Gadsden Flag Redesign

Yay! Professor Althouse posted my versions here!


"It's For the Children" is, in my opinion, one of the most nefarious phrases ever invented, the rallying cry of power-mad statists everywhere.

"Shovel-Ready" kind of speaks for itself.

No Reason To "Withdraw the Claim"

Andrew Sullivan throws down the gauntlet this week, challenging Megan McArdle to provide evidence that Jared Loughner could have been influenced just as easily by Andrew's own writings as by those of the "right," including of course that nefarious person, Sarah Palin.

This post may be a little hard to follow at times due to the he-said/she-said nature of the narrative. For the record, I don't think Loughner was influenced by anyone except the voices in his head. His worldview was so bizarre that there is really no consistency in it whatsoever, and to label it as "left" or "right" is an exercise in futility. I went through some of his material posted on Above Top Secret and it makes no sense at all.


Andrew: "Megan takes issue with this post on Loughner:"

Megan: "Andrew's defense seems to be that there are a lot of right wing jerks out there, and that by combing Loughner's writing, he can find a few sentences here and there that sort of sound like things that might have been said by one of those right wing jerks. But I'm pretty sure that if I combed Loughner's writing, I could find some sentences here and there that imply that Loughner read Andrew's writing, or gay rights literature, or Edmund Burke."

Andrew: "Really? Go ahead. Make my day. Or withdraw the claim."

(The "this post" that Andrew is referring to is this one:

Andrew: "So far, the paranoia and conspiracy theories dominate - but they also dominate the atmosphere of the far right. And when a mentally ill young man complains of the "Broken United States Constitution", or regards legal tender as illegitimate “I did not pay with gold and silver!”, some of this nuttiness has penetrated. It didn't come from nowhere. And the critical point from the very beginning was not that Loughner was some kind of trained militia member killing a foe, but a mentally unstable person who, because he is mentally unstable, might be susceptible to extreme rhetoric from authority figures.")


One of Loughner's favorite books: "Gulliver's Travels"

The crazed internet rantings of Jared Loughner

Andrew: Gulliver in Afghanistan

Gulliver in Afghanistan


Loughner: too many incoherent rantings about "currency" and/or "gold & silver" to need citation

Andrew's endorsement of Ron Paul, an advocate of a return to the "gold standard"

Go Ron Paul!


Loughner: "Therefore, Iraq and Afghanistan war of 2010 is a war crime from the Geneva Convention articles of 1949."

Jared Loughner's Anti-War Views

Andrew: "It [the Iraq war] was, in many ways, a crime."

Shrugging at Torture


I see no reason for McArdle to withdraw her claim.

Andrew Refudiates Himself

This week, among the many wondrous, logic-free emanations from the towering intellect that is Andrew Sullivan, we find this post:

How Many Likudniks Can You Quote In One Article?

Amusingly, the post contains the following two phrases:

There is not a single quote from a single Palestinian in the entire piece

There is one - count it, one - quote from the Palestinians

I guess the Atlantic's blog software does not include a "preview" function, or else Andrew just doesn't read what he writes before posting it.

Why Willow Palin Might Be "Homophobic" - Exhibit A

This week Andrew Sullivan goes after 16-year-old Willow Palin, who had the audacity to call someone a "faggot" on Facebook.

Take a moment to digest the earth-shattering news that teenagers call each other "faggots." OH THE HUMANITY!

Have you collected yourself now? Ready to read on? While I don't condone the use of "gay" or "faggot" as casual insults, it is unfortunately very common. Andrew, however, suggests that young Willow, by the use of these terms, might cause young homosexuals to commit suicide.

Seriously? When Christopher Hitchens called Andrew a "lesbian" on national TV, I don't recall him suggesting that this would motivate young lesbians to kill themselves; rather he suggested that some people need to get a sense of humor.

Also, I seem to recall Obama denigrating his bowling performance as worthy of the "Special Olympics," and Rahm Emanuel's use of "retarded" as a pejorative, but Andrew's concern apparently does not extend to the possibility of suicidal ideation in the cognitively impaired.

