SullyWatch

"You're a funny man, Sully ...

that's why I'm going to kill you last."

 

Thursday, June 19, 2003

TOODLE-OO:

We will in all likelihood be taking the weekend off. While there is so much we could post before we go, we would leave you with Alex Frantz�s dismantling of Sullivan�s critique of Hillary and when she learned the truth about Bill and Monica.

Where there is are Clintons and spin, you can always find Andrew Sullivan:

And at its center is an obvious, big, glaring fib: that she never had an inkling of her husband's long pattern of sexual abuse and harrassment until the August morning he told her of his latest victim. This stretches credulity beyond even Clintonite limits.

This is such an obviously false charge that even Sullivan himself contradicts it on his own site:

This time, the fuse was the leaked spin that the former First Lady only found out about her husband�s adultery with Monica Lewinsky the day before Clinton's civil deposition. Until then, we are asked to believe, she had no idea that her husband would ever have contemplated an illicit sexual liaison with a young intern.

What Hillary said was that she had believed Bill's denial about Monica Lewinsky until he admitted the truth. This is widely claimed, without proof, to be impossible, or at best proof she was delusional. But where is the real difficulty in believing this? There is obviously no doubt that Bill had a history of cheating. Like all philanderers, he tried to hide the truth from his wife, but she certainly found out about at least some of it. But these incidents took place before Clinton became a serious presidential candidate. It seems clear that Clinton changed his habits after, or perhaps well before, the Flowers story came out. Presumably that was discussed between the Clintons. For all the jokes and stories, there is no good reason to believe that Clinton had any dalliances in the White House other than Lewinsky � certainly Starr�s and Jones�s lawyers were trying hard to find one and came up empty. (Kathleen Willey, the only other alleged case, is an unreliable witness.) So when the Lewinsky allegations first came out, Hillary knew that Bill had a long history of such activity, but had every reason to believe that he had changed. And she also knew that both he and herself had been targeted with an endless stream of false allegations for six years. In that context, her believing Bill about Monica was entirely reasonable.

posted by Sully 6/19/2003 10:56:00 AM

Wednesday, June 18, 2003

SLAP! SLAP!:

More from his letters page:

Your apology about the photograph about the Palestinians retriving body parts froms a bombed car is to be commended (�I thought it was horrifying because I thought that the body parts were of murdered Jews. They weren�t.�). But perhaps now you understand better the difficulties the Guardian got itself into with Wolfowitz we-invaded-Iraq-because-it-floats-on-a-sea-of-oil story. When you see some information which fits your general perspective, it�s all too human not to check it out too carefully, and this doesn�t prove that the Guardian is peopled by Bush-haters anymore than your dodgy link proves that you are viscerally hostile to the Palestinians. The swashbuckling nature of your site is part of its attraction, but it�s at its least convincing when you attack others� motives rather than their errors.

[...]

So DeLong thinks that Hillary, based on a single failed project, has proven that she would be dismal President. What would he predict about a man who ran numerous businesses into the ground? How about a man who pretends to be a Texas rancher yet hides his blue-blooded background? A man who left so many children behind without healthcare as Governor? A man who declared that anything less than a $550b tax cut would be a failure? A man who has lost over 2 million jobs, a huge surplus, and ran up a deficit in a scant 2 years? A man who refuses to give inspectors time, but then demands that world wait for proof? A man who has not yet captured Osama bin Laden or Saddam Hussein? Hopefully, he would predict that the man in question will be back in the private sector in 2004 and out of the business of privatizing public interests to the detriment of the public.

I think I�d rather take my chances with Hillary, who seems to have learned from her mis-steps.

posted by Sully 6/18/2003 01:25:00 AM

WE DIDN�T HEAR A WHISTLE YET:

TBogg joins the party giggling at Sullivan for his suggestion of the sort of symbolic gestures in support of the Iranian revolutionaries that he never fails to snicker at when the left proposes them

Yes, Andy is going to unleash the awesome power of the blogosphere to bring those Iranian theo-fascists to their knees the same way it almost brought Trent Lott down, and it almost gained control of Afghanistan, and the way it almost won the hearts and minds of the people of Iraq, and the way it made almost made France beg America�s forgiveness.

I almost can�t wait....

posted by Sully 6/18/2003 01:18:00 AM

GALLOWSWAY:

Cute pun, Sully. But also tell your readers Gorgeous George said this as well:

Yesterday, however, in an interview with the Radio 4 programme On The Ropes, he said: �I was in Iraq on Boxing Day of 1999 and I spent Christmas Day with Tariq Aziz.�

But he added: �If I had spent all day with the second most important man in Iraq, why, the next day, would I meet a junior intelligence officer who has to write a memo to his boss, who has to write a memo to his boss, asking for financial support?

