Andrew Sullivan: LEAVE OBAMA ALONE!!!
[Posted by Karl]
The Times of London runs Excitable Andy’s apologia for the Obama Administration’s shaky start. Sullivan tries to buy himself some cred with this assessment:
[T]here’s a case for feeling that Obama is floundering. He has yet to solve the banking crisis, his Treasury is horrifyingly understaffed and he somehow allowed a bunch of incompetents and thieves at AIG to walk off with massive bonuses under his nose. His stimulus package was too controlled by the Democrats in Congress and is too spread out into 2010 to have a big impact now, when it’s most needed. He is trying to take on too many things at once – from climate change and healthcare reform to engaging Iran and reforming Pakistan. The aura of his campaign has waned as the poetry of insurgency has segued into the deadly and often ungrammatical prose of government. He seemingly still can’t speak without a teleprompter.
However, to avoid the obvious conclusions, Sullivan lurches back into his fantasy world:
On Iraq, Obama has essentially given the neocons everything they want except an eternal occupation. By back-loading troop withdrawals until 2010, Obama also keeps his hand strong in the poker game with Iran. His swift return of the US to the Geneva conventions, and disavowal of the dictatorial presidency favoured by Bush and his vice-president, Dick Cheney, are also clear signals, even as he waits for internal reviews on the more excruciating questions of detention and rendition.
He is right, I think, to keep climate change and healthcare reform on his first-year agenda because the real-world challenges they pose cannot be deferred for much longer. His biggest error, I think, has been a failure to show how he will cut spending on Medicare, the government-run health insurer, and other benefits, even as his aides insist in private that they understand the problem.
Obama’s position on Iraq was one of the primary reasons Sullivan gave for supporting Obama in the first place, but it apparently does not matter now. Sullivan also ignores Obama’s actual record on war issues:
[H]is Justice Department has been quietly pressing forward with some of the more controversial policies of the previous administration.
We’re talking about lawsuits over torture, warrantless wiretapping, state secrets and policies of extraordinary executive powers that allow the president to indefinitely detain suspected terror supporters abroad — and even here on U.S. soil.
Even Internet sock-puppeteer Glenn Greenwald has this figured out. Sullivan is still in denial.
Denial is what should be expected from someone who fancies himself a conservative, yet writes about the “beguiling” idea of a sudden government takeover of several big banks. It is the sort of disconnect from reality evident in someone who thinks universal healthcare ought to be on the front burner in the same paragraph as he recognizes the need to cut spending on the government-run health insurer. It is the disconnect evident in thinking that Obama is playing a poker game with Iran.
One thing Sullivan gets right is that if the economy is recovering by 2011, Obama’s political prospects will look pretty good. However, that will not help Congressional Democrats facing voters in 2010; they need a better economy sooner, not later. They will run over Obama if they think that is what they need to do for that timeframe. That is the biggest threat to the Leftist agenda the Conservative of Doubt admits is “too much, too soon” — but supports anyway.
–Karl
As noted in a prior thread, Sully is the current record holder for being HBP.
JD (5e452c) — 3/23/2009 @ 10:07 amJD,
Homophobe!
Karl (694374) — 3/23/2009 @ 10:19 amMaybe us conservatives should leave Limbaugh alone? Just an idea.
I wonder how the fishing is!
Joe (dcebbd) — 3/23/2009 @ 10:24 amAnd did Sullivan bring up anything about Sarah Palin or her kids? Because if Obama is failing it must be to those fecund Christianists up in Alaska (and where the fishing is always good!).
Joe (dcebbd) — 3/23/2009 @ 10:26 amSullivan?… Sullivan?…What’s a Sullivan?
AD - RtR/OS (39b1d4) — 3/23/2009 @ 10:34 amJoe,
I’m already on record.
Karl (694374) — 3/23/2009 @ 10:41 amIf I were Obama (and thank God I’m not), I would leave the handicapped jokes alone.
He is completely inept. If not, why has not even nominated anyone else for Treasury? Surely there are 18 Democrats without criminal records who have paid their taxes.
