Look, I like Andrew Sullivan. I have always defended him, have always thought he was interesting and fun and brought something great to the blogosphere, but after reading his live-blogging of the Democratic debate in Nevada from last night, I have decided it is really time for an intervention. Here is a snippet:
9.10 pm: Did Robert L. Johnson actually say he was “out of bounds” in bringing up Obama’s past drug use? That’s what Clinton just said. Did she just make that up?
(Update: if you read Johnson’s press release, you can see that Clinton was lying to maintain good relations with Johnson. She lied when she said that ayone who did such a thing would be disowned. She hasn’t disowned someone who both smeared Obama, then lied about it, then refused to back away from it. So that’s two lies. If it were her opponent, you can be sure she’d be taking notes. I’m holding her to the same standards she applies to others.)
9.20 pm: Clinton again said that she doesn’t want to inject the gender issue into this race. Again, this is easily disproved by any number of statements she has made over the last several months. She’s not as bad as her husband, but she reflexively makes stuff up.
9.30 pm: Just like Bush, she cannot talk about her own weaknesses. In her eyes, her weakness is being too aggressive for change! And then she pivots to exploit Obama’s own confession of his personal disorganization. The more you see her, the more calculating she is.
Notice anything missing? Like, for example, THE OTHER TWO CANDIDATES.
Andrew, I know you hate Hillary (your top two posts today make that clear), but put the keyboard down. No one I know really likes Hillary. I know I don’t. I still think of the Clintons as the folks who made triangulating a bad word. And yes, she is a liar. Yes, it will be sheer hell if she is elected. I personally would rather chew on glass than relive the nineties. And no, I don’t think she will change the fundamental culture in Washington- she will be far too get along/go along. I, and many others, essentially agree with you on literally everything you have written about her. And yes, I think Obama is probably a better person, a better candidate, and will probably be a better leader.
But you are obsessed, and it is has made you almost unreadable the past few weeks. Hell, at this point I would cheer five successive stories about Bear culture. Again, I am coming to you as a friend- I know we all get our little obsessions (see me and Sheehan, Schavo, etc.), but step away from the brink. Please.
It is because we care.
*** Update ***
I am not the only one who noticed the liveblogging last night:
I’ve always found Clinton hatred a bit of a baffling phenomenon. At times, I’ve disliked the political timidity of the Clintons, or thought that Bill Clinton allowed his personal appetites to overwhelm his public duties to the detriment of the country, or felt that Hillary Clinton approached the presidency too much like a middle manager and too little like a director, but I’ve never gotten the hatred. Which is why Andrew Sullivan’s blog has been particularly fascinating this year. Read his liveblogging of last night’s debate. Edwards never even makes an appearance. Obama, who Andrew is deeply committed to, hardly even qualifies as a walk-on character. Instead, it’s Clinton. It’s Clinton and Clinton and Clinton and Clinton. At 9:30 we learn that “Just like Bush, she cannot talk about her own weakness.” At 9:50 she “manages to pivot the sub-prime mess to pander to blacks, Asians and Hispanics…Her tone is a little hectoring as well.” At 10:57 we learn “You have to understand that she can tell lies almost as well as her husband.”
Jen
Oh noes, now a tutorial on block quoting…
Tim in SF
You forgot your / on your second blockquote, John.
Tim in SF
wow. fixed it quick. :-)
Elvis Elvisberg
I second John’s sentiment.
And commend to him this fine link:
https://balloon-juice.com/?p=9470
srv
It wasn’t Hillary’s fault you didn’t get laid.
4tehlulz
You really have to wonder if Sully is secretly hoping HRC wins so that he can spend the next 4 to 8 yrs raging against her.
gypsy howell
What’s poor sully going to do if she doesn’t win? What will he fume about for the next 4 years?
Z
Amen!! I can’t read him anymore. His foaming at the mouth Hillary obsession is obscene! I’m not a Hillary fan, either, but DAMN! I mean, DAMN!
Katinula
John,
I was literally just about to post on that and had emailed Andrew last week regarding his new obsession. He needs to go cold turkey and get some perspective. Well, I still posted, but had to let you know I’m on the same page as you.
alphie
I think Sully hates all women.
So, nothing personal against Hillary.
He’s still a pro (in his own eyes, at least).
wasabi gasp
Its so painfully obvious, Mr. Cole.