�If I had wanted financial support from Iraq I would have asked Tariq Aziz on Christmas Day.�

posted by Sully 6/18/2003 01:13:00 AM

ONCE THEY THOUGHT LIGHT COULD GO FASTER OR SLOWER, TOO:

Don�t you just love the way Sullivan responds to Dworkin? �What planet is he on?� Further proof that for conservatives, the belief that the media is incorrigibly liberal and incapable of being objective has taken on the status of an immutable law of the universe, with no need to restate the evidence or even examine whether it might be true that the media is less liberal than it used to be.

As if we needed another reminder, let�s remember last winter�s Times Book Review review of Susan McDougal�s The Woman Who Wouldn�t Talk, which erroneously stated that McDougal had been convicted of defrauding the Previns (she wasn�t) and then, when correcting itself, committed a second error, attributing McDougal�s jail time to civil contempt of Ken Starr (again, she was acquitted). It took a letter from McDougal herself to finally set things straight, after the Times was mailbombed by lefties and Clinton supporters.

Sullivan could have hardly found a better example, if he was truly concerned about declining journalistic standards under Howell Raines, to have blogged so robustly about. Yet he was silent.

posted by Sully 6/18/2003 01:03:00 AM

IF WE WAIT FOR AN ANSWER, WILL THE SILENCE BE BROKEN?�:

We sometimes wonder what Sullivan would say if he chose not to so studiously ignore us. Now, Neal Pollack has imagined it for us:

For some reason, PollackWatch continues to harp on the fact that there are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq at the moment, and that I claimed there were while deriding critics as �enemies of the state who should be castrated.�

Once again, I had good information. It�s not my fault that my sources were unreliable criminals with a sinister secret agenda. I work very hard every day to bring you the finest Internet fact-based opinion writing, with very little gratitude and a lot of criticism. I wish the people at PollackWatch and Smarter Neal Pollack and Screw Neal Pollack, He Sucks, would get off my ass. It�s either criticize me or criticize the natural enemies of freedom. Your choice, douche-monkeys.

Go read the whole thing. But avoid drinking anything as you left-click. (The only thing you missed, Neal, was actually creating pollackwatch.blogspot.com)

Oh, this post is also worth the eyeball.

The recent resignation of Howell Raines from The New York Times, which I celebrated by renting a loft in Soho and throwing a massive teabagging party with all my friends, is conclusive proof that blogs have arrived as the primary form of character assassination in America. And when I say �character assassination,� I mean �cleaning out the Fifth Column gutter by blowing minor details of a story way out of proportion.� Without the analytical work of hundreds, nay, thousands, of creepily-obsessed geeks with an inflated sense of self-importance, King Howell would still be spreading his lies today.

What Sullivan thinks, Pollack says.

posted by Sully 6/18/2003 12:49:00 AM

Tuesday, June 17, 2003

WHY DON�T WE TIE LITTLE RED, WHITE AND GREEN RIBBONS ON OUR SITES, TOO? THAT�LL SHOW THE MULLAHS:

Inexplicably, Jim Capozzola left Ana Marie Cox off his list of female bloggers he likes (along with Eve Tushnet).

She�s definitely going on our blogroll now, though, with two great jabs at Sullivan in the last couple of days.

First, she looks askance at The Blog Queen�s proposals that for one day ro so the entire blogosphere do something in support of the Iranian uprisings:

This strikes me not only as arrogant, but also kind of lazy. Imagine the blogosphere in civil rights era: �Hey, everyone, you�ve got to link to this article about lunch counter sit-ins!� Though I admit that I would have much preferred a blogosphere approach during, say, The Crusades.

Her skepticism about the penetration of blogs that was expressed in that post also took a Sully-specific direction before:

To say that this sort of blog is �one of the most reliable forms of news out there,� then, is a little like calling the person who delivers your pizza a great chef, or dubbing your librarian a prolific author. Also, if an actual working journalist � say, a young affirmative-action intern at the Times � attempted this sort of recycling, I just don�t think Sullivan would be quite as pleased.

OUCH!


posted by Sully 6/17/2003 10:42:00 AM

NOTHING TO BRAGG ABOUT:

Jo Fish takes another whack at Smalltown Boy:

Sully wants to know how much Raines will be getting in severance. What business is that of his? He seems annoyed that �$6.4 MILLION: That was Arthur Sulzberger Jr.'s total compensation last year�. How do we deduce this? Scroll down to here and see where the �dish� is in it�s membership drive. Not as good as he had hoped, but he�s paying himself a salary. However as a true republican boss, Robert, his (employee? boyfriend? paramour du jour?) is doing the scut-work of database entry/list organization for free. So there you have it, Sully really is republican...free labor keeps the ship afloat along with free WiFi when his ISP is not working.