MIke K (8df289) — 3/23/2009 @ 10:47 amMy hypothesis is that hiring other Treasury officials would make Timmy G less indispensable.
Karl (694374) — 3/23/2009 @ 10:55 amI wouldn’t be too sure.
Dr. K (f196bc) — 3/23/2009 @ 10:58 amUnanswered still is the question:
Why do people who conned me into believing them to be reasonably bright persist on reading Andi Sullivan and echoing her prattle without so much as a ‘NSFI” tag.?
Larry Sheldon (86b2e1) — 3/23/2009 @ 10:59 amKrugman says Geithner’s bailout plan will fail
“This isn’t really about letting markets work. It’s just an indirect, disguised way to subsidize purchases of bad assets,” he added.
Krugman called it a recycled idea of former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, who later abandoned the “cash for trash” proposal.
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R., (6b0eee) — 3/23/2009 @ 11:09 amLarry Sheldon,
Sully’s blog is currently #29 on Technorati, while Forbes lists him as one of America’s most influential liberals, and he holds the 2008 Weblog Award for Best Blog.
Thus, his prattle should not go undocumented or unmocked.
Karl (694374) — 3/23/2009 @ 11:20 am…and Paul Volcker still sits in his unused office, only a short walk away – decades of the best advice and counsel on the planet, summarily ignored. Worst use of the meager talent base by this administration so far.
Dmac (49b16c) — 3/23/2009 @ 11:20 am#4, as a matter of fact he did, although not in this post. On Sunday he wrote a fairly cryptic post that did not comment on any specific charge or allegation he ran with, but in general terms said he had no regrets and would absolutely go after anyone who was as supremely unqualified for such an important job as Palin was without hesitation and with everything he has.
Doesn’t exactly refute Patterico or even Greenwald(?!)’s point about Sully, does it?
Sean P (e57269) — 3/23/2009 @ 11:23 amAll together now: “Iam off to see the wizard the wonderful wizard of Oz…”Good luck in finding a brain in Mr. Sullivans’head and/or President 44.
mike191 (7634c3) — 3/23/2009 @ 11:23 amBack in ’95, I saw a woman reading the paper regarding the OJ trial. She announced sarcastically with an understated intonation – “It’s beginning to look like OJ killed those two people.”
It’s beginning to look like Andrew Sullivan is somewhat confused.
Apogee (f4320c) — 3/23/2009 @ 11:28 amL(unatic)OTUS has still got his his enablers with BDS. It will take a year or two.
Jimminy'cricket (637168) — 3/23/2009 @ 11:34 amAndy’s middle initial is an S, ya?
Bear1909 (edc81c) — 3/23/2009 @ 11:45 amDuring the campaign I noticed that Obama issued contradictory statements all the time. But people seized only upon the one with which they agreed. People were so eager to support him that they built their very own Obama-position-list from his plethora of messages. They voted for that partial Obama — what do we do now that we have to deal with the real, contradictory mess?
Anonymous (0d6d87) — 3/23/2009 @ 11:47 amMike K. has speculated that Sullivan’s illness may be affecting his judgement over the past few years – the drugs and possible dementia could be contributing factors. No excuse for his unhinged ranting, of course – but a possible explanation.
Dmac (49b16c) — 3/23/2009 @ 11:53 amSullivan — when the government leaves me and mine alone, I’ll have little interest in bothering the government. Tit for tat plus forgiveness. I think they’re into death spiral, now, though.
htom (412a17) — 3/23/2009 @ 12:12 pmTHE WALLBAMA by Pink Sullivan
I don’t need no education
I already got that thought control
No dark sarcasm for my muscled hero
Right wingers leave my Obama alone
Hey! Neocons! Leave my Obama alone!
All in all I’m just another brick in Obama’s wall.
All in all I’m just another prick in Obama’s wall.
I already had a revelation
Jack Bauer (793cce) — 3/23/2009 @ 12:15 pmI see his pecs and lose control
No doubts about my new obsession
Right wingers leave my Obama alone
Hey! Neocons! Leave my Obama alone!
All in all I’m just another brick in Obama’s wall.
All in all I’m just another prick in Obama’s wall.