Hillary. You LUUUUUUUUVVV her!
zzyzx
Let’s see, the 90s – dot com boom made it easy to find well paying jobs, prices of homes were sane compared to salaries, US was at peace, there were so few crises going on that we had time to worry about a pretty trivial sex affair.
Hell, I’d love to have the 90s back.
Neal
I almost spit my water all over my computer with that one. Thanks, John.
I read Andrew every day. He’s how I found Balloon Juice…and I personally loathe Hillary as well…but yeah, he’s gotten a bit obsessive, hasn’t he? He’s entitled to it, of course…but as a reader, I prefer the “Yay, Barack!” stories to the “Hillary is a lying whore” stories.
Gus
I’ve sent Sully a few emails telling him basically the same thing, but who knows if they ever get past his interns.
scoutt
Actually John, some people really do like Hillary. I know it’s popular to say you hate her but some of us boobs out here respect her quite a bit.
D-Chance.
What other two candidates??? Gravel is comedy, Kucinich is a space alien, Dodd/Biden/Richardson are out, Purdy Boy is stuck in the mid-teens with no upside. That leaves the “insurgent” candidacy of Hillary (and since when did “insurgent” become a compliment in Democrat party vernacular?) and the “establishment” candidacy of Obama (that is, if Bill is to be believed).
Andrew may be a bit obsessive in his anti-HRC rhetoric; but he has made a number of Obama posts. The rest of the current Dem field are laughably insignificant.
Jake
Hyperbole much?
WTF does it even mean: “relive the nineties”? The impossibility of time travel aside, a number of factors make a reprise of the nineties fairly fucking impossible.
(See for example the burning pile of slag that is all that remains of the US economy.)
But to listen to some people talk ninety million demons are ready to yank our asses back to the nineties. I swear it’s like listening to the Armaggedon Groupies. Shut up.
John Cole
Fair enough. I think I have tried very hard to be fair to Hillary. I personally don’t care much for her, but I think she is being shit on unfairly this campaign, and have tried to defend her.
I think the insane and inchoate rage directed at her is craziness, though.
John Cole
What it means is I can not face the prospect of 8 years of Sullivanesque ranting about Hillary from the usual suspects. Is that profoundly unfair to Hillary, that her haters are dictating how I feel about a potential Clinton Presidency? Absolutely.
But it is still the case. I don’t think I can take it.
TheFountainHead
I agree, he hurts his own cause with the ferociousness with which her supports it, but on the other hand, it’s his damn site and he can say as he pleases. It’s not like he’s going out of his way to slander Hillary or anything, mostly he points out the flaws in her campaign/soul. I have him RSSed because his blog is entertaining, even if the Hillary Pillory gets a little old, even for me.
On a tangental note, I think his fervor for Obama is something he shares with most Obama supporters. Theirs is an emotional support on a gut level. They really FEEL he needs to win and Hillary needs to lose, and I think that’s what gets JC all up in arms about the Obamaniacs. He’s from the Republican party, he’s not used to that level of “feeling” in politics.
NonyNony
John –
I think you’ll find that once you’ve lost your “Clinton Hate Goggles” the 90s look a lot better to folks even on the rightward side of the aisle. I threw out my Clinton Hate Goggles in ’98 – when I finally came to realize just how stupid the Republican Congress was and just how pointless and election-driven their Clinton persecution was. Clinton gave the GOP a good chunk of the things they were asking for and they hated him for it. (Which is why a lot of liberals don’t actually like Clinton, even as Dems mostly love him – that was the whole “dimes worth of difference” argument that Nader had that resonated with the liberal wing of the Dem party in 2000).
I really don’t want to relive the political swamp that was the 90s either, but the only way to avoid it is to elect a Republican to the White House. ANY Dem – Obama, Clinton, Edwards – is going to suffer at the hands of the media and the Republicans in DC. And, unlike the GOP, the Democratic Party loves its infighting – any Dem president is going to be fighting not just with the Republicans, but with Dems as well (see Clinton, Bill – 1992-94). The GOP politicians rallied around GWB as if he could do no wrong – the Dem politicians often refuse to believe that their leaders can do anything right.
The question will be whether the elected Dem will be a Carter or a Clinton – will s/he face the assualt and fail miserably, or will s/he face the assualt and do well despite it. There is no middle ground and no “free ride” for Dem presidents in this day and age.
