Tag Archives: Andrew Sullivan

Enough!

Sullivan’s admonition to the GOP is simply put…on point.  You’ll agree when you read it.

Andrew Sullivan

Between the humiliating and chaotic collapse of Speaker Boehner’s already ludicrously extreme Plan B and Wayne La Pierre’s deranged proposal to put government agents in schools with guns, the Republican slide into total epistemic closure and political marginalization has now become a free-fall. This party, not to mince words, is unfit for government. There is no conservative party in the West – except for minor anti-immigrant neo-fascist ones in Europe – anywhere close to this level of far right extremism. And now the damage these fanatics can do is not just to their own country – was the debt ceiling debacle of 2011 not enough for them? – but to the entire world.

Those of us who have warned for years about this disturbing trend toward ever more extreme measures – backing torture, pre-emptive un-budgeted wars, out-of-control spending followed, like a frantic mood swing, by anti-spending absolutism of the most insane variety in a steep recession, vicious hostility to illegal immigrants, contempt for gay couples, hostility even to contraception, let alone a middle ground on abortion … well, you know it all by now.

But the current constitutional and economic vandalism removes any shred of doubt that this party and its lucrative media bubble is in any way conservative. They aren’t. They’re ideological zealots, indifferent to the consequences of their actions, contemptuous of the very to-and-fro essential for the American system to work, gerry-mandering to thwart the popular will, filibustering in a way that all but wrecks the core mechanics of American democracy, and now willing to acquiesce to the biggest tax increase imaginable because they cannot even accept Obama’s compromise from his clear campaign promise to raise rates for those earning over $250,000 to $400,000 a year.

And this is not the exception. It is the rule. On abortion, the party proposes that it be made illegal in every state by amending the Constitution. Torture? More, please. Iran? It should be attacked if it merely develops the technological skill to make a nuclear bomb, let alone actually make one. Israel? Leading Republicans don’t just support new settlements on the West Bank. They show up for the opening ceremonies!

Gun control? A massacre of children leads to a proposal for more guns in elementary schools and no concession on assault weapons. Immigration? Romney represented the party base – favoring a brutal regime of persecution of illegal immigrants until they are forced to “self-deport” – or rounding as many up as they can. Climate change? It’s a hoax – and we should respond by shrieking “Drill, Baby, Drill!” Gay marriage? The federal constitution should be amended to bar any legal recognition of any gay relationships, including civil partnerships. Their legislative agenda in this Congress? To “make Obama a one-term president.” Not saving the economy, not pursuing new policies, not cooperating to make Democratic legislation better. Just destroying a president of the opposite party. And, of course, failing.

Then there is the rhetoric. In just the last fortnight, House Republicans have asserted that secretary of state Clinton faked her recent fall and concussion at home in order to get out of testifying on the Benghazi consulate attack. And then the Weekly Standard quotes a Senate Republican staffer saying: “Send us Hagel and we will make sure every American knows he is an anti-Semite.”

Enough. This faction and its unhinged fanaticism has no place in any advanced democracy. They must be broken. But the current irony is that no one has managed to expose their extremism more clearly than their own Speaker. His career is over. As is the current Republican party. We need a new governing coalition in the House – Democrats and those few sane Republicans willing to put country before ideology. But even that may be impossible.

4 Comments

Filed under GOP Bubble, GOP Extremism

Tuesday Blog Round Up

GE to hire 5,000 U.S. veterans, investing in US plants

Andrew Sullivan: How Obama Set A Contraception Trap For The Right

Paul Krugman: Severe Conservative Syndrome

Soros: GOP Hurting Economy To Win Election?

Sarah Palin: “I’m Not Convinced” Mitt Romney Is A Conservative

McConnell: Any Employer Should Be Able to Deny Contraceptive Services

Santorum Suggests Romney ‘Rigged’ CPAC Straw Poll

Who Is Foster Friess? Seven Facts You Need To Know

10 years after Salt Lake City Olympics, questions about Romney’s contributions

Priests Accused of Molesting Children Hiding in Plain Sight

 

H/t: Randi Rhodes’ Homework

Comments Off

Filed under U.S. Politics

Jerry Springer calls out Fox News’s perpetual Obama bashing

I didn’t know Jerry Springer was still around…

The Raw Story

Appearing on the Fox News morning show Fox & Friends on Wednesday, former Cincinnati Mayor Jerry Springer, notorious for his low-brow talk show, criticized host Gretchen Carlson for pretending to be fair when it comes to matters of presidential politics.

Speaking about the recent Newsweek cover story by blogger Andrew Sullivan, Springer complemented the author and agreed with its overall message. “He’s saying that the critics are dumb — obviously that’s a headline to grab your attention — but it’s not really that the people are dumb, it’s that they’re missing a point of how he’s been successful in a very difficult time.”

