Is there some world championship for self-deceit and puffery of which I am unaware? Andrew Sullivan seems to have penned a winning entry. His theme, roughly - How I Was So Right About Sarah Palin Yet So Wrong About John Edwards.
My John Edwards Failure
I've been thinking about what seems to me a double standard in my treatment of vice-presidential frauds, with respect to Sarah Palin and John Edwards, and trying to figure out where I went wrong. No, I'm not backtracking on Palin: all I regret is not being able to expose her for real yet.
Any day now! Trig has a mother all right, and as soon as Andrew eliminates the three billion candidates from Planet Earth he can explore theories involving extra-terrestials.
Here is why Edwards got a pass:
So why did I let it go? My first reason is my leeriness of investigating people's sex lives. I had my own ransacked a decade ago and it was a brutalizing experience. The exposure of such intimate thing coarsens our discourse, violates human dignity and should, in my view, be done only if massive hypocrisy is on the table and the person is more than just a minor public figure. That's why I've long opposed outing people.
So I steered clear out of this sensitivity. I barely covered the Tiger Woods stuff for those reasons, and even came to defend Clinton in the end because of the callousness and fanaticism of Ken Starr. But there was something else at work here in the case of Edwards, I suspect.
The humble son of a millworker with the sainted wife bravely battling cancer while a loyal aide lives with the mother of the candidate's love child - no hypocrisy there. And Edwards was only in play for the Presidency, the Vice Presidency, or maybe Attorney General. Andrew only hunts big game. Highly paid golfers and potential Presidents aren't important.
But he has another reason:
It just seemed too awful for me to believe. I mean his wife, whom I took to be a very decent person, had terminal cancer.
Oh, and Andrew is far too decent a man! Now, Sarah Palin has a baby with Down's Syndrome, but there is no tragedy there - after all, who wouldn't lie about a baby or use it as a political prop?
The admission of error:
In all this, of course, I was wrong. It really was that bad, and if Game Change is to be believed (and I think it broadly is), it was even worse. My mistake as a journalist was in making an assumption of a baseline of decency in public officials that it is not my job to make. My job is to assume nothing and to trust nothing until verified.
Assume nothing and trust nothing. Uh huh. So we know Andrew will hop to on the Bill Ayers/Barack Obama connection - Team Obama lied about it repeatedly during the campaign, so there is no question that something was being hidden. How tightly is Obama controlling the telling of his own life story? Will the media play along with his brand management, or seek out the facts? This is a Truth to Power moment I know Andrew will pursue with vigor and commitment.
Or maybe he won't. Any wagers?
Andrew and the doppelbloggers are so remorseful that they briefly abandon use of the English language:
With Palin, people assumed that because she was a governor, she had a baseline level of competence, logic, general knowledge and mental stability. Wrong. On the Trig stuff, it was just too absurd to doubt her story, however factually implausible it appeared.
I don't know what that means but I have only read it six times (seventh time lucky?!?... Nope.)
I get the first bit - it was wrong to assume that Palin had a baseline level of competence. But what does "On the Trig stuff, it was just too absurd to doubt her story" mean? Andrew did doubt her story, quite famously. Puzzling.
His big finish:
I want to apologize to my readers for dropping this ball. And congratulate the National Enquirer for following the facts where they eventually led.
There's courage in that. Pulitzer-level courage.
Oh, there was Pulitzer-level courage in sticking with the "Trig spawned by space aliens" angle too. National Enquirer level courage.
For myself, I am stuck on the simpler theory that Andrew wants to bash what he sees as homophobic Republicans, not seemingly sympathetic Dems.
DARE WE SAY IT? Let's cut back to the coverage of the Edwards campaign and offer a cheer for the "Three H's". The usual suspects decried the media focus on Edwards' homes, hair cuts and hedge funds while ignoring the Real Issues, but in hindsight the press was clearly using that as a metaphor for a larger truth, to wit, Edwards was an utter phony.
