Tweety and Andrew SULLIVAN: No amount of rehab will ever make them forgiveable

[UTUSN]

There are plenty of SULLIVAN fans here, as there are those who were apologists all along for Tweety ("He's really anti-war because he has SONS who might get killed in war." ) . If anything, Tweety's latest incarnation as Scolder of Shrub-CHEENEE's Iraq has also been exposed as hollow by his denying he had something to do with DONAHUE's firing, when there is video available of his perfidy and reportage that he wanted himself-alone to be the face of MSRNC and therefore wanted DONAHUE out.

Similarly, SULLIVAN's defenders claim something like, at least he repents or somesuch crap. One of the Eternal Questions is, how come us-nobodies know truth to be obvious when celebrity thinkers with all their resources find it so difficult? The selected Gawker readers below speak for my contempt of SULLIVAN (and Tweety).

I have been a Tweety basher since the FAKE impeachment, roiled in detestation of him from Campaign 2000 on, barely stopped ROILING when he switched against Shrub. A DUer said it best, "When he's on our side, there's nobody better." I have often wondered how much rehab is enough, but his current denials about DONAHUE have shown me that he can NEVER be trusted: Whenever he speaks up on my side of things, I'll just go, "O.K., fine/so-what."

*************QUOTE*************

http://gawker.com/5991988/

[font size=5]Tom Scocca
More Iraq guilt: Andrew Sullivan says he got it wrong because he's a hothead who mistakes grudges for principles. Noted.[/font]


(Gawker readers’ comments: )

EbenHJ
Reading that, it's like he hasn't learned anything from the experience. Basically he's saying "Oops, my bad, but I thought about it and I'm not going to change any of my underlying beliefs that brought about my error in judgement in the first place".
I think I'll just roll my eyes and move on.

b-rar
The fundamental narcissism of these folks who got it wrong but presume people want to hear their side of the story is galling. The only honorable thing any of them could do is shut the fuck up forever.

MrWally
It served Andrew Sullivan's purposes years ago to be a conservative, Republican partisan. That was unique, got him attention, and probably got him laid when he was young. Now he is old and it's hard to get attention as a gay Republican. So he becomes a liberal and dredges up this old stuff to denounce and get more attention. It's hard out there for a pimp.

MeaCawlpa
He got it wrong because he's a neo-con at heart, preferring dramatic sweeping military gestures for their simple-minded entertainment value.

VictorScope
It's kind of hilarious that he thinks anyone cares about the thought process that led him to make such poor judgements and offensive accusations a decade ago. Just apologize and STFU, Andrew. No explanations necessary.

*************UNQUOTE*************

[font size=5]Gawker has a link to SULLIVAN’s crap, if anybody wants it.[/font]

[LeftishBrit]

1. Sullivan was a big Thatcher supporter in the 80s; I find it hard to forgive him for that!

[UTUSN]

2. So what's the basis for his reputation as a supposed Lib? n/t

[LeftishBrit]

4. He ended up opposing the war in Iraq - though he supported it to begin with

And he is relatively liberal on social issues. On economic issues, I don't think he's on the left even now. And that is always a sticking point for me.

With all the evil RW journalists around, I wouldn't say he's the worst (he did end up supporting Obama IIRC); but I wouldn't call him a hero either.

[UTUSN]

6. He and HITCHENS had reps for being Libs. As a THATCHER supporter, where did this come from?

Switching sides on Iraq and Shrub ain't enough, as I say since nearly all of us here know what side to be on from the beginning of whatever issues. Besides, he has plenty of personal baggage that doesn't jibe with his pose as being "traditional"/Catholic in values. Nothing adds up to my being able to attribute being principled to him. In fact, everything points to his being totally UNprincipled, for whatever his personal motives are, which I'm curious about: Money, attention, sex? Is he a practicing Catholic? How does he reconcile with the official doctrines of the Church (and the Church's ABUSE of its own doctrines)? Is he Vichy or a Stockholm Syndrome type, including siding with Rethugs?

