Andrew Sullivan has gone too far.
Is there a club for people utterly disgusted with Andrew Sullivan? If so, please count me in.
Now, I know many conservatives dislike him because of his wacko campaign on behalf of Obama. I’m no conservative. And I know Sullivan claims to be a libertarian, as do I, but I also know that Sullivan claims lots of things that just aren’t so. But his hatred for Sarah Palin is so rabid and irrational that I have to wonder the cause -- a stroke perhaps?
Sullivan was a major source spreading the demonstrably false claim that Palin had faked her recent pregnancy in order to deceive the public. This wacko theory argued that the baby actually belonged to her daughter. That is physically impossible as the daughter is pregnant now and sufficiently pregnant to have been in that condition when the baby was born in April. In other words, for Sullivan’s bullshit theory to have been accurate the girl would have to be pregnant with two infants simultaneously, conceived months apart. But Sullivan is into virgin births so maybe this sort of “miracle” makes sense to him.
The people at Reason magazine had been friendly with Sullivan in the past. They had him speak at a conference they put on in Amsterdam which I attended. But Reason rips into Sullivan for his irrational bout with fringe theories and his snipping manner. The Reason article notes that Sullivan pushed his theory without a shred of “compelling evidence.”
Narcissistic Andrew went so far as demanding that Palin release her medical records to prove she had actually given birth to her son. In another post he demanded that the McCain campaign put an end to the rumors, which he was helping spread, by releasing the medical records. He bitched: “So let’s have them. And then we can move on.”
This is typical Sullivan who is convinced that the sun shines out of his ass. Sullivan spreads a false rumor with no hard evidence to back up his wacko theory. He then demands that others cater to his demands to prove him wrong. And he whines that their refusal to obey him is preventing us from moving on.
Reason was amazed that Sullivan couldn’t “move on” from his petty gossiping even after it was shown to have been impossible for the infant to belong to Palin’s daughter. “Even after Palin announced that her daughter was pregnant, Sullivan couldn't exactly move on, and despite the chronological impossibility—to which he was previously so attentive—of the child actually belonging to the governor's daughter, Sullivan proclaimed: ‘Now all we need is confirmation from the obstetrician who delivered Sarah's baby, Trig.’”
I started out liking some of what Sullivan was saying. I got his book on conservatism and found some of it correct but much of it just nonsense. And I listened to his speech in Amsterdam, which I thought was badly organized, disjointed and poorly delivered. His arguments were weak there as well. I personally think he ripped off the Reason people and took a free trip to Amsterdam on them without delivering the goods. The high point of the evening when Sullivan spoke was when Tom Palmer, from Cato, very aptly and accurately pointed out the errors and mistakes Sullivan had made in his speech. Sullivan basically stuttered a bit, tried to respond without responding, and then ignored the response.
And in recent months it has become clear to me that Sullivan is actually a sad little man. He isn’t stupid but I suspect he may be lazy. He is not doing the research to back us his positions. He basically makes decisions and then twists evidence to fit them. He is absolutely convinced that he is correct and therefore the evidence must fit his theory. To make it more boring he is entirely self-absorbed constantly informing us about his personal life, as if we care, or trying to promote his own importance in the grand scheme of things.
I have to wonder if Mr. Sullivan, having been afflicted with decades of self-loathing inflicted on him by his Catholicism and the closet, has never actually made peace with himself. He appears to literally think that he is the center of the universe. And I find myself reading less and less of his tiresome blog at The Atlantic. In fact I only checked it today after reading the Reason article to see if he responded. After all it is a chance to make himself a topic of conversation again.
What I found on today’s blog was mind-boggling. It was a full page of attacks on Palin. I counted 31 different posts, most consecutively, attacking Palin. Really, if Andrew has such a hard-on for Obama he really shouldn’t be so obvious.
Now Sullivan is stooping to a new low and trying to paint Palin as an anti-Semite. We saw how Obama’s people were trying to claim that she was friends with a “Nazi-sympathizer” because she attended a local campaign meeting where Pat Buchanan spoke. Sullivan pushed that as well even though Palin was on record as supporting Steve Forbes not Buchanan!
The proof that Sullivan offers is as pathetic as normal for him. Palin attends an evangelical church. At that church a representative from Jews for Jesus spoke. Jews for Jesus are converts to Christianity who attempt to convert other Jews. There you have it! Anti-semite. This is pathetic.
Evangelicals try to convert everyone! That means Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Lutherans, Hindus, Anglicans, etc. While I have no sympathy for evangelicalism in particular, or religion in general, it is the height of absurdity to try to paint this sort of evangelism as anti-Semitism. That is the nature of the evangelical. If anything, the evangelical tends to be overly pro-Israel taking the view that Israel can do no wrong. And Sullivan’s own much loved Catholic Church, has a long history of real anti-Semitism that makes the Evangelicals look like amateurs. As far as I know Evangelicals have never burned a Jew at the stake the way Sullivan’s own Church has.
What is even more astounding is Sullivan’s open double-standard on such things. When Obama was crtiticized for attending a church where his pastor said things considered anti-American he was defended by Sullivan. After all you can’t really hold him responsible for a sermon he heard. But Palin, well, she’s a different matter. His constant looking for dirt with which to smear Palin is even more bizarre when we consider his own sleazy record.
In this blogger’s view Andrew Sullivan has just become more than I can stand. His moralistic, hypocrisy, while being firmly rooted in his rampant Catholicism, is too much to endure. Add in his exaggerated sense of his own importance and the mixture is entirely stomach-turning. This blog has often given out a “moron of the week” award. But we have been reticent to award an “asshole of the week” award because I find the term rather offensive in general. But as I try to grapple with an apt description of Andrew Sullivan it is the only term that I find that really fits him perfect -- so we award Andrew Sullivan our first Asshole of the Week award -- no, at the very least it ought to be Asshole of the Month. It’s only September but so far he is our lead candidate for the annual award as well.
One wag has suggested that Mr. Sullivan suffers from AIDS dementia. However, he notes that this rumor could be cleared up immediately if Mr. Sullivan will just release his medical records to the public. Quoting Mr. Sullivan himself, I say: "So let's have them. And then we can move on." What about it Andrew? Will you prove with your medical records you are not suffering dementia?