Andrew Sullivan can't get over Sarah Palin. His latest explosion leads to another classic climbdown:
[Correction: I should have read the full Esquire excerpt rather than
the Courant summary of it. In the actual interview, she gives all three
reasons for Bristol's name. So no contradiction. My bad.]
He just can't quit her.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | February 07, 2009 at 12:24 AM
Biden Urges Passage of Stimulus Despite Voter Backlash
Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | February 07, 2009 at 12:57 AM
Well as I mentioned earlier, the Alaskan Senate voted today to find Sarah's husband, First Dude Todd Palin, along with 9 Sarah aides, in contempt for ignoring a subpeona to testify in the "Troopergate" Investigation. (ADN.com). The Resolution sponsored by Democrat State Senator Hollis French, who is supposedly soon to announce his run for Governor against Sarah), was widely reported today on local Talk Radio, and Walt Monegan, the Police Commissioner at the heart of the controversy, who was supposedly fired by Sarah for failing to fire the Trooper, is currently running for Mayor of Anchorage. This new round of negative Sarah press will probably greatly benefit both their candidacies with massive name recognition and outside money.
All this just now hot off our local newswires, my bet is that Andrew Sullivan will be giddily blabbing again about Levi, Trig and Bristol by Tuesday latest.
Posted by: Daddy | February 07, 2009 at 01:36 AM
There's something very, very unhealthy in the Democrat party today, and it ain't just in one state, or just at the national level, they've self selected for a new kind of pol.
Posted by: Pofarmer | February 07, 2009 at 06:54 AM
I think someone has a mancrush. Sullivan, put down that vaseline before you hurt yourself.
Posted by: TheWatcher | February 07, 2009 at 09:18 AM
Frum can't get over Sarah either.
I spent most of Thursday and Friday arguing about Palin over email with an old friend. She's a typical hater, and thinks Palin lost the election for McCain, but in the end I got her to admit that Palin was unfairly trashed by the media. Um, I asked, do you think that could have played a part in McCain's loss, then? Her answer: well, we'll probably never know because of the economy tanking at the same time. Which was my original point!
Anyway she put forth all the usual disinfo. And she is just about the smartest, most reasonable Dem I know besides my mom. Who also hates Palin. So it is going to be a long slog.
Don't get me wrong, I love Sarah, and I think that if the media coverage was anywhere near fair then she wouldn't have been the polarizing figure she was in the last election. But the depth of the hatred, and the idea of 2012 being a renewal of the culture wars writ large, depresses me.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 07, 2009 at 09:34 AM
You know I think Sarah reminds some people of George Bush and that's why they hate her. ( I'm trying to write a post on FWDAJ about style v substance, and how in this elected the media determined that we don't need no stinkin' substance), and in the course of that I was thinking about the styles of past presidents and candidates. Obama is cool and Kennedy was cool and Gore is a geek and Bush is a cowboy.
Now the whole redstate cowboy thing really appeals to me, but it turns a lot of people off - as we have seen. I think Sarah represents the same sort of red state self-sufficient hard worker that Bush did, and maybe that's why so many people hate her.
It's an elistist thing.
Posted by: Jane | February 07, 2009 at 09:49 AM
In Sullivan's case, I think he hates her for the same reason Paglia likes her--she's a strong, capable woman--real woman--with kids and breasts and peep toed shoes and all.
Posted by: clarice | February 07, 2009 at 09:55 AM
It's an elistist thing.
I think you're right. I tried to argue this with my friend, and she countered with the story of "McCain's illegitimate black daughter" from 2000 - meaning, McCain is upperclass and yet he got trashed by his own party, "so these things obviously transcend class boundaries." As if primary sniping in the GOP eight years ago somehow equals or outweighs the national sport of destroying Palin and her family which continues today.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 07, 2009 at 10:10 AM
"Excitable Andy" seems an obsessive woman hater. Maybe it's "vagina envy" ??
Posted by: Neo | February 07, 2009 at 10:30 AM
For the hell of it I checked to see what he's said about other women in politics--he is admiring of Thatcher although she's long out of it and therefore safe, but he hated Clinton:
"It's time feminists realized that Clinton is a dream gone sour. If you believe in women in politics, in female leaders who lead by themselves, on their own merits, with no strings to pull and husband-presidents to rely on, do yourself a favor and vote for Obama.
One day, there will be a woman worth electing to the White House. But not this one."
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/02/clinton-the-ant.html>Sullivan on Clinton
And again--he praises Thatcher but despises Palin:
"Thatcher was a brilliant, pioneering, fearless, open and ethical conservative. Palin is a proudly ignorant, cowardly, secretive, unethical, know-nothing populist. And John Miller used to be a fair writer."
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/10/palin-or-thatch.html>Sullivan on Palin
Of course, and I repeat myself, Palin is sexy and Thatcher was not.
Posted by: clarice | February 07, 2009 at 10:34 AM
I don't and haven't ever read Sullivan, but I sure read a lot about him in the blogosphere.
