Quote of the day
posted at 10:40 pm on June 11, 2008 by Allahpundit
Explaining that Sen. Clinton’s loss was due in large part to her husband’s behavior on the trail, Hitchens, a troublesome grin appearing on his face, concluded: “That pleases me more than I can say. In fact, I think I might orgasm in my trousers.”…
And yet, lest one think Hitchens was an supporter of Barack Obama, he had some choice critiques for the Illinois Democrat as well. On the Senator’s highly praised speech on race that he gave in Philadelphia during the crest of the Jeremiah Wright scandal, the Vanity Fair writer challenged members of the audience to recited a single line.
“You can’t,” he proclaimed, a bit excited that his prophecy had turned true. “It was one of the most boring speeches ever made.”
Hitchens also poked fun at Obama’s recent address in Minneapolis in which it was officially announced that he was the presumptive Democratic nominee. Pronouncing Obama a “megalomaniac” who had the self-delusion to suggest that his primary victory would be looked back upon as the day water levels started to recede, Hitchens mockingly declared: “Just by gathering the delegate count he has arrested the climate crisis.”
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: 1 2 Next »
What is the point? That the communist Hitchens is cuddleable for conservatives? Try harder.
Buddahpundit on June 11, 2008 at 10:44 PM
I don’t agree with the Hitch on everything, but when he’s right…it is so sweet…on Iraq and the Clinton’s, he’s always been dead on the money.
AUINSC on June 11, 2008 at 10:45 PM
Oh, and I might add…he’s got BO’s number as well…I expect to see him and Andy in some more awkward moments on CSPAN soon…it’ll be a good time!
AUINSC on June 11, 2008 at 10:46 PM
Communist? Really? Is there anyone who isn’t a communist?
lorien1973 on June 11, 2008 at 10:48 PM
lol. Megalomaniacal is a good word for what that speech was.
AbaddonsReign on June 11, 2008 at 10:51 PM
Yeah, I think that was over the top…clearly not a communist…he has at least explained that a bit, though he has never backed away from any position, including being a ‘Trotskyite’. But, you take the good with the bad with Hitch…but he is always totally honest and you always know exactly where he stands and he doesn’t care what you think of it…so, yeah, I’ll always be a fan.
AUINSC on June 11, 2008 at 10:53 PM
What a poetic way to point out the obvious. Hillary has more baggage than a 747. That all came out when her biggest claim to legitimacy came out to support her as a loving husband.
highhopes on June 11, 2008 at 10:55 PM
Oh come off it. The man is a lifelong Marxist. Read an anthology of his stuff from the ’80s.
Buddahpundit is not McCarthy.
Hitchens has spent almost the entirety of his adult life promoting Marxism. He is not just “anyone”.
If conservatives want to embrace Hitchens because of his support for the Iraq war (and his “temporary neocon allies” in his own words) then fine but don’t expect the rest of us to turn stupid out of convenience.
aengus on June 11, 2008 at 11:01 PM
Hell I’m just glad some other people realize Obama is BORING!
SouthernGent on June 11, 2008 at 11:03 PM
Poor writing skills at HuffPoo, but the comments are precious. The Clintons are devils, their Obama is not to be touched, Hitchens’ book on religion was great, but otherwise he’s a drunk who can’t orgasm inside a woman, and, yes, he’s a limey. What a bunch of cell-limited rats dwell over there.
“In fact, I think I might orgasm in my trousers.” – - Christopher Hitchens over demise of Bill Clinton
“I think I have a thrill going up my leg” – - Chris Matthews over Obama’s rise from the heavens onto earth
Mr. Hitchens absolutely nailed it, his insight flawless, as usual, with the Obama-as-megalomaniac. Indeed!
Entelechy on June 11, 2008 at 11:04 PM
Yes he certainly is. He called the Maronites in Lebanon “Christian fascists”. That would be news to Walid Jumblatt, the leader of the Progressive Socialist Party of Lebanon, who said the Maronites were the most liberal faction in Lebanon’s civil war.
aengus on June 11, 2008 at 11:05 PM
From the comments section:
Let’s see this same poster talk about illegal aliens and freedom of speech.
MadisonConservative on June 11, 2008 at 11:05 PM
aengus, he’s like an ex smoker on Marxism (I’m fully aware that he still smokes, unrelated to political philosophy).
Do you think he’s like Chavez today? Or the Castros?