Yeah, that was back when he had a Right Wing Noise Machine that could make some noise. But those days are coming back, baby!
Sullivan's insane. He should be sent back to England to live his final days in quiet anonymity.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | February 04, 2010 at 09:50 PM
Edwards doesn't have a vagina ..that's the diff.
Andrew is clearly insane and clearly hates Palin because she's attractive and capable.
Edwards OTOH always struck me as terrifically unmasculine..a kind of political Liberace. But more conventionally dressed.The kind of guy old ladies in see through dresses you don't want to see through flock about.
Posted by: clarice | February 04, 2010 at 09:58 PM
Is there some world championship for self-deceit and puffery of which I am unaware?
Sully's up against John Kerry, War Hero, Barack "Fiscal Responsibility" Obama, &c, &c, &c.
Posted by: bgates | February 04, 2010 at 10:03 PM
A number of blogs refuse to link Sullivan, it's like the T-4 virus,risking contamination,
now he has also being promoting this latest
theory, also featured in the Lacey book I've
referenced before, starring our 'good friends'
the Uteibi's, or as Doughty called them the Ateyba, in the LUN
Posted by: narciso | February 04, 2010 at 10:10 PM
Silly Sully is so stupid and irrelevant.
Posted by: bad | February 04, 2010 at 10:12 PM
This may be the funniest Sullivan post you've ever written. I mean, sure, he served up the raw material for you, but, well, by god, Sir, fine work!
Posted by: Tom Bennett | February 04, 2010 at 10:14 PM
Please keep this hysterical moron out of our lives. I beg you, Maguire, stop quoting Sullivan and Yglesias. There are innumerable better conversation starters available.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 04, 2010 at 10:16 PM
I'm twice delighted. First, because Zeb-head Sullivan realizes that neither he, nor anyone else, has exposed Palin as anything other than what she appears to be. Second, I'm delighted that even TM doesn't know what the hell Dullivan means when he writes that screwy stuff.
I consider it a personal failure that I cannot understand or even remotely fathom why anyone would say anything bad about a mother of 5 who became one of the leading political figures of the last decade.
If Sullivan had a theory that John Edwards was Trig's father, I could see why that would make Palin look bad. But, it's my understanding that Sullivan is accusing Sarah about lying about the child's maternity in order to protect her daughter from attacks by outrageous journalists. Of course it's hard to tell what the guy is talking about, because he's nuts!
Posted by: MikeS | February 04, 2010 at 10:18 PM
" Will the media play along with his brand management, or seek out the facts?"
So true. The Obama inconsistecies are there for all to see, but no one wants to touch it. But I think the diff is the media knows deep down and doesn't care even if it's true.
As to Sarah story being implausible, I am not quite sure what it means. Maybe because she didn't show much in pregnancy, which from the clips I saw, is true. It is a little odd that she managed to hide her pregnancy for so long, being an active governor of a state. However, perhaps being athletic there's a difference in showing. I must look that up sometime. See I am an equal opp conspiracy theorist.
One thing that's good about the modern age is that we have video and texts and of course DNA. Remember in the old days when people in the beginning could even hardly believe Bill Clinton cheated? Now the gals have lots of proof. And I think society understands more about what is going on behind closed doors.
Posted by: sylvia | February 04, 2010 at 10:22 PM
Just like with the IPCC, there is a monetary basis for this type of lie, promulgated by Sullivan. Dan Riehl, who has had a bit of a falling out over the Tea Party Nation, has
uncovered the sundry character at IM, who
was sponsored through a Soros false front to
spread these lies. I didn't think anyone would
accept these lies for a minute, but then I couldn't have imagined that 9/11 denialists
would gain any public support either.
Posted by: narciso | February 04, 2010 at 10:29 PM
I think so too. Great job, Tom.
I was puzzled how Andrew could state this
and this
BUT he assumes Plain is bad based on nothing verified even though he says not his job and still even though it's not his job he regrets he can't expose his unverified assumption FOR REAL YET!!
