Video: Hitchens flips off Maher’s moronic audience
posted at 12:30 pm on August 26, 2006 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
I know why the uncaged bird sings. It’s one thing to sit across a desk from an idiot blowing up a truth-to-power balloon; no matter how smug and slimy his moral equivalence might be, you still get a chance to engage him and pop it. The hooting imbeciles in the audience get off scot free, though. Usually. I guess we all have our limits, and cheering a comparison between Bush and a terrorist-supporting, Holocaust-denying, Islamist fascist is where Hitch draws the line. Good on him.
Follow the link for vid. Deepest thanks to Newsbusters for catching this; I thought for a moment this morning I’d have to link C&L, which basically is Maher’s audience.
Here’s Hitch on the Daily Show last year, debating another guy who’s not as funny as he thinks he is while the intelligentsia roots roots roots for the home team.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Hitchins is a pompous ass whose views are best read. He can make a wonderfully cogent argument, no arguing with that. But he has such a supercilious attitude in person that I avoid watching him, so I catch his articles in Vanity Fair instead. Don’t agree with him a lot, but admire his ability to build a thoughtful case without resorting to wild generalizing or kneejerk responses.
honora on August 26, 2006 at 12:45 PM
I vaguely remember some incident a while back where Hitchens said the f-word to Al Franken multiple times on a live election coverage special of some sort… though, in that case, I think he was just drunk.
Watcher on August 26, 2006 at 12:48 PM
It was one of those Comedy Central things… Indecision ‘92.
Watcher on August 26, 2006 at 12:51 PM
Bill Maher is a Grade A a–hole. Is he still claiming to be a Republican?
JammieWearingFool on August 26, 2006 at 1:14 PM
Hitchens and Cleland, I wonder what they had to say to each other. I saw Hitchens, Samantha Power, Lewis Lapham and Anthony Lewis on a panel in fall 2002 arguing the upcoming Iraq War, though ostensibly the topic was “dissent”, which as you know was being stamped out all over by Bushitler in fall 2002. Samantha Power complained about Republicans defeating Cleland by attacking his patriotism and here the man had been injured in Vietnam etc. She said he was a heroic dissident who had paid the price in our age of stamping out dissent, and also he was great for dissenting from Vietnam after he got back. Hitchens responded airily: “if he was really such a great dissident, he wouldn’t have gone in the first place.”
Alex K on August 26, 2006 at 1:23 PM
Say what you want about Colin Quinn, but he called it when he slammed comedians who pander to the audience and go for applause breaks instead of laughs. “That Bush guy, I mean come on, am I right, people?” [APPLAUSE]
Jim Treacher on August 26, 2006 at 1:23 PM
I abhor Maher. He’s a little turd with regurgitated BS from the 2000 election as his only material. If it weren’t for Lucky Louie, I’d cancel HBO just because his lameness is on the network.
Good one Hitchens. Vanity Fair employs this guy? The best part is the audience saying “oooooohhh” when accosted with the bird-as if the things they say without remorse about their president aren’t shocking.
NTWR on August 26, 2006 at 1:24 PM
Ah, the Gibsonian defense!;^)
honora on August 26, 2006 at 1:24 PM
NTWR: Hitchens is a regular contributor to Vanity Fair, yes. It has some of the best articles from all points of view on all subjects–serious, frivolous and in between. Had a really great interview with Colin Powell a couple months ago and recently the whole story on the politics of rebuilding Ground Zero, a case of not knowing which group of people to dislike most.
honora on August 26, 2006 at 1:29 PM
And he dropped the F-bomb on ‘em! It’s about time someone did it. Nice job, Hitch!
Pablo on August 26, 2006 at 1:36 PM
When I turn gay, Hitch is first.
james hooker on August 26, 2006 at 2:28 PM
“Ah, the Gibsonian defense!”
Heh… no, I just mean that I don’t remember anything in particular that provoked it. Well, other than the fact that he was talking to Al Franken.
Watcher on August 26, 2006 at 2:40 PM
And here I thought I was the only one who said that to Maher’s audience.
daveintexas on August 26, 2006 at 3:07 PM
Me, too.
georgej on August 26, 2006 at 4:17 PM
Is Maher trying for the lead in the George Hamilton Story?
B Moe on August 26, 2006 at 4:18 PM
Harper’s magazine Christopher Hitchens? LOL. What a maroon. He was as shrill when he was a leftist as he is now that he’s a righty. What was it Galloway called him, a “drink-soaked former Trotskyist popinjay.” Sounds about right to me.
