Gay Patriot Header Image

Is Andrew Sullivan Too Crazy For Even
The Vast Left Wing ‘JournoList’ Gang?

There are now 107 confirmed names from the allegedly defunct “JournoList”.   And while the whole thing stinks to high heaven (news story manipulation by this gang), I can’t say I’m all that surprised about the names popping up.

But I do have to say I’m quite surprised that one Andrew Sullivan hasn’t surfaced.  He’d be the first one I’d expect to have been invited begged to have been put on the JournoList. After all, his Atlantic & TNR buddies Ambinder, Yglesias, Cohn, & Chiat are there.  And Sullivan is a “name”.  I would have thought he’d be one of the first we’d hear about — no offense to Dave Weigel.

Is it possible that the liberal media, academic & Obama cabal considered Sullivan too wacky for even them?  This Daily Dish posting on July 20 suggests Sullivan was in fact left out of the gang.


Or since the JournoList is mostly white straight guys — perhaps they are just racist and homophobic?

Video courtesy of HillBuzz.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)



  1. […] The Journolist Posted on 07/24/2010 by stix1972 embaPub="ccc0aa1b81bf81e16c676ddb977c5881";embaStyle="";embaPub="ccc0aa1b81bf81e16c676ddb977c5881";embaURL=""; Amplify’d from […]

    Pingback by The Journolist | Stix Blog ver 4.0 — July 24, 2010 @ 3:43 pm - July 24, 2010

  2. He is still insanely fixated on the conspiracy theory that Sarah Palin is not Trig Palin’s mother. Have you ever seen a middle-aged gay man so fixated on a woman’s reproductive organs before?

    Comment by V the K — July 24, 2010 @ 5:13 pm - July 24, 2010

  3. In Sullivan-land, nothing is as it appears: conspiracy and rejection (of him) lurk around every corner. In your link, Sullivan says:

    I was never on Journo-list, of course, and would have declined if invited.

    For normal people that would be the end of it, but in Sullivan-speak it would mean: he tried mightily to be included in JournoList, was rejected, felt deeply hurt, and then realized they are actually a homophobic false-flag operation in secret alliance with Palin to cover up Trig’s true parentage.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 24, 2010 @ 5:23 pm - July 24, 2010

  4. (continued) and start a new war.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 24, 2010 @ 5:24 pm - July 24, 2010

  5. Bruce,

    Don’t forget that Sullivan was being invited to weekly (or was it monthly?) dinners with other media figures that were regularly attended by Obama advisers. …No, I dont remember where I read it, I only remember that I read it somewhere very reliable.

    Comment by American Elephant — July 24, 2010 @ 5:51 pm - July 24, 2010

  6. It’s still early yet, his name might surface on the JournoList at some other time. Tucker Carlson said in Friday’s Daily Caller he was not releasing all the entries since much of it was just dried-up heaves of bitchiness.

    I would like a comprehensive list of all JournoList contributers regardless with their names & their media they represent at the time they made the Journolist entry & their current standing to date.

    Comment by Sebastian Shaw — July 24, 2010 @ 7:26 pm - July 24, 2010

  7. Wait, if he wasn’t on Journolist, does this mean that he came to his conclusions about Trig all on his own? So is that more impressive than the lock step of Journolist, or were they just sitting there laughing their asses off every time he wrote something?

    Comment by Leah — July 24, 2010 @ 9:16 pm - July 24, 2010

  8. Just crazy enough to use an alias, I suspect!

    Comment by jdcroft2001 — July 24, 2010 @ 9:49 pm - July 24, 2010

  9. To the Journolist crowd, and the left as an entitiy, Andrew Sullivan is useful, but not really accepted. They keep him on the periphery.. seriously, they view him as not one of them, and not because he’s gay, but because they don’t really trust him. I’m not sure if it’s because he’s a neo-con, I don’t really think it’s even that, more that they view him as a loose cannon perhaps?

    They seem fine with neo-cons, they know that neo-cons are coming from the same place they are, and working towards the same ends, they are all Marxists after all. Perhaps they do view him as too crazy?

    Thing of it is, they’re all crazy, or shortly will be. Not that I’m saying they have consciences, but given the different strata they all reside in, there’s bound to be conflict, and back biting, and I’m sure it’s starting to impinge upon the rarified air of even the Journolist ivory tower. If the economy is going to get worse, more of them are going to get pink slipped, and there aren’t going to be anywhere for those this happens to, to go. I’m not looking forward to that, because at the same time, so many innocent people are going to be suffering more, but those Journolist narcissists are going to really be turning on each other.