Mad John
Sullivan doesn’t hate women; just criticize Margaret Thatcher if you want to get him fired up.
But yeah, the Dish isn’t very interesting these days.
scoutt
Kos site has gotten a bit nutty too.There’s a thread going about Hillary saying Bush was “pathetic”. Some of the guys are “insulted” and are going on about how she loves to emasculate men. WOW! ‘Hillary Hate Goggles’ (love that!) – where left meets right!
Melbie
I remember when Sully was beating up Paul Krugman every day in early 2002. He managed to paint Krugman, a free trader, NAFTA supporter, and respectable economist as some kind of left-wing loonie. And he posted dismissive posts about Teresa Heinz Kerry for basically being too outspoken to be the First Lady. (I think he has problems with high-acheiving women). I thought that he stopped his hyperboles but now he is repeating the same kind of hyperboles on the Clintons. Old habits die hard. Give Sully some lithium.
myiq2xu
One of the funniest aspects of CDS is exemplified by Tweety – he hates her because her husband cheated on her.
WTF?
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
I emailed the below to him. I doubt it’s going to affect him. The Dark Side is winning. We need more people telling him that this hathos is stupid. I, for one, would like for focus on the good deeds. (Which is why it looks more and more like I’m going to be an Obama supporter, but that’s neither here nor there. Transcendentalism!!)
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
(oh, btw, title on that email was Yglesias Award? For Ed on Hillary, or Ed on Cohen?. Helps the context.)
Zifnab
I think he’s more referring to the political dialogue. I don’t know anyone who could honestly say the Clinton years were worse than the Bush years. But I can see John’s reluctance to go through another season of “Media Hates The Clintons” that we got to see last decade. Do you really want more breathless Nancy Grace reporting on Presidential Panty Shots and whining about how White House Christmas Cards are an abuse of power? Perhaps a media expose on how the Leader Of The Free World handles not being able to pee standing up?
I would share John’s loathing except that exact same bullshit whining and pants-shitting will happen whether or not Hillary gets elected. Before the Bill and Hillary Clinton we had the media trashing Ted Kennedy. After the Clintons, I’m sure we’ll find another Democratic First Family to drop giant steaming turds on at every opportunity.
Making Hillary go away will not make the media behave less like a flock of pre-pubescent wanna-be sorority girls. Chris Matthews will still preen in the sight of any broad shouldered Republican. Wolf Blitzer will continue to flub every political interview he conducts. Bill Kristol will have his NYT Op-Ed to whine about how we’re going to all get butchered by terrorists if someone doesn’t listen to him right now in perpetuity. CDS isn’t the disease, its just the symptom of a failed media. Once you get passed that, Hillary doesn’t look as bad.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
Interesting. Male defensiveness running to defend a war-criminal? Linkage, por favor?
KCinDC
I’m up for the intervention, as long as we can have a similar intervention to address John’s obsession with Obama’s transcendence. At this point I’d cheer five successive stories about Steely McBeam.
F. Frederson
Look, I like Andrew Sullivan. I have always defended him
He’s been awful forever. I stopped taking him seriously after his ode to testosterone bit, and tuned him out completely after his “fifth column” column. He’s a clever writer but has profoundly bad judgement about nearly everything.
The Grand Panjandrum
Amen. I would probably stop reading political blogs, and start making youtube videos mocking celebrities.
My concern dynasticism. I want the Bush/Clinton tag team lock on the Presidency to end on January 20, 2009 for the long term good of our country. I am very troubled by this trend and wish to see it brought to a conclusion.
Andrew does need to dowse the fire in his hair. He did mention this problem and publish an email criticizing his obsession. But, it only took him a couple of days to fall right back into his rut.
Sasha
It’s been said that the Clintons’ greatest talent is their ability to get their enemies to overdo it. Sully has obviously partaken of the overreaction Kool-Aid.
What he really needs to do is after he writes any Hillary entry, he should go outside and play with the beagles, then come back and edit what he wrote before posting it.
Hell, everyone should engage in dog therapy before posting on a topic that irks them.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
I second that.
Obama will be “too devoted to
being blackblack causes”Edwards will be “hateful of the American white-collar worker”
McCain will be “lacking a pulse, lethargic”
Huckabee will be “too self-assured”.
so on, so forth.
diana
” And yes, I think Obama is probably a better person, a better candidate, and will probably be a better leader.”