THeDRiFTeR on August 26, 2006 at 4:35 PM
Hitchen’s middle finger salute was pointed in the wrong direction, it should have been addressed to Maher!
Umnumzana on August 26, 2006 at 4:36 PM
No nanny state and on the most important issue of our time, dead on – all else fades in comparison.
Brilliant mind, writing/gabbing talent, courageous in a time of wussitude, independent, not afraid to put the blame where it belongs, PC be damned, and:
Entelechy on August 26, 2006 at 4:41 PM
Umnumzana, glad you’re back, since yesterday :)
THeDRiFTeR, C. Hitchens calls it like it is, regardless of who gets harakiried.
We consider Galloway a “respected” authority on important matters, just like Michael Moore, Cindy Sheehan, Cynthia McKinney and Barbra Streisand, to name just a few.
Entelechy on August 26, 2006 at 4:46 PM
I’ll bet he has.
THeDRiFTeR on August 26, 2006 at 4:54 PM
I didn’t know that Maher still had a show, not that it matters.
I’ll stick with Ann Coulter. She is quite apt at enraging liberals with just a smug look. :o)
DannoJyd on August 26, 2006 at 4:57 PM
Jim Treacher wrote:
True – I think it’s standard operating procedure for liberals on TV, whether they are comedians or ’serious’ TV talk show hosts, to pander to the crowd by playing to the laugh factor because they know it doesn’t take much and they can change the direction of the show by doing so – because if the keep it serious, they know their talking points will usually be decimated. Paul Begala comes to mind on that (and hopefully will leave my mind very soon).
As to Hitch flipping off Maher’s audience, I say in response: “flipping fantastic” :)
SisterToldjah on August 26, 2006 at 4:59 PM
Channelling someone with severe BDS:
GALLOWAY!!!! I!!! HATE!!! HIM!!!! MICHAEL MOORE!!! LIED!!! ALL THROUGH FAHRENFAKE 451!!!!! BILL MAHER!!!! FACIST!!! WHAT’S NEXT????? CONCENTRATION CAMPS!!!! IT’S ON THE WAY!!! WAKE!!! UP!!!! AMERIKKA!!!
By the way, I’m starting a business that will replace the Caps Lock and exclamation point keys. Should make a killing over the next few months.
Gottafang on August 26, 2006 at 5:25 PM
What was it Galloway called him, a “drink-soaked former Trotskyist popinjay.” Sounds about right to me.
That’s pretty funny coming from a Saddam’s cat-suit-wearing minion…
Lehuster on August 26, 2006 at 5:44 PM
Hitchens is an arse. Setting aside Sammenhold or any other conservative friendly views he may have, he was a plaintiff in the case that took (or attempted to take) down the NSA wiretapping program last week. I think this is quite possibly one of our most vital tools, and he fought against it.
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspying/23485res20060116.html
RightWinged on August 26, 2006 at 5:54 PM
oh, and when discussing this on Fox and Friends recently, he had the nerve to get pissing over Brian calling him “Chris”… “Well first of all, my name is Christopher!….” (paraphrasing, but that was the jist)
RightWinged on August 26, 2006 at 5:55 PM
RightWinged, no matter how one feels about C. Hitchens, he has forever clarified that he is “Christopher” and not Chris.
Regardless of views, I believe he is, like all the rest of us are, entitled to be called whatever he prefers (in his case his given name). Sincerely,
Entelechy on August 26, 2006 at 6:12 PM
I don’t understand why Maher was so eager to play the anti-Bush card when he just wrote a Huffpo piece about how Bush is doing the right thing in the Israel/Hezbollah conflict. Even if he generally dislikes/hates Bush, he should know full well that the Iranians are in a nutso league of their own.
Squid Vicious on August 26, 2006 at 6:15 PM
Hitchens is fantastic.
Martin on August 26, 2006 at 6:43 PM
Christopher Hitchens is absolutely brilliant.
Maher is an egotistical, no-talented comedian who I believe once claimed to be a Libertarian.
But he’s just an idiot.
Corky on August 26, 2006 at 8:00 PM
True entelechy, but if someone calls me by the wrong name, I’m not an a-hole about it. Hitchens was.
As for all this Hitchens is brilliant stuff from everyone else… I’m sorry, but I just can’t be happy about one of the plaintiffs trying to take down the NSA wiretapping program.
