As Donald Rumsfeld once famously said, there are known-knowns and known-unknowns, and then there’s Andrew Sullivan twisting himself into knots over his Burberry-clad bête noire:
The lies of Sarah Palin are different from any other politicians’. They are different because they assert things that are demonstrably, empirically untrue; and they are different because once they have been demonstrated to the entire world that they are untrue, Palin keeps repeating them as if they still were true or refuses to acknowledge that she was wrong.
As opposed to lies from politicians that assert things that are demonstrably, empirically true?
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
6 Comments
1. K:What is this strange hold Andrew Sullivan has over the right blogosphere? He’s a prat. A literate prat, but a prat just the same. Why keep quoting him? Is it some sort of reciprocity? He’s obsessed with Palin, thereby giving her mounds of coverage but only while the right blogs do the same for him?
Nov 27, 2009 - 10:05 pm 2. David Thomson:“What is this strange hold Andrew Sullivan has over the right blogosphere?”
Andrew Sullivan should be normally ignored simply because he rarely has any anything intelligent to say. The guy is something of a jerk. But this wasn’t always true. Roughly six years ago Sullivan was one of our most insightful bloggers. He is living off his past reputation.
Nov 28, 2009 - 1:24 am 3. tehag:And to think The Atlantic was once respectable. Everyone associated with them is tarnished.
Nov 28, 2009 - 3:24 am 4. syn:For a devout Catholic, why is Andrew Sullivan performing bizarre Crucifixion-like fervor against the Madonna and Child.
Perhaps the Pope might try having a Catholic conversation with devout Catholic Andrew Sullivan before Sully completely turns the Catholic Church and the Pope into useless joke.
What is the taste when sharing the communal body of Christ with those Catholics obsessed with crucifying
Mother and Child?
It must be a nasty flavor.
Nov 28, 2009 - 3:46 am 5. smitty:Maybe Dr. Helen should opine.
Nov 28, 2009 - 7:19 am 6. Rick Caird:When the lovely and talented Andrew says: “They are different because they assert things that are demonstrably, empirically untrue”, does that not really apply to Andrew and his whole derangement syndrome?
Rick
Nov 28, 2009 - 12:41 pmSorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.