One question was: “How difficult is it to be a passionate, prolific blogger and be non-partisan at the same time?” Sullivan a non-partsan blogger? Yeah, and I’m Hillary Clinton. Anyway, here was his amusing answer (emphasis added):
Very difficult, it would appear. My biggest disappointment with the blogosphere – which had and has the potential to be a forum for real independent thought – is how so much traffic goes to purely partisan sites and partisan propaganda. I’ve been blogging since 2000. I backed Bush in 2000 and Kerry in 2004. I wonder how many other bloggers actually switched parties in four years. Not many, alas.
Anyone with a really interesting take can be discovered quickly and become an elite blogger overnight. Look at Michelle Malkin. Constant hysteria helps as well, of course. Alas.
As Tinti notes with examples, Andrew Sullivan making assertions about anyone else’s supposed “hysteria” is like the pot calling the kettle black.
It’s a real shame what’s happened to Andrew Sullivan over the last couple of years. He’s anything but non-partisan, and anyone who disagrees with him on gay marriage issues is a bible-thumping “Christianist” (a term not meant to be remotely flattering), and anyone who disagrees with him on any other issues is simply an administration shill. Andrew was one of my inspirations for blogging. I read his blog before I started my own. Had it on my blogroll for about a year after I started blogging. But after he made his switch from a fair minded writer to a bitter, hysterial critic of the Bush admnistration, he lost a lot of the respect he had from me and if the reaction to him in certain other quarters of the blogosphere is any indication, I’m not the only one. Not that it would matter to him, of course. I mean, who am I? But the fact remains that Sullivan isn’t the blogger he used to be and sadly I don’t think he’ll ever return back to those days when he was well-respected on both the left and right side of the blogosphere.