And remember, this is a guy who takes his Augusts off.

posted by Sully 6/17/2003 10:18:00 AM

STILL MILKING THE COW:

Hmm. We see Hillary�s declining to be interviewed about the political content of her book as simply a way of saying �I've said what I�m going to say, and that�s it.�

Perhaps Sullivan should recall that, even as he jokes about it and makes light, he, for his part, has refused to speak at length about this little episode, beyond this piece, which reaches the same conclusion:

I see no reason to say anything more. If you are a reporter and want a quote from me about the details of my sex life, feel free to use the following: �It is none of your business.�

If the right has not satisfied their self-flagellatory urges through Hillary, that, in turn, is their problem and should not be shared with the rest of us.

posted by Sully 6/17/2003 10:13:00 AM

YOU CAN�T USE THE WHIFFLE BAT IF YOU WANT TO MAKE THE BIG LEAGUES:

For the record, we think that Council of Europe reg is sort of silly, and frankly sounds like something out of Norah Vincent�s wet dreams (see blogroll). Not to mention unenforceable ... can anyone imagine an American court upholding such a decree?

But buried in the story is this graf that should make Sullivan happy:

Pall Thorhallsson of the organization�s media division explained this move by arguing that bloggers and their brethren are becoming influential enough to be regulated as are their counterparts in the offline world.

You can�t have it both ways, Andy. If you don�t want them to notice, you can�t get too big.

posted by Sully 6/17/2003 10:05:00 AM

SAVING SAVING PRIVATE LYNCH:

The Post story is, of course, immediately suspect once one sees Stenographer Sue Schmidt�s name still on the byline (Why didn�t the Post add Jayson Blair�s while they were at it?). After all, she cowrote the original story which the article takes a great deal of time to correct:

The Post's initial coverage attracted widespread criticism because many of the sources were unnamed and because the accounts were soon contradicted by other military officials. In an effort to document more fully what had actually happened to Lynch, The Post interviewed dozens of people, including associates of Lynch�s family in West Virginia; Iraqi doctors, nurses and civilian witnesses in Nasiriyah; and U.S. intelligence and military officials in Washington, three of whom have knowledge of a weeks-long Army investigation into the matter.

The result is a second, more thorough but inconclusive cut at history. While much more is revealed about her ordeal, most U.S. officials still insisted that their names be withheld from this account.

Of course, the Post has to blame its sources for misleading them.

Neither the Pentagon nor the White House publicly dispelled the more romanticized initial version of her capture, helping to foster the myth surrounding Lynch and fuel accusations that the Bush administration stage-managed parts of Lynch�s story.

But the salient point of our critique and Kampfner�s still stands:

The Special Operations unit's full-scale rescue of the private, while justified given the uncertainty confronting U.S. forces as they entered the compound, ultimately was proven unnecessary. Iraqi combatants had left the hospital almost a day earlier, leaving Lynch in the hands of doctors and nurses who said they were eager to turn her over to Americans.

[...]

Razaq and the hospital staff said the last Iraqi military and civilian leaders had fled the morning of the raid; they stripped off their green uniforms, abandoned their vehicles in the parking lot and disappeared. None of the hospital staff was injured during the rescue.

(Emphasis ours)

That means that this statement is a bit of a fib:

�There was not a firefight inside of the building, I will tell you, but there were firefights outside of the building, getting in and out,� Brig. Gen. Vincent K. Brooks told reporters at Central Command in Qatar.

Left strategically unaddressed by this story, as usual, is the most damning allegation: that the Army had reliable information the day before the raid that Iraqi troops had left and that the Iraqi medics had tried to return her in an ambulance that same day but were fired on and turned back.

Does anyone think that Sully will point to this as yet another example of slipshod standards in journalism? Don�t hold your breath ...

posted by Sully 6/17/2003 09:56:00 AM

Monday, June 16, 2003

FRENCH NUMBERS:

Max Sawicky clues us in that Stephen den Beste might be talking out of his ass on the French trade deficit, and leads us to the conservative blogger Minute Man, who takes a step back:

The French say that their trade balance with the US fell by roughly 300 million Euros; we say that the French trade balance as viewed by the French rose by roughly $270 million. I�ll tell you what � if this were my checkbook, I would look to see if I had reversed a sign, or confused imports and exports, or made some such slip-up. Or maybe Jayson Blair is doing press releases for the French. Or the US. Since I don�t trust the Feds or the French, my default settings are useless.

[...]

Anyway, I can not say just what it is that is meant to be included in these trade figures. However, the totals and net balances seem quite different from what I presume to be their US counterparts, and I can�t find the darn stats for April and March of 2003. Hope that cleared things up.

