Hard hitting analysis from Andrew Sullivan on how the right is being hypocritical on the unrest in the middle east.
There is, of course, great potential for bad as well as good in these kind of transformative moments in history - the Arab 1848 as it were. We should be vigilant on that score. But it is bizarre to read conservatives who praised the Iraq war that led to the empowerment of al Sadr and the deaths of hundreds of thousands in a country occupied by the US to be now retroactively endorsing the other Saddams of the Middle East.
See the entire post here
What do I need to do to get the kind of attention in the blogosphere that Andrew Sullivan gets?
Drink? Eat paint chips? Watch an episode of Sesame Street hosted by Biden?
I haven't walked a mile in his shoes, so I don't know if it comes naturally...or does someone like Sully have to work at it to be so stupid?
How is it "bizarre" that conservatives have a different outlook on the middle east unrest now when they were the launching pad for the Iraq war? The reasons are so obvious I feel bad listing them at the risk of insulting everyone's intelligence. Then again, I get liberals visitors so this can be for their benefit.
For these reasons conservatives are wary of what's happening in that part of the world. The only thing that's truly "bizarre" about all of this is the left's inability to understand such an elementary distinction.
I put Sully in that lefty box even though he considers himself to be a conservative, which is fine because I consider myself to be the world's first billion dollar rodeo clown.
After digesting several of Sully's blog posts that he, for his sake, should confess to having had a child ghost write, I can only conclude that the only thing about him that's conservative is his brain cell count.