Based upon what facts, John?
And oh yeah, Sully reads his emails. I sent him one about just this subject and he responded. His response was content-free, so that proves it was he who wrote it.
Chris Andersen
Amen to that. My experience with the last two Democratic Presidents was that their worst enemies were back-stabbers in their own party. Both were undermined right out of the gates by people who should have been their allies.
I only wish the Democrats were half as organized and directed as the conspiratorial mumblings of the right suggest.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
The man is one of the busiest, longest-running bloggers known. The lengthiest response I’ve ever gotten from him is “thx, ill post”, all 13 bytes. I’ll guarantee he works harder than any of us here, so you should at least be able to give him room on that.
If you disagree with him, just say so.
Dug Jay
That pretty well sums it all up.
The Grand Panjandrum
And up jumped the Devil! Andrew just posted another “explanation” of his anti-Hillary hysteria. Yes, hysteria.
LarryB
John,
I have to say that even after all these years I’m still mystified about all the CDS code words (seriously).
“She’s a liar”. Ok, a lot of pols shave the truth. This one must have origins in a celebrated incident. What was it?
She “made triangulating a bad word”. I know the liberal argument against triangulation, but what, exactly is the beef from the other side. Does it boil down to sour grapes?
“No one I know really likes Hillary”. Now, this one I don’t understand at all. Although I’m not in love with her “third way” politics, I actually kind of like HRC. She seems smart, driven, passionate about issues she cares about (e.g., Health Care) and, at least in private, funny. What is it that especially grates?
Honest, I’m not snarking. I really have never figured out the nuts and bolts of this intense animus against her. OTOH, I don’t want to send anyone into a post-combat trauma episode, either :-)
dnA
I’m tired of these incessant pro-Clinton diatribes!
/sarcasm
ThymeZone
Heh.
bob
All conservatives have been, at least since Nixon, traitors to the constitution. The idea that laissez faire capitalism is even remotely constitutional is, for example, ludicrous. Corporations constitutionally must be broken up after twenty years. This country was founded on the principle of NOT allowing family dynasties to acquire the same type of political power they had in Europe. No PRIVACY? Where the fuck did they get their understanding of plain English? Fourth Amendment ring a bell? Jesus. And speaking of JEEEEEESUSSSSSS, need I even begin? Furthermore I don’t respect a gay republican any more than I respect the Jewish trustees in the train stations. I realize I just lost by Godwin’s Law, but does anyone here think that the republicans WOULDN’T just love to round up gays and gas them? Conservative economics DON’T FUCKING WORK. They are full of wishful thinking. Conservative social polices DON’T FUCKING WORK. Hasn’t 40 years of conservative rule in this country shown us that YET? And don’t give me any bullshit about Nixon being a liberal. Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush. All conservative. Only Clinton was at least a good administrator, but he ramped up the war on some drugs, mainly concentrating on marijuana, gave us NAFTA and GATT, and deregulated telecommunications. Thanks, now tell me what he did that was ULTRA-liberal. Gays in the military? Trust me when I say that in 1972 when I was in the military there were gays. In 1943 when my father joined the military there were gays. ALEXANDER THE FUCKING GREAT was gay. So, now we are on the brink of 1933 economically because of the re-de-regulation of financial institutions, we manufacture ZERO, hell even most of the companies that DO manufacture here are majority foreign owned. Tell me again why I should listen to Andrew Sullivan, I forget.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
I fired off another email, this time going for the intervention tone.
If the drug-addict model is correct, Andrew will run way while were not looking, pack a suitcase and fly to his boyfriend’s house in Seattle while screaming “don’t come looking for me! I know what I’m doing! I can quit when I’M READY!!! (sob)”
Z
Democrats due tend to eat their own, but fortunately it is the GOP lately that has been attacking itself. I hope it continues. >:}
As for John, he isn’t obsessed with Obama. He just loves feeding Unity Ponies peanut butter and laughing at their reaction.
LaurenceB
Speaking as an avid Sullivan reader and an Obama supporter I can only say that I wholeheartedly agree with Cole. The worst thing about Sullivan’s posts on Hillary is that they are almost completely free of discussion of policy or position.
Please stop, Andrew!
r€nato
John, if you are so determined that you don’t want to relive the 90s then you might as well allow yourself to be mau-mau’d into voting GOP again this year.
