andrew sullivan c/d

It's a lucrative gig and he's good at it, so yeah it doesn't seem unreasonable to speculate he'll be back. Especially if he remains financially vested in the Dish; the incentive to return to blog up the 2016 election has got to be huge.

people aren't gonna come back to his pay model after getting burned

Not to get too speculative/cynical, but he could use this as his hiatus to parachute away from the dish, then return to blogging in the year to cover the elections for some other site that would probably pay much better. The hunger for election coverage is going to be huge, and I could see a few sites bringing him on as a renter the way NYtimes did Nate Silver

lmao the dean hits on what's really important

https://twitter.com/rxgau/status/560554662815076352

(yes that is from like 1min ago heh)

Checked in hourly during the last few months of the 2008 election. Not too often the past few years.

oh xgaupaws

"he could crank it out ps eat shit"

Great now I'm gonna be singing "Fuck any pipsqueak" to the tune of "Climb Ev'ry Mountain" for the rest of the day

"What does Robert Christgau do in bed? You know, is he a pipsqueak-fucker?"

Charles Pierce:

Andrew Sullivan has given up blogging again until he starts blogging again. (Too bad, I was hoping to be called a Fifth Columnist again, having been born too late for the Red Scare.) During the Chait-Coates dust-up, Sullivan chimed in with another defense of his tenure as editor, and another explanation of why the sourest bilge of scientific racism, spruced up by The New Republic for a new century, was worthy of debate. The fact is that TNR, which already was headed for Crazytown because it was owned by a bigot and a maniac, accelerated in that direction under his command. And it wasn't just The Bell Curve, either. It was Betsy McCaughey's tobacco-industry knob-gobbling hit-piece on Hillarycare. It was using Stephen Emerson, a crackpot so garish that even Fox News won't have him any more, to "debunk" the October Surprise story. It was he who was her editor when Shalit began to steal everything that wasn't nailed down from other publications. Her reward was to write a completely meretricious piece on affirmative action at The Washington Post. He also hired Stephen Glass, which turned out to be good for a laugh, anyway. (He seems to have been a little weak on the editing aspects of being an editor.) For those of us who watched what happened to that magazine, and who chafed under the entire notion that, on the big issues of the past 35 years, it had anything to say about progressive politics beyond the bacon-wrapped scallop liberalism of a very insular Beltway circle jerk, and who believed that political writing in this country could use a lot less TNR in its DNA, this has been a very good week.

the bacon-wrapped scallop liberalism of a very insular Beltway circle jerk

ok this lily is way gilded - circle jerks are insular by definition, no? - yet "bacon-wrapped liberalism" deserves enshrinement

jerks within jerks

depends on how big the circle is

you could all be facing out i guess

take it the sex droughts thread, guys

http://pando.com/2015/01/28/andrew-sullivan-is-not-the-future-of-journalism/

Wow. Thanks, J.D. And I started reading the dear in 2001.

Here's what this man was posting in March 2003: http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2003/03/page/3/

ouch. this is painful, horrible reading.

at the very least, it's a good antidote to any lingering positive feelings i might have had about the guy.

It’s really wonderful to watch apologists for inaction now have to watch as action defeats evil. They will change the subject; they will attack those who got this entire story right while they got it entirely wrong. But they will never reconsider. That would require the kind of open mind that Conason jettisoned years ago. The forces of evil are being dealt a terrible blow on the battle-field. But their chattering enablers are about to be politically annihilated.

Last post on Friday.

Hope he just does this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WINDtlPXmmE

RIP:

I’m known for changing my mind, when the facts change. But on this, I remain convinced that we were more than right to elect Obama twice. His even temperament, his endurance of so many slings and arrows, his integrity and his patriotism loom large at this moment, but will seem, in my view, even larger from the rear-view mirror. We will miss this man when he is gone; and I am deeply proud of having played some small part in framing the case for him, and in seeing it through.

Ah yes. One last time with feeling.

Meep meep, motherfuckers. Meep Meep.

At least shaking his hand at Mass convinced me to stop going to church. Never been back.

I’m known for changing my mind, when the facts change

lol

a Groucho Marxist

"those are my opinions. if you don't like them, I have others"

"those are my opinions. if you don't like them, I have others wait til you get a load of these...."

