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.



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

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.

Your vomit-inducing clip of Andrew Sullivan achieving mutual Obamagasm with Chris Crazy Legs Matthews

Good Freaking Grief! They act like two teenage girls at a Twilight movie

PATHETIC! This is what happens when anyone allows themselves to be so wrapped up in their “identity” that everything revolves around their gender, or ethnicity, or in this case their sexuality. Sullivan, whether or not you agree with his ideology, and I certainly do not, has achieved quite a bit in life. Yet, he needs to be told that he is “equal”? Someone pass me a vomit bag! When I say that Liberalism is an ideology for the child-like adults, THIS is what I mean!

Donald Douglas adds this nugget!

I don’t think you could find better progressive optics I mean, seriously, Sully’s emoting to Chris Matthews, who in 2008 confessed that, “I have to tell you, you know, it’s part of reporting this case, this election … the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama’s speech. My, I felt this thrill going up my leg…”


Yes, really

Should I attend CPAC next year?

Well, let me weigh the pros and cons.

Donald Douglas has a good reason NOT to! I mean look at this headline ‘Sex at CPAC is Strongly Discouraged’

What? Donald explains

Look, you’re surrounded by young women at CPAC, so it’s not surprising that a lot of young conservative dudes would be looking to score, but by the looks of the buzz online yesterday, a backlash is brewing among those older and wiser. See Robert Stacy McCain, for example, “Cody’s Totally Excellent CPAC.”

Robert links to Erick Erickson, “CPAC: Not Quite Like the Media Matters Communications Room. But Still, Grow Up” (at Memeorandum as well). And also to Melissa Clouthier, who pulls no punches, CPAC: The Jersey Shore-ification of Our Young People“:

Wow! Looks like I missed it this year. I can see the point, I guess, very public displays of “affection” are not my cup of tea, and Melissa Clouthier lays down some rules for the ladies at CPAC.

1. No cleavage. That’s right. Cover that up. I say “no” in absolutist terms because women will show a tiny bit and that’s okay, but really, in a business environment where ideas are the priority, a dude thinking about your ta-tas is counter-productive.

Very good point, no doubt. I would say, though that as a guy, we are pretty much going to be thinking of Ta-Tas even without visible cleavage. Sorry, just being honest.

2. Skirts no more than three finger-widths above the knee. Why do I even have to write this? Well, because someone is allowing these girls out of the house with mini-skirts that reveal too much.

Another good point. take it from me,  guy, a very short skirt is inviting to the eyes, but, it also plants the seed, in the male mind, that the woman wearing that skirt is a girl, that, well , you know

3. Save the stilettos for Saturday night on a date with your boyfriend.

No real thoughts here, except how does a woman, or Andrew Sullivan, walk in those things?

4. Bend at the knee. No, I don’t want to see your butt.

Personally, I do not mind looking at your butt ladies, but, again, the key point here is that ultimately, a man will still be attracted to you, and will RESPECT you more if you dress more conservatively. Trust me, nothing is sexier than a woman in business attire. But, again, there is my point, in a way. Men will ALWAYS be drawn sexually to attractive women. A pretty girl is pretty, no matter what she wears. Sure, we will respect a hot woman who dresses in a less revealing fashion, more than a woman dressed like she is in a rap video. But, in the end, the male mind is, well, the male mind

I will leave you with thoughts from Douglas. Thoughts I tend to agree with. Sorry, I guess I am just a Libertarian on this in the end.

I don’t know, but I suspect that young people raised well by their parents already know this. My son for example is a young gentlemen who respects his girlfriends and hangs with a good crowd. But in four or five years, if he’s out at a CPAC-like conference, I’m not going to blame him if he’s looking for a good time — and if that means notching a bedpost, well, you only live once. Frankly, young people are looking for action, and I’d be surprised if this notion of no hitting on hotties at CPAC finds a huge audience with the hip crowd. Indeed, I think I’m with Dan Riehl on the more on the libertarian side of things. Either way, have fun, be responsible and dress nice — and most of all, keep a perspective on things. Sure the goal is marriage and family, but one doesn’t have to detour to the monastery beforehand.

Amen! Like Dan Riehl, I will SUFFER for the advancement of Conservatism

Talk about blogs coming of age. In my opinion, CPAC is about politics, not parenting. If it takes hundreds of new folks with perhaps more libertarian, than traditional, leanings to infuse a more powerful right in America, I’ll take it. And if some number of them are hotties in tube tops, I’ll find a way to endure because I love America just that much. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it! ; )

Yep! Dan and I are just that damn selfless! The lengths we will go to for the cause!

