Obtuse angle

This is the stupidest thing I’ve read on the internets today:

If I lived in Arizona Nevada and had the vote, even though Sharron Angle is beyond nuts, I’d vote for her. Better nuts than this disgusting, cynical, partisan Washington kabuki dance, when people’s lives and dignity are at stake.

I’m not a fan of Harry Reid either but how do you advance the cause of gay rights by replacing a Senator who supports repealing DADT with a Senator who would likely enact anti-sodomy laws given her druthers?

This kind of reasoning is nearly always stupid, e.g. “at least with Bush, you know where he stands”. People don’t talk this way about things other than politics. No one says “better a quack than all this medical kabuki” or “better Barry Switzer than all that West Coast offense mumbo jumbo”.

If you want to have good government, you do it by voting for sane candidates whose positions you agree with, not by supporting nuts in order to make some ridiculous point about an imperfect system.






88 replies
  1. 1
    fourlegsgood says:

    That IS some class A stupidity.

    People who are that dumb are sure to get what they deserve. I’m going to have no pity when things go south and they all get fucked by these lunatic teabaggers.

  2. 2
    Zifnab says:

    If you want to have good government, you do it by voting for sane candidates whose positions you agree with, not by supporting nuts in order to make some ridiculous point about an imperfect system.

    In all fairness, this is coming from the later day conservative Andrew Sullivan. Perhaps he’s simply embracing that old “Government doesn’t work” mantra and isn’t satisfied with Harry Reid’s hit-or-miss record.

    I mean, at least Bush Hitler Sharron Angle is consistent.

  3. 3
    Jay in Oregon says:

    This kind of reasoning is nearly always stupid, e.g. “at least with Bush, you know where he stands”. People don’t talk this way about things other than politics. No one says “better a quack than all this medical kabuki” or “better Barry Switzer than all that West Coast offense mumbo jumbo”.

    Quoted for goddamn truth.

    EDIT: And kudos for another great post title!

  4. 4
    fourlegsgood says:

    Jesus christ – I just went to the link. Sully said that? good grief.

    I figured it was some dumbass teabagger troll.

  5. 5
    dmsilev says:

    Remind me again why anyone takes Sullivan seriously on political issues?

    dms

  6. 6
    SpotWeld says:

    This kind of reasoning is nearly always stupid…

    Except, what you quote isn’t reasoning.
    It’s bascially saying. I hate my house with the bits of mold and rot hidden under the dry wall. I may as well just torch it a live in the burned otu shell, at least that way I’ll be able to see the studs and rafter.

  7. 7
    MobiusKlein says:

    Sully apparently hasn’t noticed all the other goddamn legislation stuck in the Senate.

    But now that it’s his hobby horse, he’s heated. Hells-bells, he’s hypocritical.

  8. 8
    SpotWeld says:

    And further, the who reason we have this

    …this disgusting, cynical, partisan Washington kabuki dance, when people’s lives and dignity are at stake.

    Is because morons like you rationalize voting in the crazy which means that people like Ried are forced to deal with them in accordance to the rules of legislature which requires that these nut jobs be at least given the benefit of a doubt.

    Ried isn’t the problem.. people who vote like this are.

  9. 9
    mclaren says:

    No one says “better a quack than all this medical kabuki”…

    No, wrong. That’s exactly what people say.

    Do you have any idea how big the chiropractic business is?

    Alternative medicine (i.e., quackery) is huge.

  10. 10
    mclaren says:

    No one says “better a quack than all this medical kabuki”…

    No, wrong. That’s exactly what people say.

    Do you have any idea how big the chiropractic business is?

    Alternative medicine (i.e., quackery) is huge.

  11. 11
    David says:

    Sullivan has become unreadable on this issue, his posts make so little sense I’ve quit trying.

    Here’s the thing, the House has already passed the DADT repeal and we know Reid / Obama / Senate Dems want the DADT repeal passed as well and are doing the most they can to guarantee that it will pass. They attached it to the defense appropriations bill, something that WILL PASS eventually. I repeat, the bill is going to be passed, and they are a lot closer to getting the support needed to pass it with the DADT repeal than the GOP is to getting enough votes to strip out the DADT repeal.

