Sunday, June 14, 2009

Rovian Islamism? Sullivan Equates Bush Administration, Sarah Palin to Iranian Thuggery!

Recall my post from this morning, "Andrew Sullivan's Anti-Mormon Bigotry"?

Well, Sullivan's up to real nastiness again with, "
The Rovian Islamist":

Ahmadinejad's bag of tricks is eerily like that of Karl Rove - the constant use of fear, the exploitation of religion, the demonization of liberals, the deployment of Potemkin symbolism like Sarah Palin ...

Think of this regime as Cheney and Rove in a police state setting, and you see what's been going on. (Of course, Rove and Cheney live within a democratic system utterly unlike Iran, and there's no evidence they would violate democratic norms as Khamenei just did. But their demagoguery, abuse of the state, dedication to conflict abroad, co-optation of the armed forces, and manipulation of rural and religious voters all have parallels in Red State Iran.) We keep expecting to see some kind of shame or some attempt at rational dialogue. They have nothing but contempt for that kind of talk. If they're going to lie, it's gonna be a Big Lie. Like this sham of an election.

This is a sick, awful man. I will continue blogging on Sullivan's totally bankrupt nihilism.

Spread these posts, readers. This is nothing short of journalistic terrorism. Sullivan's words are intended to injure, even kill, all under the cloak of the First Amendement.


Added: William Jacobson, "Ahmadinejad Stole The Election, Just Like Bush."


DrCruel said...

Pretty obscene - especially considering that Leftists have been stumping for Ahmedinejad's proxies in Israel, Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan ever since Putin came to an "arrangement of convenience" with Iran. But nothing out of the ordinary for these people. The Left have been demonizing Bush and his cabinet since before he took office, most of their attacks never rising above the petty and personal.

Likewise the hypocrisy of using the same techniques one is attributing to others in the very essay you're writing isn't lost to me. Consider this gem:

"We keep expecting to see some kind of shame or some attempt at rational dialogue. They have nothing but contempt for that kind of talk. If they're going to lie, it's gonna be a Big Lie..."

Nothing much more to say after that.

dave in boca said...

What DrCruel said...

Plus, no one imitates POTIIR [President of the Iranian Islamic Republic] more than the leftist blotto-sphere, and wired & weird Andy is the tip of that sphere.

Mark Harvey said...

Sullivan is in the same category as the Little Green Lizard Turds place. All they do is spew vial nonsense. That's what happens when one is educated beyond their intelligence levels of comprehension.

Dave said...

It appears Andrew Sullivan's BDS has reached the acute stage.


Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Douglas: I think you are off the beam on Sullivan. Earlier this morning you said he may be suffering from HIV-related dementia. Could be, but you and I have no way of knowing this. Have you considered that if he is suffering from HIV-D, he is not responsible for his writings?

I don't think HIV has affected his thinking. You would notice a deterioration of style and manner. But read his 1990s and early 2000s posts, and you won't see much difference in either. Are you prepared to say Sullivan is not responsible for his writings? Go further: are you prepared to forgive him because he isn't responsible?

I'm not, not to either proposition. I don't think Sullivan suffers from any mental disorder. Good old fashioned malice and meanness are his foundations. That and the rigidity of the turncoat, who always must blast what he used to stand for so he can reassure himself that all's now well in his world. That, not dementia, explains Sullivan.

Sullivan knows that Palin is the sorest point he could attack, one that is bound to generate the most reaction. It works. That's why he persists. Palin and her family are just convenient sticks to poke in the Right's eye.

So what's to be done? Ace proposes a mass boycott of linking to Sullivan. That's futile. How much of Sullivan's traffic comes from the Right, these days? Cut his traffic ten percent, so what? Sullivan is giving THE ATLANTIC what it wants. Sullivan continues to claim that he's the "true" conservative, even while spouting the usual left wing bunk, exactly as THE ATLANTIC wants. Sullivan will continue his Trig trooferism, laughing as the Right seethes, generating traffic for THE ATLANTIC.

A real boycott might have some success. But that means not reading Sullivan, nor responding to his attacks. This has its own drawbacks: "See? The "false Right" can't respond to me because they know I'm right etc etc etc."

I can only think of one approach. Sullivan has said that his visa will expire in March 2011, and then he will have to leave the US, thanks to his HIV status. But let The One wave his scepter, and those restrictions will vanish. This is why Sullivan has been so mild (for him) as The One casually tosses gays under the bus. Not for The One the foaming that Geo. W. got from Sullivan. Sullivan knows that The One is his only chance to stay in this country. This presents an opportunity for the Right. What's needed is a systematic campaign, where hundreds of people email Sullivan every week, politely pointing out all the ways in which The One is failing gays. Sullivan does read his email, and posts at Right blogs. This sort of pressure would be a constant burden to him. He might snap and blow up at The One just as he did with Geo. W. To be sure, he has the imperative reason not to, but Sullivan's cortex has always had to fight with his limbic system, and is never more than 50& successful. Let him blow up at The One, and it's good riddence in March 2011.