Entelechy on June 11, 2008 at 11:07 PM
Heh, Madison, thanks for catching that. NO – he made my day when he embraced it, especially why and when. If only Mr. Steyn would do the same.
Entelechy on June 11, 2008 at 11:08 PM
I still loathe Obama, regardless of Hitchen’s comments. Shall we move on?
awake on June 11, 2008 at 11:09 PM
My sentiments exactly. He is a brilliant and flawed pundit. We would be much poorer without his commentary.
Come on, folks, you have to admire a guy who is so pure in his thought and speach, whether you agree or not. He has no safety net – he’s equally prepared to skewer power brokers right and left, conservative and liberal. And like many such great thinkers, he has large blind spots and horrendous personal flaws. Very human.
peski on June 11, 2008 at 11:10 PM
Yes, I know…and I don’t agree with him on a number of positions…and I don’t care…he has been one of the most forceful and eloquent defenders of 2 very big issues…1) that the Clintons were one of the biggest frauds the US ever bought into and 2) That islamic terrorism must be stamped out world wide no matter what…the other things, I could hash out with him over a beer to two.
AUINSC on June 11, 2008 at 11:11 PM
That is a very silly question. Chavez and Castro are in positions of great power and thus have the potential to cause enormous damage and suffering to the lives of the ordinary citizens of their respective countries.
Hitchens is a journalist so the comparison is relative. I bought his book God Is Not Great expecting to find serious arguments challenging Christian theology and was disgusted when I realised how juvenile it was. I could’ve written a better atheist tome myself and I’m a believer!
aengus on June 11, 2008 at 11:15 PM
Cubs have the best record in baseball. White Sox are second, and …… oops, wrong thread.How deep did you go into that caseo of Newcastle tonight, AP? Wait, sorry…
Uh…ah, yes; Hitch. Smashing backhand for Obambi, and well deserved. Quite enjoyable. Whatever else his public policy preferences may be, let’s consider his disdain for the black rookie socialist Senator as an enormous positive.
Being not all that bright myself, I am happy to have Hitchens seeing the candidate the way I do. Would anyone here rather claim an Olbermann, Matthews or Dowd over Hitchens, given their sword-swallowing affection for him?
Jaibones on June 11, 2008 at 11:19 PM
aengus, please calm down – it was just a way of saying that he’s no longer the Marxist he once was. He’s written about that. I haven’t read his God Is Not Great.
Entelechy on June 11, 2008 at 11:22 PM
Plus, if he’d be a devout Marxist today he’d like/love Obama, or he’d have perfect reasons to.
Entelechy on June 11, 2008 at 11:23 PM
As soon as you publish…let us all know..
We’re all chomping at the bit….
BigWyo on June 11, 2008 at 11:25 PM
Well I don’t agree. Hitchens has defined himself as being against all religion and, in the fashion of a Marxist theoretician, was glad that 9/11 happened because he realised it would advance his agenda.
As Orwell once said socialists need the capitalists to exploit the workers because otherwise the Communist revolution will not be possible.
Everyone, even their most die-hard supporters, know and have always known that the Clintons are frauds.
Hitchens has spent his life coddling Islamic terrorists who waged war against Israel, Lebanon and Serbia. It was only when he perceived that the revulsion against religious extremism that followed 9/11 could be subverted for his own purposes to advance atheism that he changed his tune.
The SUPERMOST best ever argument against the existence of Israel is a argument written by Hitchens (not available on the Internet) called Broadcasts. I’d advise you to track it down. It is well worth reading.
aengus on June 11, 2008 at 11:27 PM
It was a big blur. I remember Wright, grandmother, and the entire black community.
ninjapirate on June 11, 2008 at 11:28 PM
Wow, something I agree with him on. What took him so long to say that Obama is boring?
jencab on June 11, 2008 at 11:30 PM
Are you stalking me now? Congratulations for going one comment without a reference to some disgusting rectal bodily function.
aengus on June 11, 2008 at 11:34 PM
Okay I’ve calmed down. I admit I sometimes get carried away but I think his abandonment of Marxism has resulted, as in the case of many ex-socialists, not in an embrace of conservatism but an incoherent and roundabout route back to the same thing. He gets far more credit than he deserves even though his stated public objection to “Islamism” is his professed hatred of (all) religion.
aengus on June 11, 2008 at 11:40 PM
aengus, just a little bit on Broadcasts here – section 2.1
Entelechy on June 11, 2008 at 11:41 PM
The truth is that 9/11 changed a lot of minds, some for the better and others for the worse. Do you have any evidence to back up your claim that, “Hitchens […] was glad that 9/11 happened because he realised it would advance his agenda.”?
