Andrew Sullivan, who writes for the Atlantic Monthly and used to pretend to be a Conservative, although he has shown himself as a complete fraud by supporting Kerry and now Obama, has finally gone off the deep end (actually he went off the deep end long ago, he’s just really off the deep end now). Sullivan has completely lost his mind when it comes to Sarah Palin. He is literally obsessed with trashing this lady’s good name, and in the process destroying the last remaining bit of his own credibility. First, he posts this rot here:
The Caption of the picture reads “The Softer Side of an “F-ing Redneck”
He then goes on to post these two brilliant thoughts:
Bill Kristol on Sarah Palin. All he writes about in this piece of propaganda is electoral strategy and the people he hates in the media. In a week, he hasn’t said a word about Sarah Palin’s foreign policy views. I know she’s being safely indoctrinated by Joe Lieberman and AIPAC as we speak, but the fact that Kristol, like the rest of us, has not yet been able to point to a single view of hers on foreign policy in her entire life, is eloquent enough. Aren’t we at war? Isn’t he supposed to care about national security? Is everything about pursuing power by any means to him?
and
John McCain has demonstrated with this insane decision that he is unfit to be president of the United States. This was an act of near-criminal negligence. If he can behave this recklessly and impulsively with this decision, the idea of allowing him to become president of the United States is only a smidgen less terrifying than thinking of Palin in that position.
Whatever few doubts I may once have still had about this election, they are resolved now.
Obama has to win. The alternative is unthinkable.
You liberals and your Jewish conspiracy theories crack me up. As I’ve pointed out before, any time liberals blame some nefarious plot (or preemptive war on Iraq) on evil neo-cons that is codeword for Jewish conspiracy. I swear they take this stuff right out of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The idea that Palin (who I thought was a neo-Nazi because she wore a Buchanan button one time) is some how conspiring with Bill Kristol, Joe Liebermann and AIPAC is beyond hilarity. Then, to add to his intellectual dishonesty he then goes on to pretend that he was some fence-sitter in regards to John McCain but the Palin pick some how pushed him over to Obama. To even pretend that he was any where close to neutral at some point in this election is just asinine. Criminal negligence? Come on, if you want to be a hack for Obama, fine, but at least attempt to couch your overt hackness in something approaching a rational thought. How is it any where near criminal negligence to pick a VP who isn’t a DC insider? Honestly, Sullivan’s posts the past few days can be described as nothing short of misogynistic.
Huge hat tip to Ace who has been chronicling Sullivan’s decent into madness.
September 6th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
. As I’ve pointed out before, any time liberals blame some nefarious plot (or preemptive war on Iraq) on evil neo-cons that is codeword for Jewish conspiracy. I swear they take this stuff right out of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
I see, so anti-neocons like Rahm Emanuel, Carl Levin, Barbara Boxer, Henry Waxman, Barney Frank, Adam Schiff Russ Feingold, Charles Schumer, Al Franken, Dianne Feinstein, and the other 87% of Jews in the United States who vote Democrat and overwhelmingly oppose the war– they are all secretly anti-Semitic? Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I was also not aware that the neoconservatives Don Rumsfield and Dick Cheney were Jewish.
Oh, and since you brought it up– The “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” was published and promoted in the United States not by liberals but by car maker tycoon Henry Ford, a notorious anti-labor conservative who’s thoughts on the Jews was an influence on a very well known German anti-Semite of the time.
“I regard Henry Ford as my inspiration,” [he] told a Detroit News reporter two years before becoming the Chancellor of Germany in 1933.
The more you know!
W
September 6th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
“whose” not “who’s”. I hate it when I do that.