Don't the he and his sockpuppets proof their posts to save themselves form the embarrassment of gobbly gook hyper-ventilating craziness?
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | February 04, 2010 at 10:36 PM
What's "IM"?
Posted by: clarice | February 04, 2010 at 10:37 PM
Oh yeah, and states that character is so important to him that's why his favorite presidents of all time are Reagan and Obama.
Sorry, hope you didn't spit your drink straight on your monitor laughing too hard.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | February 04, 2010 at 10:39 PM
Speaking of criticizing, one thing I think is interesting is Joy Behar (yes I watch that show) always going after Glen Beck.
And contrary to the start of her show, she never invites Repubs on to defend him, it's always people like Arianna Huffington on the show all piping in unison basically saying Beck is the devil. She doesn't understand why people watch him and thinks they are brainwashed by him and she hates his conspiracy theories.
She can't get that many people watch him for an alternative point of view. Like I do. I might not agree with everything he says, and sometimes I think he is kooky with his theories, but I like to hear them to see what parts of it I think may be true or not. It makes you think.
One thing I think Beck does poorly is never have guests on with a different point of view. He doesn't seem to take disagreement well. He is like the conservative Joy Behar. Those two are very similar actually.
Posted by: sylvia | February 04, 2010 at 10:40 PM
Oh crumb. A Dougj.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | February 04, 2010 at 10:41 PM
"A Dougj",ts? What's that?
Posted by: clarice | February 04, 2010 at 10:42 PM
Just your troll friends speaking troll speak Clarice.
Posted by: sylvia | February 04, 2010 at 10:44 PM
I suppose calling this a "fairy tale" would be wrong.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | February 04, 2010 at 10:49 PM
Clarice
An idiot.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | February 04, 2010 at 10:49 PM
Clarice,
A wack job from Balloon Juice who makes our regular trolls look considerably less insane. TS has a great memory.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | February 04, 2010 at 10:52 PM
You know, this National Enquiror story on Edwards is very interesting. It is one of the few times in history that group think is actually punctured. To the point where there is no denial left.
Group think is so strong, that often times even if you give people the logic and some proof, that people don't want to believe badly about members of "their team".
So they come up with excuses and counter lies to get out of it. Usually they bury the story in the media. But the Nat Enq went on and on till they got the whole story. And that hardly ever happens, where there is enough proof to really pin down the story so that people can't get out of believing it.
So this is new. I'm telling you, we have reached a new era in human history. I wonder how this will change ethics and perceptions going forward.
Posted by: sylvia | February 04, 2010 at 10:52 PM
I suppose calling this a "fairy tale" would be wrong.
Yes, but at the same time oh-so right.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | February 04, 2010 at 10:53 PM
Sullivan is the embodiment of Gresham's law, bad corrupt speech drives out the good, I view
Behar's retromingent circlejerks in much the
same way. For a time she did have Coulter and
SE Cupp for rebuttal, but that wouldn't make
for enough of an echochamber
Posted by: narciso | February 04, 2010 at 10:53 PM
TS does have a great memory and is the world's greatest researcher. Particularly as age dims my poor faculties even further, TS is the sort of person I never want to lose as a friend.
Posted by: clarice | February 04, 2010 at 10:58 PM
Awe Clarice, back at ya.
Hey, Obama's tanking in New Hampshire so sayeth new poll, didn't he make a trip there today or yesterday? Thought that was weird.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | February 04, 2010 at 11:02 PM
"Her story"
Sarah Palin had a baby. It's not "her story".
I think Sullivan gets way to much press in conservative circles because "he was once a conservative". I have always held that when Sullivan endorsed Kerrey because he was "more fiscally responsible" everyone should have realized he was no longer rational.
Posted by: ben | February 04, 2010 at 11:03 PM
We should start a web wide campaign to have "birthers" mean people who think Trig is not Sarah and Todd's son but their daughter's.
I have never read Sullivan on his own blog. Just snippets here and there. And for that I'm thankful.
