(Note to literalists: the Watched column presently contains only a smattering of 'warblogs' because the facilitator of the template-change--Dr. Menlo--is not very familiar with them, and will be adding more as they are sent to him. Also, this blog may contain areas of allusion, satire, subtext, context and possibly even a dash of the surreal: wannabe lit-crits beware.)
Control
[Watch this space for: Pentagon and Petroleum, The Media is only as Liberal as the Corporations Who Own Them, Wash Down With, and Recalcify]
WARBLOGGER WATCH
Wednesday, July 10, 2002
Saul Newton told his devoted and adoring Sullivanians yesterday that he had recently given an interview to listings rag Time Out New York. "I was in a silly mood," Sullivan says apropos of a photo he allowed taken of him. That silliness reached its expiry quick-fast when the subject of Iraq was broached: "it's an absolute prerequisite of this country's seriousness that we go there," Sully euphemistically told the interviewer with all the sobriety someone clad in a visored leather cap and a pair of Ponch's castoff sunglasses can credibly muster.
"We are threatened by a terroristic entity that is profoundly hostile to the rights of women and the freedom of gays," Sullivan continues, as if a retrograde attitude toward women and homosexuals was the established criterion for deciding to war with a country. I wish for the sake of my own comprehension he had introduced a thought somehow segueing from his meditation on upholding the national seriousness to his avowal of Iraq's moral and aesthetic deficiency, but, alas, he hadn't. Apparently the real reason the people of Iraq will have to suffer another invasion is that their leader offends the delicate sensibilities of Andrew Sullivan, a flimsy reason but one he feels no need to apologize for. After all, "Why should it be in any way problematic for a gay man to enthusiastically support the war on terror?" Iraq, after all, has a lengthy history of terror attacks on America.
Lil' Andy then explains that the supposed proud tradition of progressive thought typical of the gay community was vastly oversold. Nay, it never existed at all: "I don't think that gays have ever been antiwar, necessarily." Not necessarily, but certainly empirically. It's as if Sullivan is wholly unfamiliar with the history of the community of which he is a nominal member, though the truth has always been a discountable commodity in the brain of Andrew Sullivan.
What then to make of Sully's commitment to the furtherance of America's gravity? Was it not served when a laughably pompous blowhard was evicted from the country's showpiece media property? We answer in the affirmative. Would it not be better served by a regime change closer to home? Our ridiculous president runs roughshod and ham-fisted inexplicably introducing instability across the globe, puzzling our allies and proving himself transparent to even the slowpokes at Stratfor. Sullivan, suffering from a generalized Stockholm Syndrome, thinks not, viewing the unelected president as the best hope for the world's women and gays.