  12. 12
    Zifnab says:

    That said, I do want to highlight this…

    Once Harry Reid recognized the bill probably wasn’t going to advance, it made sense to add on provisions that would appeal to Democratic voters. It made particular sense to add an immigration provision that would appeal to Hispanic voters. With an election a little more than a month away, losing on DADT was an opportunity too good to pass up.

    Which is equally stupid.

    “I voted for Harry Reid, because he was brave enough to put DADT up for a vote after it was blatantly obvious that the original bill wouldn’t pass.”

    I feel like a kid who hopped in the car for a dentists visit and was told, “Well – the dentist is postponed for a month, but if we had gone right now, we’d also be going to Disney World!”

    I can’t wait to hear what wonderful legislation Congress almost would have passed in 2011 and 2013 if we’d only elected more Democrats.

  13. 13
    beltane says:

    It’s funny, but I’ve yet to meet a pro-choice woman threaten to vote for a vicious right-to-lifer because she saw criminalizing abortion to be better than “kabuki”. Maybe Sully needs to get out of his liberal (that must kill him) enclaves and experience what people like Sharron Angle have planned for him.

    And he has the gall to complain that Markos is over the top for comparing these people to the Taliban. The guy really needs to get out more.

  14. 14
    MBunge says:

    I think Sully’s reaction only highlights how the DADT issue has been elevated beyond where it should be. I’m sure it’s very important to gay folks in the military, but it’s being trumpeted as the equivalent of giving black people the right to vote.

    Mike

  15. 15
    piratedan says:

    so much for common sense….he disdains kabuki? where the hell was he when Susan Collins witheld her vote because there weren’t enough “opportunities” for Refusicans to amend the bill when she knew damn well that there was more than enough time while it sat in the Armed Services Committee to do so. Kabuki in watching folks see the ideas that they promoted when Republicans were in power and never acted upon being put forth (when they are actually decent ideas, scary enough) by the other side and now are unpalatable.

    How in the hell is that guy getting paid to write what he thinks?

  16. 16
    PeakVT says:

    Sullivan: Clever writer, bad judgment, yada yada…

  17. 17
    dmsilev says:

    Per Wikipedia, the DREAM Act, which is what Sullivan is apparently objecting to, has been debated off and on in Congress for almost a decade now. The Pentagon thinks it’s a pretty good idea, which in part explains why it was in the Defense bill. And it wouldn’t be particularly controversial if Republican Senators didn’t believe in making *everything* a controversial issue which must be filibustered ad infinitum.

    And yet Sullivan blames Harry Reid.

    dms

  18. 18
    Violet says:

    Sully gets his knickers in a twist over a select number of issues, particularly things that affect him personally. But not always. Remember his hysterical demands for Obama to wear a green tie during the Iranian uprising in June 2009? He seemed to feel personally affronted that Obama had chosen to wear another color tie.

    He’s so ridiculous in this instance. I would be a lot of money that if he were in the voting booth and had to choose between Angle and Reid, there is no way he’d vote for Angle, not with the vote this close. He’s just spouting off for effect.

  19. 19
    MikeJ says:

    Is political noh ok?

  20. 20
    DougJ is the business and economics editor for Balloon Juice. says:

    @mclaren:

    That’s because people don’t think chiropractors are quacks, unfortunately. They don’t say “I know their quacks but…”

  21. 21
    c u n d gulag says:

    “I’ve got a problem with my car and I can’t stand my mechanic. He charges too much.”
    “Really?”
    “Yeah, you know anyone who’d good with transmissions?”
    “Well no, but my cousin used to build model cars when he was a kid.”
    “Maybe he can help. Sure, why not? What have I got to lose?”
    “How about all power when you’re trying to enter onto a super-highway uphill with 7 semi’s going 85 mph sorrounding you?”
    “That’s ok. I’ll take that chances.”
    “You sure? Did I tell you that he’s autistic with ADD and ADHD?”
    “What difference does it make?” I just don’t want to take my car to this mechanic anymore.”
    OK, it’s your funeral…”

  22. 22
    David says:

    @Zifnab: Explain how attaching the DADT repeal to the defense approprations bill, something that is 100% guaranteed to pass shows that the Dems don’t want to pass it. You make no sense.