I guaran-fucking-tee you, whoever is the Democrat who gets elected to the White House, Rush and Savage and Hannity will be talking impeachment well before the inauguration. Probably the week after the election is done, if they decide to show a little restraint.
gypsy howell
what bob said.
Billy K
By now Sullivan knows he has a bad case of CDS. He gets email all the time pointing it out clearly and irrefutably. He posts the email, he promises to be better, then he does it again. Like a dog eating its own sick, vomiting, then restarting the cycle, Sullivan is trapped.
He knows it, but he just can’t resist. That’s why I just can’t take anything he says seriously.
Nancy Darling
Mad John says “Sullivan doesn’t hate women; just criticize Margaret Thatcher if you want to get him fired up.”
John, Maggie Thatcher has so much testosterone, she has to shave at least twice a week.
As a progressive liberal (and proud of it) I am leaning towards Edwards at the moment. I could support any of the three and would love to see any combination of them on the ticket.
After watching the back to back Republican/Democratic debates several days ago, I was proud to be a Democrat. Hillary Clinton made me proud to be a woman.
No matter who is elected, the bat-shit crazy right wing slime machine will swing into action. Hillary Clinton has proven that she has the cojones to take whatever is thrown at her and keep on going.
I have often thought the old East Coast Republicans who hate Bill Clinton so much are the same ones who hated Roosevelt because he upset their status quo. In their eyes Clinton
is this white trash upstart from Arkansas. BUT, he is not only smarter than they are, he is better at their game; and at the end of the day, he was and is still standing. Many of the criticisms of Hillary are the same ones they hurled at Eleanor—the voice, the cackle, the hunger for power, etc.
I still love Bill Clinton although I disapproved of many of his policies. He is a good man and a very, very bad boy. But then aren’t we all darkness and light? The Monica thing was not o.k. but it was also none of my business.
Well, the old guard has had one of their own (he poses as a Texan with his chain saw in the brush, but he is one of them) at the helm for the last seven years and look where that has gotten us. I for one am way beyond ready for change (starting to hate that word).
Jake
Total BS.
Name one Democratic candidate that you think won’t cause four or eight years of ranting. Not only will they be pissed because their choices were a bunch of mixed nuts, they’ll be looking for a distraction from the various piles of dooky their leader left laying about and someone to blame for the various piles of said dooky.
You think they’re going to shut up and make nice if Obama or Edwards wins? You do?
Come here, I got a bridge going cheap.
Jake
Sorry, didn’t see Renato’s response.
Now, about this bridge…
rawshark
Good God why?!! Other than returning to a time when the Patriots and Red Sox were perenial losers I’d love a re-do. And I hated Clinton.
AkaDad
I’ll try to look at the bright side of a Hillary presidency. The people who questioned my patriotism would be miserable for 4 to 8 years.
Zed
John, at the risk insider-baseball: it is hard to overstate the level of simple, poisonous, irreducible loathing that gay men of Andrews generational cohort hold for their female counterparts. Esp very publicly successful women, esp esp famous impossible to kill physically and fashionably unfabulous successful women.
There are a couple of (sort of) good reasons for this, but it does not really bear going into. For now suffice it to say that it is endemic to his subsection of our subculture and he will never, ever get over it. Of course, growing up Brit has *really* not helped on that score either.
Any gay man born before 1970 or so has this to contend with, and if they havent the inclination to dig it out, they can and do carry the stink around forever. Its too bad but I have given up trying to do anything with my compatriots on this one, its ultimately not remediable. All you can do is continue to mock him on it, in as affectionate a way as you feel appropriate I guess.
Carlo
Yup, a lot of people have noticed Sullivan’s Clinton obsession. Here’s Ezra’s take.
bpower
I’m ahead of the Cole Curve again. Oh Lord, why did you make me so awesome?
Xanthippas
Sullivan’s own readers have tried to tell him as much. His response:
That lasted what…a day?
dj spellchecka
the ultimate problem with andrew’s advanced case of HDS is that it renders the blog utterly predictable. i don’t even have to actually visit the site to know what he’s posting about. boredom is the kiss of death.
jenniebee
Yes, John. We all know you have a weakness for Bears of Very Little Brain.