W
September 6th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
And since I’m fixing my own grammar, it really should be “whose thoughts on the Jews WERE an influence…”
W
September 6th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
Palin is a good story and a breath of fresh air on a very stale stage. Everyone knows that. What isn’t clear is what are her policy views and her approaches to problems and what kind of cabinet will they put together and who will they put in charge of all the Federal agencies and what people will follow them in to man the ship of state. Taking a paranoid view of Palin sure doesnt’t do it for me. What we need to know is operationally how will this all function. McCain should promise early on to pick the best people of both parties he can and independents and not try to create a cult of personality like Bush did. If Dick Cheney set the Veep bar so low, how could Palin possibly do any worse? What I am looking for is who are the people they are going to surround themselves with. To me the supreme court already is already right winged(without the balance of O’Conner) and in a democracy we should have a centrist supreme court that err’s in the people’s favor now and then, rather than follow some rigid party or governmental line. So we don’t need more alito’s or roberts frankly, but a sage people’s advocate who comes from a centrist point of view. This is a policy issue that does worry me about McCain while Palins sermons don’t as she is pro-life in the good sense. Their approach to the death penalty would be good to know. Anybody know?
September 6th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
Yep, I know who published the protocols, I know far to much about the antisemitism that lead to the holocaust. Certainly antisemitism is not restricted to liberals alone (it knows no political party and all).
I’m not saying that every neo-con is Jewish, but I am saying there is a large group of liberals who use the term neo-con as codeword for Jewish conspiracy.
Brian, I know that McCain supports the death penalty for certain federal crimes, and I would assume that Palin is pro-death penalty. This is something that not all conservatives agree on. I think we talked about this on the law blog, but I am against the death penalty myself for various reasons. However, I tend to view this in federalist terms, e.g. that the states should decide for themselves unless there are clear 8th amendment issues involved (which I know you think that the death penalty itself is a violation of the 8th amendment). Ultimately, one’s views on abortion and the death penalty don’t concern me that much, no president is ever going to change those two laws (sorry folks, Roe ain’t going to be overturned. Ever.)
September 6th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
I don’t think the Federal Government should have the right to put any of its citizens to death, as part of a compact between the two. Its just so grandiose as it is right now and if anything we need smaller Federal Government. We live in states that have formed nation, but the nation should serve the states and not just itself and its own interests as it does now, and for so long under a small group of elites who constitute a special “Federal Class” of citizens. You could argue that among the citizens of a state some sort of proportionate justice should exist and that is where pro-death penalty people should have their debate. This is citizen justice, where some sembalance of equal and fair justice can be meted out. The Federal Government should not have a stand alone justice system in my view. It would be better if they had their own prosecutors but would still have to try cases in State courts where local juries can decide. Frankly, at times, even the threat of jury nullification is a good thing to check the power of the Government and its ambitious employees. I would see it better that the Federal justice system work more as a federal register with advocacy lawyers(prosecutors) but that the people be heavily involved in adjudication. Its just too convienent for the Feds to have their own independent justice and court and prison system and an unnecessary duplication in my view. Now this is what I would like for people who say “change is acoming” to really do for us. You may think this strange, but I don’t think that someone lying during an fbi field investigation should be prosecuted as the way to imprison someone anymore than a wife should have to testify against her husband. I think people have a right to self privacy. They seem to think people have a right to self incrimination. Of course before a formal body in the setting of an expensive court room people should be held to telling the truth and that is how states operate. This idea that people have to self incriminate themselves in a field investigation is really police state thinking. Our justice system overall should be to adjudicate fairness between parties, not to intimidate and imprison. Its well known performance reviews from police to prosecutors are more and more a numbers game, or traffic stops, arrests, successful prosecutions, etc and it attracts the more aggressive among us to pursue those careers.. Ambition and aggression in the people who police us and are heavily involved in formulating laws and social policy. It creates a superior power class that uses the tools of law and the police state to rule the rest of us. While this would be a little less effective than the system we have now, it would still provide much of the same services yet preserve the freedom and independence of the people better. If you really look at how the Federal Government doles out highway grants which are now based on a threshold number of war on drugs traffic stops you being to see the almost seamless ring of tools its using on all of us to further empower itself. The way a federal task force can deputize various federal and state and city agencies and police forces to go on a particular binge is scary. Yes, there are some very bad people among us, but as the net expands we all come under their radar scope. This is observational factually and not just some theory. I don’t see how anyone can be pro-life yet pro-death penalty. This is inconsistent and I don’t want inconsistent power like this in the hands of the Government. If you really want change we will need to scale back the size and scope of the Federal Government and let the states handle our domestic affairs. One good way to start would be to unburden ourselves of this dual justice system, and yes it would ruin some good careers, but it would preserve better our freedoms.