“He saved our financial system when it was just about to go under, people had lost almost half of their life savings in pension funds and things like that, so clearly that. He saved the auto industry. He got Osama bin Laden. The economy is now growing, we’ve added in the private sector 2.6 million jobs in the last two years. I mean, the fact of the matter is, he’s doing very well, and it is a little disingenuous — here we are at Fox, complaining that, gee, Newsweek may be a little partisan.”

See video here (at bottom of article)…

1 Comment

Filed under Fox News Lies

Andrew Sullivan vs. Fox News’ Megyn Kelly

I saw the video of Kelly and two others discussing the Newsweek article by Andrew Sullivan.  I wondered where Mr.  Sullivan was so that there would be a “somewhat” Fair and Balanced discussion about the Newsweek cover story in question.

How can Fox News call themselves Fair and Balanced and continue discussing  people on the left’s actions yet rarely have them on air to defend their position?

The Dish – Andrew Sullivan

Fox News is now waging war on the essay. I’m not surprised. Megyn Kelly has declared that I am “not a real journalist.” She has also just said that I have written that Trig is not Sarah Palin’s child. As longtime readers well know, I took great pains never to state that and merely to ask Palin, given her insane story about the birth of her child, to provide some evidence for it, which she said she would but never did. The Beast has asked for a correction. Real journalists do not tell untruths on air without correcting them.

What I want to know is why they cannot invite the author of an essay to debate it, rather than two random individuals (including Rich “Starbursts” Lowry) to discuss. Surely that’s only fair – unless, of course, I am on a blacklist.

So this is an open challenge to Fox News. If you want to trash my work, have me on to defend it. Any time, Megyn. Any time. What are you afraid of?

Apart from the truth, that is.

Here’s Megyn Kelly:


http://videos.mediaite.com/video/Fox-News-Newsweek-Cover-011712;recently_viewed

2 Comments

Filed under Fox News Distortions

Listeners didn’t just boo a `gay’ soldier. They booed a SOLDIER

 

I agree with The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent on this issue.  Stephen Hill is an active duty soldier in a war zone.  Why didn’t any one of the candidates condemn the booing?

One comment speaks volumes on this issue:

You can tell the quality of a person by the company they keep. The company this group of candidates keeps cheers for more executions and letting people without insurance die, and boo soldiers. Enough said.

Greg Sargent – WaPo

Putting aside the question of whether the “audience” really booed Stephen Hill at last night’s debate — that’s an overstatement by any measure — the simple fact is that when Hill, who is serving in Iraq, was pelted with scattered boos, none of the GOP candidates rose to his defense:

 

Andrew Sullivan registers his outrage at the “shocking silence on the stage,” which reveals that “this kind of slur is not regarded as a big deal.” Ta-Nehisi Coates translates the candidates’ silence as: “I support some of the troops.”

I only have one thing to add. Multiple news stories today are claiming that the GOP candidates didn’t object to the booing of a “gay soldier.” That is an accurate description of what happened. An even more accurate description of what happened is to say that the GOP candidates didn’t object to the booing of a soldier.

As conservative writer Jim Geraghty points out, the failure to object to the booing, let alone to thank him for his service, “entirely defined Hill as a gay man first and as a soldier second, if at all.”

Let’s break the news gently to those GOP candidates: The law known as “don’t ask don’t tell” is no longer operative. What that means is that openly gay and lesbian servicemembers are now permitted to serve in the armed forces on equal footing with straight servicemembers. Let me quote from the U.S. Army’s announcement repealing the policy: “From this day forward, gay and lesbian Soldiers may serve in our Army with the dignity and respect they deserve.” The rules will now “apply uniformly without regard to sexual orientation, which is a personal and private matter.”

It would obviously be unfair to use this episode to tar all Republicans. Some, to their credit, have already registered their dismay about what happened. Even audience members reacted badly and told the hecklersto shut up. But it’s perfectly fair to see it as representative of the caliber of the candidates that stood on the stage last night. A soldier was booed after politely asking the candidates whether he would continue to enjoy equal treatment in the military, as current law stipulates, should one of them become president. None of the candidates rose to that soldier’s defense. None thanked him for his service.

Just to be clear on what really happened.

Related articles

Comments Off

Filed under Uncategorized

If Trump Runs As An Independent

Personally I don’t think Donald Trump will run at all.  I think he will play the press and his admirers like a fiddle until it’s time to reveal his financial data to the election board of his home state. 

I also think he really put his foot in his mouth when he suggested that he had investigators in Hawaii checking out information about the POTUS.

My guess is that he is being led by the nose by famed birther and former “swift boat” creator, Jerome Corsi.