From what I have read it seems he FEARS her and probably envies her. Maybe he wishes he was her?
Posted by: centralcal | February 07, 2009 at 10:36 AM
Clarice, I think you're right about Andrew. I think the Atlantic has sullied (hee hee) its name by allowing his garbage under its masthead.
But the nature of it is what I find absolutely astonishing.
Sullivan claims to be a Roman Catholic, and as such I assume supports LIFE. No matter what he thinks about Palin's politics, I would think that he would at least acknowledge the courage and love involved in knowingly giving birth to a Downs Syndrome child, and showing the world that these children are a gift not an inconvenience.
Instead he has used Trig Palin as a weapon against her in the most hateful, perverse ways imaginable. I hope some psychiatrist writes a long paper on this phenomenon--a few good couch sessions could show the rabid Palin haters that it's not about her...
Posted by: verner | February 07, 2009 at 10:39 AM
It's the clearest case of vagina envy I've ever seen--and if Frued had been a woman he's have written about that phenomenon.
Posted by: clarice | February 07, 2009 at 10:41 AM
*Freud*
Posted by: clarice | February 07, 2009 at 10:41 AM
Warnes, H., Hill, G. "Gender identity and the wish to be a woman" Psychosomatics v. 15, no, 1, 1974, pp 25–29
"Envy and fascination with the female breasts and lactation, with pregnancy and childbearing and vagina envy are clues to a femininity complex of men which is defended against by psychological and sociocultural means." (quote from abstract)
Posted by: clarice | February 07, 2009 at 10:43 AM
Wow, that was quick! Maybe Andrew will lurk and gain a little self-knowledge.
He needs it in a very bad way.
Posted by: verner | February 07, 2009 at 10:56 AM
Of course, and I repeat myself, Palin is sexy and Thatcher was not.
Oh I don't know Clarice, Mrs. T was pretty hot in an icy middle class dominatrix kind of way. But she was no baby bouncer, and she could never have been a calendar girl on a Harley wearing a bikini like Sarah could be...
Posted by: verner | February 07, 2009 at 11:02 AM
HEH--True, verner.Do you suppose we should send Andrew a bill for the analysis?
Posted by: clarice | February 07, 2009 at 11:04 AM
For him, I'm happy to work pro bono--out of respect for the thinker and writer he used to be...
He's so pitiful.
Posted by: verner | February 07, 2009 at 11:07 AM
Goodmorning, well I see Sullivan is making Greeley roll over at what he is doing to the Atlantic's reputation. It looks like the people of Anchorage deserve Monaghan, as they did Begich. If I was ever motivated to work for a candidate, it would be her. Because of her qualities, and in part, let's face it, partially out of indignation for the way she was treated.
Posted by: narciso | February 07, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Surprisingly according to anexcerpt in a comment on Tim Blair, they were saying the same things about Thatcher, thirty years ago.
Posted by: narciso | February 07, 2009 at 11:23 AM
andrew: sir edmund hillary
Posted by: BobS | February 07, 2009 at 11:34 AM
What about the embarrassing obsession over Andrew Sullivan?
Posted by: PaulL | February 07, 2009 at 11:35 AM
If I was ever motivated to work for a candidate, it would be her. Because of her qualities, and in part, let's face it, partially out of indignation for the way she was treated.
Especially those qualities that would look good in a bikini on a motorcycle....
Posted by: bad | February 07, 2009 at 11:37 AM
and andrew..please apply the same hissy-fit hysterics of a wronged soccer mom to one who is actually known to lie
Posted by: BobS | February 07, 2009 at 11:37 AM
What about the embarrassing obsession over Andrew Sullivan?
It's really more like the Krugman thing..a celebration of the blessing that we will never be that pathetically stupid.
Posted by: bad | February 07, 2009 at 11:42 AM
There cannot be more than one reason for anything. Period.
Posted by: The universe | February 07, 2009 at 11:48 AM
i'd like to get some opinions from my friends here about something i've been thinking.....my blog is hosted by a very nice fellow at a sports site, so i've been considering taking my political obsessions to a new blog while keeping my other as just a sports site. i've looked at using townhall.com.....anyone had any input?
Posted by: BobS | February 07, 2009 at 11:52 AM
Maybe so, bad, but I think analysis of Sullivan or Krugman or Brooks, etc., implies that they have something to say that is worth analyzing.
Posted by: PaulL | February 07, 2009 at 11:55 AM
word, PaulL, point taken
Posted by: bad | February 07, 2009 at 11:58 AM
PaulL
So you would say that Andrews post on Sarah Palin's reasons for choosing Bristol as her child's name was worth saying? He wrote 2 paragraphs on the subject that he admits later he didn't even really read the full article. I substituted He for she, his for her and now read Anrew's post
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | February 07, 2009 at 12:07 PM
btw.....notes clarice effectively went nuclear on sullivan.....sullivan's peculiarities on a wide range of topics make his legitimacy as a commentator a questionable thing at best......its sad to have witness them emerge as at the beginning i found him to be fair and thoughtful, but he became irrational
Posted by: BobS | February 07, 2009 at 12:35 PM
In Sullivan's case, I think he hates her for the same reason Paglia likes her--she's a strong, capable woman--real woman--with kids and breasts and peep toed shoes and all.