September 6th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
I’m not saying that every neo-con is Jewish, but I am saying there is a large group of liberals who use the term neo-con as codeword for Jewish conspiracy.
Why? What large group of liberals?
W
September 6th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
Why is it that the Right Pundit article authors have to infuse all of their content with divisiveness and sarcasm? 2/3s of Americans do not approve of what Bush has done over the last 8 years and we see McCain as more of the same. We on the left want to see and appreciate both sides. We tend to put ourselves in others shoes and take a look at the landscape. The right seems to blindly follow the Bush/Rove/Fox News doctrine without critical thinking. This was blatantly obvious with both recent conventions. The Republicans attacked without any basis. Dems attacked policies and factual accomplishments or failures. Making fun of Obama because he was a “community organizer?” A person who came from humble beginnings, who was able to get an education that exists in only the dreams of most people, then chose to go back to the streets and try and help the common man? The left deals in facts. The right tends to deal in comical innuendo. This is a serious world. I have friends who cannot send their kids to college and have to choose between being homeowners or having decent healthcare. These are intelligent, caring, decent, hardworking people. The Republican speeches were like stand up comedy performances. They came off like children and not like the adults we need to lead this country.
September 6th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
Pete–There are people on this blog who accuse me of being liberal though I am probably more conservative than most going back to what the original intent was for us to have a small federal government with a limited national role. Sure it can make a big military to protect the nations interests but it should have limited domestic activities and allow the states go govern themselves relatively unmolested. I say this because of the Federal Governments inexorable and continuing expansion into all our lives in so many intrusive and subtle ways. Its building its own emprire with our backs. McCain is an interesting mix of radical, conservative, republican, and insider, a true contradiction, but I don’t think he is smugly superior and his wife’s role is probably bigger than they are letting on, but she is a positive good women trying to do the right things and not a complainer or wasting her time trying to find herself for a historic place in history. So If the dems want simply to enlarge government and continue this empire building it doesnt work for me. Plus I detect a lot of narcissism in Obama and Biden, while McCain and Palin seem more fundamentalist in being called on a mission for we the people even if they have their quirks. The sarcasm at the convention was about Obama’s campaign to position him as some saint or savior whose time has come. As best as I can tell he and Michelle have lived a very priveledged life moving from a comfortable middle class to upper middle class strata and supported by social programs that aren’t held to the same standards as business. But then with the government we have currently bush has sat on his hands domestical, stuffed implants into all the agencies who are told to not do the people’s business and its a huge waste of taxpayers money to fund an epa or osha or the fcc and then not have them do anything other than cater to cororate America. As a conservative I see the excesses of an unregulated corporate america just as I see the excesses of big goverenment. I see how wallstreet and a number of other private enterprise players stole from the working classes(this includes the middle class) by taking away their pensions and making them save in 401k’s managed by the big boys who steal even more money from them. I see how unregulated speculators and hedge funds and private equity shops are looting america. But I also see obama’s grandiosity and his wife’s spoiledness where you have to walk around eggshells with her. This is where the sarcasm came in. Nobody owes obama his place in the fame gallery. Also I don’t like the way the race card is being used to divide the working classes of this country into either the republican or democratic camps. I don’t see why we need another lawyer from harvard to run the country since congress is chock full of lawyers as is our justice system and all our governing bodies. They have become a real power class in an America that banned their practice for money in litigations for 13 years after the colonies formed since under the crown the King’s lawyers stole wealth from the colonists through the british courts. Democrats are in many ways the kings residual troops domestically, just as the military and police are the residuals of the kings troops internationally. We still have this aggressive tendency to empire build while our infrastructure is crumbling much like our families. Too many churches preach various social agendas, which is their right, but they have strayed so far from God its no wonder we are morally lost at home even if we talk a great game internationally.