Posted by: Sue | February 04, 2010 at 11:06 PM
Excellent point, ben. Remember that was just after Sullivan told the audience of a gay mag he was supporting Kerry at the very same time he was leading his readers on his own blog to believe he'd not yet decided who he'd endorse. And then he has the nerve to talk about character.
He LIED. Flat out lied to his own readers.
Posted by: clarice | February 04, 2010 at 11:09 PM
Ben,
Exactly. The same for the original Joe Wilson and Scary Larry "switching" political parties because Bush "lied".
Posted by: Sue | February 04, 2010 at 11:09 PM
We should start a web wide campaign to have "birthers" mean people who think Trig is not Sarah and Todd's son but their daughter's.
HAH. I love it. I do know it's been referred to as Trig Trutherism...Trig Birtherism.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | February 04, 2010 at 11:12 PM
Life is better with the narcisolator.
For a horror inducing second or two I read a posting by Sylvia which seemed to me to be the same as posts written over a year ago. I thought with the return of AS to the Trig Palin is really Rosemary's Baby theme we were about to return to JOM's third circle of hell, Sylvia's equal opportunity conspiracy theories.
Then the narcisolator kicked in and life was good again.
Posted by: laura | February 04, 2010 at 11:13 PM
I didn't think there was anyone more stupid that Zero, but Andrew "Not Sean" Sullivan wins I believe.
Posted by: Bill in AZ | February 04, 2010 at 11:14 PM
I think to get into journalism school, you have to provide the best excuses beyond "the dog ate your homework."
I heard one, once, where the homework was put on the floor while the car also had a hole in same floor. And, the homework was sucked out the bottom.
In other words? When you can pass this test you're a journalist. Then you ride the nice horsey around in circles, while you reach for your credential. Remember to wear your seat belt while riding.
Posted by: Carol Herman | February 04, 2010 at 11:18 PM
Sullivan has so totally lost it, that I think it's wrong to link to him and to fisk him. I mean, that implies there is a certain level of seriousness, intelligence, and/or logic.
I think the only apt response to Sullivan these days is to point and laugh.
Posted by: Karen | February 04, 2010 at 11:21 PM
Mr. Sullivan seems to suffer both from profound gender confusion and some sort of intellectual deficit perhaps rooted in one of the diseases common to his cohort. His childhood must have been a nightmare. The man should be ignored and pitied rather than excoriated. Even if patently offensive there are limits beyond which he is not responsible for his behavior. Please leave the man unremarked upon and in peace.
Posted by: Mandingo Bacigalupi | February 04, 2010 at 11:30 PM
Good grief. Sully needs to find a nice cozy hospice in which to live out the remainder of his demented life.
Posted by: Alo Konsen | February 04, 2010 at 11:48 PM
The thing about Sarah Palin is that even if she had shortcomings, it would have been based on how much she was challenged in her daily life. So if she is around allegedly brilliant people from Washington, she will get it.
It may take a year or two, but she would get it.
But wait, John McCain might die of cancer, the progressivtards bemoaned, the same progressivtards that went ballistic against Hillary Clinton for not quitting.
Even funnier was talking about McCain dying when his 96 year old mother was on the campaign trail with him.
Posted by: Alessandro Machi | February 04, 2010 at 11:51 PM
I think the doppleblogger wrote this graff poorly- see if this makes more sense:
With Palin, people assumed that because she was a governor, she had a baseline level of competence, logic, general knowledge and mental stability. On the Trig stuff, it was just too absurd [for people] to doubt her story, however factually implausible it appeared. Wrong.
Changes mine.
Posted by: Free Radical | February 05, 2010 at 12:03 AM
Meanwhile in other news...
I have lost any remaining faith in the meaning of such terms as "new jobless claims" and all the other claptrap surrounding the government's unemployment data. I still cling to Calvin Coolidge's formulation: "When unemployment is up, people are out of work."
Beyond that, it's all unexpected.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 05, 2010 at 12:04 AM
I fully expect to find Andy howling at the moon.
