Sunday, August 31, 2008

Andrew Sullivan, Updated--Again--And Again

Re-posted 8/31/2008, 11:30 p.m.

Original post: 8/29/2008, 1:29 p.m.: I don't mean to harp, but it took him only moments to make fun of Sarah Palin's kids' names.

What's the over-under on how long it takes him to use her Down's baby against her? Perhaps something along the lines of, What kind of family values lead a new mother to abandon her disabled baby in order to pursue her political future?

Maybe three weeks? Maybe less?

Updated from the comments: Whoever had 8 hours as the over wins.

Time for the next bet: How long until Sullivan suggests that Palin only had her Down's baby for political advantage? I'll give 3 weeks again. Seems like a sucker's line, though.

Second Update: Well, we have another winner! Sullivan passes on a rumor that Palin didn't actually even have the baby. And that the baby is fair game because, "This baby was a centerpiece of the public case for Palin made by the Republicans. They made it an issue - and therefore it is legitimate to ask questions about it."

At what point does David Bradley have a responsibility to protect his other writers and editors from association with Sullivan? If I were Jeff Goldberg or Ross Douthat or Jim Fallows or Mark Bowden--or any of the other very serious, very smart people at that great magazine--I'd be awfully uncomfortable having Sullivan as a colleague.

Sullivan is undermining the magazine's entire intellectual enterprise and laying waste to a brand that took a century to build. I hope someone over there is paying attention.

Third Update: Sullivan now says that there's a photo that "looks like it confirms" Palin's pregnancy. But of course, that's not enough either. He now demands "Just a simple confirmation from the doctor who was present at the birth."


Jacob said...

Also, Willow Palin is not named after a television witch (Willow from Buffy) as Sullivan said. Willow was born 2 years before Buffy aired.

Ed Lilly said...

Way, way, WAY under three weeks. I'd put it in terms of hours at most.

Jacob said...

Wow, Ed Lilly was right. The answer was 7 hours 50 minutes:

"I've had a few emails on these lines today:
No sooner did my best friend hear about the Sarah Palin pick did I receive an e-mail from her. It said simply: "Sarah Palin is a Bad Mother!"
I was at work but could not resist giving her a call to follow up. She told me that she was watching CNN and heard that Ms. Palin had 5 children and that one was only 4 months old and born with Down Syndrome. "How in the name of GOD, can she even think about leaving her child or taking her child on the campaign trail for 70 days?" She was indignant.

James said...

Sullivan has got to be the best entertainment for the dollar around.

You can just SEE this True Believer at work: right now Andy's in Paint It Quick mode: he knows he's a member of the media and if he can just harp on this as a bad decision long enough, other people will pick up on the meme. Which is why Sullivan's posts are jam packed with Palinology.

Poor Andy. The problem with him is he's at heart a True Believer, but he has real intellect enough to know how completely void real believers are. Harping on skepticism doesn't hide the actual hero worshiper within.

This contradiction makes him entertaining. And just flat funny.

PG said...

The idiots over at Daily Kos are already claiming that the baby is not Palin's, but her daughter's. Class acts.

Anonymous said...

The idiots over at Daily Kos are already claiming that the baby is not Palin's, but her daughter's. Class acts.

And now Sullivan's all over it!

PG said...

Who is up for a good old-fashioned protest at The Atlantic's DC HQ? I'm dead serious.

James said...

Anyone catch Sullivan's "What, Me Worry?" defense over this?

"This seems to put the kibbosh on this, although it would still be good to have official confirmation from the McCain campaign, which should be easy enough to do. Just a simple confirmation from the doctor who was present at the birth. Here's a Times of London story on the affair. As for all the hyper-ventilation about how despicable and vile and evil it is to ask some easily verifiable questions about a central argument of the McCain-Palin campaign, read my original post a few hours ago. "

Just confirm it with the police report so we all know you're not a ravenous serial killer with the taste for baby blood and it's all over, what are you getting so testy for?

EVERYONE has to get asked about their ravenous taste for dead babies when they become Presidential material, what are you getting so upset about?

I said it was an unseemly rumor, for which I then asked you to cough up information.

jim treacher said...

"Hey, if Sarah Palin didn't fake her pregnancy to cover for her oldest daughter -- who just happened to miss a lot of school last year because of 'mono,' wink wink -- then why doesn't the McCain camp just say so? What, is that not a reasonable request?"

He really has lost whatever was left of his mind.

PG said...

this story just got really weird, as Palin just confirmed that the daughter is now five months pregnant. This means she couldn't have given birth to Trig, but still very weird.

AB said...

wait?? it's true, what kind of family values makes a woman who has made the CHOICE to raise FIVE children, FIVE CHILDREN, accept being McCain's VP?? With a pregnant daughter? How is that using down's syndrome against her???? Women's liberation is not just taking a man's job, it's making conscious choices. Making conscious choices about what it means to have five children, four of whom are under 18. And one of whom is pregnant. Oh, but we should think this is great pick because she's anti abortion, led a state the size of the city of denver, and when Obama was giving his keynote at the 2004 convention, she was "cleaning up" a town of 5,000! I'm so embarrassed for you all. Keep deflecting! I don't know how someone as smart as you is choking this down.

jim treacher said...

