Lileks on Sullivan

I gave up on Andrew Sullivan as a serious thinker some time ago. It’s clear to me that he’s a single-issue pundit, evaluating everything and everyone as it relates to (Sullivan’s) homosexuality.

That doesn’t stop James Lileks from giving Sullivan’s endorsement of John Kerry a good fisking:

Is it instructive to note which side Sen. Kerry instinctively inhabited in the 80s? Apparently not. Because now he knows that if terrorists strike, he runs the risk of discrediting his party. Got that? Runs the risk. Of discrediting his party. Of all that the theats he might face, apparently that’s the one that seals the deal. Look: The guy voted against the first Gulf War. What else do you need to know? UN thumbs up, global test, allies coming out the wazoo, and he voted no. Because that’s who he is. There are lots of Democrats with hard-core pro-defense no-nonsense smite-the-fascist records. He ain’t one of them. One might reasonably assume he would only commit US forces unless they were under the command of the Vulcans, and only then if the Federation High Council had given up on the Organians coming in and making everyone’s guns disappear in their hands

It’s well worth reading.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


UA-2941127-3