[Ken Burch]

34. I could never understand why a gay Brit of Irish Catholic descent

could vote Conservative...The party that fought to prevent Catholic Emancipation, the party that stopped the Irish Home Rule bill in the House of Lords(thus causing "The Troubles", and the party that brought in Section 28..

[WorseBeforeBetter]

3. So what? Sullivan *likes* Obama, so all is forgiven!

Tweety, well, he's just a which-way-is-the-wind-blowing mess.

[Ken Burch]

35. Sullivan STILL opposes the ACA, and wants it repealed.

By itself, that is unforgivable, especially since repealing ACA will deprive millions of LGBT Americans of access to health care.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

38. Really. Huh. I tuned out Sullivan long ago...

don't give a shit re: his opinions. (Or Tweety's, for that matter...) Give it a few years and Andrew will be penning the ACA version of "How Did I Get Iraq Wrong?" Must be nice to be paid so well to be so... wrong.

[Bluenorthwest]

5. Sullivan also utterly trashed those who protested or otherwise opposed Iraq invasion

he did not just support the war and tout the wisdom of Cheney, he also attacked politicians and citizens who did not join him in pom pom pushing for Bushco.
When Sullivan 'apologized' he claimed he'd never stop apologizing, instead he almost instantly remounted the pulpit to continue his pronouncements and attacks as if he still had standing to do so, as if he had not been so deeply, unflinchingly wrong and so passionately full of conviction about everything he misjudged.
He's like Dick Morris level in terms of accuracy and insight.

[MNBrewer]

19. Whatever Dick Morris or Andrew Sullivan say is 99.999999% guaranteed to be false.

Even A.S. sometimes gets something right on the first go-round, but hey, a stopped clock is right twice a day.

[Generation_Why]

7. My opinions change on a regular basis. I don't see why that makes them unforgivable. nt

[WorseBeforeBetter]

8. So do mine!

About which ice cream is better, for example: Breyer's, Ben & Jerry's, or Blue Bell. Not about whether it was right to fucking invade another country over non-existent WMDs belonging to toothless tiger Saddam. Tweety and Sullivan should have seen through the bullshit like the "loud Left" did.

[iemitsu]

11. They knew the truth. They are paid to lie.

For that there is no forgiveness.

[Honeycombe8]

27. I'm not sure they knew the truth. I think they live in a bubble, same as politicians.

We out in the public get our info from a variety of news people and sources, incl. some non-professional news sources. I don't think they do. They work long days and are fed information. I don't think they go home at night and pore on the internet and on tv looking at and reading a variety of news.

For example, remember Rice's interview where she showed those metal canisters and said Saddam has lots of them and they can be used for nuclear war or something like that? A lot of people saw that and believed it. However, I ALSO saw a news story, where the guy explained all the uses of those metal canisters, one of the most logical and common uses for them, which was no doubt what they were used for in Iraq, and how difficult they would be to use for nukes. A lot of people did not see that story. So without seeing the latter, it would be easy to fall for the first story.

Tweety not only does his show, he preps for it, and I know he spends a lot of time reading histories and such, which takes a lot of time (I don't have much time for that, and I just have a regular job). So he probably doesn't watch the other news shows not on MSNBC, and read anything other than the headlines of major papers, if that.

That doesn't excuse falling for the lies that led to the war. That was eventually just so obvious even someone in a bubble would've gotten a clue. But that was later. When the inspectors didn't find WMDs after several tries, when France wouldn't approve the war w/o more proof...that was a huge clue, even if you didn't know the other things.

