory of the deception and incompetence and recklessness of the last six years, and focus, as we should, on what can be done now, how to make things better in practice, how to rate the options in front of us. But at times, it’s worth looking back in anger.
…
This coming election is about the candidates, the issues and the parties. But it is also a verdict on these past six years. Was it a mistake? Or was it a catastrophe? How far do we need to go to expunge this deep stain on the reputation and honor of the United States? That, for me, is the primary question. Everything else is a function of willful amnesia.
Ah. So watching a film is what set Andrew off…behavior more akin to that of a high school sophomore than a nationally published writer. Andrew’s excuse makes it more clear than ever that he’s operating on emotion, rather than reason these days, but he’d still like you to acknowledge that if you don’t agree with him on what the “primary question” is regarding how this nation should punish itself for having taken actions Andrew doesn’t approve of, it’s you that suffer from willful amnesia.
Nice work, if you can get it, eh?
Filed under: Andrew Sullivan, Blogging, Iraq, News, Politics
I too was a reader of Andrew’s back in the day. I remember clearly when he went straight over the edge – it was the question of gay marriage. It was as if this single question was a matter of life and death to him – to the point that it completely and totally turned his mind.
Basically he decided that Bush was evil because he didn’t support gay marriage – therefore EVERYTHING Bush did was evil and must be reviled.
While I don’t agree with everything Bush has done – for that matter there are somethings I vehemently disagree with… to go so completely off the course of logic and sane argument lost me completely.
I haven’t read him for years now. And even when the link is relevant to the discussion at hand, I have no wish to read anything he writes. But I do wish I could write dementedly enough to get paid for it. What a gig!!!
I’ve given up on Andrew. It’s hard to believe I once looked up to him as an example of a balanced gay conservative.
I have seldom agreed with the President; I thought the war in Iraq was not sane policy, and I have criticized the President for it. But Sully has went from a lapdog that couldn’t say anything bad about the President to seeing the man as pure evil.
After a while his emotinalism became tiring and I just gave up listening to him. I haven’t read his blog in months and don’t care to ever again.
“Previous war-presidents have gathered opponents into their cabinets”
During WWII both parties supported the war effort, whereas today the Democratic Party bears more than a passing resemblance to the Copperheads of the Civil War. Regardless of how one feels about that terrible war, this is a distinction that puts the lie to Saint Andrew’s hysterical ravings. And I say “lie” deliberately: Nobody as well-educated as Andrew Sullivan could make this error by accident.
Oh and by the way, I too stopped reading Sullivan several years ago.
I recommend that you go see the movie “No End in Sight.” Just try it. Then see if you don’t share a pretty good share of his outrage and anger.