    Also, the DADT Repeal as part of the defense appropriations bill has been planned for a long time.

  23. 23
    Stefan says:

    This kind of reasoning is nearly always stupid, e.g. “at least with Bush, you know where he stands”. People don’t talk this way about things other than politics. No one says “better a quack than all this medical kabuki” or “better Barry Switzer than all that West Coast offense mumbo jumbo”.

    Nihilists! Fuck me. I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it’s an ethos.

  24. 24
    Stefan says:

    People who are that dumb are sure to get what they deserve.

    Or, as H.L. Mencken once wrote, “One day the American people are going to get the government they deserve. And they’re going to get it good and hard.”

  25. 25
    ruemara says:

    @MikeJ:

    You, sir, win the internets

    EDIT:
    You say chiropractors are quacks; I say I’ve used one multiple times and it’s helped where traditional medicine hasn’t. Who’s right, the naysayer or the person who’s experienced it? Granted, some alternative medicine is out and out quackery, some of it works.

    This is also why people vote for lunatics, sometimes, the lunacy has worked for them.

  26. 26
    kay says:

    I think he had this crazy dream that thoughtful, reasonable conservatives were going to put this thing over the top.

    And now that dream is (once again) dashed, so he does what he always does, which is blame Democrats for the non-existence of thoughtful, reasonable conservatives.

    We scared the mythical reasonable conservatives away again, with our crass “politicking”, and such.

    They retired to the library, and are searching for their souls, penning some big, boring self-absorbed screed about the Future of Conservatism.

  27. 27
    Nylund says:

    My friend has a saying, “Democrats are terrible, but Republicans are evil, and I’ll happily vote for terrible over evil every time.”

    Its just a standard,”lesser of two evils,” argument, but in this case the “evil differential” is so large that even the idea of a “protest vote” for the other side sends shivers down my spine.

    Its like saying, “my babysitter is kinda irresponsible and over-charges so I think I’ll hire a known child rapist instead.”

  28. 28
    Bob Loblaw says:

    @MBunge:

    Well, actually, it’s about a country holding a group of people in such low esteem due to their biology that it refuses their voluntary help towards the greater national defense.

    Yeah, you’re right, that’s totally not important. It’s just a bunch of silly homos upset they can’t get their gay on before getting their gun on too…

  29. 29
    BGinCHI says:

    Because when Angle is in the Senate DADT will seem like a progressive policy.

    Sully on the sauce again.

  30. 30
    Violet says:

    @mclaren:
    I have a family member who was in a terrible car accident (not his fault). After the accident he went to all sorts of doctors for neck/shoulder pain. At the advice of several doctors he avoided visiting a chiropractor. After six months of trying every other type of “approved doctor treatment” (physical therapy, massage, medication, etc.) and still struggling with pain, he finally visited a chiropractor. Three treatments from the chiropractor and the pain was gone.

    We went from skeptics to believers after that.

  31. 31

    I wonder if sully can own-goal a Malkin award?

  32. 32
    Steeplejack says:

    I don’t like this traffic jam, so I’m going to ram into this bridge abutment.

  33. 33
    SB Jules says:

    @Zifnab:

    I wouldn’t believe anything Sully wrote in this instance. He’s gone round the bend.

  34. 34
    Violet says:

    @kay:

    I think he had this crazy dream that thoughtful, reasonable conservatives were going to put this thing over the top.

    He must be smoking some of that stuff he got arrested for having, which is another pet subject of his. Funny how he goes on and on when it affects him personally.