The Internet will let him continue blogging, but the forced leaving of this country is bound to mark him in the same way he's trying to mark the Palins. More, he is afraid to leave the US permanently. As Bruce Bawer learned years ago, Europe is no place for gays in this era of resurgent Islam. Sullivan blusters well, but he knows dam well that Islam has him on a list, and would not be shy about giving him the works, literally.

So. The most effective response to Sullivan is to get him out of the US. The best way to do that is by stirring up discontent with The One in Sullivan's limbic system. It would take a great deal of work to do this, from hundreds of people. But the payoff would be great.

Sincerely yours,
Gregory Koster

Anonymous said...

The guy sounds as wacky as Limbaugh.

Dana said...

Journalistic terrorism? I just can't take it that seriously, because I no longer take Mr Sullivan that seriously. When it comes to his Bush/ Cheney/ Rove obsession, he reminds me of the psycho ex-girlfriend stereotype, the one who can’t accept that the man in her life is gone. Perhaps this was a deadline-pressure article on Mr Sullivan’s part, because it’s just not well-written, not up to his usual standards of Trig Palin thutherism.

repsac3 said...

While I disagree with his ultimate opinion of Sullivan, Gregory Koster makes a great point as regards excusing--or at the very least, limiting the responsibility of--people who commit bad acts, by labeling them mentally unwell.

I had the same reaction to this post, where the author says of Roeder, who shot Tiller, and von Brunn, who shot the security guard at the Holocaust museum, "I think both these murderers were insane nuts." (Donald speaks about this same blog post--without quoting that particular line, unfortunately, though seemingly coming to the same conclusion, anyway--here.)

Whether the subject is a writer with whom you disagree, or a vicious act of murder, tossing off the "crazy" or "demented" label is to say the person is less morally (& where applicable, legally) responsible for his/her objectionable words / deeds than they actually are.

A fine point by Gregory, and something to consider, anyway...

I also concur with Mr Koster's mention of "the rigidity of the turncoat, who always must blast what he used to stand for so he can reassure himself that all's now well in his world." (which I've always referred to as "the zealotry of the convert," myself.) I'll simply note here that our own professor Douglas, like a surprising number of the more outspoken con bloggers and other opinioneers (Dennis Miller, for example) used to be a liberal. In fact, according to frequent commenter Tim, who knows Donald personally (& is a relative of his, by marriage, I believe), he used to be VERY liberal.

That turncoat phenomenon very well may be at play, both as concerns Sullivan & those like him who've drifted left, and Miller and those like him, who've taken that (giant, in some cases) step to the right...

Dennis said...

Sullivan is like a few of the posters on this site I no longer take them seriously. Sullivan I do not read for obvious reasons and I scroll past a few here after the first line. It all winds up being the same drivel written over and over in hopes that it will become fact.
DrCruel basically nails it.
I, and I think I am not much different than many Conservatives, if some studies I have seen are right, enjoy reading opposing opinions that are well written and meant to sway with reasoned argumentation. No one person or ideology have all the answers. In fact in most cases they just have disparate pieces that they may think are ends instead of means.
One needs to have one's opinions challenged so that one understands the basis of their reasoning. Something I do not see from those on the Left for the most part.
It is easy to think something, but far more difficult to put those ideas into words that have had the benefit of a reasoned analysis. Reasoned analysis is where one gets to see where what sounds good has its own attendant problems and may not be so good in the end because it creates more problems that it solved.
Unfortunately Sullivan and much of the Left have not questioned their thoughts for so long that they are left with personal assassination as all they have left to do.
It should be obvious that one challenges ideas and not people, but wisdom and respect for those who disagree with them seem not to be a strong attribute. It should not be of any surprise that when you give no respect you get no respect. Sullivan is a perfect example of this dictum and defines a significant number of those on the Left.
A distressing commentary on the current manner of dealing with other citizens for a person who spent most of his life getting people to work together towards a defined goal. That one almost has to, metaphorically speaking, to get their attention.

Dennis said...

Ah, the compound complex. Insert "hit someone over the head."

atheist said...

This is nothing short of journalistic terrorism. Sullivan's words are intended to injure, even kill, all under the cloak of the First Amendment.

And so the narcissistic self-pity of the right wing reaches its deepest point to date. Now, criticism has become tantamount to violence, even assassination. Next, perhaps Douglas will scream when the doctors only glance into his padded cell.

Unknown said...

"Andy is the tip of that sphere."