Posted by: Neo | February 05, 2010 at 12:14 AM
TM,
How do you know this is written by Sullivan and not by one of his sock-puppets stewing or sauteing or simmering or flamabeying or whatever the hell else it is they do over there in queer Andy's cerebral juices?
Posted by: daddy | February 05, 2010 at 12:14 AM
I finally figured it out. Sylvia is a Sullivan sock puppet.
Posted by: Buford Gooch | February 05, 2010 at 12:16 AM
Posted by: Neo | February 05, 2010 at 12:16 AM
Calm down. Sullivan is batshit crazy and not worth all this effort.
But, why do you link to him and give him any more traffic?
Posted by: Marty | February 05, 2010 at 12:24 AM
"My first reason is my leeriness of investigating people's sex lives."
Wait, what?
Posted by: Achillea | February 05, 2010 at 12:24 AM
--I finally figured it out. Sylvia is a Sullivan sock puppet.--
I suspect she may be the extra-terrestrial who gave birth to Trig that TM references.
Posted by: Ignatz | February 05, 2010 at 12:28 AM
Posted by: Neo | February 05, 2010 at 12:51 AM
Corpsman! Corpsman!!
Posted by: Mike Huggins | February 05, 2010 at 12:56 AM
Clarice,
Jim Treacher is suffering even more abuse than your taxi driver friend. Is DC a third world country with State Department drivers rnjoying diplomatic immunity LUN
Posted by: PaulV | February 05, 2010 at 01:02 AM
Neo,
I thought it was the punchline to the old joke by Otto Von Bismark on how to solve the Irish problem.
If I recall correctly he said something like: "You take all the Irish and move them to Holland, and you take all the Dutch and move them to Ireland. The Dutch will thrive in Ireland, and the Irish will drown."
That's probably where the UN got its Science date from---Bismark's comedy routines.
Posted by: daddy | February 05, 2010 at 01:04 AM
Sullivan's obsession with Palin and her offspring is simply a one-sided cat fight larded with gooey dollops of bitchy vitriol. I'm not implying that his tres boring windmill tilting comes from Sully's latent vagina envy... just sayin'
Posted by: Neal | February 05, 2010 at 01:05 AM
Ahh Sylvia --
It is a little odd that she managed to hide her pregnancy for so long
Occam's razor, my dear.
It is far easier to wear big clothing, coats, scarves etc when one is pregnant at the age of 44 and has a lot of other important things going on. The pictures actually reinforce the fact that she was pregnant if you look at her clothing choices.
So put your worried conspiracy heart at rest. Don't waste your time 'looking it up.'
I speak with The Voice of Authority, having been there done that, (just not as a governor).
Sullivan is sad. And sometime soon he will be taking a sabbatical to spend more time with his beagles.
Posted by: JAL | February 05, 2010 at 01:07 AM
The reason Sullivan gave John Edwards a pass is obvious, he was in love with him. Maybe Andrew believed Ann Coulter's comments about Edwards gayness and fantasized.
Posted by: fatman6502002 | February 05, 2010 at 01:08 AM
Bah,
My wife had the scuttlebutt early on the Palin pregnancies from an unimpeachable source---the Hair Dressers at the Allure Day Spa hair cut chicks.
While getting her standard 'doo the wife said Bab's said they were both pregger's 2 months before the news, and Chiffon and Guadalupe' chipped in and confirmed it, and Loretta likewise swore it was Gospel, as well as Miranda and Kimberly and Lutetia.
So there. That puts that dead horse out to pasture once and for all.
Posted by: daddy | February 05, 2010 at 01:19 AM
"It is far easier to wear big clothing, coats, scarves etc when one is pregnant at the age of 44 "
Yeah I've seen a lot of pregnant women, and it's kind of hard to hide with a scarf. Now I heard obese women can do that sometimes, but Sarah was thin. I saw an interview with her on Greta when she was supposed to be iirc about 7 mos preg, and she didn't look it. I wonder if that had something to do with Down's Syndrome maybe? It was just odd.
