Posts Tagged ‘andrew sullivan’

You might recall in my dissertation on Bloggers Alzheimer’s I said the following:

Like regular Alzheimer patients some brief periods of lucidity may emerge (re Iran) but when exposed to the “external threat” again (re: Palin) the syndrome re-asserts itself. And the patient will often make an object of adoration of any opponent of the external threat.

Andrew proves both points, the first to his credit:

I’ve noticed a few right-of-center blogs complaining of double standards on the left, in the denunciations of extremist rhetoric and imagery of the Tea Party marches. Ed Driscoll has a good point. The extremes of the anti-war left before Iraq were every bit as inflammatory and loopy as the Tea Partiers today. Now, they were opposing a war that turned out to be a catastrophe for all involved, while the Tea Partiers are just opposing the working poor having a chance to buy health insurance. But if Godwin’s Law is the point, many (but not all) on the left currently do not have a leg to stand on.

Full marks to Sullivan for backing up Ed Driscoll and others who have not thrown the left’s marches down the memory hole.

Those brief moments of lucidity are precious to those who deal with Bloggers Alzheimer’s and it is welcome, but when the trigger returns so does the disease:

Some remaining questions: When exactly did Todd find out about the pregnancy? And when did he discover that his son had Down Syndrome? Or were those two pieces of news delivered simultaneously? Why did the Palins make no attempt to prepare their other children for Trig’s special needs when they had so long to do so? Why on earth did Palin believe that the mere fact of her pregnancy would elicit criticism and disdain – “Oh, the criticism that I knew was coming” – when it would obviously actually redound to her credit as a working mom and governor?

I’m taking a risk with this link and quote but I’m an old hand with Sullivan’s syndrome so don’t try this at home, remember the warning:

No current treatment is known for Sullivan’s syndrome but readers are advised to avoid prolonged exposure to the subject as the syndrome can spread to the point where the infected person can become the trigger for the syndrome in others.

So be careful.

Here comes that Kryten moment for those on the left (Hi Andrew) who were sure that George Bush was going to impose a religious test for free speech:

While attracting surprisingly little attention, the Obama administration supported the effort of largely Muslim nations in the U.N. Human Rights Council to recognize exceptions to free speech for any “negative racial and religious stereotyping.” The exception was made as part of a resolution supporting free speech that passed this month, but it is the exception, not the rule that worries civil libertarians. Though the resolution was passed unanimously, European and developing countries made it clear that they remain at odds on the issue of protecting religions from criticism. It is viewed as a transparent bid to appeal to the “Muslim street” and our Arab allies, with the administration seeking greater coexistence through the curtailment of objectionable speech. Though it has no direct enforcement (and is weaker than earlier versions), it is still viewed as a victory for those who sought to juxtapose and balance the rights of speech and religion.

I guess all you folks who took that idiotic Blasphemy challenge (which doesn’t actually work by the way) better watch out for Eric Holder and not Benedict XVI or George Bush.

To steal a line from Glenn from who this comes… They told me that if I supported Sarah Palin that free speech would be suppressed in favor of religious speech and they were right!

If there was ever a time that we will find out if the Obamacult is real this is it.

…and I agree with Ron Radosh’s article from Pajamas Media that said:

So is there any media source one can listen to on TV that is not part of the either-or mindset? Fortunately, if you get up early, there is Joe Scarborough on Morning Joe each day 6-9 am East Coast Time. He and his guests of different persuasions discuss things rationally, without screaming at each other, and in a mature and serious way. They have the kind of conversations you would have yourself with friends, probing those you disagree with and trying to reach them with arguments.

but c’mon guys! I just watched Andrea Mitchel (shudder) paint the Iran stuff as if the Administration is just getting this information and is now acting on it. Please:

One might also conclude that, since Obama says he has known about the Iranian deception at least since inauguration and possibly even during the campaign, therefore the One Himself was also lying to the American people and playing us for saps; he knew the Iranians were cheats and liars, but he told us we could trust them to honor agreements and tell the truth.

But one would be wrong… for the Obama administration (and its liberal allies) instead see the entire incident as adding to the luster of the president’s foreign-policy acumen.

Even worse Andrea sounds like Alexander Cockburn:

In reality the public disclosure of something the US knew about years ago ­ knowledge it shared with its prime Nato allies and Israel ­ changes nothing. The consensus of US intelligence remains that there is no hard evidence that Iran is actively seeking to manufacture nuclear weapons. Iran has agreed to an inspection of the plant at some appropriate point.

At least unlike Cockburn (the $10,000 man) they don’t blame Israel and even Mika is in favor of dropping the word allegedly from the building nukes.

But please, you guys are too smart to subscribe to Andrew Sullivan’s cunning plan theory.

And lets put the poll here too:

Apparently Andrea will be the first vote in favor.

Update: And don’t even get me started on the Polanski stuff, they are not covering themselves with glory over there today and the Washington post is covering themselves with even less.

Even if you give him every benefit of the doubt on the actual initial crime. He RAN.

Update 2: That’s gotta hurt.

Baldrick Hussein Obama

Posted: September 27, 2009 by datechguy in opinion/news
Tags: , , , ,

Andrew Sullivan is convinced that the events of this week involving Iran are all part of a cunning plan:

Is this weakness or is it a different avenue to strength? Politics is always about timing and context. Seeing Obama’s moves without taking into account the Bush-Cheney inheritance is to wear ideological blinkers. Obama’s promise was and is a rebranding of America (which was the primary reason I supported him). If you are an unchastened neocon you see no need to rebrand after Guantanamo, Iraq, Bagram and Abu Ghraib. But if you are capable of absorbing complicated reality, you realise that such a rebranding is essential if America is to dig itself out of the Bush-Cheney ditch and advance its interests by defter means than raw violence and occupation.

It takes a special kind of faith to actually believe this stuff, he clearly has more faith in president Obama than in well his actual faith.

But is Andrew actually smarter than the rest of us? He sure thinks so. But I leave it to you:

Update: Villainous Company reminds us that Andrew had to be persuaded that General McChrystal’s plans were cunning at all.