Mickey Kaus fires back at Andrew Sullivan. It's pretty rough stuff--and he doesn't even call him any names! Of course, Sullivan will get the last laugh--I mean, it's not like Kaus is going to be in a Gap ad or anything. Plus, I hear someone is looking for a new celebrity spokesperson. Cha-ching!
Housekeeping: Our previous post about the outbreak of open hostilities between Kaus and Sullivan garned some criticism that needs a response:
(1) Andrew Sullivan linked to Galley Slaves and asked "is there any conservative blog out there that can criticize my work without some poster eventually imputing it to AIDS dementia?"
I'm afraid Andrew is wrong on both counts. I certainly wasn't criticizing him for his part in the Kaus-Sullivan war. Galley Slaves takes no side in this fight. But, just to prove a point, here's a bit of genuine criticism of Sullivan from a previous G.S. post. At least as of this writing, there's no AIDS demetia comment. I look forward to Andrew's correction.
(2) A nice blogger named Eric Deamer is bothered by Galley Slaves' continuing coverage of Kaus vs. Sullivan: Caged Heat. He thinks Galley Slaves is supposed to be a "wonky" blog. Sorry to disappoint you, Eric, but this blog is for fun, not wonk. If you want more serious writing from the Slaves, I suggest you look here.
Update, 5:03 p.m.: Now Sullivan comes up swinging with . . . more personal insults! Also, still no correction to Item #1 above. Are you getting tired of all of this nasty back-and-forth? Yeah, me neither.
1 hour ago
I believe that by "poster" Sullivan meant "commenter" as opposed to you or one of your co-bloggers. And it is true that at 3:25 am an anonymous poster wrote:
It may be HIV encephalitis, or another for of HIV dementia. It's not universal among HIV patients, perhaps 10% are at risk.
It's too bad, I used to read him constantly and gave him $20 in his first blogothon. But last summer he became unreadable.That's pretty clearly a suggestion that Sullivan's opinions of late are attributable to AIDS dementia. I myself have found Sullivan less and less readable of late, but I think he's well within his rights to be offended when he's accused of suffering from a degenerative brain disease.
It's galling that young Deamer sleeps in comfort under the blanket of intellectual understanding that you provide and then complains about how your provide it.
Young Deamer doesn't want you on that wall - he needs you on that wall.
Technically, his complaint is registered in a unit measured as aids encephalitis comment posters per blog, not aids encephalitis comments per post.
Not that I'm in some big rush to defend Sullivan; after all I am 95% sure that I wouldn't know who he was if I hadn't read about him here.
Will Mickey and Andrew kiss and make up? Uh, maybe not.
I would be devastated if they did. Last is right - this is the most entertaining blogger smackdown the 'sphere has ever seen. Imagine Atrios and Kos shooting at each other - it's sorta like that.
And while our gracious host coyly states that he takes no side in this affair, I think it's safe to infer that he is sympathetic to Kaus' demeanor in this tete-a-tete, his positions notwithstanding. Jonathan's reiteration that Sullivan falls back upon insults and cheap shots when his back is up against a wall (and let there be no doubt: this is undeniably true) is a clear indicator of who he favors in this fight, at least from an aesthetic standpoint.
I will declare my bias openly and say that I fall on the same side. Sullivan may have supported the war, and Kaus opposed it, but Sullivan's increasing tendency to degenerate into an arrant bully (albeit a bully with an excellent command of the language) leaves a very bad taste in my mouth. I find myself in the positions of agreeing with much of what he says yet wishing he wasn't the one saying it, since he is a counterproductive spokesman for those views.
"Imagine Atrios and Kos shooting at each other - it's sorta like that."
Except with the capacity for wit, self-reflection, and impulse control. Well, on one side, anyway.
Post a Comment