Posted 8:52 AM by Scoobie Davis

Hard Times For British Pundit Who Caters To The Hard Right
Andrew Sullivan has been getting beaten up recently; however, the pummeling couldn't have happened to a nicer guy: Sullivan’s recent work has proven that he is a hack—not to the point of being a Fred-Barnes-reading-off-the-GOP-talking-points hack--but he is very close. For instance, Sullivan, joining the right’s chorus that heaped the blame for September 11 on the Clinton administration, wrote a reckless and slipshod article on the matter for Salon. Joe Conason refuted Sullivan’s article, showing the multiple errors, omissions, and half-truths in Sullivan’s egregious diatribe. Among other things, Conason debunked Sullivan’s false charge that the Sudanese government offered bin Laden to Clinton; Conason showed how Sullivan ignored Clinton’s repeated efforts to fight terrorism—many of them opposed by Republicans in Congress. In sum, Conason handed Sullivan his head. (This didn’t, however, prevent Sullivan from posting his error-laden smear-piece on his web site sans the Conason rejoinder.)

Sullivan criticized what he thought was a news story as having a liberal bias it referred to an obscure clergyman, the Reverend Peterson, as “conservative” but didn't refer to Jesse Jackson as "liberal." The media watchdog the Daily Howler exposed the sophistry of Sullivan's argument by pointing out that most Americans are familiar with Jesse Jackson and his politics, while most are not familiar with the Reverend Peterson, so it was necessary to indicate that he is a conservative. The Daily Howler further pointed out the absurdity of Sullivan's complaint: The "news story" that Sullivan cites as having a liberal bias was not a news story, but a press release put out by conservative activist Larry Klayman of Judicial Watch. Duh!

The latest Howler has some new funny observations about Sullivan’s “journalism.” Click here.