Posted by: sylvia | February 05, 2010 at 01:24 AM
OT, but cool: Roman 782 gear.
A venerable multi-tool. Even back then, there was a special 'Silky Pony' version available...it came with a comb and a mirror.
A.S., OTOH, is simply a tool. Let's call him "The Wedge" - you know, the simplest of all tools.
Posted by: Mustang0302 | February 05, 2010 at 01:34 AM
Andrew Sullivan is the one blogger President Obama admits to reading. That explains how he can be so out of touch with the public...
Posted by: Martin L. Shoemaker | February 05, 2010 at 01:41 AM
The Atlantic loses credibility every day this egregious specimen of polymorphous perversity continues to splatter his fecal material under its masthead on line.
And if Obama admits to reading him, the Won loses even more cred in the marketplace of ideas and opinion, because A.S. is without one & is an obsessive stalker of Sarah Palin with only his moronic opinions, including breaking news that Todd was getting a divorce the next day, oh back in September. This meathead just keeps trying to be Nancy Pelosi in a fat male body.
Posted by: daveinboca | February 05, 2010 at 01:51 AM
After reading Sully Obama probably tunes in Oblermann
Posted by: Neal | February 05, 2010 at 01:52 AM
OT,
The Anchoress has recommended 90 minutes with Justice Thomas here: A Conversation with Associate Justice Clarence Thomas (You need Internet Explorer sadly to watch it)
If you would like to just have some of the audio for IMAC users go here: http://www.wusf.usf.edu/pbcore/7161/full_audio.xml ">Justice Thomas
Other links: here
If anyone finds video for IMAC or other links to his speech please let me know.
A movie comparing the lives of President Barack Obama and Justice Clarence Thomas would be astounding to me. Just their understanding of the U.S. Constitution would make an award winning picture to show our kids.
It is so sad to realize the different treatment these two men were given and the outcomes of both that have touched and changed an entire generation.
God Bless The Honesty of Justice Clarence Thomas and our nation. It makes me sick who we give awards too. That has to change and not with fake HOPE but real spine changing belief in this country.
Sorry, I listen to Clarence Thomas and think about what we could of been w/o Biden, Kennedy, Leahy and the other SOB's that put our nation on this path to distruction.
I grew up like Clarence Thomas. What the heck are we going to do to get it back. It makes me cry that we take our valuable time to talk about Andrew Sullivan. Why?
Posted by: Ann | February 05, 2010 at 01:56 AM
The bad news: The BHO Store in D.C. has gone t!t$ up.
The good news: This news makes A.S. twice as sick - BHO Fail + reference to female anatomy.
Posted by: Mustang0302 | February 05, 2010 at 02:20 AM
61 comments before someone thought to link Dial 'M' For Maternity: Excerpts from the new Mike Loads gyno-mystery by Andrew Sullivan. Tsk tsk.
Posted by: Extraneus | February 05, 2010 at 05:56 AM
"...My first reason is my leeriness of investigating people's sex lives."
My God, did Andrew Sullivan really write that? Andrew Sullivan?
The man is out of his mind. The virus has cheesed his brain. If he means what that says, he can't even read his own writing.
Posted by: Francis W. Porretto | February 05, 2010 at 06:49 AM
Is Sylvia a sock puppet for Andy Pandy?
Posted by: WestWright | February 05, 2010 at 07:11 AM
So why did I let it go? My first reason is my leeriness of investigating people's sex lives.
Really? How is questioning the maternity of a child any different?
Posted by: Goldwaters Ghost | February 05, 2010 at 07:28 AM
John Edwards' biggest scandal isn't that he couldn't keep it in his pants. He should be indicted for illegally using campaign money to buy his mistress a house and to support his illegitimate kid.
And let's face it, we all know that Sarah Palin conspired to have a retarded kid, so that some day she could chastise Rahm Emanuel.
