You mean he's not sincere? Will blogland ever recover?

And, of course, conservatives share only their own money while liberals share everyone's money.

It appears that "our man Sullivan" is a huge fan of HBO's The Wire.

Sully obviously took to heart that genius Bodie's "getting" Stringer Bell's economics lesson for drug dealing in the Terrace.

If your product is tapped out or your clientele is sick of your product, just change the brand.

Spineless pop culture vulture, that's what "our man Sullivan" has become.

Mr. Sullivan's sad case of kerrytosis reminds of several credulous saps who tried to persuade me that Jimmy Carter was the conservative candidate in 1976. With any luck, Mr. Sullivan will never have the chance to learn how wrong he is.

Andrew has degenerated into a David Brock wannabee.

Ransom, that's a beaut. Take heart: third season of "The Wire" is en route.

So who's Bubbles? Theresa Heinz?

Just when I was going to tell the missus I lost the rent money on Lucky Lindy in the third at Belmont, I hit the daily double with Vanderleun and Lileks.

"So who's Bubbles? Theresa Heinz?"

With the benefit of a half day's time, we know now who Bubbles is on the nag's dais, none other than Jimmah. I didn't realize that smack and sour mash were kissing cousins until I heard Mr. Nobel speak tonight.

Now, if Sully were only half the man Omar is we wouldn't have to line Tweetie's cage with The Dish.

The Wire rocks! (At $10 a piece).

Izzat what he looks like?

I always imagined some sort of tow-headed British public school-boy.

He looks like one of the "British Bulldogs" who used to wrestle for the WWF back in the 1980's.

Heh.

Maybe we'll even see a biography out of all this: Memoirs of a Blog-Whore.

Wow, I thought it was a hallmark of the liberal attack to reduce all human activity to rank materialism (see Howell "They Don't Vote Their Economic Interests" Raines in today's WaPo for a classic of the genre). Sullivan (heretically, apparently) flirts with a Kerry endorsement, ergo he must be doing it for the money? This is embarrassingly juvenile from a site that is usually marked by informed commentary.

Is no one is allowed to waiver from the orthodoxy without motives being impugned? Let's even grant that Sullivan's Kerry-ward drifts are being motivated by lucre (a dubious proposition at best). So what? What about his arguments?

If you can't beat them, you can rail about him being "on the take" all you want - it will simply sound flaccid and pathetic.

As we all know, commenting on old posts is like speaking in an echo chamber.

Anyway, I guess I called it right when I said Sully was going to follow Stringer Bell's economics lesson.

Just call him, Bodie.