FloatingRock on June 11, 2008 at 11:41 PM
All true…in fact, one of his most grating flaws is his proselytizing and gratuitous comments he’s made about all faith in favor of atheism…If atheism is a religion in itself (and there are good arguments to be made that it is), then he is truly a born again atheist (if you’ll pardon the expression).
And yet, he has broken away from the modern left about as decisively as is possible…he is one of the few polemicists that they truly fear…and the reason why is because he completely understands them…their language and thought processes and the biggest weapon he has is the ability to turn their words right around on them…he can spot their dishonesty a mile away…and is in a position to exploit that…and has never, ever run away from a fight with them….he has publicly state (actually, years ago, though I don’t remember the exact date) that he no longer considers himself a marxist. He is certainly no fan of the Soviet Union and you will here no praise from him about Chavez or Castro or any of the old school Stalinist regimes left in the world.
I agree with you that his position on Israel has, until recently, been completely wrong…but I have also seen that he certainly has been losing faith in the Palestinians in recent years and has even expressed serious doubts about their ability to govern themselves. And again, he has a very hard time reversing himself, even when it is evident that he is wrong…but he has done it before.
Bottom line is, he has been a wonderful scourge of the modern left…and a courageous one, in spite of the positions he takes, past and present, that I absolutely disagree with on. For that I applaud him…and always love to see it when he chews up and spits out these people on the subjects that matter most.
AUINSC on June 11, 2008 at 11:44 PM
Man, isn’t it annoying hearing so called conservative pundits say what a great speaker he is. Look up “We Are Bamboozled” on youtube. It contrasts barry’s speeches with the sources that he stole them from. When you see them back to back it is obvious what a boring speaker he is (as well as a dishonest one).
peacenprosperity on June 11, 2008 at 11:47 PM
Ok aengus, much better :) We’re just having a conversation. Btw, I often wonder how come you’re up so late…you must be a night person.
Anyway, on Hitchens, I love his writing style, agree or disagree with him. I like to read Ms. Paglia’s articles and don’t agree with her, hardly. Some people have this talent which I adore. Also, I have no problem with anyone’s beliefs, or lack thereof. Therefore, that doesn’t register with me. Many would like his writing, if they’d get past that hangup. Not accusing you or anyone, just an observation.
I also found him to have cojones made of steel for hiding Salman Rushdee in his own apartment, with his kids present, until that goofball from NYT, Maureen Dowd, gave him away, and they had to move him. Same after 9/11/01, when we needed more with steely ones. No, I don’t like Rushdee’s writing/s but I believe in people/art to be free all over the world.
Entelechy on June 11, 2008 at 11:48 PM
Its an opinion, not a stated fact. So no, not being psychic or God I don’t have conclusive documentary proof that that Hitchens behaved in this way.
He did say that he found the 9/11 “exhilarating” because now all civillisation could pit itself against the “Parties of God” as he puts it. I suppose he was talking about Islam.
As for any evidence that Hitchens displays a bias against other religions such as Christianity it is difficult to say.
aengus on June 11, 2008 at 11:49 PM
Hey, Hitch is right on a number of things and wrong on some. He’s British, so cut the brother some slack.
I will vote for him on his opinion of Barry. The guy is a fraud.
thatcher on June 11, 2008 at 11:49 PM
I have. I can understand why Christians are hurt by what he says in that book. But the smackdown he delivers to radical Islam is literally one of the best out there.
Mark me down in his fan column. He’s a maestro of rhetoric.
RushBaby on June 11, 2008 at 11:56 PM
You have to read the entire piece. Its in a book calling Blaming The Victims co-edited by Edward Said and Hitchens.