But we simply must continue to discuss the lineage of that ‘tard baby that Gov. Palin gave birth to and that the media covered up for by saying, oh … never mind. He is sick.
JD (16485e) — 3/23/2009 @ 12:16 pm“disavowal of the dictatorial presidency favoured by Bush and his vice-president, Dick Cheney”
Just ignore those super-Cabinet positions Obama has set up at the White House that did not require Senate confirmation and report only to him. Obama is already surpassing what the progs called an imperial presidency but they won’t acknowledge it.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 3/23/2009 @ 12:34 pm“…and Paul Volcker still sits in his unused office, only a short walk away – decades of the best advice and counsel on the planet, summarily ignored. Worst use of the meager talent base by this administration so far.”
Because the Dems are still afraid of being attacked from their right, by people like you.
Geithner, this morning: “We are the United States of America, we are not Sweden.”
Meanwhile China is moving forward with a huge stimulus package and we’re lagging.
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=china+stimulus&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
The democrats have been republican lite for years, under the logic that wall street and corporate hackery was the only game in town. But they’ve never matched the level of republican corruption. The point is you idiots, that principled democrats and their supporters have been attacking corporate sell-outs for years, and they still are.
Why read Obama bashing here when I can read it at TPM, where they are actually interested in policy. Patterico was surprised the Greenwald was consistent on Gitmo. Why Pat?
And a dittohead now you quotes Krugman!!
Shocked, aren’t you, that democratic pundits are more loyal to serious debate than to their leadership? If only you were capable of that we wouldn’t be in the mess we’re in today.
And don’t start on Freddie and Fannie. In this context they were small time.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/98533-fannie-and-freddie-did-not-cause-this-crisis
http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2008/07/did_fannie_and.html
And don’t even start till you read.
Here’s a rundown of serious critiques, by adults, of the Geithner plan
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2009/03/despair-over-financial-policy.html
By the way, has anyone asked Jindal about “volcano monitoring” yet today? http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/03/jindals_mockery_of_volcano_monitoring_money_only_lo.php?ref=fp1
Look at the map and at Alaska. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/03/03/us/20090303_LEONHARDT.html
But Palin says no to stimulus $$$.
You people are so f’n stupid.
bored again christian (ae3731) — 3/23/2009 @ 12:57 pm[…] and Patterico’s Pontifications already directs us to the Andrew Sullivan, the faux conservative, and his “Leave Obama Alone” […]
The Messiah Has A Gorbasm « The Underground Conservative (05b5a7) — 3/23/2009 @ 12:58 pmMike K: Surely there are 18 Democrats without criminal records who have paid their taxes.
Dr. K: I wouldn’t be too sure.
The point is, what sane person would go work in the Treasury Department? You would have to have a really heightened sense of public service, or be a lifelong bureaucrat (like the current Secretary) in order to take a job that requires trying to keep the country’s finances on track while still green-lighting the massive wish list of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and the Democrat establishment.
I find it fascinating that Obama is in a position where he has to be supportive of Geithner at least until all these empty positions are filled. How hard would it be to recruit talent to the Treasury Department if it became clear that the President was scapegoating them for all the economic ills? Let’s see when the first MSM bigwig (of a liberal persuasion, but that probably goes without saying) compares Obama’s confidence in Geithner today to Bush’s confidence in Rumsfeld circa 2005.
Sorry to veer off-topic. Sullivan is a jerkwad.
JVW (bff0a4) — 3/23/2009 @ 2:01 pmI once e-mailed Sullivan a concern about his meds and got a nasty reply from him for my trouble. That was back when I used to contribute to his blog.
I simply cannot understand why the haven’t nominated people for those Treasury positions. There must be 18 Marxist professors he could name. It just makes no sense and adds to the impression that he is over his head. The giggling on 60 Minutes doesn’t help.
Mike K (8df289) — 3/23/2009 @ 2:24 pmAndrew Sullivan didn’t start a war that killed 100,000 people, though. So you’re not allowed to say ANYTHING, ANYTHING.