[iemitsu]

29. Your points are valid, to an extent,

but pundits are not so sheltered from information that they should not recognize lies and subterfuge (being sheltered should not preclude one from thinking for themselves). These people have better access to the news than most of us, even those of us who spend hours each day reading from various online sources. They are told what to say regardless of what they might believe.
They are insiders and they speak or don't speak according to corporate expectations.
They are well paid employees of the Ministry of Truth. Well paid and loyal (or discredited and unemployed).
The CIA sits in every American, mainstream, newsroom and clears each broadcast.
Tweety was distracted by the tingle in his thigh whenever Bush spoke, so he wasn't likely paying much critical attention to detail.
I, on the other hand, am repulsed by Bush and immediately recognized his lies and evil nature.

[Honeycombe8]

32. The tingle in his leg was for Obama. But Bush made his heart palpitate, as I recall.

I can't count the times I've seen pundits & politicians discussing certain issues on tv, and no one points out that such and such is not true. I know it's not true..and YOU know it's not true...but honestly, no one on that show knows it's not true. They really do live in a bubble.

But they should MAKE it their business to get info from a variety of sources.

Over and over I hear how Obama is spending so much, so much more than any President before, and on and on. I rarely hear anyone refute that, and so a lot of Americans have that opinion, which is no surprise. Yet I've heard several times from reliable sources that that spending myth is just that, a myth. But that doesn't get repeated on tv on those shows. I'd bet that Tweety thinks there IS tons of spending going on, and that he's unaware that's a myth.

It's really politicians' jobs to point these things out, swarm the media and tell the truth. But since most of them live in a bubble, they are most likely to be the ones in the dark.

[iemitsu]

40. If they live in a bubble, and they might, it is one of their own creation.

Their bubble is also supported by their work environment, their friends, their home address, their experiences and their outlook on life.
Just like the rest of us.
The difference is that things outside my bubble often effect my life and so I recognize them and deal with them. Network pundits can dismiss outside the bubble noise because it does not have an effect on their lives. In fact, they might shut out the noise because it creates conflict in their professional lives.
Whatever the case, they have chosen to accept that the ends justify the means when it comes to performing their jobs.
By the way, it is the job of the free press to monitor both the government and big business, with the presumption that neither is trustworthy. It is not the job of a politician to inform the public, it is their job to legislate in the public interest.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

33. "I seriously misjudged Bush's sense of morality."

"...what I failed to grasp is that war is also a monster..."

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2008/03/how_did_i_get_iraq_wrong_2.html

Can't really get much more wrong than that, Andrew. I took one look at George W. Bush and his beady little eyes and knew he was a no-good mutherfucker. Same with Sarah Palin, as she strutted on stage to accept the VP nomination.

I'm not sure how much "truth" Sullivan and Tweety were privy to, but Corporate Media exists to obfuscate, create doubt, and further the MIC. And they excel at it.

[iemitsu]

37. Hear, hear.

[Honeycombe8]

42. True enough. Then again, when you start out liking someone, sometimes you're the last one to

recognize the bad in that person.

I think Dems were more surprised than Republicans to find out Rep Weiner was sending pics of penis to coeds, and other disgusting acts. Republicans start out expecting little of Dems., esp in the morals department.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

44. Weiner's dick pics didn't cause death and destruction on a massive scale.

Nor (estimates of) $6 TRILLION in debt. I mean, it *was* pretty impressive, but no.

Republicans, with Newt Gingrich, Larry Craig, John Ensign, Mark Sanford, Dave "Diaper" Vitter, Ted Haggard, and Mark Foley in the their ranks, probably weren't surprised at all. And they're the last ones who should be judging... glass houses, and all.

[Honeycombe8]

45. It was just an example of awareness of character being colored by feelings. nt

[WorseBeforeBetter]

48. Gotcha. As a woman who spent time online dating...

I know how trigger happy many are to share x-rated photos. I liked Weiner and was disappointed. Shocked or surprised? Not really.

[Honeycombe8]

50. I guess some men are so proud of their privates. I've not done online dating, so...

I was pretty shocked at Weiner, since I've not run across that sort of thing in all my internet experience (altho I'm aware of porn sites, of course).