    I often wonder what Sully would think about DADT, gay marriage, etc. if he were straight. Would he be one of those “reasonable conservatives” penning columns about how the gays are asking for too much too soon, or how gays should just be celibate because that’s what the Bible says?

  35. 35
    Kryptik says:

    And my faith in humanity continues to take a rapid nose diving dead spiral.

  36. 36
    eemom says:

    in Sully-bashing threads, unlike in Greenwald-bashing threads, all the commenters play nicely together.

    ETA: until Lollipop shows up.

  37. 37
    Sasha says:

    @Stefan:

    Y’know, Stefan, there’s a case to be made that this has already happened.

  38. 38
    BGinCHI says:

    @Steeplejack: which will then kill thousands.

    One of the worst things about this whole process is that we wait while other states elect Senators that affect all of us.

    Don’t make me come over there, Nevada.

  39. 39
    David says:

    BTW – Sullivan originally liked the idea of attaching the DADT repeal to the defense authorization. He just didn’t expect the GOP to filibuster it, so his natural reaction is to blame the Dems.

  40. 40
    Houdini's Ghost says:

    Andrew Sullivan is sometimes interesting and/or correct, but he said this really asinine thing. I’m going to go get my political analysis from Red State from now on.

  41. 41
    Steeplejack says:

    @BGinCHI:

    I don’t care! I’m making an important point as a real American!

  42. 42
    kay says:

    @Violet:

    when people’s lives and dignity are at stake.

    I can’t imagine writing that without realizing people’s lives and dignity are at stake in immigration.

    He does it all the time. A very specific immigration issue was front-burner to him, not too long ago. He’s forgotten that, apparently, which is freaking amazing, all by itself.

  43. 43
    Roger Moore says:

    @Violet:

    I often wonder what Sully would think about DADT, gay marriage, etc. if he were straight. Would he be one of those “reasonable conservatives” penning columns about how the gays are asking for too much too soon, or how gays should just be celibate because that’s what the Bible says?

    Yes. SATSQ. The only thing that distinguishes Sullivan from a standard issue IGMFU conservative is that he has a couple of issues where he doesn’t have his and he’s willing to bitch about it.

  44. 44
    BGinCHI says:

    @Steeplejack: it’s like someone taught the teabaggers that they’re SUPPOSED to root for Nero.

    He fiddled while Rome burned because he was tired of having his freedoms taken away!

  45. 45
    Carol says:

    Maybe it’s the fact that he’s disappointed, but if he would remember, history was made yesterday. After decades of discrimination, gays came within one vote of DADT repeal. I remember when DADT was the lesser of two evils-i.e, a complete ban on gays period was proposed. Clinton allowed DADT as a compromise. And that was only about 15 years ago-and scared Democrats sided with nasty Republicans for that. But yesterday Democrats stood nearly in lockstep for repeal-in an election year no less with only weeks to go before voting (indeed, early voting starts right about now). The vote was back in 1992, and there was a horrific backlash as a result. But weeks before the midterms, DADT repeal was actually voted on and came within one vote. I never thought I would see the actual repeal be voted on anytime soon after that 1992 vote.

    Now Sully wants to give the TeaBaggers the gavel now?

  46. 46
    kay says:

    @Violet:

    And he’s not a liberal, right? His hope is there is a reasonable conservative in the Senate. One. Because he’s a conservative.

    But, turns out, there’s not, so that dream dies for the millionth time, and he gets up tomorrow and launches the search again.

  47. 47
    Violet says:

    @kay:
    He’s very self-centered on certain issues. And then not on others. I don’t get the sense that he’s ever been tortured, yet he’s excellent in exposing torture and holding people to account for not reporting it, etc.

    Gay issues are just such a personal thing for him that he loses perspective. It’s just annoying when he goes as far as to say he’d vote for certifiably crazy people who would like to lock him up for being gay to “teach the Dems a lesson.” He’s just insane when he does stuff like that.

