Andrew Sullivan formally declares independence from the right

[BurtWorm]

And here are his reasons why:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/12/leaving-the-right.html


I cannot support a movement that claims to believe in limited government but backed an unlimited domestic and foreign policy presidency that assumed illegal, extra-constitutional dictatorial powers until forced by the system to return to the rule of law.

I cannot support a movement that exploded spending and borrowing and blames its successor for the debt.

I cannot support a movement that so abandoned government's minimal and vital role to police markets and address natural disasters that it gave us Katrina and the financial meltdown of 2008.

I cannot support a movement that holds torture as a core value.

I cannot support a movement that holds that purely religious doctrine should govern civil political decisions and that uses the sacredness of religious faith for the pursuit of worldly power.

I cannot support a movement that is deeply homophobic, cynically deploys fear of homosexuals to win votes, and gives off such a racist vibe that its share of the minority vote remains pitiful.

I cannot support a movement which has no real respect for the institutions of government and is prepared to use any tactic and any means to fight political warfare rather than conduct a political conversation.

I cannot support a movement that sees permanent war as compatible with liberal democratic norms and limited government.

I cannot support a movement that criminalizes private behavior in the war on drugs.

I cannot support a movement that would back a vice-presidential candidate manifestly unqualified and duplicitous because of identity politics and electoral cynicism.

I cannot support a movement that regards gay people as threats to their own families.

I cannot support a movement that does not accept evolution as a fact.

I cannot support a movement that sees climate change as a hoax and offers domestic oil exploration as the core plank of an energy policy.

I cannot support a movement that refuses ever to raise taxes, while proposing no meaningful reductions in government spending.

I cannot support a movement that refuses to distance itself from a demagogue like Rush Limbaugh or a nutjob like Glenn Beck.

I cannot support a movement that believes that the United States should be the sole global power, should sustain a permanent war machine to police the entire planet, and sees violence as the core tool for international relations.

Does this make me a "radical leftist" as Michelle Malkin would say? Emphatically not. But it sure disqualifies me from the current American right.

To paraphrase Reagan, I didn't leave the conservative movement. It left me.

And increasingly, I'm not alone.

[KG]

1. royalty checks slowing down, andy?

[walldude]

5. Running out of booze....

on edit: That list of republican values hasn't changed in years and years, now all of a sudden he sees something wrong with it? Sorry dude you are going to have to deal with the embarrassment that is owed to you for choosing that side to start with.

[mitchum]

31. +1,000,000 (Sullivan willingly lay down with dogs...and it's the same dogs)

[fishnfla]

2. Question being

It took you how long to figure that stuff out?

[tabatha]

3. No, it was inspired by Little Green Footballs.

He voted for Obama.

[hatrack]

15. After he supported Bush in 2000 . . . I mean, I'm not all that much smarter than Sulliven

And I smelled "phony" rising from Bush like stink from a hog all the way back in 1999.

I don't congratulate people for having the skills needed to tell me the whereabouts of the sky.

[truebrit71]

27. Agreed...a day late and a dollar short...

..like it's new news that the gop hates gay people? Hello?

[tabatha]

29. Any conversion is welcome.

[barbtries]

30. agreed.

i haven't been a regular reader of andrew sullivan, but aren't there quite a few people who do read him like every day? this has got to be good, belated or not.

[tabatha]

28. He was a Republican not a Democrat.

[orwell]

4. Welcome to the Big Tent? n/t

[closeupready]

6. Yawn. Who cares.

Shouldn't this be in the entertainment forum?

[GReedDiamond]

7. He's saying this now?

Yeah, I checked the link, and this is dated "01 Dec 2009."

Where was he while all of what he decries was unfolding before our very eyes?

Anyway, good for him, finally, I guess.

[tridim]

8. He's stating it in writing now..

But he hasn't been a wingnut for years.

He's one of the only Republicans left that I respect.