    Comment by jenny — July 24, 2010 @ 10:30 pm - July 24, 2010

  10. They seem fine with neo-cons, they know that neo-cons are coming from the same place they are

    Do you even have the faintest clue what a neocon is? Please tighten your tinfoil hat.

    Comment by American Elephant — July 24, 2010 @ 10:44 pm - July 24, 2010

  11. Wait. Does anyone actually read Uncle Sully anymore?

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — July 24, 2010 @ 11:59 pm - July 24, 2010

  12. Hey, Sebastion! How’s the Hellfire Club doing?

    Comment by Otter — July 25, 2010 @ 4:59 pm - July 25, 2010

  13. Don’t liberals use the “neo con” label for dirty Jews? I think they do.
    Matthews on MSNBC frequently uses it as shorthand like other anti semites.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 25, 2010 @ 8:05 pm - July 25, 2010

  14. Gene: The term “neoconservative” was originally coined by a leftist in 1973 to describe a certain set of Jewish ex-liberals, and then adopted by one of their number in 1979, Irving Kristol, to describe himself. These ex-liberals had been quasi-Marxist in the 60s, but came to believe that liberalism had failed, so they moved to the right. But they never entirely freed themselves from their earlier collectivist ways of thinking. As Wiki puts it:

    In economics, unlike paleoconservatives and libertarians, neoconservatives are generally comfortable with a welfare state; and, while rhetorically supportive of free markets, they are willing to interfere for overriding social purposes.

    They also remained strong supporters of Israel. So, if someone is pro-America and pro-Israel, but also somewhat pro-Big Government, they are a neo-con. That certainly describes George W. Bush, so he got tagged with it. As you point out, anti-semites on both the Left and the Right focus on the Israel part and use it as a code word for da Joooz, i.e. people who they regard as suspiciously pro-Israel. However, as in jenny’s comment, it has another usage, a correct usage as a term for anyone who is sort-of on the Right but nonetheless in favor government control of the economy. (Kudos to jenny for getting it right.)

    Finally, since neo-con literally means “new conservative”, people will use it to mean anyone who politics have drifted to the Right. The blogger “neo-neo-con” uses it in that sense, to describe herself. This plethora of different meanings and usages has led to people using the term incorrectly, over-reacting when they see it used correctly (but in a way that violates their own incorrect understanding), and so forth.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 25, 2010 @ 8:41 pm - July 25, 2010

  15. P.S. On occasion, some idiot leftist on this blog has called me a neo-con. While I am proud of that in terms of my support for the Bush-Cheney foreign policy, I must decline the appellation, because I oppose the Welfare State completely and I fault Bush for his administration’s many detrimental, Big Government domestic policies.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 25, 2010 @ 8:48 pm - July 25, 2010

  16. You can find Sullivan most days high as a kite trying to ride his bike down Commercial St in Provincetown. We have some great video of it.

    Comment by Name — July 26, 2010 @ 9:26 am - July 26, 2010

  17. ILC exactly. Some have called me a neo con simply because I am pro Israel. Most were anti semites thinking they were giving me a shot. Wishing I had been one of the 7 million.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 26, 2010 @ 11:08 am - July 26, 2010

  18. Apparently, even without Crazy Aunt Andy, Jornolist was rife with Trig Trutherism.

    Comment by V the K — July 26, 2010 @ 11:41 am - July 26, 2010

  19. Mmmmm… sweet, sweet crazy.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 26, 2010 @ 12:08 pm - July 26, 2010

  20. Actually I’m coming up with a new theory, on why JL rejected Sullivan. Which they did: Even by his account, he was never invited. Picture a teenage girl throwing a party for 170 of her friends but leaving out one special, infamous figure in her set. It’s a rejection.

    Anyway, maybe… they still consider Sullivan a conservative! LOL 🙂 Laugh along with me, but Sullivan still markets himself as one (The Last True Conservative(tm) – kind of like Ashpenaz), and most lefties enjoy playing along (like “See? Even conservatives like Sullivan hate Bush / vote Obama!”). Maybe they took him seriously.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 26, 2010 @ 12:16 pm - July 26, 2010

  21. Wait. Does anyone actually read Uncle Sully anymore?

    I still do. I think it’s useful to know what the other side is feeling.

    Comment by Sonicfrog — July 26, 2010 @ 12:55 pm - July 26, 2010

  22. “I still do.”

    I don’t, because I refuse to give him the page views. It just encourages Atlantic to keep him on. I do though, appreciate others weeding (pun intended) through his daily nonsense to let me know what level of insanity he is into at any given moment. Those of you who do are far braver than I.

    Comment by Chris L. — July 27, 2010 @ 12:33 pm - July 27, 2010

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.