I will now stagger to my Big Finish: one month's worth of import and export figures don�t mean much, especially when the other country is reporting the opposite.

posted by Sully 6/16/2003 04:25:00 PM

DIDN�T YOUR PARENTS EVER TELL YOU THAT WASN�T NICE?:

Like so much else of what he posts, Edward Boyd�s attempts to figure out what Howell Raines got paid are so ridiculous one can almost envision his brain slowly dribbling out through his nostrils as he plonks away.

I couldn�t find info on Howell Raines because he isn�t included in the NY Times executive compensation data that is publicly disclosed through SEC filings. Why? Because �executive editor� isn�t one of the titles for which the SEC requires disclosure. Instead, the Times is required to list Sulzberger and four people no one has heard of.

You�d think conservatives would, of all people, understand the rationale for requiring corporations to disclose what their officers and directors make ... and no one else. Statutorily, they are the ones with responsibility. Boyd is suddenly shocked that "executive editors" are not required to report this information? Well, duh. He�s an employee, same as the guy who mops up the lobby after hours (albeit with far more favorable leverage) and nothing more. His salary is no more necessarily the public�s business than, say, what Peter Jennings gets.

Now, he has a point that maybe the Times might want to voluntarily release this information. But it�s revealing about where the conservative mindset is today that he actually thought it would be in the Times Corp.�s SEC filings.

And it is also equally revealing that he indulges in that common conservative canard of judging one�s philanthropic impulses by the amount of money they make. Andrew Carnegie and Bill Gates both made more than the GNP of several small African nations combined. We guess that they weren�t truly philanthropists, never mind that they gave away tons of that money to build libraries and fight African AIDS.

posted by Sully 6/16/2003 04:19:00 PM

WORTHWHILE CANADIAN INITIATIVE:

Jo Fish says what we would have said in response to Sully�s hopes about gay marriage in Canada and its impact in the U.S.

Mostly because he�s about as dense as lead, and politically as radioactive as plutonium to his buddies in the republican party, I guess that word has not gotten to the nether-regions of Rhode Island that the wing of the republican party currently in favor inside the beltway is not Sully-friendly. Imagine that. But like the little engine who could, Sully huffs and puffs about the Canadians recognition of all kinds of marriage.

Actually, Jo, Provincetown is in Massachusetts. But anyway ...

Um, yes..what was the question again? Permutations? There are some of his fellow republicans who would like to make that word illegal in this country, much less anything it describes...

Remember, Andrew, It's all about 9-11 here in America..for us or against us!! and our neighbors to the north think Smirk is a moron, and we�re all warmongers. Hence many republican 10-watt luminaries seem to feel we should not even be talking to the Canadians (damn furriners) anyhow, and you�re wondering how these 10-watt lawmakers are going to treat a gay couple married in the great white north? Can I buy some of what you have been smoking?





posted by Sully 6/16/2003 09:52:00 AM

BUSH LIES, OH YES HE DOES:

York engages in an evasive pattern Sully knows well: respond to the more easily deflated charges. Still, when engaging Dana Milbank�s months-old Post article, he actually tries to get away with this:

On the economy, Milbank took Bush to task for urging Congress to pass a terrorism insurance bill. �There�s over $15 billion of construction projects which are on hold,� Bush said in a speech last October, �which aren�t going forward � which means there�s over 300,000 jobs that would be in place, or soon to be in place, that aren't in place.� Milbank complained that the $15 billion figure was not a government estimate but had instead been produced by the Real Estate Roundtable, which favored terrorism insurance and had come up with that number through an �unscientific survey� of its members. The figure of 300,000 jobs, Milbank wrote, was also suspect, but he offered no evidence that either figure was actually incorrect. The White House stood its ground; an official told ABCNews.com�s �The Note� that the jobs figure was �vetted and approved by the president�s economic team.�

So, a pro-business administration, with a reputation for either hiring people to analyze data who are known to put partisanship over all or pressuring those who aren�t to consider their future in this administration when they do vets figures provided by a business group and agrees with them. Surprise! Dog Bites Man!

And sentences like this next one make you wish MWO weren�t on break at the moment:

Moreover, the incident raises the question of why Fleischer would tell a lie that reporters would be able to discover almost immediately � well before the president�s speech.

When we recover our composure, we guess the best answer we have is a quote from another Schwarzenegger movie: �That�s what he does ... That�s all he does

While York shows some glimmers of fairness by implying that Clinton-bashers were wrong to suggest that similarly exaggerated statements in a political context by Bill were lies, and in general breaks with current right-wing SOP by not larding his article with ten times as many sneering insults to the left as actual content, he ends up merely papering over the issue. He�d be well-advised to check out this fairly familiar-looking blog, or an incident where it�s hard to argue that Bush knew, or should have known, information that contradicted what he was saying, like this example.