However, I dated quite a bit in my younger life, and yes, I did find that men are pretty proud of what they've got (even if what they've got ain't that much).

[WorseBeforeBetter]

51. It's not just men. I remember coworkers playing around on IM...

and folks going wild on craigslist, particularly Casual Encounters. I'm not judging, I'm just saying it's out there.

[iemitsu]

9. I'm with you about the irredeemability of professional

journalists who "get it wrong" when I (we), a relative nobody, can get it right.
If they can't do a better job of interpreting the evidence, then they need to be out of the business that requires them to do just that.
The fact that they are extremely well-paid and are not being fired for their ineptness, suggests they are really being paid to misrepresent the information they are charged with relaying to the public.
The viewing audience needs to bombard television networks with the message, that their spokespersons are not believable and that until those spokespeople are gone the network will not be considered a reliable source of news.
I would like to add Diane Sawyer to the list of those who can't be trusted. I can hardly keep from spitting when I see her lying face.

[HiPointDem]

22. +1. The professional press corps = largely whores and shills, mouthpieces.

"they are really being paid to misrepresent the information" = indeed.

[iemitsu]

23. Ok, so I only stated the obvious.

The worst part is that, even though the professional press corp is widely recognized and criticized for being the whore/shills, mouthpieces, you note, we are still stuck in a system that treats them as bonafide authorities.
Our society, as a whole, is stuck in a cognitive dissonance nightmare, where we refuse to accept the truth because the truth is more terrifying than continuing to live a lie.
We need a national 12 step program, to support each other through the rude awakening that is the current state of affairs in America.
Hello, my name is ________ and I'm addicted to delusion and to lying to myself and others. I'm addicted to justifying the abuse of others at home and abroad. I'm comfortable with my position and, even though I know its wrong, I need help in breaking old habits.
Its too bad that most churches support/sponsor the delusions or they could be good starting venues for the group therapy we all need.

[HiPointDem]

24. +1.

[Octafish]

10. There's only one thing worse than a lying warmonger.

That's a neocon lying warmonger.

Thank you for the heads-up and info, UTUSN.

[UTUSN]

13. Oct, my hero, you are too too kind for a lowly cut'n'paster like me!1 n/t

[rhett o rick]

15. I have a hard time with that. To me the "lying neocon warmonger" is an obvious threat.

I feel that those that, knowing the truth, willingly enabled the warmongers may be worse. People that know better but are either cowards to stand up for what's right or afraid to look unpatriotic.

[Zorra]

12. Yeh, everytime Sullivan says something that liberals have known forever, the conservadems

point out how utterly amazing he is. I totally don't understand some Democrats love of conservatism, it's like Limbaugh and Fox got into their heads when they were kids and they can't get him out.

Sullivan never made it to the dance and ain't ever gonna get no lovin' from this liberal Democrat.

[Dawson Leery]

14. Sully is in love with Obama's personality.

He wants Christie to run in 2016.

[cthulu2016]

16. The comparison is silly. Sullivan was a RABID and HATEFUL war masturbater

Matthews was among the more skeptical *mainstream* talking head on the Iraq War.

There is no comparing them. Matthews was one of the better of a very bad lot.

Sullivan was, and shall always be, beneath contempt.

[UTUSN]

18. He was NOT "skeptical." Here's what I saw him do with DONAHUE

And in the past week there have been several threads about DONAHUE finally speaking out about Tweety and MSRNC, plus video of the DONAHUE episode, and his/Tweety's NOW denying that "Iraq had anything to do with it," with NOW Donahue flatly contradicting that with an MSRNC memo saying what Tweety denies. I was monitoring Tweety daily back then and he was full-out jingo-Shrub. Also back then, he still had a newspaper column and the talk was that he was Lib in the print medium for the print/Lib people, while skewing wingnut for the cable/wingnut gang.