/sarc
Mitch from PA (890cbf) — 3/23/2009 @ 2:51 pmI do not know why Andrew Sullivan has such animus against Sarah Palin. She is in fact NOT a “Christianist”. She is mostly a moderate to conservative Republican from a state that happens to be smallest in population and largest in area. I like her. Was she the best ever choice for Veep (even though I hoped McCain would pick her), probably not, but she was better than Biden. She got plunged into a campaign with little notice, had to parrot the McCain line, and frankly (if you watch all those interviews in their entirety) did okay (better than Obama with out the teleprompter).
What is going on is a systematic attempt to destroy conservative candidates. Bobby Jindal, Eric Cantor, anyone who is a threat. Did you watch the circle jerk on Bill Maher’s show with Olberman leading the charge on how Glenn Beck is a facsist? Olberman calling someone over the top? I had to turn it off after that.
Now I am not that much of a Glenn Beck fan (I have nothing against Beck, he is a populist like O’Reilly, Dobbs, and not anywhere near as obnoxious as Olberman). I do not regularily listen to his radio show. I saw his CNN show once or twice. I have never seen Beck’s Fox show. But declaring Beck is dangerous and threatening the life of the President by inciting violence? Okay, I do not listen to Beck all the time, but I have never heard anything remotely like that. Note how Olberman manages to bring Bernie Goldberg. Do you think there is some intentional slander going on? Funny Roger Ailes is evil? What about CNN who had Beck on till he quit! And they still have that tool Olberman.
Bringing up fake death threats, that is really low on Bill Maher’s part. But that is what the left does.
Olberman might have discussed old Ithica with Maher backstage over a drink or some of that good dope Bill gets. Of course Maher went to the real Cornell. Olberman went to the community college. But I digress.
Joe (dcebbd) — 3/23/2009 @ 2:54 pmOn a serious note, while I won’t tut-tut Karl for posting about Sullivan — it’s my position that Sullivan long ago entered “The Ted Rall Zone,” meaning that the best course is NOT to give him the attention/ hits he so craves, even if by criticizing him — it IS good to see how much LESS OFTEN we talk about Sullivan in the past six months or so.
And with good reason. Sullivan sold his credibility (and perhaps his mental stability) for his new messiah, and folks. Just aren’t. Paying attention. To him like they used to.
Mitch (890cbf) — 3/23/2009 @ 2:58 pmI do not know why Andrew Sullivan has such animus against Sarah Palin. She is in fact NOT a “Christianist”.
The “Christianist” label is especially odious because it’s a parallel construction to “Islamist.” There is simply no group of “Christianists” that remotely compares to the Islamists.
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R., (e81172) — 3/23/2009 @ 3:02 pmIs a Christianist like a Homosexualist?
gus (36e9a7) — 3/23/2009 @ 3:32 pmBBJF, C.O.R.–you are correct and in fact the label is intended to be odious. It is all about slandering and isolating opponents. The general intent is all Christians are no better than Islamists because they disapprove of homosexuality (even though that very narrow cartoon characterture does not define the vast majority of Christians). Many if not most Christians may define homosexuality as a sin, but it is hardly a central issue to most Christians. And many, including for that matter Sarah Palin, are rather tolerant over such issues.
Joe (dcebbd) — 3/23/2009 @ 3:47 pmNot to mention the fact that the worst the “Christianists” call for is prohibition in gay marriage, while a few of the most over-the-top might theoretically call for reinstatement of the old sodomy laws (never heard anyone call for this, but I’ll allow it for the sake of argument). The worst the islamists do to gay people? Death by hanging, in the case of Iran. In the West bank, tying the offending individual up with rope, rubbing bacon over the offending individuals naugty bits and toss them into a sewer to be attacked by rats was apparently done on more than one occasion.
Oh, and you’ll never guess which blogger highlighted those exact examples as a reason why there was no comparison between christian fundamentalists and islamic fundamentalists. You have one guess.
Sean P (e57269) — 3/23/2009 @ 3:57 pmSully couldn’t be a bigger drama queen if he put on a wig, lipstick and rouge, and donned a Madonna cone bra.
He sounds like that effeminate YouTuber who screamed in defense of Britney Spears.