RightWinged on August 26, 2006 at 8:39 PM
RightWinged: Entelechy is right, in my opinion. Once I have introdcued myself to someone and they apply a contraction of my proper name without my permission, I make it quite clear that is not my name and I would appreciate their not assuming the right to call me by any other name.
Umnumzana on August 26, 2006 at 10:33 PM
I agree if the person makes it clear that they prefer to only be called their full name and nothing else. But during a debate Kilmeade was jumping back and forth to the guests and said “Chris let me get your take on that”… He didn’t just say “you know, I’d prefer to be called Christopher” he made some snobby little remark like “first of all my name is not Chris, is Christopher…” You may still think that’s justified, but I think it’s being a whiner. You can search “Chris Hitchens” and get tens of thousands of results because most people in the US named Christopher go by Chris so we naturally call him that… David=Dave, Johnathan = John, Michael = Mike… 99% of the time no one would even care, and most of the other 1% would either ignore it if it wasn’t someone they were going to have to deal with on a daily basis or just politely say “I prefer to be called…”
I guess maybe I just don’t get it. I like to be called Randy, but my name is actually Randall so I’m the opposite… except when people call me Randall I don’t care.
I can’t really describe the way he said it without you seeing it, but I just remember being shocked and thinking “what a prick”, because it came off like he was doing it out of anger over being pressed heavily on his role in knocking the legs out from under the NSA program. The debate got heated and he seemed to throw that in there in a pissy way rather than just make his point. Does anyone think Brian Kilmeade was deliberately calling him “Chris” to offend him? I just think the attitude was uncalled for. I could see if he was a regular guest and had repeatedly asked to be called Christopher, but come on.
RightWinged on August 26, 2006 at 11:52 PM
The warrantless wiretapping program? The one where conversations of Americans were listened to without a court being consulted — even after the fact as is permissible through FISA? The one that blatantly violates the Fourth Amendment? The one that the Bush Administration has admitted is illegal, but contends it can keep running regardless?
If you’re going to support it, at least call it like it is. Libertarians aren’t against wiretapping when it is legal and doesn’t violate the Constitution or the Separation of Powers doctrine. It’s warrantless wiretapping that is the issue… the government listening in to any call they like without judicial accountability. You may trust the Bush administration, but some of us want something more than “it’s okay, we’re violating the law to make you safer… we won’t abuse it, we promise.” It’s not American to trust our elected citizens with unchecked power over us.
Mark Jaquith on August 27, 2006 at 12:54 AM
What part of the NSA wiretap program violates the 4th amendment. they are not listening to YOUR calls but overseas calls of known terror associates…..if an “american” is speaking with terorrists I want that persons phone tapped.
As presidents Lincoln, FDR, Truman, IKE, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, CARTER, Reagan, CLINTON used executive powers for “eavesdropping” using the technology of their period I do not see how it is unconstitutional and without precedent. Where was your “concern” then?
robo on August 27, 2006 at 8:21 AM
The TSP isn’t wiretapping, it’s eavesdropping. And even if you think it’s illegal, the Administration could simply outsource it, and that would be perfectly legal.
Would you prefer that? I certainly wouldn’t. And if this is such a horrific abuse of rights, I’d love for anyone to please direct us to a victim of this abuse. Show be a violated person, please!
As for Hitchens involvement in the NSA suit, he’s talking out of his ass here in a piece that, oddly enough, also turns up here.
If anyone can look at their side of that argument and not come away with eyes rolling, I’d like to hear about it. Hitchens is certainly bright enough to know better.
That said, Malcontent has more of the Hitchens/Maher vid. It’s great fun to watch. (Via Ace)
Pablo on August 27, 2006 at 8:21 AM
Kudos Hitchens.
I cannot stand Bill Maher.
He hand picks his audience for liberals and then uses the audience against any conservative that makes the mistake of appearing on his show.
They all are treated to a patronizing signature Maher diatribe then the audience jumps on the bandwagon on cue, and boos the conservative.
I get so mad that I too flip off short man syndrome Maher.
I applaud Hitchens for having the balls to let the audience have it, only I wish he had told Maher the same thing.
ScottyDog on August 27, 2006 at 9:03 PM
re: warrantless wiretapping.. I think Dick Morris put it best recently… how do you get ask for a warrant when you don’t know what you’re looking for? You cast a net out there on calls that have one talker in the US and one outside, where at least one of the two has suspected terror ties… When patterns are seen, a warrant is sought.