F
I found this GQ Article on Ezra’s site (h/t Carlo) and the jist of the article is that the Hillary haters themselves don’t even know why they hate her. However this quote from Dick Collins a “veteran Republican fund-raiser” and a creator of the Stop Her Now Web site says alot about him as a person.
F
sglover
Yeah, I’m really confused by this thread: Who gives a fuck what darling Andy thinks about anything?!? The guy’s a dope with zero integrity. His stupidity and his falsifications don’t even have the saving virtue of novelty or originality. Why do you all even bother to read him?
sglover
IOZ tries to explain Hillary to Sullivan, in slow and measured tones.
Hypatia
I think Obama or Edwards, the former in particular, might get more of a honeymoon period just for Not Being Hillary and having penises, but once and if they actually try to implement any unwelcome ‘change’ it’ll end very fast.
Jake
Win.
myiq2xu
Well, with everybody in the media and blogosphere doing such a thorough job of it already, why should she?
Jake
Wow. Let’s do the time warp again. Equal pay (still a debatable point I understand) came after, way after what little bra burning there was back when people were burning bras. (And, um. Who cares?) But in his mind the streets are filled with undie igniting women and if Hilary gets in office … I guess they’ll make them into sling shots and put someone’s eye out with a sharpened tampon.
LiberalTarian
Mr. Cole, I am so *not* on the same page. Especially the whole “don’t wanna relive the 90s.” That was *Republican* bullshit from the get go–Ken Starr and the gang spent better than 100 million taxpayer dollars trying to fuck up the Clintons and their friends/allies. Then, when the Clintons got out of power, they tried to hack everything they did out of existence. Just one example of a Clinton era accomplishment, Bill Clinton did more to reform/improve welfare than any president since its inception, and while he was getting 3rd generation welfare families weaned off the public dole he was helping them enter the middle class. That was progress that Republicans took great glee in destroying when they cut state funding for low-income daycare.
If anything, anybody who supported the Republican party during that period, what with all their “I could vomit I’m so sick about how immoral those people are,” owes me and the rest of the country a heartfelt apology.
Don’t y’all be telling me how miserable the 90s were. Y’all helped put those bastards in office and keep them there. It took the equivalent of a 4×4 upside the head (GW Bush and his rubber stamp Republican Congress) to make moderate Republicans see what a bunch asshats and ideologues those people are.
Unless you have a damn good reason to *personally* hate Hillary Clinton (like she dumped you in high school to date your best friend), stop being a 90s-rightwing mouthpiece and telling anyone who will listen what a horrible person she is. It was bullshit then and it’s bullshit now.
bob
Maybe the Bear of Very Little Brain could stick his nose in a pot of hunny and be muzzled. Right wing eliminationism has destroyed any do-gooder impulse in Kanga and Piglet and Tigger is just a DFH, anyway, so he’d be stuck, muzzled, for a long, long, time. Maybe if he was forced to be quiet by his own stupidity, he would be quiet long enough to learn something about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness of which his right wing masters wish to deprive a TRUE DFH such as myself.
diana
“Maybe the Bear of Very Little Brain could stick his nose in a pot of hunny and be muzzled.”
Are you covertly suggesting he turn straight?
Homophobe!
Jake
I thought it was some sort of B&D euphemism.
diana
I think Zed hit the nail on the head.
diana
Now Sully is saying this:
(I fisk):
“I admire Hillary Clinton’s stamina, diligence and, at her best, pragmatism. Her political professionalism and discipline are amazing. At times, Obama seems to believe a little too much in his own messiah-ness, which is not the source of his strength.”
That’s the only thing he has going for him.
“I don’t care for his proximity to organized labor. On the role of government, I’m far to his right. But after the GOP in the Bush years, I don’t feel like punishing the Democrats for being big government. I feel like punishing the Republicans. They’re the ones who’ve committed treason against conservatism, not the Democrats.”
Then why the insane hatred against one of the leading Democratic candidates?
“Substantively, I don’t have a massive policy case against Clinton if I don’t have one against Obama.”
OK…..
“They really do represent a very small difference.”
OK.
“Clinton is also very able. Her work as a Senator for New York has been admirable. She’s straddled on the war but I don’t feel angry at her the way some of the netroots types do.”
OK.
“God knows I have no leg to stand on.”
God knows.
“My case amounts to concerns that she would entrench a cynicism in politics that’s wrong for the times, that her polarization and trust issues are insurmountable, and that eight years in a White House should be enough for any power couple.”