I’m a truly insane night person. When I was eight years old my mother died from cancer and I’ve been staying up all night ever since.
aengus on June 11, 2008 at 11:57 PM
He definitely is no fan of Christianity…and I think he hates it only slightly less that fundamental Islam (though he seems very respectful of the Kurdish peoples attachment to Islam, which he sees as a peaceful version). But the examples of Christians he most often cites are the true nitwits (aside from Mother Theresa, who he hates, but I’ve never bothered to read up on to see if he is justified)…like Rowan Williams…Archbishop (and resident moron and spineless cipher) of Canterbury…or the Vatican, when they seem to cave to Islam on certain issues…hard to say why…but he only argues these positions to convince others to reject religion…he never advocates the forcable destruction of Christianity or any religion…so, that, in itself makes his positions tolerable in this day and age.
AUINSC on June 11, 2008 at 11:58 PM
Heck yeah! His speaking style, (when he’s reading speeches, at least), isn’t exactly monotonous but it doesn’t have any tonal variation to it either. He ends every phrase on a down note from a musical perspective. If you were to plot his syllables and words as notes on sheet music each phrase would look like a speed bump and each sentence like a small grouping of bumps, and that’s besides the fact that his speeches are devoid of any content, let alone anything that requires any thought or introspection. I honestly thought Clinton’s speeches during the primaries were delivered far better and found myself tolerating Clinton and turning it off after a few minutes of Obama. Boring!
I just don’t get it.
FloatingRock on June 12, 2008 at 12:00 AM
Wow. One of the finer comments at Hot Air, in terms of intellectual honesty.
RushBaby on June 12, 2008 at 12:02 AM
Not at all. People think supporting the Iraq war = conservatism. It isn’t.
I didn’t know that. If you point me towards anything regards this I would be grateful.
He spits bile at people who don’t support the Iraq war …yippee?
aengus on June 12, 2008 at 12:03 AM
I agree. I’d recommend
, an anthology of his writings during the Reagan years. Its more leftish but also better thought out and better written than his contemporary stuff.
aengus on June 12, 2008 at 12:07 AM
That’s not really true. He mocks God, Moses and Jesus on any occasion. Whenever it suits him. I understand why you want to support him but it makes no sense to denounce Rowan Williams and excuse Hitchens.
aengus on June 12, 2008 at 12:10 AM
Well, here’s a starter…there is more out there more recent than this:
http://www.slate.com/id/2135098/
And yet, he has broken away from the modern left about as decisively as is possible…
Not at all. People think supporting the Iraq war = conservatism. It isn’t.
AUINSC on June 12, 2008 at 12:12 AM
Did you happen to read any of the comments at the Huffpo piece? Underlying the tone of those comments is resentment that someone they wanted as a weapon against the war is instead turning the Vorpal Blade against their puny pacifism.
RushBaby on June 12, 2008 at 12:14 AM
I don’t read Huffpo threads because I know they’re all full of the most acidic bile there is but that doesn’t affect my opinion about Hitchens in any way.
aengus on June 12, 2008 at 12:18 AM
Obama, himself, may be “boring”, but as a gloriously-blank and luminously-latent screen -on which to project one’s left-orama fantasies of a Shining Socialist Utopianized Future (where all bicycles are made of hemp and the oppressed Third World finally rules in anarchistic glory)- he is obviously mesmerizing.
To a dangerously numerous suckocracy at large.
Hitchens better start helping to derail this Express Train to Oblivion with more ascerbic stuff than ennui.
profitsbeard on June 12, 2008 at 12:19 AM
Ok, past bedtime for me, but I will say one other thing about him that put’s him over the hump in the plus column for me…he has repeatedly stated that he now sees American power…military and economic..(clearly, as opposed to what he used to think) as a force for good in the world. And when he realized it, he decided he would become a US citizen. That was his biggest and most unequivocal plus yet…something I don’t even think the Democratic nominee (or his wife) believes.
AUINSC on June 12, 2008 at 12:22 AM
Gosh, I think we all know who Hitchens is and what he stands for. We may like him or dislike him, but nearly everyone here likes some of what he has to say. We’d be better off discussing that and not holding some inquisition into the nuances of his past and present beliefs.
Let’s not forget that National Review founding editor James Burnham was originally a Marxist. People make mistakes. We should celebrate those who correct their mistakes.
thuja on June 12, 2008 at 12:24 AM
meg·a·lo·ma·ni·a (mg-l-mn-, -mny)
n.
1. A psychopathological condition characterized by delusional fantasies of wealth, power, or omnipotence.
2. An obsession with grandiose or extravagant things or actions.
Frankly, I think this describes Barack’s mentor, Michelle Obama more than it does himself.