  48. 48
    Violet says:

    @kay:
    Yeah, he’s not very realistic when it comes to stuff like that. Exactly where did he think that vote would come from? And why is it the Democrats fault that the Republicans refused to vote for it?

    I think he may cool down in the next few days. But he won’t learn from this experience. He never does.

  49. 49
    You Don't Say says:

    I live in Nevada and Mr. Sullivan can move here if he’s ready to vote for Angle. (I know that sounds like an 4th grade threat but I can’t find the proper adult words to express my disgust.)

  50. 50
    kay says:

    @Violet:

    I don’t really understand him. I was really uncomfortable with his big discussion with Noted Conservatives when he was trying to convince them his marriage is valid. It felt wrong. I didn’t think he should have to do it.
    I had to stop reading. I felt as if he should have just told them to fuck off, at some point. There are limits to “reasonable debate” and “respecting colleagues”. He’s married to an individual, not an abstract concept. They can fuck off if they don’t like it. No more debate.

  51. 51
    Gozer says:

    Wasn’t he also wanking about the need for divided gov’t at some point?

    WTF does he think is gonna happen in that situation?

  52. 52
    Mnemosyne says:

    @ruemara:
    @Violet:

    Chiropractors can be great for back and neck pain — they’ve saved lots of people from having unnecessary surgery. For some reason, though, a lot of the anti-vaxers come from chiropractors. Why people who specialize in working on your back and spine think they’re qualified to lecture you in microbiology, I have no idea, but they’re pretty convinced that vaccinations are poison and measles is a myth.

    By the way, thanks, anti-vaxers, for the worst whooping cough epidemic since 1955. Thanks a lot.

  53. 53
    Warren Terra says:

    @David:

    BTW – Sullivan originally liked the idea of attaching the DADT repeal to the defense authorization. He just didn’t expect the GOP to filibuster it, so his natural reaction is to blame the Dems.

    This filibuster wasn’t exactly The Spanish Inquisition.

  54. 54
    Zifnab says:

    @David:

    Explain how attaching the DADT repeal to the defense approprations bill, something that is 100% guaranteed to pass shows that the Dems don’t want to pass it. You make no sense.

    Harry Reid polled the Senate. He determined that the Defense Bill would not pass. He then inserted the language of the DADT and DREAM Act into the Defense Bill he knew he did not have the votes to pass. The bill came up for a vote. I did not pass.

    When the bill comes up for a new vote, we’ll see if DADT and DREAM remain, or if they fall out as victims of bipartisan compromise. I’m not going to give Reid credit for failing to pass a bill that was dead before it hit the floor, because he crammed a few goodies in to tease me.

  55. 55
    Steeplejack says:

    @BGinCHI:

    I got lousy seats at the Colosseum last week, so I want Nero to burn Rome down!

  56. 56
    David says:

    @Zifnab: You’re timeline is a little off, the DADT repeal has been planned for the defense authorization bill for almost a year. It most certainly was not a last minute addition.

  57. 57
    Jager says:

    @You Don’t Say:

    Yes, and he can buy a really nice house for short money in Las Vegas

  58. 58
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @Gozer:

    Wasn’t he also wanking about the need for divided gov’t at some point?
    __
    WTF does he think is gonna happen in that situation?

    Magic, baby. Magic.

  59. 59
    Jager says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Isn’t Dr Jenny McCarthy, honors graduate of the Hugh Hefner School of Medicine, the spokesperson for the anti-vaxer community?

  60. 60
    Zifnab says:

    @David: But it was hotly contested addition and one that – as I previously mentioned – wasn’t added in until AFTER Reid had made a whip count.

    Both DREAM and DADT repeal provisions were inserted into the bill as political fodder AFTER the Democrats realized they didn’t have the votes to pass the bill sans provisions. I’ll congratulate Reid on the vote when the bill gets to the floor of the Senate intact. But I’ve been burned too many times on Public Option and Climate Change and Financial Reform to simply concede the Senate bill will see final passage without getting gutted or poisoned just because Reid decided to play the crowd right before an election.