Posted by: peter | February 05, 2010 at 07:45 AM
I think it's preposterous to investigate let alone charge Edwards for that. Time for the prosecution to fold its tent.
Posted by: clarice | February 05, 2010 at 08:00 AM
Exactly what do you have against my gayness?
Posted by: Raw Muscle Glutes | February 05, 2010 at 08:05 AM
You misheard=I am against your feyness not your gayness.
Posted by: clarice | February 05, 2010 at 08:09 AM
I can't believe I'm even wading in here, but one great way to tell that Sarah was really pregnant is to look at her face in the photos during the later part of her pregnancy and in the photo with Todd after Trig was born. There is a puffiness there that believe me, is very hard to hide (or fake), esp. on a woman who would be very slim if not pregnant.
Later pregnancies seem to show less than earlier ones - possibly because the mom often doesn't bother to rush out and buy every maternity item on the rack, but instead tries to wear her regular clothes longer. I can speak to that. :)
Lastly, Down's children are smaller even in the womb - that may be a factor.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 05, 2010 at 08:12 AM
Maternal age influences the chances of conceiving a baby with Down syndrome. At maternal age 20 to 24, the probability is one in 1562; at age 35 to 39 the probability is one in 214, and above age 45 the probability is one in 19.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_syndrome
Posted by: Undertoad | February 05, 2010 at 08:37 AM
Sullivan's insane. He should be sent
backtoEnglandYemento live his final days in quiet anonymity.where his severed head could be used as a soccer ballSorry but I'm continually amused by this ignorant popinjay's descent into complete lunacy. Tweety and the rest of the MessNBC fools gave him a forum as a "conservative"; let them and the Atlantic be associated with him forever.
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 05, 2010 at 08:56 AM
This rather loopy attack on Palin doesn't appear to be one of Sully's fever-swamp induced hallucinations, but rather a concerted effort. First out of the box was the Times's Timothy Egan who wrote in Grifters’ Tale:
Yeah that was convincing. Then we had Sully, still searching for the meaning of life in Sarah Palin's uterus. Today, Heather Horn piles on without substance in: Edwards and Palin: Who Can Tell the Difference?Gotta admit being a bit baffled by all this. How is it supposed to work, exactly? John Edwards was unfaithful so Trig must not be Sarah's baby? (Okay, that explains Sully, but . . . ?) Is this JournoList at work? Even the Kos types aren't jumping on this bandwagon. A little Googling shows Peter Collier noted the meme yesterday. I know Sarah wouldn't approve, but Rahm's "effing retarded" seems apt.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | February 05, 2010 at 09:11 AM
Isn't it pretty well established by now that the man you're writing about here has shown repeatedly that he is grossly unfair and unbalanced in his writing? Why is anyone still paying attention to him? Not all trolls limit their writings to blog post comments. Don't feed the trolls.
Posted by: Milton Stanley | February 05, 2010 at 09:22 AM
I wonder when and if this Sarah hatred will go over the edge and reverse. We are seeing it with Bush, starting with the Hillbuzz apology and now the European newspapers. I wonder if a time will come when people begin to appreciate Sarah.
I don't mind the posts about Sullivan. He's just a joke to me.
Posted by: Jane | February 05, 2010 at 09:47 AM
Good catch, Cecil. I suppose the journolists are just smart enough to realize Palin's still a problem and have decided that everytime a pol does something wrong they are going to suggest she's just as bad.
Really, it's time they moved on to Downtown Scotty Brown.
Posted by: clarice | February 05, 2010 at 09:51 AM
At some point, I think it is going to be recognized that Sullivan (or whoever is writing posts for him at a given moment) is not to be taken seriously. One can disagree vigorously with folks such as Greenwald (and I disagree with most of Greenwals's expressed views), but I think they deserve to be taken seriously. Sullivan? I'd say he was the Don Rickles of the blogosphere, except that Rickles was truly funny, while Sullivan's insults long ago crossed into the cosmos of the pathetic.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | February 05, 2010 at 09:54 AM
Milton Stanley:
"Why is anyone still paying attention to him?"