I see Barack as nothing but what others put into him.
Connie on June 12, 2008 at 12:26 AM
Right you are. Read Radical Son by David Horowitz for a chilling insight into early utopian/communist progressives in this country, all the way up to the Black Power movement (whose ripples are becoming waves on the shore today) and how he escaped– and now fights–the Leftists.
RushBaby on June 12, 2008 at 12:31 AM
Burnham? Give me a break. He switched allegiances so often he might has well have been pulling a card trick. If an alien invasion force from Mars landed tomorrow he would suddenly discover his ideological roots as a Martianist.
aengus on June 12, 2008 at 12:31 AM
Ok, one more..then sleep. If you are a Christian, then Rowan Williams has been much more destructive to Christianity than Hitch has. Williams has basically caused a schism in the Anglican Church and done enormous damage by directly injecting multi-culutural moral relativism directly into the Church. Hitchens could never do that kind of damage just by mocking Jesus or Moses or anybody…how many Christians do you think Hitchens has actually converted?
AUINSC on June 12, 2008 at 12:31 AM
I don’t agree. To reveal that Obama is boring is to undermine the only idea that Obama has going for him: isn’t it exciting to vote for young, hot black man for President?
thuja on June 12, 2008 at 12:34 AM
But he is
so
darned
boring.
Really.
Connie on June 12, 2008 at 12:36 AM
Sorry to hear about the loss of your mother, aengus, at such an early age. I lost mine, for same reason, at 13, when she was only 33.
Thanks for the reading recommendations aengus.
On Hitchens, I remember seeing him on C-Span, and reading about his distance from his early Marxism. It goes along with what AUINSC wrote on this sub-topic.
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 12:37 AM
Connie on June 12, 2008 at 12:26 AM
“Megalomaniac” describes both to perfection.
profitsbeard, you are officially adopted, volens/nolens.
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 12:38 AM
Goodnight and enjoy your rest.
Christianity is not like politics where competing factions damage each other in the way that political parties.
Hitchens published a book with the intention of brewing up contempt of (all) religion. Williams has been very weak. If you want to argue that Williams is as bad as Hitchens then I might accept that but to argue that Williams is significantly worse than the secular saint Hitchens is ridiculous from a Christian perspective or indeed any perspective. Aside from the Holy Mission of Iraq no one has any reason to back Hitchens.
aengus on June 12, 2008 at 12:39 AM
Probably none, and I don’t think he cares to, or cares if they do, or don’t. It’s the other side which cares more to convert people.
aengus, I loved reading his articles/books long before Iraq, again, some agreeing, and others disagreeing with. He can write and he can debate, or has a style which I adore. I love that he writes in our time. His grumpiness and sheer chutzpah, no matter who’s on the other side, is attractive to this reader.
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 12:44 AM
I haven’t read Burnham’s biography so I’m not sure what you mean. I read a book of his articles from the National Review in the 1950′s and 1960′s and thought they were excellent. Anyway, why did William F Buckley trust Burnham with a position at the NR if Burnham was such an opportunist?
thuja on June 12, 2008 at 12:56 AM
E – still reading? If so, give the headlines at LGF a scan.
RushBaby on June 12, 2008 at 1:04 AM
RB, I will. Thanks.
The power of words.
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 1:09 AM
Whadaya know blind faith is alive and well in America.
Speakup on June 12, 2008 at 1:13 AM
RB, The Disassociator photoshop is gold, along with the headlines.
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 1:13 AM
Yeah, I thought you’d get a kick out of that.
RushBaby on June 12, 2008 at 1:24 AM
I might like to discus this with you over a beer sometime. I’ve been known to mock God, Moses, and Jesus on occasion – but from a position of deep respect for those who “believe” in them.
I have my reasons. Not sure what Hitchens’ are.
peski on June 12, 2008 at 1:34 AM
You are staying up way too late. Anything to clear the palate?
peski on June 12, 2008 at 1:35 AM
I’m not sure if the patch on his lens represents rose-colored glass or a terminatoresque heads up display but it’s amusing to consider both possibilities.
FloatingRock on June 12, 2008 at 1:36 AM
Jeeze, this late night stuff is profound. WTF does it mean?
peski on June 12, 2008 at 1:38 AM
peski, not late for me – recall, I’m in San Diego.