  61. 61
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @Zifnab:

    Harry Reid polled the Senate. He determined that the Defense Bill would not pass. He then inserted the language of the DADT and DREAM Act into the Defense Bill he knew he did not have the votes to pass.
    __
    When the bill comes up for a new vote, we’ll see if DADT and DREAM remain, or if they fall out as victims of bipartisan compromise. I’m not going to give Reid credit for failing to pass a bill that was dead before it hit the floor, because he crammed a few goodies in to tease me.

    So…these are things that actually happened:

    What made Democrats on the Hill so antsy to get moving? Undoubtedly the looming losses expected in the November elections played a big role. If Congress waited until after the pentagon’s report was released in December, then DADT would be kicked to the next Congress, where Democratic majorities in both chambers are expected to be much smaller.
    __
    “Anybody who’s paying attention would realize that’s part of it,” an aide to Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-PA), one of the sponsors of repeal told TPMDC, referring to the political math. “This is our window of opportunity.”
    __
    Sen. Levin acknowledged as much, too. Questioned by TPMDC on two separate occasions this week, Levin affirmed two critical realities: Repealing DADT will require action by Congress at some point, and it will be “a lot harder” to take that action if the Democrats suffer significant losses in November.
    __
    The White House thus chose what many regard as the path of least resistance. The compromise deal delays the repeal of DADT, making it contingent on sign off from the Defense Department, even allowing for the possibility that future administrations might re-implement the ban. But the key provision from the perspective of supporters of repeal is that the deal changes the law now while the getting is good. That way the White House and Congress aren’t seen to be forcing the Pentagon’s hand but rather simply giving military leaders the tools they need to implement the reforms they say they want.

    That, of course, is from May of this year, which should immediately put to rest the notion that the addition of DADT to the defense bill was some kind of last minute political move. Moreover, it should be noted that DADT was initially passed via a defense bill in the 90s, so there really isn’t anything all that unseemly about ending it in the same fashion.

    You may not want to give Reid credit for “failing to pass a bill that was dead before it hit the floor,” but you may want to give him some credit for getting DADT into in the defense bill in the first place, making it much more unlikely that Republicans will be able to get the 60 votes necessary to remove it.

  62. 62
    Zifnab says:

    I mean, if it does pass intact, I will personally lead the parade down Main Street. I’m just not holding my breath.

  63. 63
    silentbeep says:

    @Carol:

    “I never thought I would see the actual repeal be voted on anytime soon after that 1992 vote.”

    Exactly. History is on our side, and we have to keep pushing, no matter what. I like Obama, but if he’s not gonna do it, we gotta pressure our own reps. and the next president, to do it. It didn’t start with him, and it’s not going to end with him.

    Andrew’s too upset to see that.

  64. 64
    David says:

    @Midnight Marauder: Exactly, and DADT was planned for that bill for several months before May, in fact you can find news references back in 2009.

  65. 65
    BombIranForChrist says:

    If you want to have good government, you do it by voting for sane candidates whose positions you agree with, not by supporting nuts in order to make some ridiculous point about an imperfect system.

    What if there are no candidates you agree with or that you suspect are agreeing with you only long enough to grab your vote and then shit on you later?

    I agree that the specific quote above is rubbish, but any attempt to generalize from this quote is a straw man. You and Cole say you just don’t understand the reasoning of some people, but I think it may be because you refuse to listen to them. I think there are perfectly reasonable reasons for Dems to sit on their hands for this current election cycle, and your unwillingness to “understand” has nothing to do with the quality of their reasoning and everything to do with your need to characterize these reasonable people as nut jobs, much as you do with people on the right.

  66. 66
    silentbeep says:

    @Violet:

    “Sully gets his knickers in a twist over a select number of issues, particularly things that affect him personally”

    I could not agree more with this: he has very selective compassion. For other issues, such as the Bell Curve and race in general, we apparently should strive for more “candor” and shouldn’t be so “overly-sensitive” and “PC.” The fact that he could really give a damn about social justice for anyone that doesn’t fit into his set of interests, is one of his biggest flaws and it’s maddening to watch on display

  67. 67
    Roger Moore says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Why people who specialize in working on your back and spine think they’re qualified to lecture you in microbiology, I have no idea, but they’re pretty convinced that vaccinations are poison and measles is a myth.

