Mark Shea (via
Steve Dillard at
Southern Appeal)
notices that the
key to everything [Andrew] Sullivan writes is the defense of his sex life. His attacks on Bush suddenly began after Bush said no to gay marriage. And, of course, his increasingly shrill loathing of Benedict springs from the same source.
I
noted the same phenomenon on September 9, 2004, in the heat of the Bush-Kerry race:
Andrew Sullivan, renowned homosexual blogger, who was once a staunch supporter of Bush and the war in Iraq has turned his back on his old loves. Sullivan now openly embraces Kerry (no pun intended), puts down Bush at every opportunity, and second-guesses the war in Iraq.
Like many other bloggers, I long sensed that Sullivan eventually would change his colors because he has been monomaniacal about the recognition of homosexual marriage. He kept harping on it in post after post, day after day, week after week. It got so boring that I took Sullivan's blog off my blogroll and quit reading it.
Now, Kerry isn't much better than Bush on gay marriage -- from Sullivan's perspective -- but Kerry doesn't make a big issue of opposing it the way Bush does. Maybe that's because Kerry doesn't know where he stands on gay marriage. Why should he? He doesn't seem to know where he stands on anything. No, I take that back: Kerry believes in serial monogamy with rich women; the evidence is irrefutable.
But I digress. Back to Andrew Sullivan. He seems to have put his sexual orientation above all else. He's really a one-issue voter. Sure, he has rationalized his change of mind, but his change of mind can be traced, I think, to his preoccupation with gay marriage as a political litmus test.
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