I also don't concede indulgences for "better" vs "bad lot." And wow, I was able to present an opinion (with evidence) differing without using the word "silly."

How Tweety "Executed" DONAHUE on MSNBC. Tweety was on his book tour for another one of his "books" (large type, wide spaces between lines, blank half-pages). It was in the jingoistic hysteria in the run-up to the illegal Iraq attack. The book was about supposed "Americanism" -- an American Civ 101 ripoff about books and movies and cultural stuff that are essentially American (think, "The Great Gatsby&quot . So Phil welcomed him as a colleague and peer on Phil's show for the full hour to plug the book. From the moment he appeared, there was a strange, deadly snake look in Tweety's snake eyes. Phil was walking around the audience, apparently not sensing anything, while Tweety was motionless, following him only with his eyes. Phil brought up something or other questioning blind, kneejerk jingoism, and Tweety STRUCK! He started out with venom dripping, "You see, THIS is EXACTLY what's wrong with YOU Liberals: You are NEGATIVE about this country, you find NOTHING good about it," and on and on. It took awhile before Phil figured out what was happening. Later, Phil, devastated and spent, was sitting at the table with Tweety and, weaker and weaker, did some of his trademark shoulder shrugging and arm waving. Tweety delivered the coup de grace, "What's THIS (mimicking the movements)??!! What's with the --APE-- movements???!" Days or a week or two later, Phil's cancellation was announced and took effect.

[iemitsu]

26. Tweety is too impressed with power.

It sends a quiver up his thigh.
When Tweety announced that W caused this sensation in his loins, I knew he was smitten. One can't trust a smitten man to be honest about much.

[shadowmayor]

17. We're all neocons now

This is a quote from tweety when chicken george landed on the aircraft carrier. He and Peggy were bumping heads to see who could blow george first. Another disgusting display of his love for celebrity. Tweety was all on board that day! And no Chris, some of us have never been and never will be neocons!!

The shadowmayor

[iemitsu]

30. Thanks you for reminding me of Tweety's declaration

on that infamous day.
He really is embarrassing.

[xchrom]

20. Those who 'love' sullivan and others who hold positions

Like him - I'd guess are conservative dems - neo-liberals.

[Ikonoklast]

21. Those two both have millions of reason$ why they do and say what they do.

And Tweety voted for Bush twice, bet on it.

[sendero]

25. I'm just not hearing anything from anybody..

.... who claims to have been fooled by the Bush admin about the Iraq war. It is BULLSHIT. A 10 year old could have seen through all the lies and obfuscations.

And I especially, especially ESPECIALLY DO NOT WANT TO HEAR ANYONE WHO SUPPORTED THE IRAQ WAR COMPLAINING ABOUT THE DEFICIT.

Eat shit and die you fucking hypocrites.

[Zen Democrat]

28. I'm not a fan of Tweety, but he was very much against the Iraq War before it started.

After it started, the entire media was caught up in the spectacle, but Matthews wrote columns in the San Francisco Chronicle and spoke during his Hardball program against going to war. This is a pretty interesting Salon interview from February 2003:

http://www.salon.com/2003/02/14/chrismatthews/

Sometime he gets it, sometimes he misses badly.

[iemitsu]

31. No, he always gets it, he just has no integrity.

[UTUSN]

41. O.K., allow me to add some context.

First of all, I acknowledged upthread that the word about Tweety was that he played to his Lib audience in the print media/his newspaper column, while playing to the older, more wingnut cable audience on t.v.

Next, I was WATCHING Tweety in his cable incarnation, never read his print stuff. Plus, my exposure to Tweety began during the FAKE impeachment, when his hatred for CLINTON, and by extension, all things Dem, was visceral.

As I used to post repeatedly during Campaign 2000 when his extended Dem hatred encompassed GORE and very much looked like adoration of Shrub, Tweety (and G.E. RUSSERT) were Rethug operatives for all practical purposes, and this had come from Tweety's flunky status in D.C., where success is everything and he worshipped the RAYGUN success, which, by the bye was at the expense of Tweety's erstwhile bosses O'NEILL and CARTER.

