Comments on: Andrew Sullivan’s Descent into Madness

By: spainishirish

spainishirish — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 12:21:19 +0000

Sullivan links should be banned.

By: spainishirish

spainishirish — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 12:17:39 +0000

I'm not going to tapdance around it, either, although it puts me near the same level as he (but in my case, there is a factual basis for the assertion). Sullivan has a disease that leads to dementia. Why the editors at The Atlantic let him continue to spew obviously psychotic and increasingly incoherent rants is beyond belief. He is a very sick man and his on-line display is a throwback to the most exploitative freak shows that once made the carnival circuit.

Sullivan always was a fraud and a two-bit street hustler. What has changed is the obvious madness you pointed out. It is unlike anything I have ever witnessed in a relatively sane publication.

By: Brock

Brock — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 08:08:05 +0000

Right of center sites should make it policy not to link to anything Sullivan writes.

By: speciallist

speciallist — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 23:11:29 +0000

By: jcallis

jcallis — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 23:07:02 +0000

I admit, my focus was on said baby but I’m getting better typing with my left middle finger.

By: speciallist

speciallist — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 23:05:10 +0000

opps

By: PSDA

PSDA — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 22:53:56 +0000

Sullivan’s shtick is EXTREMELY obvious. He’s the prototypical “Moby troll” writ large. He was doing it before that term was even invented, and all for self-promotion and personal moral vanity. Also, it needs to be pointed out, to turn an easy buck.

He pretends to BE a part of some group that he actually hates in order to conjure up the credibility to attack it and to be listened to when he’d otherwise be ignored.

Come on. Look at his “Catholicism.” He agitates for gay marriage, exaggerates every failing of the church and rejects any authority whatsoever of the pope.
He claims to be “conservative” but rejects ALL conservative values and cheerleads for the biggest socialist, left-wing politician to ever hit the stage.

May I make a suggestion?

It seems that about every five minutes, some conservative commentator puts up a post about how off-the-rails Andrew Sullivan is, how he’s no longer worth reading, how he’s gone off the deep end. Can’t he just be ignored?

By: speciallist

speciallist — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 22:42:38 +0000

if you made this many errors posting…how many errors are you making with that precious baby?

By: jcallis

jcallis — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 22:27:44 +0000

Sorry for the typos and grammar. I have night duty with a 3 week old and I’m limited to one hand.

By: jcallis

jcallis — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 22:16:13 +0000

There are two writers I respect the read weekly and that is Christopher Hitchens and Victor Davis Hanson. I was first introduced to Sullivan when I heard him debate Hitchens on Charlie Rose and later on Tim Russert's show. Hithens positions were clear. Sullivan seemed at odds with the facts on many fronts about the Iraq war so as a reasoned writer I discarded him. Perhaps I was biased to Hitchens whom I consider to be one of our best American (he recently became a citizen) writers and debaters.

Hitchens was right about Reverend Wright and Iraq. Hitchens was right about Iraq even before McCain.

Here he support Reverend Wright basically saying that Wright was given a bad wrap:

Hitchens and Sullivan

Basically, Sullivan is passing a journalistic fart in a crowded room by writing this article. We should leave the room and let him sit in it for a while.

I suspect the article is crap as well as his positions on other issues he writes about.

Judge Sullivan two years after a position or article he write...and you will find him lacking.

John

By: Ben_Domenech

Ben_Domenech — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 21:49:14 +0000

Sullivan demands to see DNA evidence from medical records. He’s done it repeatedly, most recently here: http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/thedailydish/2008/08/a-smear.html

Such DNA evidence would’ve been obtained at the time of Trig’s birth from placenta or amniotic fluid. Hence: hyperbole based on what he asked for.

By: AnnaD

AnnaD — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 20:59:42 +0000

I used to enjoy reading Andrew Sullivan, but I’m beginning to think there is some HIV-related dementia going on here. I’m sorry for him as he loses his mind.

By: PHenryandWEarp

PHenryandWEarp — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 20:36:04 +0000

That explains his hatred for the GOP. Like Jann the evil man who controls Rolling Stone and US Weekly, he is part of the “vast conspiracy” that unlike Hillarys figment is real. He is part of an organized group of homosexuals who have decided to do anything in their power to fight the war they see before them as they seek to silence anyone who gives them less than everything they ask for, marriage, benefits etc. They seek not negative tolerance that says you do what you want and leave me alone, but positive tolerance that says it is okay for them to be gay. They will never get it.

By: rjd27

rjd27 — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:27:20 +0000

Obama responds to every slight, wayward glance and thought that may or may not besmirch him. Sometimes, it takes him more than one response.

It should be expected, then, that all politicians are just as thin-skinned and lily-livered. Of course, that is not true, and quite the opposite.

Most folks that decide on a life of politics, learn along the way that it's a full-contact sport. But, not Obama, he isn't one for sports (ok, maybe a little basketball, for the camera's).

In Andy's small Obama-world, Obama can do no wrong, thus what he does must be right and everyone else should follow. Thus his outrage at Sarah Palinm, a woman who would dare to be strong, confident and who wears her nickname "Barracuda" as a badge of honor.

By: Ralph4159

Ralph4159 — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:41:26 +0000

If there was ever a medical reality that Andrew Sullivan is probably intimately familiar with it is this: over 73% of male homosexuals who are carriers of the AIDS virus for over a decade will develop dementia. This is the brutal truth everyone is afraid to mention. It's obvious the guy has lost his mind.

And who can forget this sickening escapade: Sullivan's HIV ads

By: Brock

Brock — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:36:53 +0000

I fully expect you to be as outraged that Sen Obama has not released his medical records. This is particularly troubling since he is a smoker.

By: ojintoad

ojintoad — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:16:28 +0000

n/t

By: Neil_Stevens

Neil_Stevens — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:10:35 +0000

By: ojintoad

ojintoad — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:09:56 +0000

n/t

By: ojintoad

ojintoad — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:07:59 +0000

I’m sorry, I feel like there is some sort of mistake with one part of your article. You state:

As Jonathan Last blogs at the fantastic Galley Slaves: Sullivan demanded that he be able to inspect Palin’s amniotic fluid or Trig Palin’s placenta in order to determine the “hidden truth” about Palin’s pregnancy.

I don’t see in either of the linked articles the work “placenta” or “amniotic” in either of the linked articles in that sentence. How can they have reported that if they don’t use those words?

The links in the quote, in order:
http://galleyslaves.blogspot.com/2008/08/andrew-sullivan.html
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/08/vileandvilercolmesand_sull.asp

I could give a rats ass about Sullivan, he obviously seems really obsessed about a witch hunt based on his blog and all the links you have. But I’d like to see the backup for your claim of his demanding to see physical parts of Palin. As far as I can tell the most he demanded was a doctor/medical document.

If you were being over the top I totally missed it. But the point of links are to back up your argument and I don’t see the backup at the link.