Well, now Donald Douglas has gone and done it!

In one very short blog post title, Douglas might have offended most of the people on earth! And I am darned proud of him. Here, is that title, and be warned you too might be offended by it!

African Indigents with Massive Erect Cocks?
Click the link to see what Douglas is talking about, and trust me, it is an excellent post exposing the inanity of the race-obsessed Left. But, let us consider the incredible outbreak of Offendeditis this will surely cause
It will offend, of course the race pimps, and all those who suffer from Racial Obsession Syndrome
It will outrage Feminuts, because, well men with erections deeply offend Feminuts for two reasons. A man with an erection is likely thinking about a Hooters waitress, a cheerleader, or maybe a woman in a bikini, and a man finding women attractive or sexy is “degrading” to women according to Feminist theology. The other reason that Feminuts will be offended is that most Feminuts are either too ugly, or to damned mean or in most cases both, to give a man an erection.
It will offend Leftists who always defend thugs and rioters as “victims of Capitalism and Western society”
It will offend those who freak out every time they see a naughty word, and that is good because those types only seem happy when they are offended by something they saw on TV, or read in a magazine, or at a blog. It will offend them so much that they might actually stop begging the FCC to police what their neighbors are watching, which would be a good thing.
It will offend Lesbians, and I doubt I really need to explain why
It will offend every host at MSNBS, who will somehow blame the Tea Party, and Secessionists, because hosts at MSNBS get paid way too much to be offended.
Lastly, Douglas’ post will offend Andrew Sullivan when he finds out there are actually no “massive erections” in the post itself
Of course, I am sure I have offended many people in this post, and I truly hope I did, because, as I have stated before, it seems that these types are only happy when they are offended.

Why the Hell is a Gay man so into Sarah Palin’s uterus anyway?

It seems that, I have diagnosed yet another Liberal disease, Dr. RS McCain has discovered the first known case of Uterus Obsession Syndrome, and, oddly enough, it seems that a Gay man, Andrew Sullivan, is the first victim.

I would also like to clarify that Alyssa Milano’s breasts were not involved, in any way, with the discovery of U.O.S.

For those of you wondering……….

Yes, Andrew Sullivan is still in need of mental health help! Dan Riehl expounds

Stop embarrassing yourself, Andy. The only reason you’re allowed to continue to believe anyone takes you seriously on anything anymore is because you’re such a wonderful water carrier for the Left. No sane, or objective individual is even amused much with your ongoing melt down, or believes you’ve much substance to contribute to any political debate. Certainly you gave up any facade of honesty long ago.

Get a sex change, or at least start wearing Red outfits and high heels around the house playing Sarah dress-up for yourself and whatever gutter trash you can round up at the local adult book store. You look like an aging queen on her knees at some gloryhole waiting for a miraculous birth certificate to be slipped in from the next stall so you can engage your latest perversion until you climax all over yourself.

You’re sick, dude. Get some freaking help.

The BlogProf: Anderson Cooper going down faster than Charles Johnson on Andrew Sullivan.

OK, he does not define Coopers ratings trumble in those EXACT words, but………

CNN suck-up, literally and figuratively, Anderson Cooper, the man who popularized the dismissive “teabagger” slur against tea party protesters this year, is in trouble. His rating are down 62% in total, and 72% in the key 25-54 demographic. Couldn’t have happened to a more deserving liberal.

Now, I do want to note that I could have used this to make a rude comment about Alabama cheerleaders to pester R.S. McCain, who hates me so much he refuses to feature this blog on his headlines, Hot Blogs, or on his FMJRA Award! and Carol, who both think Tim Tebow AND I are both evil! I would never do that, because, well, it would be wrong! Funny? Sure, but still wrong. After all, I am sure most Bama cheerleaders are great gals, they likely do not even chew tobacco in public anymore, and thankfully have discovered, at least I am told, that they can shave their armpits.

Is Andrew Sullivan fantasizing about Levi Johnston?

Why do I get the idea that Little Andy is blogging this crap with his pants off?

This is either one hell of a 19-year old self-described redneck or someone who has the serene confidence of knowing that the truth is on his side. Here’s the transcript of his real time reaction to the Oprah interview:

Apparently Andy has a fever for douchebag rednecks.

UPDATE!! It is worse than I thought Looks like Andy has broken out the heels to woo Levi!