I believe there are certain hormones that, taken by men, cause the breasts to grow somewhat.
Perhaps Sully should look into that.
Posted by: PD | February 07, 2009 at 12:35 PM
time flys......the daytona 500 is next week and the magical time pitchers and catchers report is upon us
Posted by: BobS | February 07, 2009 at 12:41 PM
Acute vagina envy complicated by the onset of aids dementia.
LUN
Posted by: Chris | February 07, 2009 at 12:44 PM
ts--That is brilliant!
Posted by: clarice | February 07, 2009 at 12:46 PM
flies......badly in need of auto spellcheck that word provides...and i wish this damn shift key on the left worked
Posted by: BobS | February 07, 2009 at 12:51 PM
BobS, I find the Townhall interface to be a little clumsy/cluttered. And the comments there are a bit troll-ridden in my experience. But as hosting sites go, it might not be a bad place to start.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 07, 2009 at 12:52 PM
thanks, porchlight....i kinda miss my mets only theme on my regular blog and know i lost alot of readers to my right wing rants....ny's rather a left-wing locale...
Posted by: BobS | February 07, 2009 at 12:55 PM
I believe there are certain hormones that, taken by men, cause the breasts to grow somewhat.
Is that what happened to O?
Posted by: hit and run | February 07, 2009 at 01:01 PM
hit: experience matters, eh? but we were told its his judgement by bill bradley and the one himself talked about how evil dick cheney is, so we could throw experience to the wind....could it be that americans are witnessing what real wrong headed is?
Posted by: BobS | February 07, 2009 at 01:06 PM
Andrew Sullivan hates Sarah Palin because she represents the kind of people who don't automatically find gay couples adorable. I can no longer read him.
Posted by: MTheads | February 07, 2009 at 01:08 PM
it makes perfect sense that obama would acquiece to pelosi to write the stimulus package as in the illinois legislature, his handler just put his name on every piece of legislation. so he's used to someone else doing the actual work and just taking credit for it.
Posted by: BobS | February 07, 2009 at 01:09 PM
HA, BobS
Posted by: bad | February 07, 2009 at 01:20 PM
Nothin but love, verner & tops...nothin but love!!
Posted by: glenda | February 07, 2009 at 01:23 PM
PaulL:implies that they have something to say that is worth analyzing.
Andrew Sullivan has a wide audience, a place at a much-lauded, influential magazine, and was invited to meet with our new President. Obviously, he has much to say that many want to celebrate.
Is it best for his critics to ignore him, so he can continue getting only accolades?
Now, if Andrew Sullivan just went away, that would be fine with me. That doesn't seem to be an option.
Posted by: MayBee | February 07, 2009 at 01:24 PM
Excrement Andy hates Sarah Palin because he saw her as a threat to his latest crush, O.
Now he has to justify his idiotic obsession, hence the stupidity referenced by TM.
He'll lose the crush in time because his perpetual victimhood will overcome the unrequited urges.
Posted by: bad | February 07, 2009 at 01:29 PM
i understand your point maybee, yet the atlantic is a leftist rag, and its only natural that obama would bring in one of his cheerleaders....but you are correct in that he should not be ignored, but responded to when his disturbing points are written.....and sadly for sullivan - a writer once worthy of attention - these events only serve to discredit him further
Posted by: BobS | February 07, 2009 at 01:31 PM
Taranto made a pretty convincing argument a couple of years back that Sullivan is obsessed with the horrifying repulsiveness of menstruation. That he was turned against the WOT not by the "torture" of waterboarding, but by the "torture" of rubbing red dye on the interrogatees and telling them that it was menstrual blood.
Sarah's repulsiveness is precisely that those five children represent surefire proof that she has menstruated, and recently.
Posted by: cathyf | February 07, 2009 at 02:01 PM
cathyf- I agree with you and Taranto.
Posted by: MayBee | February 07, 2009 at 02:06 PM
Thanks for that reminder CathyF. I'd forgotten Taranto's theory.
My gay nephew thinks Sullivan would have long ago lost his Atlantic job if he wasn't gay. He also believes Sullivan reinforces all of the nastier gay stereotypes.
Posted by: bad | February 07, 2009 at 02:14 PM
Bob, Breitbart has started a wordpress site for bloggers at BigHollywood.com. Free and attached to a well laid out site.
Posted by: Stephanie | February 07, 2009 at 02:23 PM
wow...thanks, stephanie...i'll check it out
Posted by: BobS | February 07, 2009 at 02:58 PM
I toyed with the idea of emailing Andrew and warning him to get back on his meds, but then I thought better of it.
Posted by: Antimedia | February 08, 2009 at 03:27 PM
You guys are all missing it; the only thing Andi cares about is his gayness. Sarah is a threat to that because she made his wiener move.
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 09, 2009 at 11:27 AM