My, my my, one pebble drops and the avalanche starts.
It started with a post I wrote last year in reply to a question Andrew Sullivan posted to AOL about moral equivalence between Iran and Israel.
Want to hear the question again?
"Do we have a double standard regarding Israel's and Iran's rhetoric?"
And my anger at Sullivan started from two points:
1) When I cited the anti-Israeli rhetoric used against President Bush from the Daily Kos, I sent 4 emails to Sullivan (who always had a large platform) to say, please stand up against it. He chose not to. The Blogger was a Brit named the Heathlander who still writes to this day on Kos about how "evil," the Israeli's are to the Palestinians. Did Andrew Sullivan do anything to stop it? NO
2) Going after the Palin family. I learned from Old machine Politicos who followed Tip O'Neill rules of the Road. The biggest rule in politics is "stay away from families," Andrew Sullivan is not a citizen, how dare he?
Conor Friedersdorf whined today (and Dan Riehl had a great rebuttal) about how he lost a job and three dates because of Dan and mine posts. call the waahbulence. If you are a Conservative Journalist, why are you attacking all manner of Conservatives?
No one said Conor is the next William F. Buckley, Jr. It is not a self-appointing position, you get picked by many in the base and among the Beltway. If there is a Buckley, many Conservative Bloggers and activists will vote you down because of your association with Sullivan.
And Conor, here's a hint: Buckley consistently went after Liberals first, then he cleaned out the Right. What Obama Policy have you attacked recently (and with gusto)?
On Monday Mr. Wieseltier fisked Sullivan because of his attitude towards Israel. Sullivan's response was emotion based and did not answer any of my earlier charges, and to confirm I was right, tonight, Mr. Wieseltier wrote this:
"If I should be more careful about the question of anti-Semitism, so should Sullivan. He complacently says that on this score 'I did my best.' No, he did not. There is a lot of this prejudice in the world right now, and this is really no time to be sloppy...about it. Sullivan is correct that there is not much difference between our views about the settlements and Israeli brutality in Gaza and the ideological orientation of the Likud--but there is all the difference in the world, because I have labored to provide an example of what Michael Walzer has described as 'connected criticism,' of criticism that cannot be mistaken for enmity. (This does not mean that enmity is not allowed. It does mean that enmity cannot pose as friendship.)"
I said it before and I'll say it again, Andrew Sullivan hates Israel and Jews And Conor stands by Sullivan's every word.
Even though I am a low level Blogger (Conor's words), I have my principles and I stand by them. I stood by them when I was a New York Democrat, and I stand by them today as a Conservative Republican (with a Libertarian streak) from California.
I write about my principles here in the Valley, whether it becomes a popular Blog or not is not my worry, but whether my friends and family around the country (especially in the San Fernando Valley, New York, the Beltway and on the Hill) hear my ideas.
My question: Will either Sullivan or Friedersdorf admit they are wrong? And why is Sullivan allowed to break one of the basic rules of American politics by going after Palin's family?