It's the guilt-free intellectual version of gawking at car crashes and train wrecks, or shooting fish in barrels. What's not to like?
Posted by: JM Hanes | February 05, 2010 at 10:34 AM
Sullivan and his retinue produce an often interesting product, and I read him for a very long time (and resume looking there when things in Iran heat up.) But his blog is like seeing someone like Judy Garland in decline. The gifts are there, the skill is often there, but the years of self-abuse (in Sullivan's case -- the effortless but radical intellectual course corrections) make for a product that is hard to watch or listen to. And, frankly, I simply don't trust him to give an uncompromised honest assessment of anything other than the wonderfulness of beagles.
Posted by: Appalled | February 05, 2010 at 10:51 AM
Is this JournoList at work?
Bingo.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | February 05, 2010 at 01:23 PM
Sullivan's post shows that he, and presumably other Leftists, are aware that when they denigrate Sarah Palin they are vulnerable to the retort of, "Did you see anything wrong with Edwards, a guy so bogus that he might as well have had the word 'phony' tattooed on his forehead?" How can a person claim to be a good judge of character if he or she missed the obvious phoniness of Edwards? I have not seen a good answer to this but at least Sullivan knows it is a problem for him and other Palin bashers.
Posted by: nohype | February 05, 2010 at 01:26 PM
For what it's worth Sylvia, at the health club I frequent one of the instructors was 7 months pregnant and imho was just starting to show! It's amazing how small athletic women can look. It doesn't take a conspiracy theory.
Posted by: Matthew Crandall | February 05, 2010 at 03:06 PM
For some reason my wife of 30 years thinks Andi Sullivan is "cute". And I have to say that I think Sarah Palin is "hot".
So we're even I guess.
Posted by: sullyFan | February 05, 2010 at 03:31 PM
"a guy so bogus that he might as well have had the word 'phony' tattooed on his forehead"
Oh, so that's what the hair was coiffed to cover.
Posted by: sbw | February 05, 2010 at 04:04 PM
The "Ellie LIght" version of an orchestrated "Time to hammer Sarah Campaign" remains in full swing in Alaska.
The ">http://www.adn.com/palin/story/1125241.html"> "Sarah didn't Pay her Cabin Taxes" story has 169 comments, mostly negative.
The new ">http://community.adn.com/adn/node/147559"> "E-Mails shoe Todd Palin gave Sarah advice" story has 207 comments, mostly negative.
The ">http://community.adn.com/adn/node/147561"> Senator Begich tries to overturn the Supreme's Corporate Finance Ruling has 6.
All 3 stories were posted on the same day, 5 February.
Posted by: daddy | February 05, 2010 at 08:09 PM
My daughter gave me one of those email shoes for Xmas.
Posted by: MikeS | February 05, 2010 at 08:22 PM
Reading these comments shows me how irrelevant Sullivan can be. I can see reading his little "mea culpa's" for missing an obvious cover up of a sexual scandal by a presidential hopeful with a terminally ill wife and but to say that he hasn't insulted Sarah Palin enough, well that screams bias and a goal to keep the balances always tipped. It may be that Sarah Palin is female and Mr. Edwards is not, I have no idea of his motives. I do smell double standard here but I may be wrong. I will not assume anything as I do not know Mr. S., nor have read anything by him before today. All I know is that he hasn't seemed to take a critical look at what is going on in this country and think about what he wants for the future here. Some day he may want to have children in his home, he needs to thing of that future. I believe if he had, he wouldn't play the part of a "yenta" when it comes to Palin and would concentrate on the what is really going on in this country.
If we want this kind of information, hell we've got the National Enquirer that we can read. He seems like an intelligent gent and may have a lot of information to offer, but this article/confession seems irrelevant - life is too short for all of us.
Posted by: Seagull1106 | February 07, 2010 at 11:52 PM