[AndrewP]

14. +1

[kstewart33]

24. Me too. He's one of the best writers on the web. nt

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

19. Better late than never, I suppose. (nt)

[GodlessBiker]

9. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then.

[PM Martin]

10. Yawn.

:boring:

Conservative ideals have been archaic for centuries.
He needs to admit that he was wrong to ever be a conservative.

[SpiralHawk]

11. D'oh

Talk about slow on the uptake...

[meegbear]

12. Bully for you Sully .. now fuck off

[JVS]

18. +1

[Prism]

13. When he apologizes for his slanders against my community, I'll care

Until then, I will continue regarding just about everything he says and does as self-interested posturing. He knows the GOP is the sick man in American politics. He wants to be on the "winning team". So, here he is.

He's done this often.

Until he makes amends for the entire decade he spent denigrating the LGBT community as a bunch of amoral hedonists, I just don't care whose side Bareback Andy is on.

[closeupready]

22. +1

n/t

[QC]

16. He's still an asshole, though.

One of the most reprehensible people in American public life.

[polichick]

17. Good points - these days we could list things about Dems we don't support too. nt

[BurtWorm]

20. That would make for an excellent thread!

:applause:

[polichick]

21. If you start one, I'll gladly add to it. nt

[BurtWorm]

23. I'm thinking about how to post it without having it automatically locked.

Declaring independence from Democrats might be taken the wrong way...

:think:

[polichick]

26. You're right! nt

[joeybee12]

25. Un-reccing...sick of hearing what this lying POS has to say...n/t

[RainDog]

32. I'm glad he's out there offering some voice of sanity for the right

because the Republican Party has strayed so far from a reality-based world they are a threat to the entire planet.

They are no less dangerous than Al Qaeda. More so, because they have more access to power and arms. They are a danger to this nation and, by extension, to the world because they refuse to accept scientific fact because it offends their apocalyptic fairy tale version of the world in which their god gets to kill everyone they hate, if they don't do it first.

They are the basis for a very dangerous political movement. The democrats better address the problems of the working poor or the Republicans will gain power because the working poor are the ones who turn to this heeby-jeeby view of the world when the things they built their lives on in the past: work, a life with a living wage, affordable housing, the ability to spend some time doing something stupid and fun occasionally.

In fact, those things bind us all together, but the religious stupid find it easier to blame the guy working next to them rather than the guys selling mortgage backed insecurity.

So, in fact, the democrats have lost their way by trying to appeal to the religious stupidity. Instead they should create the conditions in which such fear and paranoia are not encouraged. Glenn Beck will thrive as long as the democrats think they can appeal to the religious right and win votes. In the process, democrats will lose the support of gays and women and, essentially, gut their own party trying to win stupid.

While rational republicans are distancing themselves from the religious right, democrats are embracing them and thus setting the stage for a win by a candidate who bases a campaign on fiscal conservatism and social liberalism.

If most democrats had to choose between voting with fiscal conservatives or social conservatives, I don't know one that wouldn't vote with fiscal conservatives rather than the religious right. The religious right has never stood for values that progressives or liberals support and they never will. On the other hand, fiscal conservatives were able to work with taxes far over the current rate, raise taxes (as Reagan did), and pretend they aren't giving away the store to the bank while they were.

Since democrats are now doing the same, why would a liberal want to vote for a party that is trying to woo religious righties?

[jonnyblitz]

33. the DEMS are probably wingnutty enough for him now, all pro-war

and shit.

[HillWilliam]

34. There's a hilarious (and scathing) retort

at Driftglass.

Sully is still a typical conservative: an opportunistic horse's arse, looking for a way to make a buck without having to do real work. Always will be. He's just tiptoeing off the Titanic clutching the hem of Charles Johnson's robe, wafting the same hint of batshit and Sour Grape Koolade behind him.

Meh.

[arthritisR_US]

35. an excellent retort ! n/t