That’s your case, Sully?
That’s it?
Then why the hate?
Why the insanity?
Why the contempt?
Why, Sully, why?
What’s going on here?
Emma Anne
I agree that it won’t matter which Dem candidate ends up being president. But I don’t think it will be as bad as the nineties in any case. We have some things going for us that we didn’t have then.
– a Dem congress. Yeah, I know, the congress was allegedly Dem for the first few years of Clinton’s presidency. But not really, because so many of the Dems were conservative southerners. Who needs Repubs when you’ve got Dems like Sam Nunn to stab you in the back?
– More balanced media. In the nineties we had talk radio, which was hardcore right wing and hated Clinton. And we have the MSM, which ptetended to be middle of the road, and hated Clinton. Talk radio and the MSM are still pretty bad, but there are some voices on the other side – Olbermann, Daily Show, Air America. And we’ve got the internet. Still outnumbered and outgunned, but much better than last time.
Anonymous
That’s it?
Then why the hate?
Why the insanity?
Why the contempt?
Why, Sully, why?
What’s going on here?
I think Andrew Sullivan has a very very very small penis. And he’s afraid in a head-to-head match up, Hillary’s clit would be bigger.
That, and the testosterone injections tend to make one jumpy when you have to rely on them, I’ve heard…
Maybe the honeymoon with Aron is over, and he’s just not getting enough back door attention?
Eric Noll
Here come the Bear Culture posts…you asked for it!
Rusty
Oh come on — remember inauguration day when the lines were so long that some people who had been standing outside to get into the white house were going to get shut out and Hillary protested “we’re going to screw all those people” and the VRWC *attacked her* for using foul language that got picked up by reporters? How could you not like a person like that?!
Jack_Spratt
Sorry, I’m with Sullivan on this. Yeah, he’s a little obsessed (ok, a lot obsessed). But the elections are on, and anyone hoping to influence them has got to speak up now. I don’t think anyone is going to get so turned off by Sullivan’s HRC-hatred that they would vote for her just to spite him, but there are probably more than a few people out there who are introduced to some new piece of evidence that sways them against Hillary or who think “gee, if this normally even-keeled Sullivan guy hates here this much, maybe it’s worth looking into her negs a little more closely.” Anyway, that’s how I’ve felt as I read the Daily Dish. I’ve thought from the beginning that electing her would be a slap in the face to our Republican compatriots, but as I compare her fakery to Obama’s authenticity, I feel a new level of disgust welling up and I almost would consider voting for the Repub in the general if she is the Dem nominee. Reading Sullivan has played a part in my evolution on her.
Mentar
For what it’s worth:
I’d say that one of Sullivan’s prime qualities is that he _is_ able of self-reflection, and I respect how he manages to give dissenting views a forum in his blog aswell.
Alot of sneering smart-aleck commenters in this blog could actually learn a bit from him when it comes to this. Because they obviously lack this touch of class.
Just my 0.02$
DemUnity08
I make a similar point about Andrew Sullivan today and then worry out loud that he may be somewhat hurting Obama right now because all the Hillary hating crap coming from AS and the blogosphere is pushing people away from Obama.
“A worry for Obama: are too many of his supporters Hillary haters?”
Moderate Dave
IF ANDREW SULLIVAN NEEDS AN INTERVENTION THAN I DO TOO. I AM A DEMOCRAT WHO LIVES IN FLORIDA, AND I WILL NOT VOTE FOR HILLARY UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. I’M A BIG OBAMA SUPPORTER BUT VERY MUCH RESPECT AND ADMIRE JOHN EDWARDS.
HILLARY IS KARL ROVE IN A PANTS SUIT. I’M AS INCENSED WITH HER BRINGING ROVE’S SLASH-N-BURN TACTICS TO OUR PARTY AND FIND HER BEYOND CONTEMPT….AND YES I AM OBSESSING ABOUT IT….AS ARE MANY, MANY, OTHERS….
tammy sue
Sullivan should be shunned. His contribution to the war and to placing the current occupant in the White House hardly puts him in the position to mumble let alone rant. The damage caused by policies and people he advocated (with considerable impact) in that respect so outweighs the petty bullshit he finds himself so busy with these days it makes me puke. His judgment and his subsequent bullying of those he opposes is infantile. His hating and his loving of personalities and sentiments is of no relevance to the health of our government. Besides, how many times has he mentioned Madonna vs. same with Prince: He’s culturally stuuuupid. Sullivan isn’t stuck on Hillary, he’s stuck on Sullivan. Phew.