Lots of retrospective posts and do-you-remember-whens today. From 2004:

Well, I could easily be wrong, but I have a feeling Cheney will crush Edwards tonight. The format is God’s gift to Daddy. They’ll both be seated at a table, immediately allowing Cheney to do his assured, paternal, man-of-the-world schtick that makes me roll on my back and ask to have my tummy scratched. (Yes, I do think that Cheney is way sexier than Edwards. Not that you asked or anything.)

what's the opposite of asking

Okay, that's just...ew. And Sullivan is one of my favorite hate reads, but I don't read it for Re-puke porn.

https://sullydish.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/andrew-sullivan-i-was-wrong-cover2.png?w=244&h=391

So I miss this blog. Are there any other good general-discussion blog heavy on politics that I should be reading in its place? Seems like a very big readership to just send into the wind without a clear successor

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner

Not sure if that's a joke suggestion or not. I do read the Corner from time to time, because it's nice to read smart conservative opinions, but I'm looking for something a little less ideologically rigid (and borderline hateful)

Larison often shrewd about GOP foreign policy pieties.

u should read twitter

chait stepping into the vacuum, it seems

i miss this blog too!

He must be giving an earful tonight to whoever's sitting next to him at the bar / on the beach.

One-day return:

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2015/06/26/it-is-accomplished/

His 1989 article advancing "a (conservative) case for gay marriage" is worth a read:
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/79054/here-comes-the-groom

I haven't been keeping up, so this was probably posted in the political thread:

https://newrepublic.com/article/138951/beyond-hope-barack-obama-legacy-age-trump

It's a roundtable on Obama, and Sullivan's part of it. Unsurprisingly, his is the most uncritical evaluation, so much so that he's ridiculed by the other participants more than once.

It’s easy to mock this reductionism, I know, but it reflects something a little deeper. Asian-Americans, like Jews, are indeed a problem for the “social-justice” brigade. I mean, how on earth have both ethnic groups done so well in such a profoundly racist society? How have bigoted white people allowed these minorities to do so well — even to the point of earning more, on average, than whites? Asian-Americans, for example, have been subject to some of the most brutal oppression, racial hatred, and open discrimination over the years. In the late 19th century, as most worked in hard labor, they were subject to lynchings and violence across the American West and laws that prohibited their employment. They were banned from immigrating to the U.S. in 1924. Japanese-American citizens were forced into internment camps during the Second World War, and subjected to hideous, racist propaganda after Pearl Harbor. Yet, today, Asian-Americans are among the most prosperous, well-educated, and successful ethnic groups in America. What gives? It couldn’t possibly be that they maintained solid two-parent family structures, had social networks that looked after one another, placed enormous emphasis on education and hard work, and thereby turned false, negative stereotypes into true, positive ones, could it? It couldn’t be that all whites are not racists or that the American dream still lives?

His primary question is worth asking. His coyly suggested (but simultaneously denied) answer, that "they maintained solid two-parent family structures, had social networks that looked after one another, placed enormous emphasis on education and hard work", is based on little more than stereotyping - which he (again, coyly) suggests are "true stereotypes" w/o offering any hint of evidence.

That is opinion writing at its laziest. Ask a worthwhile question, then give a worthless answer made up of anecdotes and intellectual sweepings.

As some folks on twitter have pointed out, Sullivan never read this article:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/04/14/asian-americans-used-to-be-portrayed-as-the-villains-how-did-they-become-a-model-minority/?utm_term=.e29c96639c44

Sullivan's take is lazy and not well-researched, compared to the Jeff Guo & Daron Taylor Washington Post article I posted..

Well, Sullivan seems forever locked in competition with Jonah Goldberg to see who can push out the laziest, least-researched copy, so.

After commenting on this I went to the kitchen and as I started cooking supper the truly poisonous racist assumptions that are hiding in plain sight in that paragraph jumped out at me. wtf were you thinking, Andrew Sullivan?

His primary question is worth asking. His coyly suggested (but simultaneously denied) answer, that "they maintained solid two-parent family structures, had social networks that looked after one another, placed enormous emphasis on education and hard work", is based on little more than stereotyping - which he (again, coyly) suggests are "true stereotypes" w/o offering any hint of evidence.

That is opinion writing at its laziest. Ask a worthwhile question, then give a worthless answer made up of anecdotes and intellectual sweepings.

Not worth asking