Andrew Sullivan: Americans think my blogging is worth $1.67 a month!

Sure it is Andy, sure it is. I mean where else can readers learn about your obsession with Sarah Palin’s uterus?

Via TheDC:

After stints blogging at Time, the Atlantic, and the Daily Beast, Andrew Sullivan has announced he will be going back out on his own. Starting February 1, he will move to a new paid content model.

In return for purchasing a subscription, Sullivan promises his readers, “No corporate ownership, no advertising demands, no pressure for pageviews … just a concept designed to make your reading experience as good as possible, and to lead us not into temptation.”

For now, Sullivan is offering readers a chance to sign up for $19.99 a year, which he notes, “translates to $1.67 a month.”

Poor delusional Andrew Sullivan

 

Yoko Ono is a deeply disturbed human being, and so is her new clothing line

Yoko Ono has issues, deep issues, she broke up the Beatles, and now, she is bringing her complete lack of talent to fashion. 

 

Yoko Ono 4 - Echo of Moscow

I have a passion for bad fashion

 

The Lonely Conservative is amazed that anyone would design crap like this. I am amazed that anyone would buy such garbage. I mean these outfits make sweater vests look manly. Of course, I imagine Andrew Sullivan might think these pants are cool

 

Oh my gosh, this is horrible. Look at these clothes Yoko Ono has designed for men.

Those pants cost $335.00 and that thing on the right is called a “bell board,” whatever that is.

Yoko-Ono-Menswear

 

Your Marxist Moron of the Day is….

Andrew Sullivan, who might need to read a couple of history books, especially where the War Between the States is concerned

Andrew Sullivan’s ahistoricism is simply breathtaking. Just watch his stunningly ridiculous comments on “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” at Mediate, “Andrew Sullivan to ABC: If Romney Wins Florida and VA, It’s the ‘Confederacy’” (viaMemeorandum):

PBS reporter Gwen Ifill said that “we can’t ignore” the possible factor racial animus may play in deciding the election, noting that the poll indicates that, on some level, people are still willing to admit “racial bias.”

Sullivan then added: “If Virginia and Florida go back to the Republicans, it’s the Confederacy. Entirely. You put a map of the Civil War over this electoral map, you’ve got the Civil War.”

Conservative panelist George Will rolled his eyes. “I don’t know,” said a skeptical Ifill.

Will then posited two possible explanations for Obama’s slippage in the white vote since 2008: “A lot of white people who voted for Obama in 2008 watched him govern for four years and said, ‘Not so good. Let’s try someone else.’ The alternative, the ‘Confederacy’ hypothesis is that those people somehow, for some reason in the last four years became racist.”

“That’s not my argument at all,” replied Sullivan. “It’s the southernization of the Republican Party. [Virginia and Florida] were the only two states in 2008 that violated the Confederacy rule.”

The Confederacy Rule? I have studied the WBTS AKA the War of Northern Aggression for many years, and read hundreds of books, toured nearly all the battlefields, given speeches on several battles, generals, causes, etc. But I NEVER knew that the Confederacy was this big!

Map of the Confederacy according to Andrew Sullivan

 

Romney Leads Obama in New Gallup Poll 52-45, Crazed Homosexual Hardest Hit

I guess that headline might get me in hot water with the PC types, but, they are not too keen on me, or Ed so screw them. Stacy McCain points out that the newest polling is causing the Great 2012 Liberal Freak-Out! And, chief amongst those freaking out is none other than Trig-Truther Andrew Sullivan, who always sounds like he is freaking out to me.

They convinced themselves that Obama “won” Tuesday’s debate, butRomney actually gains in the first Gallup national tracking poll with post-debate reaction? Oh, boy.

UPDATE: Ace explains what happened:

 The debate was not a victory for Obama. It was a confirmation of Romney’s acceptability, plausibility, and fitness for office.

Yesterday, Sully admitted he had been “on the ledge”:

I will now crawl back into my blog-cave and cower. But seriously, thanks to all readers who helped me off the ledge:thebea.st/R4HyCW

Oh good grief! This is classic Sullivan, hyper-emoting and making an ass of himself in general. But at least he has stopped being obsessed with Sarah Palin’s uterus for a while.

