January 31st, 2005
A quick welcome back to Beldar. I’ve missed him.
0 commentsJanuary 30th, 2005
While others are noting how some of the left are being sour-pusses today, I’d like to point out this hearty, celebratory post from the Bull Moose. It’s important to remember that not all Democrats are Juan Cole.
0 commentsKaus-Sullivan (con't.)
January 30th, 2005
Mickey Kaus fires back at Andrew Sullivan. It’s pretty rough stuff–and he doesn’t even call him any names! Of course, Sullivan will get the last laugh–I mean, it’s not like Kaus is going to be in a Gap ad or anything. Plus, I hear someone is looking for a new celebrity spokesperson. Cha-ching!
Housekeeping: Our previous post about the outbreak of open hostilities between Kaus and Sullivan garned some criticism that needs a response:
(1) Andrew Sullivan linked to Galley Slaves and asked “is there any conservative blog out there that can criticize my work without some poster eventually imputing it to AIDS dementia?”
I’m afraid Andrew is wrong on both counts. I certainly wasn’t criticizing him for his part in the Kaus-Sullivan war. Galley Slaves takes no side in this fight. But, just to prove a point, here’s a bit of genuine criticism of Sullivan from a previous G.S. post. At least as of this writing, there’s no AIDS demetia comment. I look forward to Andrew’s correction.
(2) A nice blogger named Eric Deamer is bothered by Galley Slaves’ continuing coverage of Kaus vs. Sullivan: Caged Heat. He thinks Galley Slaves is supposed to be a “wonky” blog. Sorry to disappoint you, Eric, but this blog is for fun, not wonk. If you want more serious writing from the Slaves, I suggest you look here.
Update, 5:03 p.m.: Now Sullivan comes up swinging with . . . more personal insults! Also, still no correction to Item #1 above. Are you getting tired of all of this nasty back-and-forth? Yeah, me neither.
0 commentsJanuary 29th, 2005
The Bull Moose has some thoughts on the Iraqi election. The Principles Project should be sure to reach out to him.
0 commentsYou'll Be Working for Him Some Day
January 29th, 2005
Tom Maguire beats up on the brilliant Noam Scheiber.
0 commentsAndrew Sullivan Finds a War He Can Get Behind (finally!)
January 29th, 2005
Earlier this morning I noted the most serious salvo yet lobbed at Andrew Sullivan by Mickey Kaus. Now, the battle has been well and truly joined.
You really must read the entire post, but I’ll give you this tease:
Besides, for Mickey to talk about unsteady judgment strikes me as a little rich. Hands up who can now recall whether Mickey was for the war or against it? Was he for Kerry or did he loathe him? Is he for gay marriage or against it? This is a man who cannot write a sentence without fifteen parentheses for qualifications, internal rebuttals, self-questioning, meta-meta-spin, obscure references to people he might once have dissed or who might have dissed him, and even an imaginary editor to subvert his own points even as he makes them.
This isn’t just towel-snapping anymore. This time, it’s personal.
Kaus’s baiting has been so demonically successful that he has even succeeded in prompting Sullivan to pop off against Glenn Reynolds, Power Line, and the Belmont Club. (And the ease with which Sullivan does so suggests that he’s been spoiling to to claw at these other blogs for some time now. Either that or he’s just very facile at tossing off casual, personal insults. I report. You decide.)
Update, 11:13 p.m.: A commenter notes that Sullivan used to refer to Instapundit (his “blog hero”) as “Glenn.” Now that he’s a partisan dupe, he’s “Reynolds.” I wonder when Andrew disavowed him.
0 commentsAnd the Winner Is…
January 28th, 2005
According to sources, with just ten minutes to go before an official announcement is made, the Pentagon’s Defense Acquisition Board will award the $1.6 billion Marine One contract to Lockheed Martin/AgustaWestland. The decision is a major blow to Sikorsky Aircraft of Stratford, Connecticut, and its 9,000 employees. For the reasons for and against each side and further analysis, stay tuned.
0 commentsMoore and Orwell
January 28th, 2005
Wretchard notices that Michael Moore’s quoting of George Orwell was more of a sloppy paraphrasing. How did that get past Moore’s vaunted fact-checkers?
0 comments
