Niche

Let's face it, every blogger who wants to be somebody has some sort of vehicle to take them to the top of the blogosphere:

Firedoglake became the place to go for Fitz; Crooks & Liars if you want video; Wonkette for metaphorical ass fucking; Assrocket & Zombies for proverbial assfucking.

Last week this blog tried to take the lead on the O'Beirne book but bigger blogs quickly jumped into the fray.

So what is a blogboy to do but try harder.

And DAMMIT, I'm riding this Fred Barnes' book to the very middle!

Today, the reviews from the Right start coming in and who should be first, but Andy Panda:

Fred Barnes' fellatial biography of Bush. (He makes Powerline read like the Daily Kos.)

Fellow bearsuited moronophile John Podhoretz, author of the prior standard in Bush masturbatory fantasy, "BUSH COUNTRY" cannot let this pass:

ANDREW SULLIVAN'S ANTI-GAY INVECTIVE [John Podhoretz]
Andrew Sullivan calls my old friend Fred Barnes's admiring book about President Bush "fellatial." Imagine if someone had used such a word about an Andrew Sullivan blog item about, say, John McCain. Andrew would have been OUTRAGED! He would have demanded an APOLOGY! Andrew, you see, is gay. So any comparison of his rhetoric to homosexual conduct would be UNACCEPTABLE. But Andrew, being gay, is free to use slighting sexual references to homosexual conduct when discussing the rhetoric and ideas of others. Why? Because, in Andrew's eyes, he is beyond reproach solely because he shares a bed with other men. And Fred Barnes? Married to a...(I know it's unimaginable) woman. How contemptible of Fred. Doesn't he know marriage is only for gay people? UPDATE: Yes, the act Andrew S. analogizes to Fred Barnes's treatment of President Bush is not exclusively one performed by homosexuals. But since Sullivan uses the word for a male writer's analysis of another male, his use of the word "fellatial" therefore has an unmistakably gay tinge.
Posted at 10:40 AM

One could infer that J-Pod's seems rather over-fixated on the gay doesn't he?