B Trumble
More often than not through the years Mr. Sullivan has been a delight. And as a Conservative I believe he deserves credit for admitting that he was in error in the run up to Iraq, like so many of us suspending our naturally “conservative” suspicions. Likewise he remains an important voice in reminding us that torture is not and should not be the American way. There’s much I genuinely dislike about Senator Clinton. That said, sadly I have to agree with those who are finding Sullivan’s Daily Dish almost unreadable. This is no longer opinion, or journalism, or the observations of a keen political observer, Mr. Sullivan is indulging in full blown Conspiracy Theory.
Howard B
I have to agree with Moderate Dave, above. I’m very glad that Andrew is speaking out and reminding voters of the cynical manipulations of Camp Clinton. I’ve never been a Clinton-hater, per se, but this year her campaign has been appalling to watch and the fact that she’s remained the frontrunner from day one is a real indictment of the system.
sglover
.
Ah, swell, but, um, wrong.
First, the “give dissenting views a forum in his blog” remark is at right angles to reality. Sullivan’s never had a comments section, almost certainly because he knows that he’d be outclassed and upstaged by many of his readers.
Second, his celebrated “self-reflection” usually occurs only after he’s staked out a position so laughably stupid or obtuse that it’s indefensible. I mean, realizing that Bush’s Excellent Iraq Adventure wasn’t going as promised isn’t exactly a triumph of intellect and empiricism. ESPECIALLY when you’ve spent your whole “working” life blowing your own horn about your supposed libertarian-ish leanings.
Jake
Yeah, fine, whatevs. If you accept that it is the place of the media to influence elections, great. I think it odd to the point of being fucking creepy, but if that’s what floats your boat have at it.
Damn! Fooled by another spoof.
Wildthumb
To Gus: I’ve emailed him many times and I think he has courteously replied to me three times. He DOES respond over time, but apparently he gets thousands of emails.
kentonindy
Um, boyfriend? Andrew has a *husband*, not a boyfriend. Legally married in Massachusetts last summer, remember?
I’ve been reading Sullivan forever, and while I’ve rarely agreed with him in the past (except on same-sex marriage) the trepidation I feel as I brace myself for his nearly-endless barrage of Hillary rants is entirely new.
As for now, I’m still reading his blog daily, like I do my other cycle of politico-blogs, but I can see a day coming soon where that will no longer be the case. If Hillary gets the Democratic nomination I think that’ll be the breaking point, for Andrew towards her, and me towards him.
Lee Travers
My six daughters and I love Andrew Sullivan’s postings on the detestable Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton. Long may he wax eloquent on the machinations of this nasty little piece of work.
daveinboca
Hillary and her husband have turned the bald-faced public spectacular lie into an art form. She hasn’t a scintilla of shame or an ounce of compunction when she concocts or repeats whatever might advance her interests or destroy her opponents, regardless of the truth or accuracy of what she’s saying.
Pandering is where she excels the most in the fine gradations of saying what will get her votes. She probably picked up this particular skill-set on promising to do what she perceives the particular interest group or ethnic/gender/sex-orientation subset she is wooing from her husband/spouse/collaborator-in-chief. He never hesitates to change the record or lie openly about his own record & achievements & felony/misdemeanors. It’s what he does.
And going to the videotape or soundtrack doesn’t make him miss a beat, as he will explain how his mental reservations or jesuitical special exemptions from law & morality [he learned well from the Jesuits at Georgetown during his undergrad years] make him immune from the normal constraints that limit politicians or public figures.
He is the world’s best and biggest liar and she seems an avid student who may well surpass him someday if she is elected POTUS.
bernarda
What is there not to like about Sully? Oh, just maybe his barebacking ads in gay porno magazines. Well, that is ok because it is just between Republicans.
sglover
Y’know, I’m no fan of either Clinton. To me, they’re just warmed-over Republicans — snakes, in other words. Their weasel nature is pretty much the norm for any Southern “leader”. But by the standards of American politics, they’re not outliers in any way that I can discern. So I’ve never understood the exceptional hate that they attract.