Centerfield

Shocking... Sullivan only told us what he has leading up to for four years. It's as if he enjoys being the Bush supporter who turned. I don't find his endorsement inspiring at all. He only tells me what the Democratic Party tells me... They are not voting for a President, they are voting against one. What they are not saying, however, is what John Kerry will actually do in office except spend more money on Education, Homeland Security, and Health Care.

He has not been leading up to this for four years. This has been a development over the last 12 months. He certainly represents one variety of swing voter.

I disagree that it is as honest as that, but I suppose it is a personal preference. I don't mean to disrespect his endorsement of Kerry, I just don't think it was as difficult decision for him as he is letting on.

Actually, Mathew, Sullivan is a recent convert... he only realized the GOP wasn't really interested in protecting gay rights when the push for the may marriage ban amendment came.

As to what I'm expecting from Kerry? Actually, spending more money on education, homeland security, and health care would be a pretty good start. What's Bush going to spend our money on?

Oops. That should be "gay marriage ban." I'm fairly certain the Republicans don't have anything against May weddings.

It wasn't exactly a stunning endorsement.

I got this blurb from Instapundit.

[Kerry's] record is undistinguished, and where it stands out, mainly regrettable. He intuitively believes that if a problem exists, it is the government's job to fix it. He has far too much faith in international institutions, like the corrupt and feckless United Nations, in the tasks of global management. He got the Cold War wrong. He got the first Gulf War wrong. His campaign's constant and excruciating repositioning on the war against Saddam have been disconcerting, to say the least. I completely understand those who look at this man's record and deduce that he is simply unfit to fight a war for our survival.

you should read the whole thing. Agree or disagree, he makes points worth thinking about.

I did. And I understand it greatly as he echoes many of my own feelings.

However, overall, it is a reluctant endorsement.

Taking that paragraph out of context is symptomatic of what is wrong with our politics today. Trying to reduce complex issues to a sound byte or a saber rattle has gotten us to where we are at present. Read the whole text, consider the issues and form your own opinion. I think that's what the forefathers had in mind, eh?

Sully giving his lukewarm endorsement didn't surprise me much. But I was surprised to see Christopher Hitchens adding his name to the list. I actually thought he was leaning the other way.

From http://slate.msn.com/id/2108714/

"I am assuming for now that this is a single-issue election. There is one's subjective vote, one's objective vote, and one's ironic vote. Subjectively, Bush (and Blair) deserve to be re-elected because they called the enemy by its right name and were determined to confront it. Objectively, Bush deserves to be sacked for his flabbergasting failure to prepare for such an essential confrontation. Subjectively, Kerry should be put in the pillory for his inability to hold up on principle under any kind of pressure. Objectively, his election would compel mainstream and liberal Democrats to get real about Iraq.

The ironic votes are the endorsements for Kerry that appear in Buchanan's anti-war sheet The American Conservative, and the support for Kerry's pro-war candidacy manifested by those simple folks at MoveOn.org. I can't compete with this sort of thing, but I do think that Bush deserves praise for his implacability, and that Kerry should get his worst private nightmare and have to report for duty."

I read this also, Jeremy. I'm not sure that's an endorsement. It says to me that if Americans are stupid enough to pick a weakling like Kerry instead of staying with a resolute, principled man like Bush, we deserve the utter chaos that will ensue. I note that he states flatly that mainstream and liberal Democrats aren't real about Iraq.

Aren't Hitchens and Sullivan expatriates who don't vote in this country? I don't know. But, do their words resonate with the masses?