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 1:38 AM
O
Not late for a young pup like you. I’m in OC, and 10:30 pm is past my sleepy time.
peski on June 12, 2008 at 1:40 AM
peski on June 12, 2008 at 1:38 AM
peski, peski, my adorable one, your fuse is sometimes too short.
See the link in
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 1:13 AM
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 1:41 AM
peski, “young pup” is a relative term – neither young, nor old. What is OC?
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 1:42 AM
I saw the link – cool shades, but unreadable commentary. Sorry, I don’t buy into the hate.
What’s the point? Black racism? white racism?
Tired of it, which is why to me Obama is an Obmination.
peski on June 12, 2008 at 1:45 AM
Orange County, north of SD.
And believe me, I’m oldish by any standard but an Oooooold fart’s.
peski on June 12, 2008 at 1:47 AM
peski, no, it’s Obama’s disassociation with all the people in the photoshop. Do you recognize them? It’s brilliant. It’s not hate, it’s a depiction of how he throws under the bus his life-long associations if they’re a political impediment to his zeal and power.
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 1:48 AM
With out a doubt…. the best comment and most accurate.
Kini on June 12, 2008 at 1:49 AM
peski, I had no idea that we’re almost neighbors. I go through there a lot on the way to Cedars-Sinai hospital, at least once a month, sometimes more often.
One is only as old as one feels :)
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 1:50 AM
Entelechy & peski
Your comments are feeding my craving for milk and cookies this late in the evening. :)
Kini on June 12, 2008 at 1:52 AM
Good evening Kini. How are you? Always good to see you in the house.
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 1:52 AM
Kini, then you should have some milk and chocolate. I had some pineapple icecream earlier instead of dinner, just because I like it, the tropical package from Costco, with the icecream inside the real pineapple.
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 1:54 AM
Dear gents, peski and Kini, the lady begs you good night. Must get up early to work hard. Obama will need lots of taxes to enable Socialism/Marxism. Must do my part for the good of the world.
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 1:57 AM
wow, just read that the puppy toss video was real, and the marines involved are being disciplined. tried to search for the old post on here, and it’s oddly gone missing or I just couldnt find it. I remember so well how many hot air commenters tried to call that some left wing conspiracy too.
your_worst_enemy on June 12, 2008 at 1:58 AM
I get it. It’s cute – and clever. Nice poke at the empty suit, who will abandon his backers at the drop of a mike.
But the whole “aura” of Obama has me tired. Get the feel of the text on that site. I’ve been living with the spectre of racism my entire life – as a poor white boy who grew up in a black ghetto. I’m just F-ing sick of the whining, from both sides. Fuck race. Take care of your family. Be nice to your neighbors. Work hard. Make freinds. Love and care for your children. Stop asking for handouts and blaming someone else.
Don’t get me started on religion…..
peski on June 12, 2008 at 1:58 AM
Ok, Kini, that’s a cute web site.
peski on June 12, 2008 at 2:02 AM
peski, one more comment before I’m really off for a date with the sandman – we agree fully on your 1:58 comment. I work with people of any/all category in the big bucket of today’s cultural diversity. There are good and bad ones in each category.
No need to start or stop “on religion” with me. It’s also a subject by which I don’t value people. I know many who are good/bad, in either category, the believers, and the nonbelievers. I know where you stand and you’re just fine by me. Good night, and don’t change.
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 2:04 AM
Good evening and Aloha!
What troubles me is how nobody seems to listen to the obvious message from Obama. Hitchen’s might have that Mathews thrill, but every Obama supporter is about a dysfunctional as a sports player with his jock strap over his face as a surgical mask. It just doesn’t look or sound right. And asking the question, “what’s that smell?”
Kini on June 12, 2008 at 2:09 AM
Kini, you misunderstood. Hitchens had a thrill for getting rid of Bill Clinton. He doesn’t like Obama.
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 2:11 AM
Out and clear until we e-meet again. Good night all,
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 2:12 AM
I was being a facetious and somewhat over the top. A clumsy effort to be humorous.
I know Hitchen’s is neither efficacious to Clinton nor Obama.
But I was amused at the comments and being late to the conversation, somewhat over analyzing.
Kini on June 12, 2008 at 2:17 AM
Entelechy, good night, sweet dreams.
peski, Thanks!
With Obama’s campaign, I abhor, and I’m furious at the vial and sometimes outright pretentious accusation of being a typical angry, gun toting, religious neocon desperately grasping onto how to deal with life’s problems.