September 7th, 2008 at 12:45 am
I say this because of the Federal Governments inexorable and continuing expansion into all our lives in so many intrusive and subtle ways.
Totally agree.
So If the dems want simply to enlarge government and continue this empire building it doesnt work for me.
Yeah, and– wait, what?! I don’t know if you’re familiar with the goings-on in government since 1980, but it looks like this:
Reagan: Government gets BIG! Spending goes UP!
Bush: Government gets HUGE! Debt is AMAZINGLY HIGH!
Clinton: Government shrinks! Budget is BALANCED. Surplus!
Bush: Government EXPLODES! HUGE! DEBT, SUFFOCATINGLY HUGE!
As best as I can tell he and Michelle have lived a very priveledged life moving from a comfortable middle class to upper middle class strata and supported by social programs that aren’t held to the same standards as business.
Yes, being raised by a single mother- the only child of depression-era parents… those social programs they relied on were called “food stamps” and helped them get through tough times.
As a conservative I see the excesses of an unregulated corporate america just as I see the excesses of big goverenment. I see how wallstreet and a number of other private enterprise players stole from the working classes(this includes the middle class) by taking away their pensions and making them save in 401k’s managed by the big boys who steal even more money from them.
And don’t forget that they wanted to privatize social security so that even MORE money would be in that system. Imagine where we’d be today if that scheme had succeeded.
The balance has tilted where big corporations essentially ARE big government in many ways, unfortunately. If you fear big government, fear the influence that the corporations have. They are writing our laws wholesale (as in the case of the bankruptcy bill written by the banking/credit companies), setting energy policy, setting trade policy, and they are even gaining retroactive immunity, putting themselves above the law (as in the case of the telecommunications companies) when they break it.
There’s a word for when corporations run the government.. I forget it now.
W
September 7th, 2008 at 4:12 am
The police state and justice department and Federal prison system and war on drugs all expanded under Clinton’s watch. Its a pretty independent entity and self reinforcing and no politicians are brave enough to say no to rising police and prison budgets nor take on their unions. The wealth created under clinton and tax reciepts for the treasury were not his doing nearly as much as he claims. It was simply a secular long bull market, the huge growth of technology and computers which increased productivity and a vigorous growth period for globalization. In contrast, besides profligate spending from bush and a big tax break enjoyed by the richest among us the most, his administration didn’t regulate their mandates on the financial system which is currently melting down. Fannie Mae stock use to be around 70 and its now what 5.60$ and about to be driven to 0 as its nationalized after the short seller speculators make a fortune off of it. Clinton allowed companies to trade down pensions to 401k’s, promise company matches which have now been reneged and set up the current retirement funding gap, except the individual takes all the risk. And he had people like greenspan that fueled the punch bowl for the big boys and rubin who had all the ties to wallstreet that repeatedly has immensly enriched itself, till the current crises which they want to socialize to the taxpayers. I would say no one party is an angel here. But our “system” of governence simply isn’t working well. Clinton was no saint, he was simply lucky enough to be president in prosperous times in which the working classes still participated. Bush has presided over prosperous times for corporations for which working people did not participate in, and now that everything is tanking they have been invited to the party. During his reign they have effectively doubled the price of housing, pricing out most middle class first time buyers. Clinton had plenty of opportunity to really do something, but instead he ended up with a failed presidency on so many levels. Yes partisan rancour really did him in, so again its the system. But regardless budgets for the police state increased during both presidencys and now wrapping itself in the war on terror and redoing our governing agencies into a homeland security outfit its just grabbing up more resources.
September 7th, 2008 at 8:50 am
1) How can anyone defend this Levi guy? Did you SEE his myspace page?