The bottom line is that I viewed Tweety's overall effect as being for the benefit of Rethugs and I threw out the bathwater of whatever Dem-compatible professions he made (like being anti-the-war). The Tweety I saw bashed all Dems since the CLINTONs, loved Shrub and later Mc5planes and every other tin pot wingnut.

Now, as for the Salon interview, the wonderful Joan WALSH was buying large parts of the Tweety p.r. image, as shown in her quotes below.

In 1), Tweety has acknowledged that his family was "cloth coat (Rethug)," that his gravitation to the Dem side was a matter of ethnic/religion pride over JFK (not ideology), that he only joined the Peace Corps "to get out of going to Vietnam."

In 1) and 3) it is posited that Tweety is a ratings whore and that he was perfectly willing to be AILES's whore.

In 2) he claims to be THE ONLY dude in media and all journalism who was against the war. Uh, which came first being anti-the-war or the limelight of being the ONLY one and therefore demolishing DONAHUE?

Bottom line, the forest for me was his Rethug OPERATIVE status. As SNL said when they first "did" him, his audience was "FIFTY PEOPLE who watch this show," so perhaps both things are giving him too much importance by far: His being anti-the-war (who cares?) and my detestation of him. What impact does Tweety have.

**********QUOTE*******

1) Here was a one-time Peace Corps volunteer from a blue-collar family — and a lifelong Democrat who had worked for House Speaker Tip O’Neill — and he clearly loathed Clinton for bringing shame to his office and his party. But it was also true that Matthews saw the rightward drift in cable’s audience, and he knew there were ratings in his rants against a liberal president. “Hardball” moved to MSNBC and became its top-rated show, and Fox News czar Roger Ailes (who launched Matthews’ program when he was at CNBC) would build his primetime schedule around faux-Matthews scold Bill O’Reilly, another Irish-Catholic heckler who knows that the culture war matters as much as politics does to cable TV’s angry, (largely) white male audience.

2) You’re one of the few mainstream American commentators or journalists who’ll take on these questions directly — openly question our support for the Sharon approach, oppose the Iraq war. Why do you think that is?
Yeah, who’s with me? Nobody’s with me, on television anyway. I think there are several factors here. Most people agree you have to stop weapons of mass destruction — the question is how. Then there’s the emotional response to 9/11, there’s an emotional demand for payback, which a lot of journalists are reluctant to question. And then there’s Israel — a lot of people support Israel, and it’s important to Israel to take out Iraq. So it’s all mixed together. It’s a combination of motives.

3) ...we’re taking our viewers around safely. They’re just looking out the window at it. I’m trying to create a sense of comfort for my center audience. My audience is much more center right, or centrist. ....

*********UNQUOTE********

[Prism]

36. Sullivan rode smearing LGBTers to fame

His career is based on being the Good Gay. Not like those radical queer leftists he spent much of the 90s mocking and ridiculing. He was the safe gay hire who could be relied upon to keep uppity LGBTers in their place.

It always jars me to see him praised on DU. Especially given his race-baiting with that Bell Curve horseshit.

The man is not liberal. I'm shocked he's even employable at this point.

[Moses2SandyKoufax]

39. A couple of posters explained it well in this thread...

He's a conservative who praises the president, and many democrats seem to value conservative validation over almost everything else. Remember how chummy President Obama was with Richard Lugar, Chuck Hagel, and Tom Coburn while he was in the senate?

[UTUSN]

43. THANK you, Prism!1 n/t

[Dawson Leery]

46. Exactly.

[QC]

47. Amen! n/t

[JNelson6563]

49. Self-serving blowhards.

I give them no more regard than I do the self-serving blowhards I come across on the internet or out in real life.

Julie