Not Crap for this comment alone:

"If Jerry Falwell had been given an enema before his death, they'd have buried him in a matchbox."

NerblyBear wrote:Not Crap for this comment alone:

"If Jerry Falwell had been given an enema before his death, they'd have buried him in a matchbox."

Priceless.
Wow!

THAT'S the bloated, drunken jerk I love.

-A

Cunningham wrote:Hitchens can't keep his position knowing about the widespread abuse of private contracts and weapons production. Bush and Co. are lining their pockets as we speak, 4 years into this war. Look at the bottom line, follow the money, that's all there is to it. The republicans take pride in this, its what they ADVERTISE god damnit! You can't overlook this when it is EVERYTHING.

Well, I think he can still keep his position because he thinks that Saddam and people like him have to be taken out by countries that can do it. He can think that the Bushies were right to do it, but also think they did it totally wrong and not be in conflict - the old Fitzgerald line about reconciling seemingly contradictory remarks comes to mind.

I never supported this war and I thought Hitchens was wrong in doing so, just about any way you sliced it. Meaning, there are lots of things that look good on paper, but CAN NOT be effectively acheived. I love the idea of taking out Kim Jong Il, because it would help the greater good. I could even argue that the support in Korea would be pretty high, but the fact is there are too many imponderables which make planning impossible, so the default is don't attack.

Or to quote Chris Rock,
"People say 'there's no reason to hit a child.'
There's a REASON to kick an old man down a flight of stairs, just don't do it."

I'd like to think someone as smart as Hitchens would think that too.
Apparently he does not.

The basic premise of most of his arguments is "don't let shitty people get away with stuff."
That goes for Kissenger, Hussein, Falwell and, oddly, Mother Theresa.
I can accept that he believes that and can see the consistency in that belief.

He's always been wrong about Iraq though because it was logistically impossible to do the "right" thing.

-A

I voted 'not crap' because of his response to Falwell's death. There aren't a lot of people out there who will have the sensibilty to publicly celebrate the death of somone like Falwell. I have yet to learn more of his philosophy so I can't make a final judgement but I like what I've heard so far. Anybody who writes and is vocal about the actual consequences of religion (consequences in this reality) is a great person and I hope he inspires more individuals to do the same.

I love Christopher Hitchens. I don't mind occasionally not agreeing with him. That's partly what he's there for.

I have been thinking lately that I wish he were able to be appointed as a justice on the US Supreme Court. Of all the illegal stuff that gets pulled in DC, that's something I could get behind. Sadly, he is a redcoat, something we just don't truck with here in The States. So, failing that, he could move here to MN and be our governor. We accept rogues of all stripes.

I cancelled my subscription to The Nation shortly after he quit because it wasn't worth reading anymore.

I got to see him speak at length in Pittsburgh in 1997 or so, when he was supposed to introduce Gore Vidal, but Gore Vidal was sick (or blew it off, can't remember which) so Hitchens spent a couple of hours talking instead. He was great. He had a memorable line about George Stephanopolous interacting with President Clinton, which I would repeat here, if I hadn't stupidly made my username my own last name.

NOT CRAP.

Skuldt wrote:I love Christopher Hitchens. I don't mind occasionally not agreeing with him. That's partly what he's there for.

I have been thinking lately that I wish he were able to be appointed as a justice on the US Supreme Court. Of all the illegal stuff that gets pulled in DC, that's something I could get behind. Sadly, he is a redcoat, something we just don't truck with here in The States.

As of last week, on his and Jefferson's birthday, at the Jefferson Memorial, he was sworn in as a US citizen.

Not sure if he has to be born here to be a judge though - like the Pres.

I got to see him speak at length in Pittsburgh in 1997 or so, when he was supposed to introduce Gore Vidal, but Gore Vidal was sick (or blew it off, can't remember which) so Hitchens spent a couple of hours talking instead. He was great. He had a memorable line about George Stephanopolous interacting with President Clinton, which I would repeat here, if I hadn't stupidly made my username my own last name.

You could PM it to me though. I'd be grateful.

-A

I can't believe me and Bob agree on something!!!

I just ordered the new book.

Gramsci wrote:I can't believe me and Bob agree on something!!!

Don't celebrate this.

The Poll wrote:CRAP . . . . . . . . . . 50% . . . . [ 12 ]
NOT CRAP/DUDE . . 50% . . . . [ 12 ]

Ooooh, a dead heat!

Skuldt wrote:

The Poll wrote:CRAP . . . . . . . . . . 50% . . . . [ 12 ]
NOT CRAP/DUDE . . 50% . . . . [ 12 ]

Ooooh, a dead heat!

Ironically enough, I finished his new book today, hence the tie breaking not crap vote.

He catches a lot of flak because he's a bold, thought-provoking, and ultimately progressive individual who walks around with a bullseye on his fucking back all the time, because he's good at it.

He doesn't budge, his arguments are pretty much airtight, and he has this sort of black humor to his work that makes what is usually bland subject matter very interesting without sacrificing nerdy intellectualism.

He debated an Emory professor about a week ago, and it was astounding how he quickly and strongly he dismantled the pro-God professor's argument. Look for it online.