And this site has tallied up a bunch of examples that would be harder for York to dismiss, including instances when Bush outright denied he had said something he had actually said. Such as this, our favorite example of Bushian dissembling.

In any event, the issue here is not as much yet Bush lying as it is his underlings � Rumsfelf, Cheney et al � and him apparently putting up with it.

posted by Sully 6/16/2003 09:42:00 AM

BUT THE POINT STILL IS ...:

Faced with mounting pressure on his attempt to counteract the Iraqi-museum story, Sullivan just decides to dodge the question entirely, rewarding Jim Miller for being first without addressing two facts that have been repeatedly brought up in response to him and others: one, that a fraction of the US troops sent to guard the Oil Ministry could have been detailed to protect the museum; and two, that the 33 most important pieces from it are still missing.

This, actually, is telling. This is how the chickenbloggers admit that this is hurting Bush.

posted by Sully 6/16/2003 09:14:00 AM

SULLY BLOOM:

Happy Bloomsday!

We decided to celebrate the 99th by having a little fun, recalling the uncapitalized nature of Sullivan�s personal emails, imagining that late tonight Sullivan is lying awake in bed, head to foot with the boyfriend, and what thoughts tumble end over end through his mind ...

yes because he never did a thing like that before as ask for breakfast in bed tomorrow morning what the hell does he think i am some kind of wife or something well i guess some kind of british wife like madonna or my mum maybe hell make me some lovely clotted cream or maybe not god reading that johnny apple story and then that bit in the guardian got me all horned up for the home counties i mean god i hate all those people and their clever talking loudly in restaurants no wait a minute thats not how it goes who was it from again ah yes monty python there are some things that still make me feel proud deep inside to be british like tony blair god is he i mean id never say this out loud on my blog but i think hes sort of sexy in a churchillian kind of way i dont think i could ever explain this even to the most tolerant of them certainly the gay left like those arseholes excuse me assholes signorile and romenesko did i say again that theyre assholes

theyre all so different though at least on the outside but not underneath theyre just like arafat and bin laden and chirac theyre all the same one and the same they piss me off just like everybody has pissed me off since those yobs back in secondary school in west goodstone found my diary and read out loud about my crushes on the rugby team to the whole school well what was so unique about that at the time really like every english high school isnt crawling with kids working out their sexual confusion in very overt ways no not like all these american schools where they give you wedgies or worse for showing up at school in mums old prom dress but at least they encourage boys to be the kind of gay men who give equal attention to being men as they do to being gay i mean its not like we all have to wear makeup and dresses and call each other and the whole world for that matter luv the gay community would have a lot less problems if we all understood that men are just supposed to be men no matter who they fall in love with then maybe theyd let us serve in the military not that i would ever do such a thing im too smart for that

yes i think ive gotten a bit firmer everywhere it counts since i started on androgel and ive still managed to keep my 32 inch waist at least thats what they told me in chicago ah yes chicago theyll all never know just what i went to chicago for a couple of weekends ago although you can easily figure it out with google ha ha but they all respect my privacy too much or do they well it doesnt matter anymore im not going to live in the past except well especially now that that bitch howell raines got what he deserved yes he did you bloody fucking dumbshit liberal redneck whatever made you think you could kick me out of the times forever even if you have i brought you down all by myself by blogging about you every day you dont fuck with me nobody fucks with me im andrew m sullivan you mess with me youre messing with the best gonna shoot that piece of shit and i purposely avoided crediting you for the one thing you did that was good which was starting to run gay and lesbian weddings it doesnt matter if you did more for that cause in one move than i probably ever could with a hundred books you still got buggered bloody badly and i loved every minute of it watching you go down

swwoooosh rooaaarrrr ssss ssss god the surf is really strong tonight good thing i got this place fixed up hey maybe if this weeks pledge drive comes in good i can add on to it and build another toilet like it really costs that much to sit at a computer surf the net all day and look for stories and then have reihan filter through all that bullshit email especially all that stuff from liberals who say im wrong about this or that like the iraqi museum they dont really care about those things they just want to hurt george bush the greatest president america has ever had or will ever have i hope when they write his biography they mention how much i loved him but anyway i deserve all that money after marty cut me loose and howell fucked me over and i dont care how i get it but this is the greatest country in the world and im getting mine somehow yeah let alterman whine all he wants i still got it where it counts and he doesnt of course hed never really understand that would he

i got the looks you got the brains lets make lots of money ahh good to remember that song neil and chris are still so dear to my heart they were the first theyll be the last uh oh it looks like im standing another one and im not talking about drinks here either come in boys the meats ready o jamesy get me out of this poo thats the good thing about the big t you get one of these every few hours whether you want it or not and of course i do god its funny i bitch about jonah flashing his kid around and say that this is just hets flaunting their sexuality and for gays it isnt all about sex and while thats true it certainly seems to be all about sex for me more and more these days well that and making them be nice to me when they really shouldnt