RightWinged on August 27, 2006 at 9:49 PM
Hitchens is no rightwinger. He came to the correct side with the events of September 11, 2001. He realized at that time that Atta & Company meant to kill him & his. Just as they mean to kill you & yours.
His is a prodigious talent. Having Hitchens on board explaining the nature of the fight we find ourselves in helps our side immeasurably. He has a keen intelligence, seems to have read & remembered everything, speaks easily and compellingly, and is a man of letters with a facile ability of being able to pull an apt quote from literature.
That said, Hitchens is in no way a conservative and never will be but it’s a blessing to have him with us in this war.
thegreatbeast on August 28, 2006 at 12:12 AM
When given the choice,
Look, to compare American to murdering facists some people stand up to be counted, Hitchens, flawed as we all are, did hi part
EricPWJohnson on August 28, 2006 at 4:35 AM
LOL
I’m willing to put some bucks into your campaign to ban excess punctuation.
honora on August 28, 2006 at 9:29 AM
What’s not to understand? That someone isn’t in lockstep: Bush is wonderful or Bush is terrible? God this is depressing.
honora on August 28, 2006 at 9:33 AM
You get it retroactively, up to 72 hours after the fact, which Dick Morris bloody well knows.
Good grief, talk about a bottom feeder.
honora on August 28, 2006 at 9:35 AM
My favorite Hitchens bit: he has created a cottage industry taking down Mother Theresa. (I am not making this up). He berates her, calls her a criminal and worse because she did not promote birth control in the poverty stricken regions of India in which she worked.
He is a true publicity whore.
honora on August 28, 2006 at 9:39 AM
I am surprised no one else said that quicker… but you’re missing the point, these aren’t something that they need to focus on at specific instances.. I already explained this… one of two parties on the phone is overseas and one is here… one of the two is a suspected terrorist or has ties… There is no specific act that warrants a….. warrant… By that time it may be too late. The information obtained via pattern identification in this program will get what the NSA needs to get specific warrants…. I’m delerious right now, needing to go to bed and already lost my train of though… just try to build off of what I began to say, and hopefully you can make sense of it… I was trying to go to bed about 2 hours ago… later
RightWinged on August 28, 2006 at 10:39 AM
I wouldn’t characterize Hitchens as either
or a
I would characterize him as brilliant, brave, and torn.
He is a socialist at heart, and therefore, heartbroken that socialism doesn’t work, because he hates the alternatives.
He is an atheist at heart, and therefore casts his spears at the enemy he fears – any church. IMHO such fear of this enemy is often rooted in inner desires to believe in God, and the resultant self hatred and confusion
He is libertarian at heart and rejects the invasions of privacy needed to successfully win a war against an enemy who does not fight by the same rules. Libertarians have a lot of the sink the ship to save the anchor syndrome.
He has the confidence of his own intelligence to take on and debate the buffoons and scoundrels of the collectivist left. As unpleasant a task as could be. Perhaps his drink erases caution. Perhaps the task drives him to drink. For a drinker, this is not all bad. But I cheer whenever he slices these people down to the midgets they are.
He is brave. He would hate my faith. But I would welcome him to join my army any day. Really, I love the guy
entagor on August 28, 2006 at 12:56 PM
Right Winged, get some rest!!! Actually if one of the callers is a suspected terrorist, that in and of itself can the basis for a warrant. (How can something done retroactively “be too late”?)The pattern identification program that ids the suspected terrorists I have no problem with. (I did read somewhere that the problem with this program is that the amount of data is so vast, it’s virually impossible to keep up with. Don’t know enough about it.)
honora on August 28, 2006 at 1:02 PM
Right Winged–addendum to above: a FISA warrant is not a warrant in the traditional sense . Although orders issued under FISA are sometimes called FISA “warrants,” this is incorrect because it suggests that the FISA order is like an ordinary search warrant or Title III intercept order — and it isn’t. Under the Fourth Amendment, a search warrant must be based on probable cause to believe that a crime has been or is being committed. This is not the general rule under FISA.
Under FISA, surveillance is generally permitted based on a finding of probable cause that the surveillance target is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power — not whether criminality is in any way involved. So once the bad guys are identified–which the pattern id program presumable does–they can be tapped by obtaining a FISA “warrant” (and that retroactively if need be) on the basis of the pattern info alone.
honora on August 28, 2006 at 1:18 PM
Maher gathers his audience from free ticket giveaways at Whole Foods in Santa Monica.
The Ugly American on August 28, 2006 at 3:00 PM
Comment pages: