Andrew Sullivan Has Been Banned by The New York Times

andrewsullivan.com ^ | May 11, 2002 | Andrew Sullivan

[What Is Ain't]

Doesnt' this mean Howell Raines is a homophobe?

[coloradan]

What was his crime? Conservatism?

[genefromjersey]

Bitchiness is more likely.

[Paul Atreides]

What was his crime?

Maybe, Andrew turned him down for a date.

[AmishDude]

Reading between the lines, it seems that Sullivan thinks the dismissal is for his criticism of the NYT.

[Drango]

Who/What is "The New York Times" and why do I care?

[Cicero]

It's commonly said that the reason the New York Times continues to publish Maureen Dowd's execrable effusions is that Howell Raines had an affair with her. I think that's a pretty good indication of his taste in women, politics, and writing style.

Howell Raines and the New York Times were made for each other.

[poet]

"But don't worry. I'll keep biting"

Perhaps this is the reason? :>)

[Tacis]

What a badge of honor!! It must be like winning the Nobel Prize, being banned from that leftist rag. Some 50 years hence, I can see Sully's obit in _The Economist_ and close to the top will the fact that he was banned from the NYT, ".. once a daily newspaper with jouralistic objectivity that placed it right up there with _The National Enquirer_ and several other comparable journals."

[RCW2001]

LOL... "hey, watch those teeth, will ya"!!!

[livius]

Gee, I like Andrew Sullivan even more now!

[aculeus]

The-Sulzbergers'-latest-embarrassment-ping.

[xm177e2]

His crime was mercilessly poking holes in Raines' garbage...

[another cricket]

a daily newspaper with jouralistic objectivity that placed it right up there with _The National Enquirer_

The National Enquirer has actually done some investigative reporting in the past few years. This puts them several steps higher then the NYT.

a.cricket

[krodriguesdc]

I agree with Raines on this one...

andrew has a secret agenda and I guess Raines decide that he is not going to be the goat that advances it!

BRAVO!

[dighton]

“Obviously the prosecutor ought to be investigated himself. Why has he stopped two steps short of the maximum penalty and settled for twenty-five years of hard labor? After all, there is a punishment in our Criminal Code which is the final penalty, a punishment far more dreadful than twenty-five years of hard labor.”

Isaak paused, so as to make as big an impression as possible.

“What is it, Isaak?” they shouted at him impatiently. And unhurriedly, with mock innocence, he replied: “Section 20-Z, Paragraph a.”

Of all those present, for all their great prison experience, no one had ever heard of such a section. How did this legalist know a thing like that?

“And what does it say?” They screamed indecent suggestions at him from all sides: “Castrate him?”

“Almost, almost,” Isaak confirmed imperturbably. “It is, in fact, spiritual castration. Section 20-Z, Paragraph a, provides that one is declared an enemy of the workers and expelled from the boundaries of the U.S.S.R.! He can die in the West as far as we are concerned. I have nothing more to say.”

-- Solzhenitsyn, The First Circle, ch. 50 ("The Traitor Prince").

[Orual]

I'm not sure I understand why the Times has banned him. Is it because he is a homosexual? Doesn't seem likely, the Times would proudly point-out that fact. Or is because of articles like THIS?

[Trust but Verify]

Me too. What a great acquaintance he would make. I love his writing style and his intelligence.

I bet he has a great apartment, too! ;)

[Trust but Verify]

What is the 'secret' agenda?