who knows is there something wrong with my insides or maybe my outside i mean i hope thats just a bruise on my hip there its just down low enough to cover up with my pants when im not wearing a shirt which is often enough lately while i still wonder some days about that superinfection thing i think i got it working out yeah thats it it does sort of hurt a little bit well so what im not going to let those people stand in the way of getting fucked yes and damn well fucked too and getting a tongue seven miles up my brown part yes it would be just like that day when i first saw him standing on that rubble pile that was the world trade center holding that bullhorn and i looked into his eyes his eyes it was like he was asking would i be a flower of the mountain for him and holding the seedcake out for me to eat of his mouth just like in that kate bush song and i said yes i said yes i will yes yes

Of course, Sullivan really reminds us of other characters in the story ... Mulligan, maybe, Mr. Deasy definitely.

posted by Sully 6/16/2003 08:59:00 AM

Sunday, June 15, 2003

RAGGED ON BY RICH:

How long will it be before Sullivan starts frothing at the mouth over these bon mots by Frank Rich in today�s Times about the way the paper itself became part of a media frenzy as never before over the Jayson Blair affair?

Much of that coverage was accurate, fair and balanced (except, predictably, from the Murdoch empire) ...

[...]

The Times�s wounds were not magnified by any of its critics, however fierce, so much as by a media culture we encouraged by the way we told our story.

[...]

While many bloggers, especially those on the right, used the scandal as a club to beat The Times over the head for various polemical agendas, it was a site that aspires to that old-fashioned journalistic commodity, objectivity, that advanced the story. The site is known as �Romenesko,� after Jim Romenesko, the editor who runs it for the Poynter Institute, a nonprofit organization for training journalists, and is essentially a page of links to news stories about the media.

posted by Sully 6/15/2003 03:19:00 PM

ROMENESK:

A correspondent writes regarding Sullivan�s latest of his infrequent attacks on Jim Romenesko:

This is completely unfair. Romenesko links to Sullivan's website under the �Media People� heading on the left side of the page. It�s true that Romenesko doesn�t directly link to Sullivan�s articles. But Romenesko does indirectly link to them, because Sullivan has links to all of his articles on his website.

Romenesko obviously thinks that Sullivan is someone worth reading on a regular basis; Sullivan doesn�t return the favor. If �above the ideological fray� means anything, Romenesko comes closer to fitting the bill than Sullivan does, no matter how much Sullivan tries to claim that they�re both ideologues. (To be fair, Sullivan does think that some liberal bloggers are worth reading, e.g. Josh Marshall. But that doesn�t minimize the hypocrisy on the Romenesko issue.)


posted by Sully 6/15/2003 09:35:00 AM

FISCHER MAN:

Uh, does suggesting the U.S. needs another Boston Tea Party equate in any way with �speaking of the need to overthrow the current American constitution�? As usual, nothing to that effect is in the original article.

posted by Sully 6/15/2003 09:24:00 AM

HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE:

Read this heartfelt, totally non-political entry by Josh Marshall and contrast it to any of Sullivan�s vain musings on winter in Provincetown, or anything about his own inner life for that matter.

Actually, just read it for itself. It�s that good.

posted by Sully 6/15/2003 12:40:00 AM

ALWAYS ROOM FOR ONE MORE, HONEY:

Stephen Dunn at Begging to Differ goes into some depth about the contradictions between The Blog Queen�s view of the superiority of blogs for correcting journalistic errors and his actual practice on his blog, using his recent redaction of his link to Little Green Goofballs as a departure point:

It�s not the mistake that bothers me.

What bothers me is that I seem to recall Sullivan�s commenting several months ago that the blog format is superior to traditional print media in part because bloggers can instantly correct themselves right below the text of an error by posting an update � while newspapers have to run obscure correction columns that no one except Andrew Sullivan ever reads.

I agreed with him! He was right. That is a better way to handle corrections. But that�s not what Sullivan did in this case. He deleted the post. It�s gone. I can�t remember exactly how he used the word �savages� and I can�t look it up because it's gone.

Worse yet, I can�t find where Sullivan made the comment about how blog corrections are better than print corrections because there is no search function on Sullivan�s archives. What gives?

And kudos, great shining kudos, to the first person other than us to notice Sullivan�s constant timestamp deceptions

While I�m on Sullivan's case, I might as well mention this as well. In the apology post, Sullivan mentions that he posted the LGF link �yesterday.� The post is dated 12:16 a.m., June 13, 2003.

