The Duchess of Dupont just can't seem to get away from the party line about Iraq and Al-Qaeda. Because every official in the 1600 Crew from the top the bottom wants to connect them, Official Party Apparatchik Sullivan does too, and makes that specious case yet again. So let's all say this again...Andrew: The Taliban Supported Osama, Saddam did not. Since Andrew is a fan of the Big Lie principle of propaganda, look for him to repeat this over and over and over again, until at least one more person is convinced (besides himself).
John Kerry, much to Sullivan's dismay is right, the fight against Terrorism is a Law Enforcement operation. The military do retribution well, but generally suck at tracking down bad-guys, it's not what they are trained to to. Unfortunately, 1600 Crew kool-aid causes one to believe otherwise, just as it causes Andrew to believe his hero wants freedom, liberty and justice for gay Americans. Poor fool.
And he has the nerve to call Jayson Blair "astonishingly shameless"? Mirror, meet Andrew. Andrew, meet Reality.
posted by Jo Fish on 03.15.04 at 12:41 AM
Comments:
Hi,
"The military do retribution well, but generally suck at tracking down bad-guys, it's not what they are trained to to."
Exactly. One doesn't use a jackhammer to remove a tumor.
Regarding Sullivan's particular brand of journalistic psychosis, however, I've noticed a pattern--no doubt noticed by other, wiser individuals: the facts, morality, or wisdom of any given situation do not concern Sullivan in the slightest, because he is ultimately obsessed with only one thing: power (or at least the appearance of it). When Bush "appeared" strong--just as when Clinton appeared strong--Sullivan had tongue firmly in crack. But at the first signs of weakness--not moral or personal weakness, but POLITICAL or PUBLIC weakness--Sullivan turns against them.
It's not the right or wrong of a situation, but the vulnerability of a particular politician on an issue that decides Sullivan's politics. Test this theory yourself, I'm sure it's right.
There are exceptions that prove the rule--variables that must be considered. For example, Sullivan will skew his opinions if the politician in question is Jewish, because he's been trying so hard to make us believe that opposition to gay marriage is absolutely identical to the Holocaust (and 400 years of black slavery, for that matter). Sullivan's real m.o. is that he finds human frailty intolerable, because it threatens to throw him into his own 'grandiosity gap' -- therefore, military might is always right, because he can always fall back on his illusory self-imposed status as 'oppressed minority' to justify his own aggression and deceit.
Fascinating stuff---for a psychiatrist. For the rest of, it's all quite sickening.
posted by: Tim on 03.15.04 at 08:48 AM [permalink]
I wonder if Andrew watched the Sunday morning pundit shows yesterday. Rummy, Rice and Powell were very, very weak in responding to the lack of WMDs, etc, in justification of George W's Iraq decision. On Meet the Press, Howard Dean made the case against the Iraq decision very precisely. Dean also made a sincere case for his support of John Kerry. Slowly but surely the Bush Administration's position on the failed reasons for its Iraq decision boils down to this: It doesn't make a difference that our reasons were wrong.
posted by: Shag from Brookline on 03.15.04 at 11:17 AM [permalink]