2) Sarah Palin is young, good-looking, and a “breath of fresh air”- if you’re looking for a change from politicians who know their way around Washington. But… shouldn’t the VP know his/her way around Washington? Who’s she going to call to get things done, other than the same people Bush was directed to call? She’s spent her life in Alaska!!! How could she possibly be a change from the Bush administration?
September 7th, 2008 at 8:51 am
myspace or facebook. whatever it was. it was disgustingly disrespectful towards his now betrothed.
September 7th, 2008 at 8:59 am
June, who is Obama going to call at 3am to get things done? He has no executive experience and he clearly doesn’t understand small town America. He spent his life in Indonesia and Chicago!!!
September 7th, 2008 at 9:52 am
Why on earth SHOULD the future president understand small town America? What’s the big deal about small towns? First of all, being from a small town doesn’t make Sarah Palin a typical American- most Americans live in big towns or cities. But more importantly, why should the leader of the once most powerful country in the world (I say “once” because China and India are already poised to take over- and to make our children see a HUGE decrease in the American standard of living, especially since we’re still dependent oil, which drilling at home won’t change), a country currently embroiled in a mess of two wars and precarious relationships with Russia, the middle east, and North Korea- why should this country’s leader be concentrating his/her efforts on understanding small-town America? When we desperately need someone to reposition our international standing and rebuild our tanking economy, two extraordinarily complex tasks, why on earth would we look to someone with a small-town mindset and a mediocre education?? What is Sarah Palin going to do, take a rifle and shoot at the economy? I would prefer that we weren’t involved in these messes, and that all we needed for president was the poster girl for small town American values. But we NEED someone who has seen the bigger world, someone who knows his/her way around the money and power of big city people, someone whose experience with countries abroad could help us relate to the outside world we depend on.
It’s the people advising Bush that took the country to Iraq and that let the US fall into the current financial crisis. Have small-town Americans heard of Halliburton? Of the Republican Washington Elite lining their pockets with the Iraq war while small town Americans die for no reason? Those are the same people that will be advising Palin. Who will be advising Obama? ANYONE would be better than the current gang of crooks. And yet all Republican Americans are worried about is small towns. And babies.
September 7th, 2008 at 9:58 am
Waldo says;
“Why? What large group of liberals?”
Waldo, my friend has invited you to comment on your views of liberal Jews.
http://www.tygrrrrexpress.com/2008/07/another-liberal-jew-in-need-of-cranial-glutial-extraction-surgery/
September 7th, 2008 at 10:01 am
Waldo says;
“I see, so anti-neocons like Rahm Emanuel, Carl Levin, Barbara Boxer, Henry Waxman, Barney Frank, Adam Schiff Russ Feingold, Charles Schumer, Al Franken, Dianne Feinstein, and the other 87% of Jews in the United States who vote Democrat and overwhelmingly oppose the war– they are all secretly anti-Semitic? Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I was also not aware that the neoconservatives Don Rumsfield and Dick Cheney were Jewish.”
They are what you call “self loathing apologizing whimps”
Their homeland(which any of the above know nothing about) is under threat and they approach the problem with the same failed policies we have seen in the last4 or 5 decades.
September 7th, 2008 at 11:15 am
Waldo, my friend has invited you to comment on your views of liberal Jews.
I’m sorry- I know your reading skills are so-so, Micky. But we were looking for evidence of large groups of liberals using “neoconservative” as code for “Jewish”. Not attacks on liberal jews BY conservatives.
Now normally I’d suggest ya take your foot out of your mouth, but given your proclivities for spouting irrelevant nonsense I say go ahead and leave it in there.
They are what you call “self loathing apologizing whimps�
AHH, I see. The overwhelming 87% majority of Jewish Americans are “whimps”. That doesn’t sound condescending at ALL, Mickster.