As I am sitting here typing this post, it is exactly 12:16 a.m. EST, June 13, 2003. I read Sullivan�s post at least 40 minutes ago, that is, �yesterday.� Unless Sullivan posted from Nova Scotia, I do not see how it is possible for that time stamp to be accurate.

To be clear � I do not think this is an earth-shatteringly big deal. However, Sullivan�s schtick includes constant harping on the faults and foibles of traditional media organizations, in particular the New York Times. Yet the same time, he is branding people �savages� for no apparent reason, then deleting the reference from his site while issuing an apology post with a time stamp that is apparently fudged. All this, and we can�t even search his archives to determine if he has criticized exactly such behavior on the part of others in the past.

Yes, Sullivan is sorry. Rightly so.

Now there�s someone who understands instinctively why we started doing this almost a year ago. (There�s also a link to the full text (very short) of the post Sullivan deleted).

More recently Steve has qualified things a bit. Nevertheless, he still concludes:

A blog is an open-source record of the human thought process. By deleting his Palestinian Savagery post, Sullivan deprives his readers access to the most fascinating component of his blog, the stream of his consciousness.

Rather than concealing and apologizing for his mistake, I urge Sullivan to blog about it, and about his apology, and about how being a person means sometimes you fall flat on your face. Blog about the unsettling realization that hypocrisy dwells in us all. Blog about having a bias and being careful not to let the bias get the better of you... most of the time. Honesty, in this regard, is infinitely more valuable than perfection.

Nice, Steve, but we can tell you it won�t make a difference. We�ve been slamming his hypocrisy up and down the corridors of cyberspace for 50 weeks now, and has he changed his ways? No (Not that we really expected that he would, though one never knows).

posted by Sully 6/15/2003 12:36:00 AM

ALWAYS ROOM FOR ONE MORE, HONEY:

Begging to Differ goes into some depth about the contradictions between The Blog Queen�s view of the superiority of blogs for correcting journalistic errors and his actual practice on his blog, using his recent redaction of his link to Little Green Goofballs as a departure point:

It�s not the mistake that bothers me.

What bothers me is that I seem to recall Sullivan�s commenting several months ago that the blog format is superior to traditional print media in part because bloggers can instantly correct themselves right below the text of an error by posting an update � while newspapers have to run obscure correction columns that no one except Andrew Sullivan ever reads.

I agreed with him! He was right. That is a better way to handle corrections. But that�s not what Sullivan did in this case. He deleted the post. It�s gone. I can�t remember exactly how he used the word �savages� and I can�t look it up because it's gone.

Worse yet, I can�t find where Sullivan made the comment about how blog corrections are better than print corrections because there is no search function on Sullivan�s archives. What gives?

And kudos, great shining kudos, to the first person other than us to notice Sullivan�s constant timestamp deceptions

While I�m on Sullivan's case, I might as well mention this as well. In the apology post, Sullivan mentions that he posted the LGF link �yesterday.� The post is dated 12:16 a.m., June 13, 2003.

As I am sitting here typing this post, it is exactly 12:16 a.m. EST, June 13, 2003. I read Sullivan�s post at least 40 minutes ago, that is, �yesterday.� Unless Sullivan posted from Nova Scotia, I do not see how it is possible for that time stamp to be accurate.

To be clear � I do not think this is an earth-shatteringly big deal. However, Sullivan�s schtick includes constant harping on the faults and foibles of traditional media organizations, in particular the New York Times. Yet the same time, he is branding people �savages� for no apparent reason, then deleting the reference from his site while issuing an apology post with a time stamp that is apparently fudged. All this, and we can�t even search his archives to determine if he has criticized exactly such behavior on the part of others in the past.

Yes, Sullivan is sorry. Rightly so.

Now there�s someone who understands instinctively why we started doing this almost a year ago. (There�s also a link to the full text (very short) of the post Sullivan deleted).

More recently Steve, the poster, has qualified things a bit. Nevertheless, he still concludes:

A blog is an open-source record of the human thought process. By deleting his Palestinian Savagery post, Sullivan deprives his readers access to the most fascinating component of his blog, the stream of his consciousness.

Rather than concealing and apologizing for his mistake, I urge Sullivan to blog about it, and about his apology, and about how being a person means sometimes you fall flat on your face. Blog about the unsettling realization that hypocrisy dwells in us all. Blog about having a bias and being careful not to let the bias get the better of you... most of the time. Honesty, in this regard, is infinitely more valuable than perfection.

Nice, Steve, but we can tell you it won�t make a difference. We�ve been slamming his hypocrisy up and down the corridors of cyberspace for 50 weeks now, and has he changed his ways? No (Not that we really expected that he would, though one never knows).

posted by Sully 6/15/2003 12:36:00 AM

IN SO MANY WORDS:

TBogg links and reposts in full from this dead-on spoof of Sullivan and so many other heavyweights in the blogging world (see Reynolds just below).