RogerCfromSD (628cfd) — 3/23/2009 @ 4:01 pmKarl should specify that the “shaky start” which he attributes to Obama is his personal opinion, as it is shared by very few in this country. See approval ratings.
Andrew (114e1c) — 3/23/2009 @ 4:06 pmAndrew, once again it is you showing how little you are paying attention. There are polling data that show that the bloom is off the Obama rose.
SPQR (72771e) — 3/23/2009 @ 4:09 pmI love how the Left conflates performance with opinions on approval ratings.
JD (12ebb1) — 3/23/2009 @ 4:37 pmAndrew, here are the Rasmussen Numbers, Obama’s popularity is eroding. The trend is pretty clear. And for good reason, it looks like he doesn’t know what he is doing.
Now you can go back and pick on little Trig Palin.
Joe (dcebbd) — 3/23/2009 @ 4:38 pmBarone observes that the party generic is showing Democratic sucking.
SPQR (26be8b) — 3/23/2009 @ 5:43 pmSPQR – Don’t try to confuse it with things like facts.
JD (12ebb1) — 3/23/2009 @ 6:14 pmI can see why Barney Frank is gay.
libocrat (b1a191) — 3/23/2009 @ 6:35 pmCould we PLEASE stop calling Andrew Sullivan “Sully”? That name belongs to, and should be forever honored as the nickname of a very competent pilot who safely landed his plane on the Hudson River. There are plenty of other things to call Excitable Andi.
elizabeth (510c83) — 3/23/2009 @ 8:15 pmAndrew Sullivan is crazy. To try to make sense of him is to try to make sense of the guy on the street corner ranting and raving about lasers being fired into his eyes and imminent alien invasions.
Best to ignore. I suggest you do the same. It really isn’t about politics with Andrew, it’s unfortunately entirely personal. Andrew is a fucked up human being, and I wouldn’t want his support whether he was an actual Republican, classical liberal or libertarian. He’s dead to me, and that’s how he’ll stay for the rest of his pathetic life.
Phil (6e0dcd) — 3/23/2009 @ 8:32 pmMost homosexuals are quite liberal — surveys indicating something like at least up to 80-plus percent of them are — in their sociopolitical way of thinking. So it would be peculiar if Sullivan’s inner urges — not even referring to those that pertain to other instances of very poor judgment on his part (eg, the guy is well known for being infected with a major STD) — weren’t more leftwing than not.
Mark (411533) — 3/23/2009 @ 8:37 pmElizabeth (8:15 pm), “sully” is also a verb meaning to soil or taint, sort of what this chap has done to conservatism and blogging. Perhaps we can compromise and continue to call him “sully,” but only if we no longer use it as a proper noun.
JVW (bff0a4) — 3/23/2009 @ 10:55 pmAndrew Sullivan is a low down, Limp Wristed, HIV a-spreadin, Atheistic, Socialist, Pinko, Limey, and if you look up “AIDS Dementia” in the Dictionary you see his PICTURE…
Frank Drackman (c2d1a4) — 3/24/2009 @ 4:44 amLook at the map and at Alaska. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/03/03/us/20090303_LEONHARDT.html
But Palin says no to stimulus $$$.
You people are so f’n stupid.
Comment by bored again christian
There is higher unemployment in Alaska in January. Wow. What are the odds? bac’s lack of intelligence is again shown to the world.
gajim (e39b35) — 3/24/2009 @ 12:24 pmWow another anti-Sullivan posting, haven’t seen that in a long while. Only a psychologist could explain the obsession people seem to have about this person.
jack (2bea0a) — 3/24/2009 @ 8:04 pmGuess Sullivan is still struggling to see what’s in front of his nose.
FamilyGuy (d04d58) — 3/27/2009 @ 7:40 pmSullivan, Obama and Larry Sinclair would make a great porn.
Jimminy'cricket (637168) — 3/27/2009 @ 7:52 pmbecause of the blindfold and the ball gag?
carlitos (cfbec1) — 3/27/2009 @ 8:01 pmSully’s busy attending tea bag parties, not those stupid tax protests.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 3/27/2009 @ 9:08 pm