Nothing gives me more smug self-satisfaction than the sudden change of heart a lot of conservative bloggers are having about nutcase Andrew Sullivan (and no, the nutcase is not just an ad hominem — I’ll back it up in a second). After blogging really caught on after 9/11, Sullivan was one of its rising starts in part because of the mix of his pro-gay and pro-war views. Sullivan also found himself persona non grata at the New York Times due to his flagging liberal credentials.
I have always had an intense dislike of Sullivan for a number of reasons, not the least of which was his claim — backed up by practice — that bloggers such as he didn’t need to worry about being accurate. Just emoting in reverse chronological order was enough. Sullivan even attacked the generally fair minded SpinSanity as a ideological hit machine, citing as proof the fact that Sullivan received lots of hits to his blog. That’s right, in Sullivan’s world, traffic — not might — makes right.
Despite this, a lot of conservative bloggers remained enamored of Sullivan until a strange thing happened. Sullivan apparently decided that his gay rights position was more important than his support for the war-on-terror, and almost overnight his blog has gone from being Instapundit-lite to being MoveOn.Org-lite. It’s not that I necessarily agree or disagree with the change — in fact he makes a number of excellent points. Rather, that Sullivan’s only real devotion is to self-aggrandizement rather than truth or any sort of consistent position.
And, as I said in the opening paragraph, he is a certifiable nutcase. On his blog he rightly flogs Zell Miller for a racist comment Miller made 40 years ago, but has since reputed. Referring to Lyndon Johnson’s support of the civil rights movement, Miller said Johnson was “a Southerner who sold his birthright for a mess of dark pottage.” Racist and vile, but Miller doesn’t have anything on Sullivan who actually posted this on his website yesterday (emphasis added),
A fascinating (as usual) despatch from Zeyad in Iraq. He quotes one Mohammed Bashar Al-Faidhy, spokesman of the Association of Muslim Scholars. If you want to see how attuned these maniacs are to divisions in the West, read on:
[Long quote from Muslim scholar urging terrorists not to kill French hostages because they want the West divided rather than unified against terrorism.]
This is a fascinating and potentially important moment in the war on terror. If the Jihadists take the war to France now, we may get the Western unity that has so far eluded us. And that can only be a good thing.
Now I am no fan of France’s foreign policy, but what sort of nutcase would seriously suggest that terrorist attacks against French citizens would be a good thing? What a despicable thing to say.
But that’s Andrew Sullivan.