(This site does bring up one question: what happened to WinerDog, the site that does to grand-champion blogger Dave Winer what we do to Sully? We've been meaning to acknowledge them on our blogroll, but the last time we tried the link Google gave us, there was some error page instead).

posted by Sully 6/15/2003 12:22:00 AM

Powered by Blogger

 

All material on this site copyrighted by author or authors.

 

 

Blogging the Blog Queen

or,

“appl[ying] a magnifying glass to Andrew Sullivan’s performing-flea antics” – James Wolcott, Vanity Fair, April 2004.

Passionate rebuttal to Andrew Sullivan's frequent rants.

The Guardian

sullywatch AT mail.bg

Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More

THERE IS NO SOCIAL SECURITY CRISIS

There Is No Crisis: Protecting the Integrity of Social Security

Also see:

Smarter Andrew Sullivan (on hiatus, alas)

More blogs about Andrew Sullivan.

And for satire:

Neal Pollack (on hiatus as well)

Our inspiration:

Media Whores Online (presently out to pasture, but hopefully to return soon now that they are needed again)

Other watchers:

InstaWatch

WarBlogger Watch

LGF Watch

HorowitzWatch

MalkinWatch

KausPatrol

DeCal (Cal Thomas)

ConWebWatch

LucianneWatch

The Daily Howler

Media Matters

 

The small village of bloggers who try to keep Sullivan honest (among other things):

 

Democratic Veteran

By the Bayou

WareMouse

Best of Both Worlds

Steve Brady

Other blogs of interest:

 

Eschaton

The Daily Kos

The Rittenhouse Review

Roger Ailes

TAPped

Max Sawicky

Very Very Happy

Talking Points Memo

uggabugga

TBogg

No More Mister Nice Blog

Steve Gilliard

Hullaballoo

Pandagon

Abu Aardvark

Ted Barlow (now at

Crooked Timber)

CalPundit (now at the Washington Monthly as Political Animal)

David Ehrenstein

Brad Delong

World O’ Crap

Tom Tomorrow

Oliver Willis

skippy the bush kangaroo

Public Nuisance

Bruce Garrett

are you effin’ kidding me?

Light of Reason

Terminus

Onanism Today

The Suicide Letters

The Antic Muse (now Wonkette)

Sadly, No!

corrente

Anonymous Blogger

Scoobie Davis

Textism

Baghdad Burning

Whiskey Bar

Busy Busy Busy

We Report, You Deride

Silt

The Tooney Bin

Adam Kotsko

Nasty Riffraff

A Brooklyn Bridge

Suburban Guerrilla

Dave Cullen

Approximately Perfect

Trust me, you have no idea how much I hate Bush.

Beautiful Atrocities

  

 

 

Also worth checking out

 

The Cursor

Journal of American Politics

The George Bush AWOL Project

The Daily Kos

 

 

Greatest Hits (ours):

 

The Alaskan climate graph examined

Proof positive that Sullivan cannot, and should not, be trusted as a journalist to get his facts right.

 

The fisking of Norah Vincent

How we drove her out of Blogistan almost all by ourselves.

 

Excerpts from Lee Siegel's 2001 Harper's piece

Online here exclusively.

 

Why we blog the way we blog

A reply to some legitimate and friendly criticisms from Andrew Edwards

 

Why we blog the way we blog, Part II.

A reply to some of the same criticisms from the less friendly (back then) Arthur Silber

 

Bush-hating and proud of it

Our response to David Brooks.

 

Who Was That Masked Man?

The Horse remembered.

 

How the media lynched O.J. Simpson

Off-topic and our most controversial post ever.

 

Journalists behaving badly, updated.

Our wedding gift to Ruth Shalit, former TNR It Girl

 

(others)

 

Eve Tushnet's classic zinger

Sullivan has never quite been put in his place like this. Even Mickey Kaus thought it was funny.

 

"Bush reveals his poisonous colours"

Diane E. goes digging through the memory hole and finds a Times of London column Sullivan would prefer be forgotten.

 

The Datalounge list of potential titles for his memoirs

As reposted by Atrios

 

"The Princess of Provincetown"

Jim Capozzola goes further in that direction than we would ever dare.

 

Sullivan urges the Bush Administration to lie to the public

Brendan and Ben catch him in the act.

 

The Washington Times: An irredeemably left-wing rag

Bob Somerby shows the consequences of Sullivan's own logic of media bias

 

The Central Tenets of the Blogosphere

Derived from Sullivan’s blogging by s.z. of World O’ Crap and posted as a comment at Sadly, No!

Past
current