Andrew Sullivan – The Daily Dish

PPP finds that Trump “gets 31% of the Republican vote running as an independent candidate, holding Romney to just 56% within the party”:

It’s highly unlikely that Trump would really end up doing this well as an independent, but even if he just pulled 5-10% it would probably be enough to ensure Obama’s reelection. And these numbers show that if Romney’s the GOP nominee there may be enough consternation on the far right that another third party candidate and not necessarily just Trump could earn enough support from those voters to have a spoiler effect much as Ralph Nader did for Al Gore in 2000. 

Is he that serious? One fears he may be. Or if one is a Democrat, perhaps a licking of the lips is in order. But you never know. This is America. Right-wing populism has its moments. They rarely last; but they often shine brilliantly in the meantime.

1 Comment

Filed under U.S. Politics

Photoshop Disasters: Birther Edition

While we’re on the topic of “birthers”, this is one for the crazies of the year award!  I think those proponents of birtherism want us to see things from their warped perspective.  These people are desperate and have been since 2007, when Barack Obama announced his presidential candidacy. 

They still cannot believe a Black man was actually elected to the highest office of the land. 

Actually they are shocked and dismayed that a majority of people in this country do not support their outrageous conspiracy theories about The President of the United States.

Case in  point…

Andrew Sullivan – The Daily Beast

World Net Daily‘s Jack Cashill, best known for claiming that Bill Ayers ghost-authored Obama’s book, is promoting a new conspiracy theory. Cashill says that the picture on the left, of Obama with his grandparents, is a forgery. Unfortunately for Cashill, what he describes as the original photograph (right) still contains the president’s knee. Pareene bait:

What was Barack Obama’s knee doing in New York, while the rest of him was in Pakistan, and Indonesia? Dealing drugs? Why are mainstream journalists afraid to ask tough questions about the president’s detachable knee? The people have a right to know!

 

Comments Off

Filed under U.S. Politics

Andrew Sullivan: Bill O’Reilly Is A Dishonest Propagandist

I most certainly agree with Andrew Sullivan.  I respect Mr. Sullivan’s opinion over Bill O’Reilly’s any day of the week.

Huffington Post

Blogger Andrew Sullivan tore into Bill O’Reilly Thursday, calling his criticisms of President Obama ridiculous and asking to go on his show to debate him.

Sullivan’s blog post was inspired by Mark Leibovich’s profile of Glenn Beck in the New York Times Magazine. In it, Leibovich wrote that “several Fox News journalists have complained that Beck’s antics are embarrassing Fox, that his inflammatory rhetoric makes it difficult for the network to present itself as a legitimate news outlet.”

Sullivan pronounced himself baffled by this, since, in his opinion, Beck wasn’t nearly as embarrassing for Fox as Sean Hannity or, especially, Bill O’Reilly.

Sullivan had harsh words for Hannity, saying that, compared to him, “Beck seems to me to be a relative innocent. Hannity is a cynical liar and cool propagandist…shameless does not even begin to describe the man’s public character.”

But he reserved most of his criticism for O’Reilly. Writing that he had watched Wednesday’s “Talking Points Memo,” Sullivan wrote that it was “so full of meaningless cliches about ‘big government’ and ‘progressives,’ so divorced from any coherent engagement with the reality of Obama’s record and stated views, that it beggared belief “(video below).

Sullivan then responded to several of the points O’Reilly made in his segment–including one about foreign policy:

He says first that in foreign policy, progressives believe that America is a “bully” and “too aggressive.” Obama, however, has retained most of Bush’s executive powers against al Qaeda (except, critically, torture), has poured more troops into Afghanistan than was ever the case under Bush, has ramped up the drone campaign in Pakistan, retained Bush’s defense secretary, stuck to Bush’s withdrawal timetable in Iraq, and embraced targeted killings of al Qaeda operatives, even US citizens…there is no other description of this than a travesty of the truth.

Ultimately, Sullivan said, Beck is “a clown,” but a genuine one. O’Reilly, though, did not get off so gently. Sullivan called him a “a propagandist – not as bad as Hannity – but dishonest and wrong.” He concluded by asking O’Reilly to debate him:

Mr O’Reilly, I know Fox has long had a blanket ban on having me on as a guest, but here’s a challenge: allow me to debate this Talking Points Memo with you, and reveal what a completely half-baked piece of nonsense it was.

Comments Off

Filed under U.S. Politics

New Feature: Blog Round Up

Andrew Sullivan: The Daily Dish - The Kate Gosselin of Politics

Oh, For Goodness Sake - Birther Ministers of hate have change of heart.

BadFiction – Where the Tea Parties get it wrong – and right.

Huffington Post – Tea Party Patriots Attack Family Who Lost Daughter And Grandchild

New York Times – An Unsurprising Slide for Obama

1 Comment

Filed under GOP