So family values means not having a family? I guess I'm not following your point because there's not enough ALL CAPS and punctuation marks!?!?!

AB said...

What kind of family values does this woman have, if, while raising five children (one of whom has down's syndrome and breast-feeding) she decided to take on the responsibility of VP, even President, of the United States! It's absurd. Do you know how much shit a democrat would be getting from this?

She made a choice to be a mother, and only two of her children are grown. How can she juggle these responsibilities? It downplays the importance of what it means to be a mother to say she can juggle it all. Old feminism was about taking a man's job. I'm all for that. But new feminism values women and women's work, not just "doing it all."

How can you conservatives choke this down? Seriously? And now she has the responsibility of helping raise her 17 year old's daughter.

But again, she is great because she's anti-abortion, pro gun, and hot. Let's not forget hot. Another deflection. Talk about celebrity. All of these conservative blogs are posting about her hotness and appearance. You've got your celebrity now!

Conservatives are simple. No critical thinking, just the surface matters, and all of your easy figures. Black and white language and rhetoric. And jabs that deflect the truth of matters. !!!!!!!!!!!!!

PG said...

I can read the posts already: First it will appear on Kos, but soon Sullivan will pick it up. You see, this was all a Rove plant to get the Kossacks and Sullivan to take the bait, just so the story could be refuted, all towards an end of attracting female votes. You see, it's the same as Rove planting the fake memo that Bill Burkett took to Mary Mapes. The man is truly an evil genius. And the beauty of this new line is that there is no possible way to refute it, conspiracies are designed that way. Any refutation is simply part of the conspiracy. That is why the paranoid nutroots love them.
As Sullivan would say:
" in the era of Rove, anything is possible"

Anonymous said...

I don't know what to think about all of this. I really respect Sullivan, but he's hitting this one a little too hard for my taste.

Mark said...

Can anyone put a date and point to a column on when Andrew Sullivan jumped the shark? When did he make the transition from Bush backer rah rah rah War on Terror to the current nitwit we all know and love now?

ELC said...

"Women's liberation is not just taking a man's job, it's making conscious choices." LOL. That's a good one.

jim treacher said...

"Do you know how much shit a democrat would be getting from this?"

Yeah: Zero.

Wait, do you actually think Palin isn't getting shit for this? It's all over the news. It's bigger than Gustav.

"She made a choice to be a mother, and only two of her children are grown. How can she juggle these responsibilities?"

Maybe they could give her a longer chain from her ankle to the stove.

"Conservatives are simple. No critical thinking, just the surface matters, and all of your easy figures."

Whereas Obama has gotten where he is because he's so deep, right?

jim treacher said...

"I really respect Sullivan"


Anonymous said...

O! is not qualified to be president and was never properly vetted by the MSM or the democratic party primary voters. Indeed, O! is less qualified to be President than Palin, he has less accomplishments in life and less experience and his personal history has never been properly explored or investigated. Here is why:

- He was an affirmative action admission at Harvard law (he has not released his college grades, LSAT score, or law school grades yet – which indicates that he was not the stellar student he claims to have been);

- He was an affirmative action pick onto the law review (again, he did not grade on or write on - so he could only get on to law review through affirmative action);

- He has not accomplished anything as an elected official - name one important piece of legislation he has authored;

- He’s written no published articles to demonstrate academic ability;

- He admits in his books that he purposefully sought out Marxist mentors and teachers in college, indeed one of his major mentors in life was an avid Marxist.

- he’s done nothing courageous in his life, not even taking a courageous stance on any legislation (indeed, he voted “present” on almost all controversial bills in the IL state senate);

- he’s never sacrificed anything for any cause;

- he’s never accomplished anything outside of elected office.

- the man is as empty a suit as exists, with no real proof of intellectual bona fides nor even a consistent set of policy ideas (he switches his stances 180 degrees within weeks of taking a stance based on polls).

- He went to a church for 20 years where hatred of white people was routinely preached and hatred of America was routinely preached.

- he worked closely with and was friends with an admitted and unrepentant domestic terrorist – Bill Ayers (and others);

- he voted against criminalizing the killing of babies that were born alive when he was in the Illinois State Senate;

- He has a shady financial relationship with convicted felon Tony Rezko.

What exactly is it about this admitted cocaine dealer that the left finds so great?

Anonymous said...

Nice job on Radio Times today.

Anonymous said...

Andrew ultimately is never that comfortable with breeders and breeders' issues. For a guy like Andrew, having kidz and whatnot isn't really his bag.

Ed Lilly said...

I've never been so proud and so disgusted at the same time.

Joseph said...

We all know that the manic energy of the "Palin is a bimbo" meme is going to burn itself out, sooner or later. How long before Sullivan switches from "Palin is a bimbo" to "Palin is a Machiavellian Alaskan neocon"?