I’m going to suggest another “whacked” theory that goes like this: It’s the less than 13% or so of the far-right-wingers who do not represent the majority Jewish opinion in this country. It is they who are self-deluded and risk ushering great harm to the United States and the world by promoting war with Israel’s neighbors, provoking anti-western hatreds which would not otherwise exist, inhibiting peace in in the middle east, and may ultimately bring the destruction of Israel itself. Then again, many of them are aligned with Fundamentalist right-wing christian extremists like John Hagee– so wacked, anti-American, and anti-Catholic that even McCain had to say “thanks but no thanks” to his endorsement. It’s not as if those guys would mind Armageddon… they’re pretty much hoping it comes sooner rather than later.
So the way my theory goes– it’s the 13% that’s out of touch with the majority of “self-loathing, apologizing wimps” as you so lovingly and respectfully referred to mainstream American Jewry.
Think about it while you’re sucking on them toes.
W
September 7th, 2008 at 11:54 am
Waldo.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/231862/what_is_neoconservatism_conspiracy.html?cat=37
When opponents of the War in Iraq or even the War on Terror in general get worked up, they sometimes blame both on some can of conspiracy of a group called “Neocons.” “Neocon” is a kind of abbreviation of “Neo” or “New” and “Conservative.,” That begs the question: what are Neocons? And why do they get opponents of the War on Terror and the Bush Administration all worked up?
The editor of the Weekly Standard, Bill Kistrol, himself the son of a famous Neocon leader Irving Kristol, once quipped that Neocons was a, “Jewish conspiracy to take over the world, aided and abetted by the Christian Right and led by Condoleezza Rice.”
And morons on the left have taken to using this word as some sort fact now.
As far as you a$$ goes Waldo.
I engaged you in a simple question but instead you had to come off the wall with crap like this;
” I know your reading skills are so-so, ”
“Now normally I’d suggest ya take your foot out of your mouth, but given your proclivities for spouting irrelevant nonsense I say go ahead and leave it in there.”
“Think about it while you’re sucking on them toes.”
Often I am scolded for my returns to you
Now I hope you can understand why and wont go crying to the staff the next time I re upolster your a$$hole.
All I did was ask you a decent honest question , but instead you’re overdefensive insecure hide decided that this was the most prevalent course to take in order to get your message out.
You just cant take Eric up on his invite to discuss this statement of yours because you will more than likely get your ass handed to you;
” see, so anti-neocons like Rahm Emanuel, Carl Levin, Barbara Boxer, Henry Waxman, Barney Frank, Adam Schiff Russ Feingold, Charles Schumer, Al Franken, Dianne Feinstein, and the other 87% of Jews in the United States who vote Democrat and overwhelmingly oppose the war– they are all secretly anti-Semitic? Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I was also not aware that the neoconservatives Don Rumsfield and Dick Cheney were Jewish.”
Eric is a conservative Jew who is very educated on the subject and if you are truly looking for enlightment (I doubt it) you will find it there.
The evidence you seek on the use of the word “neocon” is whithin the liberal Jewish population.
So spare me the games of sematic hopscotch and head on over.
Chicken
September 7th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
you can’t look at people like Pearle, wolfy, Rummy, krystol, Barnes, cheney, bush, addington, etc and tell me they aren’t neocons. Cheney use to be a real hip 60’s guy in his day and rode a motorbike and ate in colorful highway diners at one point, but then underwent a cloud of reorganization in the ford administration to come out the man of bringing good cheer he is so revered for today.
September 8th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
The “F-ing Redneck” was a reference to how Levi described himself on his myspace page. That’s why it’s in quotes.
Cheers,
Ted
September 9th, 2008 at 5:13 am
Ted, I know that, so nice of Sully to use it in such an honorable way eh?
September 9th, 2008 at 9:05 am
[...] Posted in Andrew Sullivan, Politics, Sarah Palin by northlamar on September 9th, 2008 So this guy has decided that because Andrew Sullivan supports civil liberties, low taxes, smaller government, a [...]
September 14th, 2008 at 4:25 am
[...] Andrew Sullivan Palin Family [...]