By the way, I really do not care that Andrew Sullivan is Gay NTTIAWWT, that is his business, but I thought the headline was funny

Oh no, Obama tanks in debate, Andrew Sullivan hardest hit

 

Poor bastard! Stacy McCain looks at Andrew “Trig Truther” Sullivan’s latest meltdown, he has a lot of them, and sees real tears of unfathomable sadness

Andrew Sullivan emotionally implodes over the latest poll:

The Pew poll is devastating, just devastating. Before the debate, Obama had a 51 – 43 lead; now, Romney has a 49 – 45 lead. That’s a simply unprecedented reversal for a candidate in October. . . .
Seriously: has that kind of swing ever happened this late in a campaign? Has any candidate lost 18 points among women voters in one night ever? And we are told that when Obama left the stage that night, he was feeling good. That’s terrifying. On every single issue, Obama has instantly plummeted into near-oblivion. . . .
Look: I’m trying to rally some morale, but I’ve never seen a candidate this late in the game, so far ahead, just throw in the towel in the way Obama did last week – throw away almost every single advantage he had with voters and manage to enable his opponent to seem as if he cares about the middle class as much as Obama does. . . .

 

 

Yes, Anderson Cooper is Gay, and no, we really do not care

Oh the left and their addiction to identity politics. It baffles me, it really does. To me people are, well people, I could not give  a damn less who they sleep with, who they date, or who they are attracted to, unless, of course they are an attractive women who is into bloggers from Texas, THEN I care!

Seriously though, my reaction to Anderson Cooper exiting the proverbial closet was, one word, “so”. OK, I did say DUH as well, I mean this is not exactly shocking news is it? But the Left, the Left is having Coopergasms

NBC’s coming out party for Anderson Cooper featured soundbites from gay journalists, his being hailed as a “powerful voice” and an “advocate” for the gay and lesbian community, and panel members approving of his admitting to being gay, all on Tuesday’s Today show.

“[H]e will have a powerful voice being an advocate for the gay and lesbian community,” offered Natalie Morales. Ironically, her “Today’s Professionals” panel then brushed off sentiment that Cooper’s “coming out” would hurt his career or his journalistic integrity.

Oh good grief. I wonder if the media says that kind of thing because they are “expected” to? I suppose they think they have to utter such inanities to appear “with it”. Sad that anyone feels that their sexuality defines everything about them.

Can there ever be a tolerant discussion with the Left?

And by tolerant I simply mean a conversation that does not involve the Conservative being demonized? I mean a conversation where, depending on the topic, the Conservative is not called either a racist, Homophobe, sexist, Islamaphobe, bigot, redneck, terrorist, Nazi, Fascist, or accused of  not flossing between meals.

Such attacks make it impossible to have any rational discussion. The fact is, that sadly, Leftism not only does not welcome thoughtful debate, it absolutely makes it an unreachable goal. Basically, the Left seeks to silence all debate on any topic. Stacy McCain has a post concerning the debate over defining marriage that does a nice job explaining the problem.

Any conservative who has ever tried to have a rational discussion about what progressives call “marriage equality” understands the problem: The very fact of your opposition to this radical policy becomes the basis for attacks on your motives and character.

Never mind that you are defending 5,000 years of civilization, while your antagonist is a deranged fanatic demanding that a fundamental social institution be altered (some would say, abolished) to conform to a theoretical abstraction of “equality.”

No, it is you — standing on the side of settled custom and common sense — who will inevitably be accused of “hate” you do not feel and diagnosed as suffering from an irrational “phobia.”

The fact that your accuser (volunteering also as an amateur psychologist) is demonstrably a fool, unfit to judge the morality and mental health of others, ought to serve as adequate evidence that any “debate” is a futile waste of time and effort. One might as well debate heroin with a junkie as to debate gay rights with Andrew Sullivan or Dan Savage.

They don’t want to debate, they want to lecture, and their preferred method of “argument” is to silence critics. So when conservatives post a video critical of same-sex marriage, what happens?

Did you try to watch that video against gay marriage that we posted yesterday?
You can’t. Now.
If you try, you’ll instead see this: “This video has been removed as a violation of YouTube’s policy prohibiting hate speech.”
So much for the free expression of ideas. . . . .
[T]here is an element of gay fascism behind the whole gay marriage movement.
The fact of the matter is that these gay rights extremists believe in censorship. They will attempt to remove from public discourse anything that calls into question the morality of their behavior.

Such tactics ought to cause concern. If these are the means, what are the ends? What does it say about a cause, that its advocates endeavor to silence opponents as practicing “hate speech”?

Ah yes, the censors of the Left, silencing opposing views any way they can. Personally, I support civil unions, I think it best to leave marriage as it is, I mean 5,000 years of defining it that way might just mean there is something to it. But, I also think that if a states voters choose to define marriage differently, they have that right, even if I disagree with that choice. To me, that seems pretty damned tolerant, but to the Left? HA! I would be defined as a Homophobic monster who wants to deny Gay people equality. There is no room, or hope for debate with such tyrants. Stacy is right, there is no talking to some people.