When I recently visited Hong Kong, one of my old friends there asked why my blog always refers to Andrew Sullivan, whom he had never heard of. It’s a good question. Liberal friends of mine ask me why I even read Sully at all. They all hate him.
My interest in Sullivan is nothing new. Many years ago I was thrilled to learn he was going to become editor of the only magazine I subscribed to, The New Republic. He was young, brilliant, something of a wunderkind, Oxford-educated, and open about his sexuality — something that at the time was simply unprecedented for such a visible position.
I also rememer how my enthusiasm rapidly dwindled as I learned that the liberal prince I’d envisioned was conservative and outspoken in his love for the Republican Party. I felt betrayed, and I often felt like shouting back at his columns, I disagreed with him so vehemently. But whenever he wrote about social issues, I was always in total agreement. As much as he bothered me, I read him religiously.
I was also a daily reader of his site long before the word Blog became part of the popular parlance. It’s the first place I go whenever I turn my computer on. As usual, when he is on target he is the best commentator out there. When he goes into Republican attack-dog mode, which is sadly more the rule than the exception, I thoroughly loathe him.
I sometimes feel a twinge of guilt when I blast a Sullivan post, which is pretty often. He was the one who put me on the map by linking to one of my most heartfelt posts back in January. And it’s because of his touting the new medium called blogging that I started this site. But when he pisses me off, I can’t simply be quiet.
I guess I hope that if I say it loud enough, Sullivan will hear me and, eventually, renounce his Republicanism and see the light. I want to think it’s only a matter of time that he finally recognizes that oil and water won’t mix, that in the eyes of his beloved Republicans — as in the eyes of his beloved Church — he is The Enemy. (I know, it’s an uphill battle.)
After following him for all these years, he irritates, enthralls and fascinates me. So if it ever seems my site is top-heavy with mentions of AS, you know why.
1
By james
I’m a daily reader of Sullivan as well. I tend to be more libertarian, and find that agree w/ him on most social issues and many political issues. I don’t think his sexuality is incompatible w/ conservative ideology. Aside from the Christian right, many conservatives are coming around on the issue of domestic partnerships. Many gay/lesbian(s) seem to resent gay conservatives as traders or gay Uncle Toms. I disagree completely. What better way to initiate change than from within.
October 1, 2003 @ 2:50 pm | Comment
2
By richard
Seriously, if many conservatives are coming around on the subject of gay domestic partners, it is news to me. If they are, it’s wonderful. Just let me know who they are! Sullivan’s idol, G.W. Bush, recently expressed his own lack of enthusiasm on the issue, and even Sullivan expressed his disappointment.
October 1, 2003 @ 3:08 pm | Comment
3
By jeremy
This sordid side of you makes me sick! Next, you’re going to tell me the second site you read is the Drudge Report!
On another note, I think that the Lincoln Republicans are slowly making strides within the party.
October 1, 2003 @ 6:11 pm | Comment
4
By richard
Slowly, as in v e r y s l o w l y. The new FMA controversy may slow the progress to a trickle.
October 2, 2003 @ 12:40 am | Comment
5
By Alec
Actually, Jeremy, it’s Log Cabin Republicans. Perhaps you’re making a subconscious connection with the fact that Lincoln was born in a log cabin. Or maybe you’re thinking of Lincoln Logs, the children’s construction materials popular in the 60’s.
October 2, 2003 @ 2:29 am | Comment
6
By vaara
The problem with the “change from within” theory is that if Bush is elected in 2004, he will inevitably appoint two or three ultraconservative Supreme Court justices in the Thomas/Scalia mold. Which will make any sort of progressive social change impossible for the next 30 years.
And Bush’s election is precisely what Sullivan and his fellow-travelers in the right-wing élite are so desperately striving to achieve through their non-stop campaigns of snarling anti-progressive invective.
So as long as he continues working as a paid cheerleader for God’s Own Party, I will continue to see Sullivan as an enemy and a traitor (and I’ll apologize for my extreme verbiage just as soon as Andrew “Fifth-Column” Sullivan apologizes for his).
October 2, 2003 @ 9:00 am | Comment
7
By richard
Vaara, I’m just as scared as you are. And that Sully doesn’t see how awful a Supreme Court handpicked by GWB would be for him is simply beyond my comprehension. How can someone so smart be so stupid?
October 2, 2003 @ 9:50 am | Comment
8
By jeremy
Yep, it was the Lincoln Log mindset. Damn, I loved Lincoln Logs.
And, I was a child of the 70’s.
October 2, 2003 @ 4:22 pm | Comment