I have not witnessed a beating of this magnitude since….

Since my old dog Bo, a mix of English bulldog and Pit bull, think of the Mack Truck logo, and that would be Bo, locked his jaws onto another dog’s, er, well, let’s just say that Bo likely prevented that other dog from ever pro-creating. Anyway, since that beating that Bo, who was killed, sadly chasing a fire truck, he HATED sirens, delivered, I have not seen anyone receive such a thrashing. Until today that is.

Today, little Andy Sullivan, decided it would be a good idea to get on the wrong side R.S. McCain. I think Andy ought to remember the sage advice of the late singer Jim Croce who sang “You don’t pull the mask on the old Lone Ranger, and you don’t mes around with Jim”. Well, in your case Andy, R.S. McCain IS Jim.

By the way, lest anyone misunderstand about the late, great Bo, he was a swet dog, UNTIL another male dog came in his yard and messed with Bo’s people. In this case the dog in question, we will call him Andy Sullivan, acted in an unfriendly manner towards my little sister, BAD IDEA! Bo, was the ultimate Alpha-Male, a gentleman, unless you provoked him, then it was on!

Also, since I am comparing McCain’s thumping of Sullivan to other routs, I suggest you Google “Chancellorsvile”. There, Union general “Fightin” Joe Hooker, decided it would be a good idea to announce his intentions to destroy Lee’s Army of Nothern Virginia. It went very well for Hooker, until the fighting started. Instead of “ingloriously fleeing” as Hooker predicted, Lee attacked, and preceeded to deliver a beating of historical proportions.

Sullivan, though, should not feel too bad as he picks his teeth off the floor. R.S. McCain has smacked lots of Liberal hacks around, like Robert E. Lee out-generaled  lots of  Union commanders. McClellan, Pope, Burnside, Hooker, Grant, yes, he thouroughly out-generaled Grant, but lost what Lincoln called “the arithmetic”.

So, Andy, just learn from your beating, and stop picking fights with your betters.

Hopeless Hack: Everything good is because of Obama!

Good freaking grief! Is Andy Sullivan delusional, oh wait, what am I saying? This is a guy who is still obsessing over Trig Palin, of course he is delusional. Commenting on Obama’s long-delayed substantive statement on Iran, Sullivan launches into full worship mode!

I wrote a couple weeks back that something is happening in Iran. But it is not the only place where something is happening. The rejection of al Qaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan; the ground-up election of Obama in America; and now the rising up of Iranians for freedom and civility with their neighbors: these are the green shoots of recovery from 9/11 and its wake. Empowered by new information technology, chastened by the apocalyptic conflicts of the last few years, determined to shift course away from civilizational warfare, the people of many countries are grasping for a new order and a new peace. It will not be easy; and it will not be short. But it is the only path worth taking.

See, it is ALL Obama’s doing! The surge in Iraq? ALL Obama! Oh wait, Obama was not president, and in fact opposed the surge, even after he admitted it worked. And, those Iraqi people, that helped the surge by turning against al-Qaeda? NOPE Zero credit for them! But, nevermind the facts! It is all Obama!

And now, Sullivan wants to credit Obama fir the protests in Iran? Unbelievable! DanRiehl takes the delusional one to task over his  “sirupy concoction”

What Obama displayed through this was an American leader lacking any courage or serious commitment to genuine freedom. If he had such a thing, it would have compelled him to greet their earliest pleas for freedom and support with the strong and resolute voice for freedom nearly every previous American president would have had the strength and wisdom to immediately offer up in response.

But no, not Obama. He just went out for ice cream and that was all he did, or has done to help the people of Iran gain their freedom. He even reached out to the oppressive regime, not the people, when they first gathered to start to march

Stunner of the day! Andy Sullivan freaking out again

It seems that little Andy is convinced that Obama is a Neocon! And is losing his lunch that Obama is not going to release photos of what Sullivan just knows was rampant abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib. Apparently Sullivan is foaming at the mouth to prove that our military is just a collection of abusers and thugs.

Sullivan is also going ballistic that Obama is going to adopt a winning strategy in Afghanistan rather than trying to pursue the trumped up, and baseless torture witch hunts. It seems to me Little Andy is more obsessed with smearing our troops than letting them do their job by killing terrorists.

In the end, I must conclude that Sullivan is nothing more than a mentally deranged America basher. Facts? He does not want them. He only wants to prove his deluded fantasies are reality, which of course will never ever happen. Andrew Sullivan needs serious mental health help and soon.