May I suggest that Andrew needs to get a grip? For an adult Harvard graduate to attack a sixteen-year-old girl in this way is truly demented, no matter who the girl's mother is.

If Willow Palin is "homophobic" it is surely the result of encounters with people like Andrew Sullivan. Who wouldn't be afraid of someone that behaves this way?

Irony, thy name is Andrew Sullivan

Andrew Sullivan illustrates his oblivousness and complete lack of self-awareness this week, with a post entitled "Bush And The Right: The Dysfunctional Slobber". Yes, he actually accused someone else of "slobbering" over a political figure.

Bush And The Right: The Dysfunctional Slobber

"The interview encapsulates the conservative incoherence of the past ten years. Their partisanship made them - for the most part - blind to Bush's attack on real conservatism in his presidency. The fiscal catastrophe, the "deficits-don't-matter" lunacy, the off-budget nation-building endless wars, the budget-busting Medicare entitlement, the executive power supremacy, the descent into war crimes: all of this violated core conservative principles, and, even now, the alleged guardian of such principles, Rush Limbaugh, slobbers pathetically in front of a president he should have been debunking from the get-go."

Now I don't really disagree with all the points Andrew makes about Bush, but this is coming from a man who repeatedly informs us that Obama is the right man for our time, that we are lucky to have him, that he uses "political jiujitsu" on his insane "Christianist" opponents, that Obama should cause us to "Know Hope." Speaking of "slobbering pathetically," Andrew,

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/03/last-nights-pre.html

"He gets the mood. And seriously: he's obviously up to the job. That was as competent a presser as I've seen in my years covering politics, and light years better than his predecessor's.
...
I said it in the campaign and I'll say it again. He has flaws; he deserves pushback; he needs criticism. But we're lucky to have him right now, in my fallible judgment. Extremely lucky."

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/08/your-toryism-is-showing.html

"My belief in 2008 was that Obama represented the best practical way forward. And although I'm going to criticize him when warranted, I stand by that 1000 percent. We're lucky to have him. "

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/01/sorry-no-detail.html

"As I've said repeatedly for the last two years, we're lucky to have him."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7069622.ece

"Imagine the narrative shift if this bill is passed. Obama will not have imposed this monstrosity on the country from on high; he will have ground it through the bloggers, and the pundits will declare a resurrection. The narrative will be about his persistence and his grit, rather than his near-divinity and his authority. And suddenly it will appear — lo! — as if this lone figure has not just rescued the US economy from the abyss, but also passed the biggest piece of social legislation in decades.

There is only one story better than Icarus falling to earth; and it’s Icarus getting back up and putting on some shades. The media will fall for it. The public will merely notice that the guy can come back and fight. Even when they don’t always agree with such a figure on the issues, they can admire him."

(Snicker)

Andrew Sullivan's Hypocrisy (again)

Once again we explore the subject of Andrew Sullivan's double standards. This time the subject is conservative attacks on the Ivy League. He quotes Jonah Goldberg trying to explain why conservatives distrust political figures with elite educations. I would summarize Jonah as saying that conservatives do not resent high-end educational achievement in itself, but the mindset which too often accompanies it, of "I know more than you about what you what should do, and what I know should be encoded in the laws by which you are governed."


On this blog I have previously examined Andrew's views on Ivy League education, in a post questioning whether he is a misogynist. His own opinions vary widely depending on the person in question. For David Cameron, elite educational background is good. For Elena Kagan, it is bad, or at least not a positive attribute. In his most recent post, quoted from David Frum and linked above, it seems to be good again, as "they [conservatives] only mean to indict such members as disagree with them." I think that accurately sums up Andrew's position as well, except that his "indictments" seem also to be based in gender.

Halloween cards, or something wicked this way shuffles...

I see that I have been neglecting my pitiful blog again. Well, just in time for Halloween (since I probably won't post again before that), here is a picture of some of the cards I made yesterday. Scary! But I won't frighten you with tales of even scarier things...