Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Noted Individual With No Credibility Claims Others Have No Credibility

Andrew Sullivan has long had zero credibility when it comes to anything involving Sarah Palin. His insane hatred for Palin has caused him to subscribe to wild conspiracy theories involving her children, believe any rumor about her concocted by political opponents, and to regularly spew venom in her direction. He's long been one of the biggest hypocrites writing, regularly engaging in the same kinds of tactics and slurs he supposedly deplores in others. That's why it was particularly amusing to read his latest,

The WSJ and TWS have long ago lost any intellectual credibility. They use sophism to maintain power. Their cynicism and/or denial mechanisms are deeper than most mortals can imagine.
Coming from a loon like Sullivan, that's a high recommendation. Both publications should use that in their advertising. But then there is his ridiculous attack on John McCain. According to Sullivan, McCain picking Palin as a vice-presidential candidate was done
so carelessly, and his thought process was so cynical, that he should stand in the dock of public opinion before Palin does. Her vanity led her to say yes to his crazy offer. But he gave her that chance. And in the end, she is his responsibility.
Shorter version: McCain's VP decision was so bad that we can't trust him. He should resign as senator. This is a typical example of why I find Sullivan so laughable in general. It's amazing that so many otherwise intelligent people actually read him regularly and take him seriously. Vice-presidential picks are pretty much always done for cynical political purposes. But more importantly, Sullivan's own candidate Obama picked a complete buffoon, Joe Biden, as his VP candidate. In Sullivan World that should mean we can't trust Obama. Sullivan should be demanding his resignation. But expecting any sort of logical reasoning from him on anything involving Sarah Palin is just not realistic.


  1. The Biden pick in a nutshell: Old white guy with foreign policy experience to balance younger black guy with none.

    VP picks are always made with an eye to either balancing out real or perceived deficiencies in the Pres candidate, or to attract voters not attracted to the Pres candidate.

    In a way, the Palin pick was brilliant: a younger, attractive woman to balance out the Dem's younger, attractive minority. I really don't think McCain got what he expected with Palin, but I'm not sure further vetting would have helped. How could anyone predict she'd be winking during debates and throwing wild "pallin' around with terrorists" claims at every opportunity?

  2. Yeah, the Palin pick was just a gamble that ended up stinging McCain. His campaign was badly run in general. He'd probably have lost anyway regardless of VP, because of his own performance.

    In contrast, Obama ran a polished campaign with a well-crafted message. His own political skill made voters willing to ignore Joe Biden as just not that important.