That only happens when I order out.
Kini on June 12, 2008 at 2:26 AM
Other quote of the day, or of tomorrow, for me in 10 min.
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 2:49 AM
RushBaby on June 12, 2008 at 12:31 AM
I second Radical Son; one of my favourite books. Incredibly personal look at Horowitz and his flaws, and (frighteningly) illuminating about the left. If you weren’t concerned about the penetration of Marxism/Communism in society, you will be after you read his book.
Entelechy, something you said earlier… is Steyn not a dual citizen? I thought he was (if that’s what you were referring to… saying Hitchens embraced something that Steyn didn’t). If that’s what you’re referring to… if Steyn loses in Canada he’s pretty screwed. I thought he became an American and could hunker down in NH.
aengus – sorry about your mom. =( You as well, Entelechy, I am sorry for your loss. I lost my dad when I was 12, suddenly. Rough road.
linlithgow on June 12, 2008 at 3:38 AM
Maybe he thinks that will somehow compensate for never having personally bothered himself to participate in one.
MB4 on June 12, 2008 at 4:42 AM
*squints* greenwald, is that you?
Reaps on June 12, 2008 at 6:19 AM
And I thought I was the only one who finds Obama utterly boring. We all know his speeches are full of syrupy cliches. But what hasn’t been pointed out is how boring his voice is.
He talks in a dull drone. I would rather listen to John Kerry speak than Obama.
I’m biased, of course, but I’ve never even been even remotely enthused by any Obama speech.
The MSM are all having multiple orgasms – in their trousers and their skirts – over a man who is, at best, mediocre in every way.
But like I said, I’m biased.
infidel65 on June 12, 2008 at 6:28 AM
You have to read the entire piece. Its in a book calling Blaming The Victims co-edited by Edward Said and Hitchens.
Anything anchored to Edward Said is going to be a didactic, tedious, and ridiculous pseudo-theoretical “poor Muslims” pity party.
Lehosh on June 12, 2008 at 7:15 AM
Ingraham’s substitute laughed at the Clinton’s brewing over their hate-list, each blaming the other for their political demise, now become Mr. and Mrs. Smith out to assassinate each other.
All’s well that ends well.
maverick muse on June 12, 2008 at 7:21 AM
Hitch getting branded as an heretic in 5… 4… 3…
ZK on June 12, 2008 at 8:41 AM
Hitchens is right about Obama’s incredible arrogance; it has been on public display more than once. I suspect more of the MSM might have noticed it and commented on it before now, if they hadn’t all been so focused on the tingling sensations in their pants.
I also agree that Obama’s over-hyped “race” speech was a big bore. But I do remember one line from it. It went something like this: “I could no more disown Reverend Wright than I could disown my own white grandmother.” I only remember that line because of the irony of seeing Obama disowning Reverend Wright a couple of weeks later (after Wright committed the unforgiveable sin of speaking the truth about Obama — when Wright said Obama was just a politician and would say anything to get elected).
AZCoyote on June 12, 2008 at 8:44 AM
The Clintons are devils, their Obama is not to be touched, Hitchens’ book on religion was great, but otherwise he’s a drunk who can’t orgasm inside a woman, and, yes, he’s a limey
GREAT? I simply hope it was made with recycled paper, because there was nothing in that book that justified the cutting down of a single tree! It was irrelevant, badly researched, anti-intelectual, piece of bigotry.
Case in point; Hitchens makes the standard atheist point that religion is responsible for most of the violent wars in history, whether it is actively going to war in the name of God/gods, or providing the attitude that allows wholesale murder of those “not like you”.
However, if this were the case, there should be a lot of evidence for this, right!?! There is NONE!
As Vox Day has done in his book, The Irrational Atheist, any survey of the writings of the major war philosophers/ political philosophers/ military tacticians shows there is almost no mention of religion at all. (The most notible mention is in the diary of Nathan Bedford Forrest, where he says that if men were more Christ-like there would BE NO MORE WARS.)
Add to this the fact that, according to the peer-reviewed Encyclopedia of War only 7% of the wars fought since 2480 BCE had any religious conotation at all, and you can say that Hitchens doesn’t know what he’s talking about!
Tom Bryant
BA – Philosophy of Religion, Clemson University C/O 2008
papabryant on June 12, 2008 at 8:55 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »