Look, I like Andrew Sullivan. I have always defended him, have always thought he was interesting and fun and brought something great to the blogosphere, but after reading his live-blogging of the Democratic debate in Nevada from last night, I have decided it is really time for an intervention. Here is a snippet:
9.10 pm: Did Robert L. Johnson actually say he was “out of bounds” in bringing up Obama’s past drug use? That’s what Clinton just said. Did she just make that up?
(Update: if you read Johnson’s press release, you can see that Clinton was lying to maintain good relations with Johnson. She lied when she said that ayone who did such a thing would be disowned. She hasn’t disowned someone who both smeared Obama, then lied about it, then refused to back away from it. So that’s two lies. If it were her opponent, you can be sure she’d be taking notes. I’m holding her to the same standards she applies to others.)
9.20 pm: Clinton again said that she doesn’t want to inject the gender issue into this race. Again, this is easily disproved by any number of statements she has made over the last several months. She’s not as bad as her husband, but she reflexively makes stuff up.
9.30 pm: Just like Bush, she cannot talk about her own weaknesses. In her eyes, her weakness is being too aggressive for change! And then she pivots to exploit Obama’s own confession of his personal disorganization. The more you see her, the more calculating she is.
Notice anything missing? Like, for example, THE OTHER TWO CANDIDATES.
Andrew, I know you hate Hillary (your top two posts today make that clear), but put the keyboard down. No one I know really likes Hillary. I know I don’t. I still think of the Clintons as the folks who made triangulating a bad word. And yes, she is a liar. Yes, it will be sheer hell if she is elected. I personally would rather chew on glass than relive the nineties. And no, I don’t think she will change the fundamental culture in Washington- she will be far too get along/go along. I, and many others, essentially agree with you on literally everything you have written about her. And yes, I think Obama is probably a better person, a better candidate, and will probably be a better leader.
But you are obsessed, and it is has made you almost unreadable the past few weeks. Hell, at this point I would cheer five successive stories about Bear culture. Again, I am coming to you as a friend- I know we all get our little obsessions (see me and Sheehan, Schavo, etc.), but step away from the brink. Please.
It is because we care.
*** Update ***
I am not the only one who noticed the liveblogging last night:
I’ve always found Clinton hatred a bit of a baffling phenomenon. At times, I’ve disliked the political timidity of the Clintons, or thought that Bill Clinton allowed his personal appetites to overwhelm his public duties to the detriment of the country, or felt that Hillary Clinton approached the presidency too much like a middle manager and too little like a director, but I’ve never gotten the hatred. Which is why Andrew Sullivan’s blog has been particularly fascinating this year. Read his liveblogging of last night’s debate. Edwards never even makes an appearance. Obama, who Andrew is deeply committed to, hardly even qualifies as a walk-on character. Instead, it’s Clinton. It’s Clinton and Clinton and Clinton and Clinton. At 9:30 we learn that “Just like Bush, she cannot talk about her own weakness.” At 9:50 she “manages to pivot the sub-prime mess to pander to blacks, Asians and Hispanics…Her tone is a little hectoring as well.” At 10:57 we learn “You have to understand that she can tell lies almost as well as her husband.”