    Chiropractic is one of those disciplines like traditional Chinese medicine that has some factual support and a whole bunch of mystical nonsense. Chiropractic was founded around the idea that all kinds of illnesses were caused by skeletal misalignment, so they can fix all your health problems by working on your joints. Some of them have given up on that idea and accept that they’re really only helpful for back problems, but a subset still believe the whole deal. Those are the ones who oppose vaccination.

  68. 68
    Mark says:

    @MBunge

    I think about it this way: we have 50 million people without health insurance in this country, including a lot of children. They have no relief until 2014, and even then it will be too little and too expensive.

    Then we have 48,000 gay and lesbian servicemembers who will presumably have DADT lifted as soon as the appropriations bill passes in the next month or two.

    So 1000x as many people have to wait another three years to have one of the nation’s greatest travesties rectified…DADT is terrible policy, but it takes a lot of hubris to elevate it above something that affects 1/6 of the country.

    Not only that, but DADT is primarily an issue that affects women. So Sully using his white male privilege to paint himself as a victim of this law is pretty disingenuous.

  69. 69
    RalfW says:

    As a 5 minute Sully segment on Bill Mahr will confirm, he gets pretty silly (stupid) when he’s mad about the gay thing. Or mad about anything, really.

  70. 70
    Darkrose says:

    @MBunge:

    It’s not surprising when you think about it. The “leaders” of the gay community have decided that the hills the movement is going to die on are marriage and DADT rather than, say, ENDA. Why? Because if we’re married and serve in the military, the straight people will have to acknowledge that we’re just like them, and therefore deserve to have rights! And once our white male privilege is no longer denied because we’re gay, we can go back to hanging with the GOP, and not all those queers who are screwing up our “just like you” narrative.

  71. 71
    silentbeep says:

    @BombIranForChrist: How about do what I’m contemplating? Vote for green or libertarian? Perhaps i’m throwing my vote away – I understand such a viewpoint but I’m not trying to convince anyone of what is a very personal decision for me. I’m not sitting here advocating that people should vote for people that are clearly of their minds i.e. Sharon Angle.

    Or perhaps organize with others in the coming months to back the reps you do like, and give money to the people that deserve it, and keep the pressure on, no matter what?

    But I’m not going to lie to myself and others, by pretending that voting for Tea Party backed candidates is a good decision, in any way shape or form.

  72. 72
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @Zifnab:

    I mean, if it does pass intact, I will personally lead the parade down Main Street. I’m just not holding my breath.

    Well, that’s a good thing. We wouldn’t you to miss the parade. After all, you will have a starring role in it and everything.

  73. 73
    Cacti says:

    About the stupidest thing from Sully on this issue is the…

    “Why doesn’t Barack Obama just issue an Executive Order?”

    Because Executive Orders cannot override enacted legislation, you twit.

  74. 74
    Cacti says:

    @silentbeep:

    How about do what I’m contemplating? Vote for green or libertarian? Perhaps i’m throwing my vote away

    No perhaps about it.

    You might as well be writing in Santa Claus.

  75. 75
    That's Master of Accountancy to You, Pal (JMN) says:

    What I would like to see Zifnab explain is how Harry Reid could have inserted DADT repeal into the bill after a whip count, given that it arrived from the House with DADT repeal already in it.

  76. 76
    Carol says:

    @Cacti: So true, dat. Voting third party is throwing your vote away unless it’s local or you live in a state like Vermont that’s small enough that personality overcomes party labels. I don’t have to tell you that it also means one less vote for a viable alternative to the person who wont take heed of your concerns,

    Not voting is not an option this time around. The Republican Party, at least at the national/state level, has gone insane. While the Democrats may be sometimes exasperating, I’ll take a little disappointment over crazy.

