Now this isn’t easy, because understanding Sullivan is like trying to play whack-a-mole, a game at which I am terrible. His opinions switch more often than Arianna Huffington’s– and even more wildly. Today I discovered, of all things, that I am a firmer supporter of gay rights than Andrew, who writes in the midst of the Wright dust-up:
Or my own church, for that matter. What they have all said about gay people is horrifying to me, and I do not share all the political views of my spiritual leaders. The key – it seems to me – is the candidate’s public positions on these issues – not what his pastor has said and says in the pulpit. I remain in a church which describes gay people as “intrinsically disordered.”
Well, anything to justify Lord Barack, I suppose, but, to be frank, I can’t imagine anything more appalling than being in the congregation of a bigot–whether on racial or sexual matters. I wouldn’t stand for it for a second. It’s a moral issue to me, but I guess not to Andrew.
Earlier in this peculiar mobius curve of a post he writes:
The relevant – the only relevant – question is: are Obama’s beliefs represented by the handful of video clips of the most incendiary of Wright’s sermons? Or to unpack it a little further: Does Obama believe that black people should damn America? Does he believe that racial separatism is a viable option? Is he a black liberation theologian?
Okay, Andrew, have it your way, but some of us might have a few others, like – Does it show good judgment that a future president of the United States consorts with a racist as his chosen pastor for twenty years? Or do you like it that Obama claims not to have realized Wright’s views all this time? Or, in Sullivan’s words, “to unpack it further,” that that makes Obama either a liar or a fool? (I’m betting on the former.)
Editor’s note: This is is all Michael Weiss’ fault, since I don’t read Sullivan anymore. I found the link here.
Silly Sully would make a great spokesman for a tabacco company.
Calling Randy Andy intrinsically disordered is more positive than any of my descriptions.
My descriptions of him, of course.
I don’t care how Sully tap dances around this, Obama is not going to support gay marriage, because Reverend Wright does not like gay men anymore than he likes Jews.
This reminds me of the time after the Soviet-Nazi** non aggression Pact was signed in 1939 when most of the fellow travelers were willing to change their position overnight and go from opposition to support for Germany. All of these great “intellects” on the Left are once again willing to sell their soul for their ideology. It appears that they don’t have even a shred of self-respect. How sad.
**No, this is not a violation of Godwin’s Law.
Andrew is Catholic. His church and his religion are the same thing.
Being gay, the self proclaimed keeper the flame of true conservatism (even before Buckley’ s death), a hater of the president, and a panderer for Time and Atlantic, Sullivan often finds himself all tied up in his underwear, figuratively and intellectually, as he falls down the stairs.
Sully did not always hate the president, in fact I think he was a little in love with him once upon a time.
But alas, it was not meant to be.
I wonder if Obama were president would he have vetoed the Defense of Marriage Act which former president Clinton signed?
My guess, no, he too would sign the Defense of Marriage Act and then blame ‘the backward redneck church-going Evangelicals for being so religious’.
In any case, I’m tired of the silly reindeer games repeated year after year after decade and so forth.
Sullivan is a weather vane in a tornado, kinda worthless as it will point in every direction.
… and an Obama who offers all of us a chance to see that sometimes authentic identity requires an element of contradiction, a bridging of the resentful, angry past and a more complex, integrated future.
Andrew Sullivan ? today’s Daily Dish.
Ah, come again?
And here I thought Equality was an intrinsic value not requiring any element of contradiction.
Did I miss something from my civics?
“..authentic identity requires an element of contradiction” –
Sullivan
Separate but equal was the tenet of an “authentic identity” that required an element of contradiction.
BUT IT WAS REJECTED!!
Holy Mary mother of Jesus!
I got to e-mail him.
Eto no se va quedai asi.
Via Mark Steyn posting at The Corner on NRO today here’s yet another nugget of Rev. Wright’s infinite wisdom:
“I said that dirty word again. Every time you say ‘Israel,’ Negroes get awfully quiet on you. ‘Cause they sc….Don’t be scurred, don’t be scurred. You don’t see the connection between 911-01 and the Israeli-Palestinian, somethin’ wrong with ya’ – you wanna borrow MY glasses?!!”
Man, that guy is a piece of work.
Don’t worry. Andrew “See No Evil” Sullivan will bail on the good Reverend once someone unearths some audio of Wright bashing “teh gays.” Since black communities/churches are notoriously homophobic, what are the odds that Wright hated everyone SAVE FOR homosexuals? Has Andy even bothered to ruminate about Wright’s stance on gay marriage or same-sex relationships? Hmm.
Seems to me Obama’s speech comes down to the following:
“It’s OK to be racist so long as you are black.”
I say:
“It doesn’t matter the color of the mouth from which it is uttered: a racist remark is a racist remark and is deserving of condemnation.”
Thanks again for this blog post.Much thanks once again. Keep it up.