Comments on: Ailes, Drudge, Cheney, Rove: “They Create Reality”

By: Mondo

Mondo — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:10:06 +0000

Posts like his latest on Scozzafava and Drudge keep Sullivan occupied. I haven’t seen any Palin ovary probe pieces for at least a day or two.

By: Jim O'Sullivan

Jim O'Sullivan — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:33:22 +0000

Sullivan confused? Contradicting his old posts? Not exactly worthy of a Drudge blinking-alarm headline.
Why do people continue to pay attention to what he says? I mean, so what?

By: setnaffa

setnaffa — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:57:04 +0000

Who, exactly is AS’s audience these days? Those still suffering BDS? I saw him once on a news show and immediately classified him with Bill Maher as a frothy-mouthed America-hater…

The recently more frequent tinfoil hat commentaries seem to point out the truth in Romans 1:18-32 (“http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%201:18-32&version=NIV”).

By: Banjo

Banjo — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:44:43 +0000

Sullivan’s erratic course can be explained by the dementia that comes with AIDS.

By: Pawn

Pawn — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 12:51:13 +0000

Sullivan has been offically paid for by the DOJ. Ignore him from now on.

By: Cato

Cato — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 08:44:17 +0000

“There is a method to the Ailes-Drudge-Cheney-Rove denialism. They create reality, remember?”

I am so tired of the left’s constant rehashing of this dubious meme. It’s based on an anonymous quote allegedly from a Bush White House aide, reported by a left-leaning journalist.

In the first place, without a named source for the quote, there is no way to determine its accuracy or how representative it is of the White House as a whole. Secondly, leftists who cite this quote frequently extrapolate one anonymous staffer’s words to apply to everybody on the right.

For instance, how fair is it for Sullivan to attribute this one anonymous aide’s views to “Ailes-Drudge-Cheney-Rove”? It’s intellectually lazy, and totally absurd. Not to mention, it’s devolved into a tired, meaningless cliche.

By: ian

ian — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 05:59:24 +0000

Not sure if gay marriage is the real reason Sullivan has made a big U turn in the past few years.

It seems to me that he is someone who gets infatuated and carried away with someone, only to be disillusioned later on.

He’s in full swoon right now for Obama – disillusionment is about a year away, by my reckoning. Of course, just as with Bush, he will need some face saving reason (“I had no idea that Obama … blah blah blah.” ).

I actually rather look forward to it. It will be amusing – even if it is thoroughly predictable.

By: Kensington

Kensington — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 04:53:39 +0000

Silly, silly Andrew.

By: David Thomson

David Thomson — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 04:48:39 +0000

“…didn’t agree with him on his “big” issue, sodomite marriage.”

The irony is that Andrew Sullivan is unwitting giving conservatives a backhanded compliment. He was enraged that neither George W. Bush nor John McCain would come out for gay marriage. Sullivan conveniently overlooks, however, the fact that also neither John Kerry nor Barack Obama supported gay marriage during their presidential runs. In other words, he takes for granted the latter two men are lying! Our English cousin is literally upset that conservative Republicans dare to tell him the truth. He prefers hearing the lies.

By: Fr. Phlegm

Fr. Phlegm — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 04:41:24 +0000

Sullivan is no longer a Conservative, by his own definition. He’s mocked by Leftists. He has no where to go after this Tuesday. Ask his hero Obama to post him to Kabul to chronicle the escalation into our new Vietnam for the Stars and Stripes?