  77. 77
    Chris says:

    Sullivan’s more of a dumbass than a lot of people realize. Remember, this is a guy who thought TNR was ballsy for pushing “The Bell Curve.” He’s not quite the Lieberman of the blogosphere, but he’s not far from it.

  78. 78
    DougJ is the business and economics editor for Balloon Juice. says:

    @Cacti:

    I fucking hate the “do an executive order” crap. What, so president Palin can overturn it with a stroke of the pen? You pass shit through congress so that it’s semi-permanent.

  79. 79
    celticdragonchick says:

    @MBunge:

    I think Sully’s reaction only highlights how the DADT issue has been elevated beyond where it should be. I’m sure it’s very important to gay folks in the military, but it’s being trumpeted as the equivalent of giving black people the right to vote.

    Maybe so. Sully is bad about writing things while angry, and GLBT people are royally pissed around the country right now. Expect more of this. It won’t make much sense, and I am guilty as charged, but angry people say things they wish they hadn’t when calmer. In other news, dog bites man.

  80. 80
    Ruckus says:

    @Mnemosyne:
    Because some of them want to do a lot more than align and manipulate. They have their potions, because you’re out of balance. Or whatever. I’m not a fan because I had one break my thumb. And how many have someone keep coming back for adjustments. Too many don’t seem to fix anything except their billing. OTOH they don’t seem to charge as much as a doctor so maybe it all works out.

  81. 81
    Elizabelle says:

    I saw that too and thought of emailing Sullivan about his hysteria.

    Never mind getting the state incorrect.

    Heat of the moment, I guess.

    He does get the vapors.

  82. 82
    silentbeep says:

    @Cacti:

    True. But ya know, I’m near my limit. I’ve never voted for anyone else besides a democrat.

    I’ll still be straight ticket voter this midterm elections, but I’m not so sure for ’12. We shall see.

  83. 83
    silentbeep says:

    @Cacti:

    When it comes to personal integrity, and the stuff i’ve felt like I had to swallow from both parties, there are times when I would rather write in Santa Claus.

  84. 84
    Kerry Reid says:

    Yes, Sully had so much concern about the lives and dignity of Iraqis when he was cheerleading for the war.

  85. 85
    DPirate says:

    If you want to have good government, you do it by voting for sane candidates whose positions you agree with, not by supporting nuts in order to make some ridiculous point about an imperfect system.

    Are you sure about that? What if there are no sane candidates whose positions you agree with? Do you withhold your vote like roughly 50% of the electorate do?

    I read a post recently touching on this sort of thing. The writer was addressing leftist groups like code pink who complain that they are shut out of access to the politicians they would support and wish to lobby. His thought was “What do you expect?” After all, they will vote democrat anyway, so why should Pelosi or whomever listen to them? It’s locked up.

    You do not effect change by taking a beating and saying “Thank you, Sir, may I have another?!” No, you become active and seek alternatives. This is not a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face. Basically, it is the only means the common man has to stick it to the man.

  86. 86
    artem1s says:

    “better Barry Switzer than all that West Coast offense mumbo jumbo”.

    If you want to have good government, you do it by voting for sane candidates whose positions you agree with, not by supporting nuts in order to make some ridiculous point about an imperfect system.

    obviously you have not been following professional sports in Cleveland.

  87. 87
    lou says:

    It’s funny you should say that because I was asking my politically connected DH last night whether Reid would get fired as majority leader if he won. Nope. No mutiny in sight.

    I’ve been tempted to root for Angle just so we can get a better majority leader.

  88. 88
    Tarun says:

    I have always been amazed at the cognitive dissonance at Sullivan’s page. I have no idea how he reconciles his total disregard for religious dogma on gay issues where as using the same biblical morality to force women to carry unwanted pregnancies to their full terms.

    Even when he does not proactively support legislating to curtail abortion rights, he consistently apologizes for moral scolds like Douthat.

Comments are closed.