I hadn't been reading enough of Sullivan's writing to know that he was anti-UN. His advocacy for destroying marriage as we know it occluded my ability to see his decent side. That's good to know that he doesn't like the UN, although I don't know exactly what he doesn't like about it. But again, I'm skeptical of the "conservative" who just doesn't like to pay taxes. I know a few aging boomers who are as liberal as the day is long, but resent paying taxes associated with young people's public costs such as education. In other words, let corporations pay taxes, but don't ask me for money for the kids. Yeah, that's real conservative... NOT.
I agree that some "conservatives" are more interested in not paying taxes (or, to be fair, higher taxes) than in anything else. Such people are unworthy of the name "conservative." But Sullivan is not one of these mental midgets. He is a principled and intelligent small-government guy, interested in far more small-government issues than just taxes. Indeed, he is probably too willing to raise taxes -- one reason why he backed Kerry, or damned sure seemed to be backing him.
As for his anti-UN standpoint, I think it's mostly for the same reasons why true conservatives oppose the UN. Of course, he's not as anti-UN as some people, but he's much better than most centrists on this issue.
In the end, I'd call Andrew a centrist who has stronger principles (on both sides, but more on the conservative side) than most centrists. I would add that he deserves a lot of credit for the positions he takes, because he is in a very liberal professional and cultural environment. Being anything less than a consistent liberal in these environments takes guts, especially if you're as outspoken as Sullivan.